In the previous section we studied the words of the yenuka, who opened by bringing the matter of covering one's head in order to reinforce the principle that the Shechinah rests upon a person's head. Now let us sharpen the point of the parable itself.
The fuel has to be a refined substance specifically:
The parable of the candle is simple enough, but it deserves precision: the fuel has to be a refined substance specifically, specifically oil. The Mishnah in Tractate Shabbos teaches «With what may we kindle and with what may we not kindle» (the chapter recited in many communities on Friday). Why are there oils with which we may not kindle? Because they are not drawn properly after the wick and they do not burn well. And why do they not burn well? Because the substance is not refined enough; it cannot turn into fire, and therefore the flame is not clean and clear.
Fire is something almost spiritual. For a physical substance to become fire, that is, to become spiritual, it must be a substance that has a certain refinement of its own, and then it has a chance of being absorbed into the fire and becoming one with it.
From here we see that the wick alone is not enough: not only because a wick without oil would burn up within seconds, but because even during those very seconds it would not burn properly, and nothing would rise from it but soot. Oil is a necessity.
Why can the neshamah not serve as the oil?
At first glance this is not understood at all. We are speaking of a Jew who has a neshamah, the most inward and most refined part of him. His body is the wick, and a wick indeed cannot burn on its own, but he has a neshamah! And as we learned in chapter 3 of Tanya, the neshamah is intellect and it is emotion. Why, then, should the intellect and emotion of the neshamah not serve as the oil, as the fuel? Let him sit and contemplate, let him fill with love for the Creator and be set aflame with feeling, and that will be excellent fuel upon which the Shechinah can rest.
Says the yenuka: no! Even the neshamah is not sufficient to be the oil. What is the oil? «Ovdin tavin», good deeds, specifically deeds, action in the plain sense, all the mitzvos that are performed in action.
And the question arises: what advantage does a mitzvah of action have over the feeling in the heart and the understanding in the mind? If we were asked to rank these things, where would we place action and where would we place emotion? The question is a strong one.
The Alter Rebbe opens by asking the question himself: «והנה ביאור משל זה» (and now, the explanation of this parable), to understand the parable of the yenuka, who compared the light of the Shechinah to the light of a candle, which does not shine and does not take hold in the wick without oil. And what is the lesson? «וכך אין השכינה שורה על גוף האדם» (and so too the Shechinah does not rest upon a person's body), which is compared to the wick, «אלא על ידי מעשים טובים דווקא, ולא די לו בנשמתו שהיא חלק אלוקה ממעל להיות היא כשמן לפתילה» (but only through good deeds specifically; his neshamah, which is a part of G-d above, does not suffice to be as oil to the wick). In other words, a Jew cannot settle for saying: what do I need good deeds for, I have a neshamah that is a part of G-d above!
Sometimes a person feels that when he performs an action he is, as it were, coming down in level: a deed can be done by a small child too, by a fool too, by someone with no feeling at all, and even by someone whose feelings run in the opposite direction. «I am better than he is», a person tells himself, «and therefore I do not busy myself with deeds; instead I fill myself with feeling and with understanding». To him it is said: with all your feeling and all your understanding, the fire will not ignite, because this is not fuel. You want the fire to burn? Deeds.
The parable of the two men who enter before the king:
A great king, exalted and lofty, wise and wondrous, sits in his magnificent palace. A first man from the land enters before him, one who recognizes the king's greatness and takes in all the royal protocol, and he is so moved by the privilege that has fallen to him to enter the palace that out of sheer emotion and excitement he faints on the spot. Everyone who sees it says: look at this man, what closeness he has to the king, what intensity, what feeling!
After him a second man enters, a simple fellow who does not understand what a king even is and is not interested either; and more than that, he cannot stand the king and cannot bear to look at him. He enters because he has no choice, because they forced him in. The king turns to him and asks him to fill a cup of water for him. Deep down he has no desire to do anything for the king, but he has no choice, whether out of fear or for some other reason, so he goes over to the tap, fills a cup of water, brings it before him, and returns to his place.
Which of the two is closer to the king? (And the question is not because of the water itself, which the king does not need.) Is it the one who fainted, or the one who deep down cannot stand the king, but who did what the king said?
Bowing in the Beis Hamikdash versus kabbolas ol in the time of exile:
Before we answer the question, let us preface another point, which is not merely a parable but something written in Chassidus. In the Mussaf prayer of the festivals we ask for the time when we will go up to the Beis Hamikdash, since today we are far away and cannot go up and see and bow. In the time of the Beis Hamikdash one could bow before the King; in the time of exile our eyes see nothing, and we feel nothing.
Seemingly, where is there more revelation of G-dliness, in the time of the Beis Hamikdash or in the time of exile? Simply put: in the time of the Beis Hamikdash. For bowing is not merely a technical act, the body lying on the floor instead of standing, but the expression of something inward and of the soul: a person is so nullified that he stretches himself out flat, with his head and his foot on one level, before the greatness of the King. This is absolute bittul, total self-nullification; he is not standing and feeling himself. If so, the time of the Beis Hamikdash, the time of bowing, is the greatest bittul there could possibly be, with nothing comparable to it.
On the other hand, it is written in Chassidus that specifically in our time, the time of exile, when we do not see and do not feel, and we fulfill things with kabbolas ol alone, acceptance of the yoke, because that is what the King said, even though we have no desire for it and no feeling in it, there is in this a greater revelation of G-dliness than in the time when the Beis Hamikdash stood. Seemingly this is a contradiction: how can it be?
The explanation: my «I» or the will of the King:
The answer to this is also the answer to the parable of the two men who enter before the king, and it is the introduction to understanding the words of the Alter Rebbe. That man who filled the cup of water is doing it neither out of love nor out of fear; he has no feeling at all, and at most he has an external dread, fear and trembling, and in terms of emotion he is utterly nothing. But at the moment he acts, what is driving him? Not his «I», but the will of the king. The king said, and he does.
This, in essence, is the great advantage that the deeds of the mitzvos have over the emotion of the neshamah. The emotion of the neshamah is wondrous and good, but it cannot be the fuel that turns into bittul to the Shechinah. Shechinah means ein od milvado, there is nothing besides Him, nothing other than Him, that there is no one and there is nothing. And if there is a «something», even if that something is wondrous and beautiful and magnificent, then it is already not «nothing other than Him», since that something has an existence of its own. But when a person nullifies himself and does what he was commanded, who stands out in that act? The will of the King.
From here we see that the deed, physical though it is, is fuel for the Shechinah, because it is not my «I» but the will of the King. The neshamah, on the other hand, spiritual though it is, its emotion is a person's spiritual «I», and there is no bittul to the King in it.
In summary: in this section we established that the fuel must be refined specifically, like oil, since only a refined substance can unite with the spiritual fire, and therefore the wick alone is not enough. We asked why the intellect and emotion of the neshamah cannot serve as the oil, and we brought the words of the Alter Rebbe that the Shechinah rests upon a person's body only through good deeds specifically. By means of the parable of the two men who enter before the king, and by means of the comparison between bowing in the time of the Beis Hamikdash and kabbolas ol in the time of exile, it was explained that the advantage of the deed is that in it the will of the King stands out and not the person's «I», whereas in the emotion of the neshamah, spiritual as it is, the spiritual «I» remains intact, and there is no true bittul to the King in it.
In the next section we will continue with the words of the Alter Rebbe in chapter 35 and with the explanation of them.