Series: Be'erot, Love & Relationship with God.

Episode Transcript: Last time we were learning we had uncovered a very amazing feature about Yosef Hatzadik. And that is that everything about what he is is hinted in his name that Rachel Imeinu gave him. He's actually defined in two realizations in life: one is that, she declares as soon as he's born asaf Hashem et cherpati. That G-d has gathered in my degradation. And the other is she says rather, well, if he were listening when he was born he might have been somewhat disturbed by the other thing she says, which is naming him Yosef by virtue of Yosif li ben acher, that I have a prayer that there should be another one. It's a rather funny thing to be called. Because it actually means about you that you're nothing but a transition. Nothing but an avenue for other things to come into the world. His mother expresses her sense of him as really being that which is to be traversed in order that the next child be born. And in fact Rachel is very connected to that phenomenon as we've spoken about her in the past, that she is the behina of this world, she's the alma d'it galya , about which the rabbis say is simply a passageway to the next. And her herself, she herself, participates in that as becomes reveals when she dies "on the way." And Yaakov emphasizes that, the Chumash emphasizes that, she dies "on the way," derech Efrata. Towards the place of fertility. She never really arrives there. She dies on the way to that realization, and so, in a sense Yosef is really her image in being the one who lives "on the way." But what was most real for us about Yosef in that is what we explored last week, Yosef as the channel. And his personal way of being which was – our primary last week was -- in giving over life. And that's what Yosef does. He gives over life, he's the mashbir l’khol ha'aretz. And he stands in a radical difference from the way of living that his brothers live, or especially as expressed by Yehuda, which is of containment. Containment. Yehuda, who is the malchut , literally malchut is kelim, is, the letters of malchut actually is kelim. That's what malchut does. Is it creates kelim and it's very good at that, and that's very, very crucial, but it also has a tremendous failing when the kelim become self-serving, and the structures become a self-justifying reality in which the – like we all know it in politics – where the bureaucracy becomes its own self-serving system. And we all know it in personality also. When our personality actually becomes self-serving. By which I mean, when we have a way of being in the world that we become very, very protective of. Become very, very insistent upon. And we become very expressed through and identified with, to the point that all we see is ourselves, and then, rather than being a picture of that which is beyond, which is what the malchut is meant to be – it's a temuna, it says in the kabala the malchut is the temuna -- it's the picture. Instead of being a picture it becomes a false mirror. In other words, a true reflection of what is, is the true path of malchut, in which it's expressing that which is feeding into it, and is expressing it outside of itself as the image. So, too, in a personality. When you're authentic to what it is that you're manifesting so that's an integris picture of who it is that you are. But often times we find ourselves becoming very much involved in looking at the image that we've created and becoming, in a sense, worshipers of that image. It becomes the avoda zara of personality when that which you've created as your persona becomes that which you worship, and that which you protect and that which you preserve. And then instead of it being a picture of what is, it becomes a mirror of its own self. And as we saw last time, Yaakov actually tells that to his children before they sat [set?] out on the path of their meeting with Yosef, their first meeting with Yosef. Which begins, as we saw last week, with him saying to them, it says that Yaakov saw that there was shever in Mitzrayim. That he saw – of course literally in the pshat is he saw that there was what to buy in Egypt. There was food in Egypt. Shever; it means food and what to purchase. But shever also means, as we know, a crack. He saw that there was a sever, a severing, in Mitzrayim. Probably shever and sever, in English, are related. Because there was a cleavage in Mitzrayim. And that cleavage and that severing is what's called in the kabbala the ateret hayesod. Which is the place where things open up into reality outside themselves. And so he saw that there was this cleavage, this break in Mitzrayim, he saw there was an opportunity in Mitzrayim, for something to be born. And he says to his children lama titra'u. How comes you're just standing around here looking at each other. But, more deeply, because it's the reflexive, "how come you're just standing around looking at yourselves?" He mamash says it to them; so clear. You're just standing around looking at yourselves; all you have is these persona that you've created, and all you're doing is looking at them. And the only relationship you have with the world outside you is just figuring out how it's going to harm or feed that which