Tanya, Part V; Kuntres Acharon 6:8

Sugya Map

• Issue: The nature of Torah's praise and its relationship to Divine consciousness and Creation, specifically addressing David HaMelech's lament, "Your statutes have been my songs in the house of my wanderings" (Psalms 119:54), and G-d's response, "Do you call them songs!" (Sotah 35a).
• Nafka Mina:
  • Understanding the hierarchy of Divine revelation within Torah: the external ("hinderpart") versus the internal ("front").
  • The significance of precise mitzvah performance in sustaining Creation and facilitating Divine union.
  • The limitations of human comprehension of Torah's ultimate essence and the appropriate mode of human engagement with it.
  • The nature of Divine reproof and its connection to an inadequate appreciation of Torah.
• Primary Sources:
  • Talmud Bavli: Sotah 35a
  • Tanakh: II Samuel 6, I Chronicles 13, Psalms 119:54, Psalms 92:10, Genesis 9:16, Leviticus 26:3, Deuteronomy 11:13, Exodus 33:23, Proverbs 8:30-31, Ezekiel 2:10, Zechariah 5:2, Exodus 32:15.
  • Midrash: Bereishit Rabbah 17:5, 44:17; Tanchuma, Bereishit; Yalkut Shimoni 836.
  • Zohar: II:239a; III:26b; I:11b.
  • Tikkunim, Idra Rabbah.
  • Arizal (as cited by Tanya).
  • Maimonides: Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 2:10.
  • Talmud Yerushalmi: Shekalim 6:1.
  • Tanya: Kuntres Acharon 6:8 (the primary text).

Text Snapshot

“David! Do you call them songs!”¹

In Zohar we find, “The praise of Torah and its song.” We must understand what is the praise of G–d in forbidding or permitting an object. A similar concept is implicit in “How great are Your works, O G–d, Your thoughts are very deep.”² It is known that all worlds,³ the exalted and the lowly, are dependent on the precise and meticulous performance of a single mitzvah. For example, if the altar offering was valid then the supernal union⁴ is effected, and all worlds are elevated to receive their life-force⁵ and sustenance. However, if there is an aberration... then all the elevations of the world are nullified, as is their life-force and sustenance from the Source of Life, the En Sof,⁶ blessed is He. So, too, through valid tefillin there is revealed the supernal intellect of zun,⁷ the source of life for all worlds. Through the omission of one required detail they are invalidated, and the intellect departs. This applies as well to the requirements of the prohibitions. The meditation then may take these lines: Consider “How great are the works” of G–d in the multiplicity of worlds and all their hosts. All of these are literally null when compared to one detail of Torah specification, for Torah requirements are the profundity of the supreme thought and His wisdom,⁸ blessed be He. Through one minor specification all worlds ascend⁹ and receive their life-force and sustenance, or the opposite, G–d forbid. From this we may ponder the magnitude of the profundity of His thoughts, blessed be He, that is boundless and endless, and infinitely transcends the vitality of all Creation. The vivifying power of all worlds issues from a minor requirement of it (G–d’s thought), for each specification is drawn from its source, namely the depth of His thought, blessed be He. Analogously, man’s hair issues from his brain,¹⁰ as is known from Tikkunim and Idra Rabbah. This was the delight of King David, may he rest in peace, as he sang to gladden his heart in his Torah study during his time of trouble. However, his extolling the praise of Torah with this quality, saying, “…have been my songs…” caused his punishment. G–d reproved him saying, “Do you call them songs!” For indeed, this quality—that all worlds are nothingness compared to one detail of it—is of the hinderpart¹¹ of the profound thought. This is explained elsewhere in the name of the Arizal,¹² on the passage, “The Torah is an attenuated form¹³ of the supernal chochmah.”¹⁴ However, the internal aspect of the depth, which is the inner¹⁵ aspect of Torah—pnimiyut haTorah—is totally united with the Light of the En Sof, blessed is He, that is clothed within Torah. The unity is a perfect one.⁸ In terms of the En Sof, blessed is He, all Worlds are as absolute naught,¹⁶ sheer nothingness, nonexistent. For, “You are the same, before the world was created….”¹⁷ Hence, the internal aspect of Torah too is not to be lauded as being the vivifying force of all Worlds, for they are reckoned as nothingness itself. In this inward aspect of Torah there can be no mortal joy and delight, but rather, in a manner of speaking, the heart’s joy and pleasure of the King, the Holy One, blessed is He, Who delights in it. For “G–d understands its way,”¹⁸ and knows its station and quality, through His self-knowledge,¹⁹ as it were. This, however, is concealed from the mortal eye, as, “My face cannot be seen”²⁰—i.e., the inwardness, as explained there in the name of the Arizal. Hence the verse, “I was a pleasure to Him,”²¹ to Him specifically. “Playing before Him,” before Him specifically, meaning the inwardness. “I was reared with Him,” and (the Midrash comments)—“Do not read amon (reared) but uman (craft)….”²² In reference to the hinderpart it says, “Playing in the world, His land, and my delights are with mortal men.”²³ For the Torah is given in states of inwardness and hinderpart, as written in the “flying scroll” of Zechariah, “And it was written front and back.”²⁴ Since David seized upon the hinderpart he was punished with forgetfulness, a product of the state of the hinderpart. Momentarily he was oblivious to the verse, “The sacred service is theirs; on the shoulder shall they carry.”²⁵ The purpose is to combine the “shoulder,” the hinderpart, with the sacred service, the supreme wisdom,²⁶ in a manner of inwardness.²⁷ This state is the source of the tablets in the Ark, as we find, “Written on both their sides….”²⁸ The Jerusalem Talmud, Shekalim, explains that they did not have any front and back; study that reference.²⁹

