Room one hundred and six in the hall of Hayom Yom.
Shabbat, 6 Adar II 5703.
Before today's study sections, there is a reference to two customs practiced among us regarding the haftorah of Shabbat. The first section refers to the haftorah itself. It is known that there are differing customs regarding haftorot - there are haftorot customary among Ashkenazim, and those customary among Sephardim, and although generally our haftorot follow the Sephardic custom, this Shabbat is different. Among Sephardim, the haftorah for this Shabbat is "Vayaas Chirom", which is in chapter 7 of Melachim I, whereas among Ashkenazim the haftorah is "Vatishlam Kol Hamelachah", which is in chapter 7 of Melachim I. The emphasis here is that on this Shabbat "The haftorah is: 'Vatishlam Kol Hamelachah'", following the Ashkenazic custom.
Afterwards, there is a second reference to the blessings of the haftorah. Following the haftorah there are several blessings, and in earlier printings of the siddur there appeared an annotation at the conclusion of the first blessing, which referred to the conclusion of the first and the conclusion of the second blessing. There is a discussion on how the author of Shaar Hakolel understood this annotation, and how the Rebbe emphasizes here what needs to be done. At the conclusion of the first blessing the wording is "ki E-l Melech neeman verachaman atah", and the word "verachaman" was written in parentheses. On this, the author of Shaar Hakolel noted that the parentheses mean that the word "verachaman" should be omitted and not said. Why? Because there is a rule that the conclusion of a blessing must be similar to its closing formula (chatimah); and in the closing formula it is written "Hamelech haneeman bechol devarav", and therefore seemingly at the conclusion it should also be "ki E-l Melech neeman", without mentioning "rachaman".
On the other hand, in the second blessing, whose closing formula is "Baruch atah Hashem mesameiach Tziyon bevaneha", the word "utesameiach" was added at the end of the blessing, so that the conclusion would be similar to the closing formula. And the author of Shaar Hakolel understood that for the same reason "utesameiach" is added in the second blessing, "rachaman" should be omitted in the first blessing, so that in both there will be a similarity between the conclusion of the blessing and the closing formula. Regarding this, the Rebbe comes and states as a custom, "In the haftorah blessings we always say: 'neeman verachaman atah', 'toshia utesameiach'" - meaning that in any case we do say this ending, and we do not omit the word "rachaman". The precision is interesting, as someone noted - I have not seen an explanation for why the emphasis here is "always say", as if sometimes yes and sometimes no; if we did not think there was a difference, what is the emphasis on "always"? In any case, this is the point.
Someone else noted an interesting point: while the conclusion of the first blessing is "Hamelech haneeman", the opening of the next blessing is "racheim", and therefore "rachaman" can also relate to the "racheim" that follows it. And similarly with "mesameiach Tziyon", the next blessing is "samcheinu" - so that we see in these blessings a sort of chain. In any case, this is the point that the Rebbe emphasizes here regarding the custom.
Study sections: Chumash, Pekudei, Shevii, with Rashi's commentary.
Tehillim, 6th of the month, we say from chapter 35 to chapter 38 inclusive.
Tanya, on this day we conclude chapter 35, from the words "Vehinei beur" to the end of the chapter with the words "vehamaskil yavin".
In the opening itself there is a reference to the compilation of the sefer Tanya. There are two versions regarding the timeline of writing the Tanya, and both appear in the letters and sichos of the Rebbe Rayatz. One version says that the sefer Tanya is a sefer compiled from what Admor Hazaken told chassidim in yechidus over a period of ten years, from 5540 to 5550. During those ten years, chassidim went in for yechidus and shared all their matters with the Rebbe, and the Rebbe gave them answers, and all these answers are the foundation for the sefer Tanya. But Admor Hazaken only began writing the sefer itself in 5552, after the ten years in which he gave all the advice; in 5552 he began arranging the sefer, and a year later, in 5553, many copies were already circulating. And as is known from the introduction to the Tanya, among the copies there were many errors and intentional forgeries, and therefore Admor Hazaken hurried to bring the sefer to print in an organized manner, and the printing was completed in 5557. This is the first version.
The second version says that the sefer itself was written over the course of twenty years, from 5530 to 5555. Over these twenty years Admor Hazaken labored to write the sefer, and in 5555 he allowed it to be copied. That is, according to the first version, copies of the sefer already began appearing in 5553, whereas according to the second version, only in 5555 did he allow it to be copied; and the continuation is the same - that there were forgeries and various copies, and therefore he submitted it for print. According to both versions, the printing was completed in 5557. These are the two versions we will see in the first part of the teaching.