you've already created about yourself that you are going to maintain. But you have no interest, really, in the outside reality as something from which you could possibly learn, grow from, which you would actually invest in, as something which would become a greater realization because of your investment in it. That's not at all your interest; you're just interested in maintaining the institutions that you've created. And they're great institution makers; I mean, they are. Like, although, clearly I sort of see myself belonging on the Yosef side of the map, I don't want to denigrate the great institution makers, and they are. But that's basically what Yehuda does; he goes to Mitzrayim in order to build the Beit Midrash there: v'yishlach le'horot. He's sent ahead to teach in the Beit Midrash and to set up the yeshiva, Rashi says, that are going to be in Goshen. That's his task. But, as we all know, when an educational institution, for instance, just becomes its own self-serving fact, so then the students in it become secondary. It's like, I'm working now with this charitable organization, who's supposed to funnel money that someone has donated to make a commemoration for Shlomo who was murdered a month and a half ago, and so, I'm just watching how they're really well meaning, you know, they really want to be a charitable organization. But they've created this monster! There's like all this overhead. So from a rather large donation, they want to take 10%, which is more than $10,000. Just to give you a sense of what … Now, they don't have all that much work to do. But, I mean, the people are there, they're full-time, I mean it's like there are 2 people on staff and there's a space they're renting, and it's like this big thing. So then they need the donations to keep themselves running. That's what institutions become instead of -- losing the vision of what it was they were set-up for – they become their own self-serving thing of seeing themselves. And, literally, the attitude becomes one of spying, which we saw last week as Yosef's accusation to the brothers: "you've come spying." Because when all you're doing is being committed to the maintenance of the forms that you've made, so then the only attitude that you're really going to be willing to have with that which is outside of you is to spy all the time, whether it's going to be to your advantage or to your disadvantage. And the vision that you originally had that you're supposed to be a picture of, and maintain a perfect reflection of, becomes lost and clouded. And this is one element of what the kabala calls kitzutz b'netiyot, when the malchut is like a plant which has been cut off from its source. Like a plant that's been cut off out of the ground. That's ultimate sin in kabbala. That's ultimate sin; that's the root of avoda zara. And it is the root of avoda zara! It's when the things that are creations that are pictures of that which is beyond loose the beauty that they have as the reflection of what is beyond and they become self-serving phenomenon. That was the sod of lama titra'u that Yaakov says to the children: "All you're doing is looking at yourselves. What you need is the man who is the man of shever ." And the man who is the man of shever is Yosef always. Yosef is always in a crisis. He's always in the place of the shever. And he creates crises; he does! Yaakov Avinu, when he was mevakesh shalva, as we saw, so, ele toldot Yaakov – if you want to see someone growing, toldot Yaakov, if you want to see Yaakov producing, ele toldot Yaakov, Yosef,ben 17 shana. So bring on Yosef, right? The rest of the brothers don't even matter in the depiction of ele toldot Yaakov: well where are the rest of them? There's Reuben, Shimon, Levy, Yehuda, Yissachar, Zevulun, Dan, Naftali; where are they all? The only toldot of Yaakov, the only one who makes Yaakov continue to grow, is Yosef. Because Yaakov, who, as we saw last week, is simply a fire – just a fire burning, he doesn't reach out of himself – so he would just stay put. [16:44] Kafatz alav rogzo shel Yosef Rashi says: the guy whose whole being says "hey, where you are, it's just a transition to the next place." That's all. It's just transitions all the time. Don't get snagged on where you've come to; there's something else waiting for you. That's Yosef. Don't get snagged. So kafatz alav rogzo shel Yosef : Yaakov knows this about Yosef. He finds it out more and more. And then finally, when he, I believe, comes to the realization that his path has been, sort of, "lehitra'ot," you know, to just "see himself" all the time, and for them to see themselves, when he comes to that, then he can send the children out to meet Yosef. I don't know if these are conscious processes, but in the story that's mamash what happens. He sends Yosef to the brothers to make shalom, which, as we saw last week, is always involved in moving beyond. It's not shalva, it's not "peace." Right? It's not peace, as we saw, peace and pius is simply, what's it called, appeasement. There's a fancy word: rapprochement. That's not shalom. That's like, ensconcing things as they are. But Yosef insists on the moving; that's why he will always be the ish shalom. That's such a different perspective, and