The fourteenth "room" in the palace of Hayom Yom.
Friday, 3 Teves, the eighth day of Chanukah, 5703.
Lessons: Chumash, Mikeitz, the sixth aliyah, with Rashi's commentary.
Tehillim, the 3rd of the month, from chapter 18 through chapter 22 inclusive.
Tanya, on this day we conclude chapter 4, from the words "velachen amru" until the end of the chapter with the words "chesed umayim".
The daily saying brings two corrections and emendations on maamarim from the sefer Torah Or. It is known that in the copy of Torah Or that the Rebbe Rashab used, he made corrections in his holy handwriting on certain maamarim, and corrected quite a number of things; and the Rebbe would copy from these corrections and bring them in "Hayom Yom".
Let us examine the first correction. The wording of "Hayom Yom": "In Torah Or, in the maamar beginning Tanu Rabanan mitzvas ner Chanukah" - the wording written there is "ki ein k'dai kol hadinim", and the correction is that "it should read ki k'dai kol hadinim".
And this is the background to the matter: the Gemara in tractate Chagigah (page 15b) tells about Elisha ben Avuya, who is called "Acher". They said of him in the heavenly court that after his death they would not judge him - they would not judge him in Gehinnom, and they also would not bring him into Gan Eden. The Gemara explains that they would not judge him in Gehinnom because he was involved in Torah, but he would not come to Gan Eden because he sinned. And regarding this Rabbi Meir said: better that they should judge him with the torments of Gehinnom so that he can afterward enter Gan Eden.
In the maamar in Torah Or, in parshas Mikeitz, in one of the Chanukah maamarim whose opening words are "Tanu Rabanan mitzvas ner Chanukah", the first chapter explains the greatness of the level of the souls in Gan Eden, that they attain very great G-dly comprehension. And on this basis he understands the words of Rabbi Meir about Acher - why he said that it is worthwhile that they judge him in Gehinnom so that he should merit to enter Gan Eden. The wording of the maamar: "ki ein k'dai kol hadinim against the pleasure of his comprehension". And the Rebbe Rashab corrects that the word "ein" should be removed, and it should read "ki k'dai kol hadinim" - meaning "k'dai" in the sense of worth: all the judgments he would undergo in Gehinnom are worth it so that he can afterward enter into the revelation of Gan Eden. This is the first correction.
This part of the saying has a special connection to the daily Tanya lesson of 3 Teves - the conclusion of chapter 4, which explains that the soul in Gan Eden derives pleasure from the radiance of the Shechinah, the pleasure of the soul's comprehension in Gan Eden. And here too the content of the Rebbe Rashab's correction is about the great level that the soul has when it attains in Gan Eden all the comprehensions, which is why all the judgments and torments are worth it in order to reach this. This is the first correction.
And now to the second correction: "There, in the biur on the maamar beginning Roni v'simchi". In that same parshah, Mikeitz, in Torah Or, among the Chanukah maamarim there is a maamar whose opening words are the verse "Roni v'simchi bas Tzion". Afterward - as is very common in the maamarim of Torah Or and Likkutei Torah - there is a "biur" on the maamar, an additional maamar explaining the previous one. And in this biur on "Roni v'simchi bas Tzion", in the "section beginning" - the second section, which begins with the words "v'atah navo" - the correction is found.
[By the way, an interesting matter: one of the notable differences between Likkutei Torah and Torah Or. All of it consists of maamarim of the Alter Rebbe - Torah Or on the books of Bereishis and Shemos, and Likkutei Torah on Vayikra, Bamidbar, Devarim and Shir HaShirim. In Likkutei Torah the maamar is divided into chapters, and before each chapter its number is marked with a letter (chapter 2, 3, 4, and so on); whereas in Torah Or, although there is a division into chapters, no letters are marked on the chapters, but rather each chapter opens with letters in a large font. Therefore, when the Rebbe brings here a correction referring to the second chapter of the maamar, he does not write "section 2", but rather "the section beginning v'atah navo" - since this is the only possible way to identify the beginning of the section, given that it has no numbering by letters].