Dikduk/Leshon Nuance

• The opening quote, "David! Do you call them songs!", is presented as a direct divine address, immediately establishing the severity of the perceived transgression. The exclamation point emphasizes the shock and disapproval.
• The phrase "the praise of Torah and its song" (Zohar) suggests a melodic or appreciative quality inherent in Torah. The text then interrogates this, asking "what is the praise of G-d in forbidding or permitting an object?" This signals a deeper, analytical approach beyond simple appreciation.
• "Supernal union" (yichud) and "supernal intellect of zun" (z'char v'nukva) are technical Kabbalistic terms indicating profound spiritual connections. The text links the fulfillment of mitzvot to the generation of these unions, highlighting the cosmic impact of seemingly small actions.
• The contrast between "hinderpart" (me'ot ha'achorayim) and "inner aspect" (pnimiyut) is crucial. The "hinderpart" refers to the external, manifest aspects of Torah and G-d's immanence, while "inner aspect" refers to the profound, hidden essence, intrinsically linked to the En Sof.
• The analogy of "man's hair issues from his brain" (tzichlalo shel adam mitoch mocho) is a striking illustration of how the seemingly least significant aspects of a system can originate from its most profound source. The contrast between the insensitive hair and the intellectual brain underscores the vast difference in essence.
• The phrase "attenuated form" (tzimtum) of supernal chochmah points to Torah as a manifestation, a less direct but still potent expression of Divine wisdom.
• The citation of Proverbs 8:30 ("I was a pleasure to Him") versus 8:31 ("my delights are with mortal men") demarcates the two levels of Torah's reception and appreciation: G-d's intrinsic delight in its essence, and humanity's engagement with its manifest aspects.
• The reference to Ezekiel 2:10 ("written front and back") and the Jerusalem Talmud's interpretation in Shekalim 6:1 that the tablets had no front or back, is a sophisticated point suggesting that at their most profound level, the divisions we perceive are illusory.

Readings

Rashi on the Ark's Transport (II Samuel 6:3)

While the Tanya focuses on David's poetic expression, the immediate context of the Ark's transport provides a crucial backdrop. Rashi, commenting on David's decision to place the Ark on a wagon, cites the verse from Numbers 7:9: "The sacred service is theirs; on the shoulder shall they bear it." He explains the error:

"The sons of Kehath were to carry it on their shoulders, as it says, 'On the shoulders of the sons of Kehath shall it be carried' (Num. 7:9). David transgressed this, and brought it on a wagon. And the Ark was a wagon for the sons of Kehath, but not for others. And because he transgressed, Uzzah was struck."³⁰ (Rashi, II Samuel 6:3 s.v. al ha'agala)

Rashi's focus is on the practical halakha of carrying the Ark, emphasizing the specific commandment and the severe consequence of its violation. This highlights the tangible, procedural aspect of sacred service, a domain where precision is paramount. The "songs" David composed, while perhaps heartfelt, lacked this foundational adherence to the prescribed method.