we saw last week how much he plays that out. But that comes from a perspective on reality which is that way. Which is why we saw last week that he's the candle, he's the flame. And he teaches his brother this consciousness, in telling them of 10 candles, 10 lights, 10 fires, flames couldn't put out one, certainly one can't put out ten. When flames meet they just make each other brighter. "I met you; all you did was make me brighter, and yourselves brighter, and that's all I've been about since you did what you did to me – all I've been about is making you brighter and making me brighter. That's all I've been about. And making the world brighter. Doesn't matter what you'll do, and how dark a place you'll throw me into." And they throw him into the darkest place. It's like a way of living, all the time, to be touching that. But he's also always in crisis. There's always like a crisis, like a shever, because he can never sit still, like, where he's come to is not good enough. But for him it's not out of driveness, it's out of there's just so much more, there's always more fire to burn, there's always more reality to expose, always more connections to make. Connections to make, which is where growth and reality comes from. This is why he names his son Ephraim for. He names his son Ephraim. And Yaakov recognizes Ephraim, even though he's the second son, as being the primary son. Because that's, yeah, "that's Yosef." The man of incessant creativity and fertility; that's Yosef; he's always opening up for more. That's Ephraim.

So these are the themes that we explored last week with more openings here of the nature of how this works in personality, in human personality. And how they became entrapped and therefore spies, and ceased to be brothers. Which is what basically he accuses them of. So, this is what we explored last time, and the nature of Yosef's name, is yosif li ben acher. And the other thing, which I'm not sure I spoke out enough, which I sorely don't want to forget, and that is Yosef in his being for those people he meets. And this is another, this is a trap, which is a trap for Yosef. It's not a Yehuda trap, it's a Yosef trap. Yehuda we made enough critique of. And Yehuda desperately needs Yosef. Just as all the institution makers need the one who's always breaking the kelim. Always making a shever. They need them. They invite them in; I don't know, they may have trouble with them. But, that's a true need of the "Yehudaim" in the world, is that there be a shever to break the place out of what it just becomes more thickly and thickly self-justifying and self-creating-with. So, but the great failing in Yosef is he becomes self-involved. That's different than trying to maintain a veneer. Yosef will never try to maintain the veneer. He doesn't really care about the veneer; the veneer just gets in the way. Doesn't care about the persona. It's like, not his thing. But what he does become in his failing, and where he needs Yehuda, is he becomes self-involved. He just becomes, like, it's all about growing. It's all about creating. Right? So, "leave me to my artistry." And then there's no – this I give for Sarah -- there's no "for-ness." You know, what they call – I think that's a made-up word – but there's no for-ness, there's no being for the, for being completely devoted to truth, to creative expression, to realization, but then it becomes, in its failing, personal realization. And personal involvement. And that's his way of becoming, he's not titra'u in the sense of just looking at himself; it's not that he's looking at himself. He's just like – in the sense of trying to mirror himself. The way the Yehuda people become. He's just self-involved. He's not for the people he's coming in contact with. That's Yosef who's fixing his hair, looking in his mirror making sure he looks nice. He's outward directed, but self-involved. That's Yosef the na'ar, the adolescent Yosef. Who just becomes caught up in his own stuff and loses his for-ness. Of course the great tikkun of Yosef comes by virtue of what Paro puts him in charge of, which is to become the mashbir kol ha'aretz. Which is the greatest thing Yosef can do. Is to become completely a channel for the goodness which he brings out and into the world from beyond himself. And then he becomes a channel; that's like, clog up the Yosef and mamash the guy's going to die! Once he realizes his tikkun. And even when he's not in a realized tikkun he's like, he really in a sense deserves to die. That's simply a reflection of what he himself is sort of giving off. Because if Yosef isn't for others, if Yosef isn't out there seeking shlom acheicha, seeking the peace of your brothers, he's not out there and that's why his father sends him out to do that. "You can't stay home, Yosef! You gotta be out there seeking the shlom of your brothers, 'cause if you don't you'll just die!" So, in a sense, Paro really gives him his tikkun, to make him mashbir kol ha'aretz. It's just funny, because he'll be not only the one who provides all the nutrition and sustenance of the land, but he's also a crisis maker: the mashbir kol ha'aretz. He creates crises! He creates openings for people. He was always shuddering them out of their complacency.

