The two hundred and eighty-first "cheder" in the palace of Hayom Yom.
Shabbat, 4 Elul 5703.
Shiurim: Chumash, Shoftim, seventh aliyah, with Rashi's commentary.
Tehillim, on the 4th of the month, one recites from chapter 23 through chapter 28 inclusive; and likewise the three chapters for the month of Elul — on this day one recites chapters 10, 11, and 12.
Tanya: On the 4th of Elul we study the entire Iggeret 11 of Iggeret HaKodesh, the well-known letter "Lehaskilcha binah," up to the final word "haganuz," with which Iggeret 11 concludes.
The daily saying is divided into two parts: the first part contains a practice related to being called up to the Torah, and the second part — the teaching itself. Regarding the practice connected to the Torah reading, it is interesting that there is an update to the custom here: in the "Hayom Yom" book itself, which was first published in 5703, the custom was written in a more abbreviated form, and when it was published a second time in 5717 — after the Rebbe had published in 5708 the customs of the Rebbe Rayatz regarding being called up to the Torah — the Rebbe updated the custom as it appears before us.
What is being discussed here? Only the manner of conduct is written, in brief, without the reasons and what lies behind it. And so it is written: "The order of the blessing over the Torah": when a person receives an aliyah to the Torah and comes to recite the blessing, how does one act in practice? The first expression: "He touches his tallis at the beginning of the reading and at its end" — before he recites the blessing, he touches his tallis at the place where the reading of his aliyah is to begin, as well as at the place where it is to conclude.
This itself is a novel point, for there is much discussion of this in the halachic works, in the poskim and in the responsa: many write not to touch the letters; some object to any touching at all, while others say to touch only the white portion and not the letters themselves, out of concern for a problem. Yet here it is stated in practice that one does indeed touch, "he kisses the tallis at the place where he touched the Torah scroll" — after touching the Torah scroll at the beginning and at the end, he kisses the tallis at the place where he touched it.
Here it is worth adding that the Rebbe himself had the practice — as we observed all the years — of touching three times: first he touched at the beginning of the reading, then at its end, and again at the beginning, and then he kissed. This point is not written here, and only from his actual conduct did we see that this is how the Rebbe always did. [And it should be noted that this stage of touching and kissing at the beginning and at the end did not appear in the first "Hayom Yom" of 5703.]
What is written next? "He rolls up the Sefer Torah" — he closes the Sefer Torah. What is being emphasized here? There is a discussion in the Gemara in tractate Megillah, whether the one making the blessing should recite it while the scroll is open or while it is closed; those who hold that one should bless while the scroll is closed reasoned that this is so people should not say that the blessings are written in the Torah. Here the Rebbe rules that the practice is that the scroll is rolled up, that is, one blesses while it is closed.
Moreover, it is not enough that the book is closed; rather "and he turns his face slightly away" — he turns his face a little away from the book, to distance himself even further and to show that the blessings are not written in the book itself. And to which side does he turn? "To the right". Interestingly, in the glosses of the Rema it is written that one should turn his face to the left, whereas here the Rebbe rules that one should turn his face to the right, and only then does he recite the blessing; and after the blessing "he opens the Sefer Torah and reads from it".
There is no reference here to the conclusion. And what do we do at the conclusion? As is the custom brought in other places, the same idea: at the conclusion one touches the tallis and kisses the place where they finished, and at the place where they began — the Rebbe would touch the place of the conclusion again — and one closes the sefer Torah, and then recites the blessing. This is the reference to the custom at the aliyah to the Torah.
Now we will read the teaching in the second section. The saying itself is from a letter written by the Rebbe Rayatz in the winter of 5696. A saying from this letter has already appeared in "Hayom Yom" — not long ago, on 20 Tammuz, we had the saying about the three types of hisbonenus, which is the first part of that same letter; and the daily teaching before us appears further on in the letter.
What is written there? Later in the letter, after he explains what one should contemplate in the various types of contemplation, he brings: "Regarding the superiority of the human species" — when one contemplates the superiority of the human species, the loftiest species in creation — "there are four descriptions," four ways in which the human species is described and defined.
The first title is "adam." What does the title "adam" express? This is the loftiest of the titles, expressing the "superiority of the intellect and the mind" — the distinction of the human being who possesses intellect and mind. There are even places where it is written that "adam" is the proper name of Adam HaRishon, and therefore in the word "adam" there is no difference between the singular and the plural — even when speaking of many people, they are called by the name "adam"; there is no change in this word, since it is a proper name, and it is also the loftiest name.
The lower title is "ish". What does it signify? "The virtue of the heart and the character traits" — the word "ish" expresses a person's virtues in that he has a generous heart and good character traits. Therefore, unlike "adam", the name "ish" is a changing name — differing between male and female and between singular and plural: there is "ish" and there is "anashim", there is "ish" and there is "ishah"; not like "adam" which is a noun in itself, but rather "ish" already expresses virtues and a title.
The next level — and here he turns immediately to the lowest — is "enosh," the most inferior rung in the definition of man. "Enosh" is an expression of deficiency, as in the verse "and behold, my wound is grievous (nachlah anush)," or as in our common expression "a critical (anush) condition." What does this express? It expresses "a weakness in one of them, in intellect or in the emotive traits," in one of the faculties — we said that "adam" is a designation of the intellect and "ish" a designation of the heart; and "enosh," the lowest of them all, indicates that something here is weak — either in the intellect, or in the emotive traits, or in both. "Enosh" is the most degraded state.
Then comes the fourth level — "gever". What is "gever"? He stands above "enosh". For "gever" is related to the term hitgabrut (overcoming) — "overcoming himself", and he deals with the "enosh": he senses the problem he has, whether in the intellectual or emotional realm, and his task is "to remove the hindrances and obstacles" — to eliminate that which prevents and hinders him from revealing the quality of the intellect or the quality of the heart "in order to attain one of the qualities in intellect or in the emotive attributes", that is, he must remove the hindrances and obstacles that cause him not to receive what is within him. If he lacks knowledge, or if he does not know how to strengthen his character traits, he will exert himself to attain one of the qualities — in intellect or in the emotive attributes. This is the designation "gever", from the term hitgabrut. And therefore, as our Sages said, "it is the way of a man (ish) to conquer", so too "gever" is a designation indicating a certain overcoming.
And if we wish to sum up the four terms in a single sentence: "that is to say, the gever works with the enosh to raise him to the level of ish or adam" — the gever takes the "enosh" and attends to him: either succeeding in elevating him to the level of "ish," or raising him even higher to the level of "adam."
What is the conclusion from all this? We are not learning here mere theory, that there are various levels; the main point to which the Rebbe Rayatz leads appears in the last three lines: "And since it is possible to transform an enosh into an ish or an adam, it necessarily follows that even within the enosh there are present all those virtues that exist in an ish and also in an adam" — if the man is able to take the "enosh" and elevate him to the level of "ish," or even to the level of "adam," then it necessarily follows that within the "enosh" as well there are all the virtues that exist in "ish" and in "adam."
For if a person on the level of "enosh" had no potential capacity whatsoever to be elevated, the "gever" would not succeed in making anything of him, and he would be lost. The very fact that the aspect of "gever" is able to work with the aspect of "enosh" and raise him up to become an "ish" or "adam" — this is a sign that even one whose designation is "enosh," this is only his external appearance; but inwardly he possesses the virtues of intellect and emotion, and all that is needed is for the "gever" to come and succeed in revealing within him that which is already there.