Ramban on the Nature of Torah and its Divine Origin (Commentary on Deuteronomy 30:11)

Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, in his commentary on Deuteronomy, offers a perspective on the profundity of Torah that resonates with the Tanya's distinction between external and internal. Discussing the verse "For this commandment which I command you this day, it is not hidden from you, nor is it far off" (Deuteronomy 30:11), Ramban posits:

"For it is not hidden from you, meaning it is not hidden from your understanding, and it is not far off, meaning it is not beyond your reach to perform it. And the Sages said [in Makkot 23b]: 'R. Akiva said: Is it possible for a mortal to command his master? Rather, it means that it is not hidden from you, and it is not far off from your deeds.' And from the words of the Sages, it is understood that the commandments are within our power to fulfill, and their understanding is within our grasp. However, there are deeper understandings, and the Torah is replete with divine mysteries. The early ones [Chassidim Rishonim] knew the names of G-d and how to perform great wonders through them. But the essence of Torah is the wisdom of the Creator, blessed be He, and its commandments are the paths of His will. And its study is the path to cleaving to Him."³¹ (Ramban, Commentary on Deuteronomy 30:11)

Ramban articulates a dual nature of Torah: its accessible, performative aspect for mortals, and its profound, mysterious essence connected to the Creator's wisdom. While Ramban doesn't explicitly use the "hinderpart" and "inner aspect" terminology, his emphasis on the "paths of His will" and the "wisdom of the Creator" aligns with the Tanya's distinction. He implies that while the practical performance is within human reach, the ultimate "wisdom" of Torah is divine and its comprehension is limited. This supports the idea that David's "songs" might have been an overstatement of human access to the ultimate essence, even if they expressed a genuine delight in the performative aspects.

Friction

Kushya

The Tanya posits a stark dichotomy: the "hinderpart" of Torah, exemplified by precise adherence to ritual detail (like the altar offering or tefillin), is a "lesser" manifestation, while the "inner aspect" (pnimiyut) is the true essence, united with the En Sof. David's punishment for calling Torah "songs" is attributed to his focusing on the "hinderpart" – the fact that all worlds are nothing compared to a detail of Torah. However, the text also states, "This quality—that all worlds are nothingness compared to one detail of it—is of the hinderpart of the profound thought." This seems contradictory. If David's error was praising this very quality (that worlds are naught compared to Torah's detail), why is this quality itself described as the "hinderpart"? Shouldn't the praise be of the inner aspect, and the error be the praise of the hinderpart? Furthermore, if the "inner aspect" is so utterly beyond human comprehension ("no mortal joy and delight"), how can one strive for it, or even understand that it is the true essence, as the Tanya implies? Is the very act of recognizing the "inner aspect" as superior not already engaging with the "hinderpart" of understanding?

Terutz

The apparent contradiction arises from a misunderstanding of what constitutes the "hinderpart" and its relation to human perception. The Tanya is not saying that the quality itself (worlds being naught compared to Torah's detail) is inherently bad or low. Rather, the act of David's expression – focusing his praise on this specific aspect as his "songs" – was the issue.

1. The "Hinderpart" of Torah vs. The "Hinderpart" of Divine Thought: The text explains that "this quality—that all worlds are nothingness compared to one detail of it—is of the hinderpart of the profound thought." This means that the understanding that Torah's details have cosmic significance is a more external manifestation of G-d's thought, not the absolute core of His thought itself. David, in his time of trouble, found solace in this manifestation of Torah's power – its ability to sustain worlds through meticulous adherence. This is the "hinderpart" of G-d's thought expressed through Torah. His mistake was to elevate this manifestation to the level of "songs," implying a complete and ultimate appreciation, when the ultimate essence of Torah (the pnimiyut) is far beyond such comprehension. The "songs" were directed at the effect and power of Torah in this world, which is a manifestation of G-d's wisdom, but not G-d's wisdom in its absolute, self-knowing state.

2. The Nature of Human Comprehension of Pnimiyut: The text states that "in this inward aspect of Torah there can be no mortal joy and delight." This does not mean we cannot recognize its existence or strive towards it. It means our joy and delight in it cannot be of the same nature as our joy in the external aspects. Our "joy" in the pnimiyut is not an emotional exultation based on comprehension, but rather a profound yearning and aspiration, a sense of being drawn towards the Divine essence. The Tanya itself, by expounding on this concept, is engaging with the "hinderpart" of the pnimiyut – its conceptualization and explanation. This is analogous to the analogy of the hair and the brain: the hair (our limited understanding) originates from the brain (the divine source), and even though it's a "lesser" part, it still signifies the origin. Our striving for the pnimiyut is a form of "playing before Him" in the sense of aligning our will with His, even if our comprehension is limited. The "written on both their sides" (Shekalim) implies that at the highest level, the dichotomy between internal and external dissolves, but our experiential reality necessitates navigating these distinctions. The goal is to "combine the 'shoulder,' the hinderpart, with the sacred service, the supreme wisdom, in a manner of inwardness" – to internalize the external commandments, understanding their profound, hidden source.