"Is he creating a crisis or revealing a crisis that's there?"

Revealing the crisis that's there, beseder, OK, I'm not even sure. I mean, of course, from his perspective he's only creating, he's only revealing something which is there, latent in the reality as it is and just kinda exposing the openings that people have not come to recognize in themselves, for sure. But from the perspective of the people he's [? Working them? 26:10.2]. They probably experience him as making crises. In any case, so, Yosef, that's his tikkun, that's when the yesod becomes a giver. And that's his only tikkun, he's like, he's a dead man without that. He's a dead man; there's no existence for him. That's why Yaakov, knowing this about Yosef, as we saw, says about him that "you're the flame. I might be the fire; I might have been perfectly happy b'eretz migurei aviv, just going back home." Which is the way the chumash describes vyeshev Yaakov b'eretz migurei aviv ???? [26:59.3]: "I didn't like that whole galus thing, you know, that wasn't what I was looking for. I just got, like, chased into it. But, you know, I'm a fire. But in order for a fire to get back to Eretz Yisrael, so, we need a flame in order to get back to the place from which we can really give. We need the flame. That's you, Yosef." So, you hear in that description of him -- these primary depictions of these characters is just so marvelous, how precise Chazal are, and so deserving of real, in Hebrew it's called mishush, you know, like, I don't know if there's a good English word for that, of like, just, touching them and caressing them and moving them around – but that depiction of Yosef is also a description of his essence and therefore also of his tikkun: he always has to be a flame. Always has to be a flame. And a flame is lighting others, and is also igniting others. And [I'll? 28;16.2] experience him both ways.

So we saw, in our context of achoti, ra'ayati, yonati, tamati, so we saw in that context that Yosef brings this about in people by looking in their eyes. We were in a context of achoti, ra'ayati, yonati, tamati, with achoti Avraham, ra'ayati Yitzhak, yonati is Yosef, he's the yonah who the kabalah says looks infinitely into the eyes of the other, her partner, all the time, she's always like, very … it's a deep, deep ne'emanut that the yonah has. And it's in that both reliability and investment and faithfulness, so she exposes the infinite wellsprings of the other. So, in that sense, it's like lighting the fire of the other to look in their eyes; it's very delicate, and you have to be careful how you do it. It's tricky. But, that's how you bring another person out really, unless they're so caught up in their own being ashamed of themselves that they can't let you look in. And that will be what it will be; it's, that's what'll do it, right? Like, we turn our eyes down; it's like, we're embarrassed. And correctly so; we're embarrassed. And often times incorrectly so. But that's where a person who's embarrassed by something that's how, you know: "looked him straight in the eyes." You know. That's when it's power. But that you're willing to hold the glance, and look back, that's when you can rely on me. Right? The one who's being looked at and being willing to look back, it's "you can rely on me; you can count on me. There's nothing I'm ashamed of which I'm afraid that if it would be exposed then you'll cease to trust me." I think all those words revolve around the issue of looking into each other's eyes, which the yona is representative of.