In the second section of the biur on "Roni v'simchi", almost at its end, it speaks of the loftiness of Moshiach, and the verse said about him is brought: "Hinei yaskil avdi yarum v'nisa v'gavah m'od". And why does he bring this verse? He explains in the wording of the maamar: "that is, from the pnimiyus of Atik" - the known Atik is the pnimiyus of Kesser, and the loftiness of Moshiach is from the pnimiyus of Atik itself - "which is the pnimiyus of alef alef", and it concludes thus: "there will be the loftiness of Moshiach". "Alef alef" is an abbreviation, usually for "Arich Anpin".
And the Rebbe corrects: ""which is the pnimiyus of A"A" should read: "which is the pnimiyus of E"S"" - that the abbreviation should not be "alef alef" but "alef samech", which is "Ein Sof" - meaning that it is the pnimiyus of Ein Sof. For it is not fitting to say "the pnimiyus of Arich Anpin", since "Arich" is a level lower than "Atik"; and if it was said beforehand that Moshiach is from the pnimiyus of Atik, it is not fitting that it should afterward say "in the pnimiyus of Arich", which is a lower level. Therefore he corrects: instead of "the pnimiyus of alef alef" it should be "the pnimiyus of alef samech", which is the abbreviation for "the pnimiyus of Ein Sof".
What do we learn from all these corrections? What does the Rebbe want to convey to us with them? The Rebbe wishes to encourage everyone to study the daily lessons - and this is one of the purposes of "Hayom Yom". There are the daily lessons of Chitas (Chumash, Tehillim, Tanya), and there is the daily lesson in the chassidic parshah in "Torah Or" or "Likkutei Torah". The chassidic parshah of the week is parshas Mikeitz, in which one studies the maamarim of Mikeitz; and in the course of the study there are corrections, and the Rebbe notes them. Through the very corrections he conveys the message that one must study the chassidic parshah, so that this directive should be fulfilled.
It is worth noting another interesting point: on Simchas Torah 5731, during the meals in the apartment of the Rebbe Rayatz, the Rebbe related that when they printed Likkutei Torah in the time of the Rebbe Rashab, the printer worked on the sefer before the printing and managed to make thousands of corrections in the maamarim, so that in the printing everything came out in an orderly and corrected form.
In principle it is a wonderful thing that the sefer is more accurate. But the Rebbe related that one of the chassidim, Rav Dovid Tzvi Chen - "the Radatz Chen", the rav of Chernigov - was not at all pleased with the correcting. Why? He argued that when one studies a maamar in Likkutei Torah, the student must toil in it; and part of the toil is that he gets stuck on a word that is not understood, exerts himself, and it takes him a long time until he grasps its meaning. "And now", he said, "that they have corrected all the printing errors, he no longer has the opportunity to toil, and everything flows for him like water" - and therefore he held that it would have been better had it not been corrected.
However the Rebbe, years later, in 5740, on Shabbos parshas Vayeitzei, addressed the continuation of the story and said that this is fitting for a chassid on the level of the Radatz Chen, who toils and exerts himself even when he does not understand; but in principle, for chassidim of our standing, it is known what is written, that a sefer must be proofread and accurate. And if a sefer is not corrected - as is written regarding a Torah scroll, that if it is not proofread it is forbidden to use it and forbidden to leave it as is, but rather it must be corrected. And in seforim of chassidus, on the contrary, one must make all the corrections, and one will still need to toil to understand the content of the matters; but the corrections themselves are certainly necessary corrections. And this is what the Rebbe wants to bring in here in the daily saying - that one definitely needs to know what the corrections in "Hayom Yom" are, and one should not get stuck in the study, but rather the matters should be clear and lucid by means of this saying. This is the conclusion of the daily saying.