And the wording of the teaching is: "It is a tradition among the elders of Anash: The sefer Tanya is a compilation of advice". Indeed, in various places it is written that this sefer initially had different names among the chassidim - they called it "Likkutei Eitzot" and other names that I do not remember all of them - until the name "sefer Tanya" was established. "What our Great Rebbe answered in yechidus" - Admor Hazaken replied to the chassidim who went in to him for yechidus "in the years 5540-5550", and in these ten years he gave the advice that forms the foundation of the sefer Tanya. "In the summer of 5552 he began to arrange the sefer Tanya in its form as it is currently before us" - according to the first version, only in 5552 did he begin writing the Tanya and arranging it in the order familiar to us today. In the year "5553 there were already many copies of it" - the sefer became known and many copied it, but in most of the copies there were also errors and forgeries.
And as he says here: "And over time they became corrupted and people also began to forge it" - since there were copies, one copying from another, there were misnagdim who wanted to say things against Admor Hazaken, and they inserted intentional forgeries to show that the words were incorrect. "And for this reason [umeihai taama] our Rebbe hurried to submit it for print" - because of the corrupted and forged copies, Admor Hazaken hurried to print it, so that it would be printed and official, without all the problems of the manuscripts. The printing, which is not mentioned here, was in 5557.
The other version: "There is another version: For twenty years our Rebbe wrote his sefer Tanya, and was precise with every single word" - for twenty years he wrote the sefer, and was precise with every single letter on how to write it. When did the twenty years begin? This is not written here, but according to the calculation seen in the next line - he started from 5530, since he immediately says that "in the year 5555 it was already refined and purified", meaning that in 5555 the sefer was already completely arranged, after he had labored and was precise with every single word; if so, he began in 5530, and twenty years later, in 5555, he finished, and then gave permission to copy it. The conclusion in both versions is the same: "And when the copies multiplied and became corrupted, he submitted it for print" - Admor Hazaken submitted the sefer for print, which took place in 5557.
In the teaching there is another section, which does not relate to the order of writing the Tanya but to the beginning of the Tanya. According to the first version, in 5550 Admor Hazaken merely finished answering the questions to the chassidim on this subject, and according to the second version, 5550 was already deep into the writing of the sefer. In any case, the second teaching relates to this: It is known that the Tzemach Tzedek, the grandson of Admor Hazaken, was born on the eve of Rosh Hashanah 5550. On Rosh Hashanah - which was actually the first day of the Tzemach Tzedek as a newly born baby - Admor Hazaken delivered a special maamar, whose dibbur hamatchil was "Mashbiim oto tehi tzaddik", and it is the content of the first three chapters of the Tanya.
And as he says at the conclusion: "The Tzemach Tzedek related, that on the first Rosh Hashanah of his life" - the year 5550, since he was born on the eve of Rosh Hashanah - "our Great Rebbe delivered the discourse 'Mashbiim oto tehi tzaddik'", which was the dibbur hamatchil of the maamar, "and this constitutes the first three chapters of the sefer Tanya". And regarding these three chapters, starting with "Mashbiim oto tehi tzaddik" which was said immediately after the birth of the Tzemach Tzedek, the Rebbe analyzes carefully in a sichah and asks: What is the connection between specifically these three chapters and the Tzemach Tzedek, and why did he say them immediately?
First of all the Rebbe says: The entire concept of "Mashbiim oto" (they administer an oath to him) is fundamentally connected to birth - before the soul descends into the world it is sworn to be righteous - and therefore Admor Hazaken said this immediately in connection to the birth of his grandson. The delivery of the maamar "Mashbiim oto" is also connected to Rosh Hashanah, since he did not say it on the eve of Rosh Hashanah but on Rosh Hashanah, which is the day of the creation of Adam Harishon; and the creation of Adam Harishon is similar to the descent of the soul into the body - even though Adam Harishon was created on this day, the soul descended into the body on this day. Therefore the maamar is connected to this day also from the perspective of its source. And the Rebbe says that this is why the Tzemach Tzedek had the custom every year on his birthday to deliver a maamar of chassidus, since his grandfather acted this way immediately on the day he was born.
There is another connection between specifically these three chapters and the Tzemach Tzedek. According to the first aspect we mentioned, only the first chapter, only its opening, is connected to the Tzemach Tzedek; but in another place the Rebbe says that specifically the conclusion of the three chapters is connected to him. What is the topic discussed at the end of the third chapter in Tanya? Daat - this is the topic at the end of chapter 3. It is known that the Rebbe Rayatz brings down that in the order of the Rebbeim, the Baal Shem Tov and the Maggid correspond to the two aspects within Keter: the Baal Shem Tov corresponds to the inner aspect of Keter, and the Maggid to the outer aspect of Keter; Admor Hazaken corresponds to Chochmah, Admor Haemtzai to Binah, and the Tzemach Tzedek to Daat. It turns out that this is the entire essence of the Tzemach Tzedek, and therefore the maamar that Admor Hazaken delivered immediately when he was born began with "Mashbiim oto" in connection to birth, and concluded with the aspect of Daat - which is the essence of the Tzemach Tzedek.