So, I don't know, but – I do know – that, I mean, we don't have explicit statements of this in Chazal about Yosef, you know, looking into people's eyes, but what we do have is that Yaakov Avinu calls him the shor. The bull. So people normally associate that with, and correctly, they associate with fertility. But here's a deeper secret about shor: and that is that shor means seeing. It means looking. In Hebrew mi yishurenu, his vision is so long, mi yishurenu. Mi yishurenu is from Parshat Bilam. Bilam says this. "Wow! [32:23.7?] tov…." I don't remember the precise pasuk, but mi yeshurenu. Who can see it? shurai'na, in Aramaic means vision. Shuraina. Banot tza'ada alei shur is a play on words. It's about the women in Mitzrayim who – it's got a triple play on words, it's unbelievable – Banot tza'ada alei shur: are you familiar with the pasuk? It's in the bracha of Yosef. Ben porat Yosef [33.00.4?] porat alei ayin: he's the one, the fertile one, the beautiful one. Porat means fertile and beautiful. Alei ayin: he's the one who is above the eye. He's the one who's above the eye, or, as some interpret it: he's the olay ayin, he's like the springs of the eye. Springs of the eye. Banot tza'ada alei shur: the women were marching on the shur – did we talk about this last week? Great! The women march on the shur, meaning, literally, it means a shur is a wall, so it's the origin of the – excuse the expression – they were "climbing the walls." To see him. 'Cause he was so beautiful and so attractive, and so igniting. Extremely charismatic personality. Igniting everyone. Banot tza'ada alei ishur is a play also on him being the shor. Being the ox, as Yaakov calls him. Then: banot tza'ada alei shur they're trying to get up and over the usual way of looking at things. So that they can really look at him. So shur is a wall that you climb up on in order to get a better view, it's an ox, because it's extremely fertilizing, and productive, and it's seeing. It's [just? a] beautiful pasuk; it's really an amazing pasuk: banot tza'ada alei shur . And that's because Yosef, as we have revealed by virtue of him being connected to the yona. In this pasuk Yosef is the one who brings out fertility by looking into the other's eyes. And, in that looking, not from the place ruling and taking control, which is the abuse of that when you're looking at someone who's ashamed of themselves, so that's how you get control over them: you look them straight in the eye, right? And you know that they feel lowly about themselves and demeaned about themselves, and they're like, just garbage. So the more you look them in the eyes the more low they feel. Because you must be seeing all that stuff that they've got. And the more ashamed they are: that's how people gain control, the guys who can hold the glance are the ones – not because they're not ashamed of anything, just because they have the power, the "power glance" -- I think they have assertiveness classes – if they don't then I'll teach it to them! Not that I necessarily have it, but I know what's going on! The "power glance" is like, when, you're giving the glance in a way in which you're seeking to shame – this is extremely important for the second part of what we're going to explore this morning – but the power glance is when you're seeking to intimidate the other person by the way you're looking into their eyes, 'cause they're just feeling embarrassed and ashamed and belittled and nothing and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But that creates – it's for me not to just, like, slip into it – but that creates what's called ona'a, which is what we've taken upon ourselves to look at today, which is the other aspect of Yosef, who's totally against that. But that creates ona'a, which we began to explore last time, which is the denigration and devaluing of the other. Which we're going to explore more today. Just put that aside for now, so you can see how the question of the use of the eyes and what you're seeing in the other person is so big. But having the ayin tova of Yosef, having a good eye, is to look at the other in a way that empowers them. That creates trust and love and connection and commitment and investment. Those are all words for the yona. That's really what those girls were looking for. And climbing up the wall [for]. But you can see how – I mean, this is a delicate conversation, 'cause you can see how easily tripped up that can become into a power play, or into some base excitement that the charismatic people produce and then utilize that, when they're self-involved, to gain the sense of worth or control or whatever it is that they're looking for. Right? That's how charismatic people then become self-involved and use the charisma and use the chiyuniyut to destroy people's lives. Mamash. Destroys people's lives, and to destroy relationships. And they always get involved in other people's relationships. They always seek to break them, ruin them, and they can't keep their own. They go from relationship to relationship, from woman to woman, from man to man, however it'll be.