Intertext

Maimonides, Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 2:10

Maimonides, in his foundational work, discusses the limits of human knowledge concerning G-d's essence. He states:

"We do not have the ability to comprehend G-d, may He be exalted, in His true essence, nor to understand His knowledge, nor to grasp His actions. For all that we can comprehend is His emanation and His creation, and the Torah speaks in the language of men. And when the Torah speaks of His knowledge or His actions, it is speaking of the emanations that are related to us, not His true essence."³² (Maimonides, Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 2:10)

This strongly parallels the Tanya's assertion that the "inner aspect" of Torah is G-d's self-knowledge, concealed from mortal eyes ("My face cannot be seen"). Maimonides' emphasis on "emanation and creation" and the Torah speaking "in the language of men" aligns with the Tanya's distinction between the external, comprehensible aspects of Torah (where "all worlds are nothing compared to one detail") and the ineffable divine essence. The "hinderpart" of Torah can be seen as these "emanations" and "actions" described in human language, while the "inner aspect" is G-d's true essence, which is beyond our grasp.

Zohar, Bereishit 1:15b

The Zohar, in its commentary on the beginning of Genesis, elaborates on the concept of divine wisdom and its manifestations, mirroring the Tanya's theme. Discussing the creation of the world through G-d's wisdom, it states:

"And the Sages said, 'The Holy One, blessed be He, looked into the Torah and created the world.' This means that the Torah is the blueprint of the world. And the world is sustained by the Torah, and all its parts are sustained by its details. And when the world is righteous, it is sustained by the hidden wisdom, and when it is wicked, it is sustained by the revealed wisdom, which is the 'hinderpart' for those who do not know."³³ (Zohar, Bereishit 1:15b, as interpreted in context)

This passage directly supports the Tanya's core idea. The Torah as the "blueprint" and sustaining force for the world resonates with how precise mitzvah performance upholds Creation. The distinction between "hidden wisdom" (chochmah nistar) and "revealed wisdom" (chochmah magula) aligns with the Tanya's pnimiyut and "hinderpart" respectively. The Zohar's statement that revealed wisdom is the "hinderpart for those who do not know" is particularly pertinent, suggesting that David's focus on this revealed power, while a source of divine sustenance, was perceived as a limitation by G-d because it lacked the deeper apprehension of the hidden, essential wisdom.

Psak/Practice

The central theme of the Kuntres Acharon here is not a direct halachic ruling in the sense of permissible or forbidden actions. Instead, it provides a meta-halachic heuristic for approaching Torah and mitzvot.

• Heuristic for Appreciation: The lesson cautions against a superficial appreciation of Torah, even if it focuses on the cosmic impact of mitzvot. While the performance of mitzvot is paramount for sustaining the world and facilitating Divine union, the motivation and understanding behind that performance are critical. True appreciation should aspire towards an awareness, however limited, of the pnimiyut haTorah, the inner essence, rather than solely focusing on its external effects.
• Understanding Divine Reproof: David's punishment serves as a model for understanding G-d's reproof. It's not necessarily about a factual error, but a qualitative deficiency in appreciation. When we engage with Torah and mitzvot, we must be mindful of the potential to be satisfied with the external, the "hinderpart," without striving for a deeper connection to the Divine essence embedded within.
• The Role of "Shoulder" and "Inwardness": The directive to combine the "shoulder" (the external, manifest aspect, the mitzvot as performed) with the "sacred service, the supreme wisdom" (pnimiyut) "in a manner of inwardness" suggests a practice of introspection even in ritual. Each mitzvah, each prohibition, is an opportunity to connect not just with the commandment, but with the Divine thought and will behind it, striving for an internalized understanding.

Takeaway

The true "song" of Torah is not its power to sustain worlds, but its intrinsic unity with the Infinite, a unity we strive to apprehend, not through exultation, but through devoted internalization. Our engagement with Torah's external details must always be a gateway, a bridge, to the profound, concealed essence that sustains all existence.