So [39:01.3 ?? yesod], what're you going to do; it's heavy stuff. It's the very foundations: you don't have this? You don't have anything! Mamash. If you don't have this foundation in life, the things we're teaching this morning? You mamash, everything else is just completely destroyed and you'll have Yehuda going haywire in all of his institution building and kelim building and persona building. And you'll have the rest of the binyan clogged up and unable to come to expression. And you'll have Yosef completely self-involved. And just, using all these powers, to their precise perversion. Of what they're given to him for. So, so to speak, the yesod needs the yesod. Right? The yesod needs to have within it this ongoing realization of "I'm just a passageway. Just, this is coming through me; it has nothing to do with me. It's just what's coming through, and I want to share that and give that over and be with the other in that." We saw that, if you remember, in David in lev tov, when [what?] he actually does. But Yosef just does it with his eyes. He's not really so much the doer, Yosef. He's the one who creates the belief that people can have in themselves to go and do. But he's not the doer; he doesn't make the kelim. The only way he knows what to do in Mitrayim is because he interpreted Paro's dream. Couldn't have figured it out for himself! There are some people who interpret Yosef as like the gashmiyut and Yehuda the ruchniyut and all these crazy things which are complete violations of the text: Yosef is not a kelim maker. He just rides around on the chariot in Egypt and gets everyone really excited about being Egyptian, or whatever. He doesn't really do anything. He just interprets Paro's dream; he knows what needs to get done – v'yafked pikidi – and he sets up all of the pekidim – what's the word in English for that? they're called the clerks – they're like "take care of everything" and they take care of everything. So, if it's not flowing through him, then it becomes snagged on itself and it becomes extremely destructive. I don't think there's anything more destructive than burning people up!

So, the yona, in her beautiful place of investment, commitment, liability, sticking with her partner – that's what the yona is the primary image of – is the real Yosef, so to speak. And when he invests that into the malchut, so then the malchut can become for the people. And not just for the institutions it's created. And when he lives that, so then he can become for the other. And not just for himself. So this is some of the tapestry of the yona of Yosef, of yonati. But there's another very, very deep and important aspect of this, and this is where we'd gotten to last week. And that is the other aspect of his name. And that is that Rachel says "you've saved me from shame." And now you can really appreciate from this perspective and in this context how that's his first name. "My first experience of you, Yosef," Rachel says, "is you protect me from shame. Yeah. When you look into my eyes, I don't feel ashamed, I feel trusted. When you look into my eyes, I don't feel denigrated and small and embarrassed, I feel enlarged. Like, there's more to be born here, more to grow here." Asaf et cherpati. You're whole being is built, and its tikkun, on the guarding of other's from shame, and relating to them in such a way that the shame will not be their primary experience. They might be embarrassed about something, ok. Like, we all have what to be embarrassed about. We all have the things we're messed up about. But that the primary experience should be that we're embarrassed and ashamed? Is to enslave the person and to rule over them and to entrap them, because then they become so belittled that they have no power to do anything at all. Shame is the greatest and most powerful disenabler. It's like, you don't want anything, you don't want anybody to know about anything that you are, so it's better to keep it to yourself. [45:27.7 "no excuse me"?]; people just walk into the room, you know, and create this whole environment of "excuse me; is it ok?" they sit down very carefully as if they don't want to bother anyone, like they're the most "bothering" people who could come into the room, are the ones who, like, come into the room with this sense of "I don't want to bother anyone!" You know these kinds of things? Walk in and it's like [whispers] "excuse me," like, all closed up inside themselves; it creates this energy in the room of "eew! I don't want to be here!" Because that's all they're giving off all the time is "I don't want to be here!" Because to be ashamed, in shame, is to be in this shmama, which is literally what – are you allowed to do drashas on English words into Hebrew words? No, it's a shmama; that's what it is. Shame is a shmama. Shame is the inverse – all right, as long as we went there, but we won't spend too much time on this – but, shame, like to make a name for yourself is, like, when you're ready to go out there. You know, when the malchus makes a shem: baruch shem kavod malchuto, the malchus makes a shem, makes a name for itself. It's not embarrassed, right? It's not embarrassed. When you're empowered, you're out there to make a name. G-d says to Avraham Avinu agadla shmeicha, I'm going to make your name great. But if you live shame, if you live the English version of shin-mem, then you're really living a shmama, which is your living "name" as a devastation. Shmama is a devastation. You're living the inverse of shame. Forget the English for now; just listen in Hebrew. The inverse of shame, of name, is shmama, is to be like a desolation. That's what it means in Hebrew: a desolation. And that's because of "shame" in English, that's because of embarrassment. Of, ok. Enough of that, enough explaining.

But the point is that Yosef HaTzadik is able to make the malchut want to be a name. Is able to make another want to be exposed. Is able to, himself, expose, himself, and cut away the blockages. Because even though he may have things of which he is ashamed, and we all should, and do our tikkunim on them, that's not his prime experience of life. His prime experience of life is asaf Hashem et cherpati – like Rachel implants it in him in the outset. "This is who you are. You know what you did for me Yosef? Thank you. You've taken away my shame. You've taken away my degradation." That's so beautiful; that's her first experience of him. Imagine being born into the world with that! That means your primary reality is to function in the world in a way in which you are gathering people's shame by giving them the power to be who they are most fully. And when Yosef's orientation is that, then instead of his charisma becoming a way in which he lords himself over people, it becomes a way in which he ignites them and burns their fire so that instead of burning with shame, which is the other possibility, right, instead they burn with creativity and fertility and then the malchut really becomes what it needs to become.

So I want to explore a little more of that today. We have this curious word usage, words that come up around Yosef. We saw shalom coming up around Yosef a lot. We saw yosef, his power of tosefet. We saw shever, and mashbir. Another word which is a primal word, and the word is on. Alef-vav-nun: on, comes up a lot. Comes up first in Onen, who's Yehuda's son. It comes up again when Yosef marries the daughter of, my gosh of all people, the prince, the priest of On. Bat Potifera kohen on. And it actually comes up deeply the first time in the Torah in the name of Binyamin when Rachel says "oh, you; you are the son of my on", alef-vav-nun, ben oni. Father calls him Biniyamin, but she calls him ben-oni. M'eanyen. 'Cause if her prayer with Yosef was "Yosef li ben acher," so, who's the on that Benyamin is the son of? I mean, literally it means, in the pshat, the son of my sorrow. Because on means sorrow. On also means power. About Reuben, Yaakov says kochi v'reishit oni. The first of my power. So is Yosef the on that Benyamin is the son of? "The son of my on." I mean, he's the son that, in a sense, Yosef brought her, right? Thanks to Yosef she'll have another son. Interesting. Now, an onen is someone who is sexually self-involved. That's who On was, the son of Yehuda; clearly turned it on himself. That's why he died, and Er died, etc. What Tamar does, is she draws Yehuda out of himself. I mean, as a whore, but she draws him out of himself to do the giving that he's meant to do, which is to fill her with a child that On and Er did not. So, in a sense, he has to overcome the, so to speak, onenut of his child in the relation with Tamar. So, the Ramak, Rav Moshe Cordevero, says in the Erkei Kinuyim, in the Pardes, that Tamar is the Ateret hayesod. That she's the opening of the yesod, and some say she's malchut. What is that? I'll tell you what that is. And I think we began to hint at this last week. She is a feminine embodiment of Yosef. As the verse says: Tzadik k'tamar yifrach. The tzadik, who is Yosef, blossoms like a Tamar. Ah! Oh, I get it! So she's actually drawing Yehudah out into what he needs to become, the one who would impregnate another. So she's functioning there as the teacher of Yehuda. In a very similar fashion that Yosef functions as the teacher of Yehuda in saying "you're just spies, just involved with yourselves. Just mirroring your own realities all the time. Hey, take a look" – take a look, where? At the petach einayim, 'cause that's where he meets her. She's sitting there at the petach einayim. That's Yosef bechina: "open up your eyes, open up your eyes! Take a look, hey! Here I am!" Right? She's sitting at the petach einayim. And she gets Yehuda to open up his eyes! And then again, it's not in the very best of circumstances, but nebech, some people need processes, as they say. So, part of the process for some of them is – all right, enough said. But the, yeah. So, she does the most amazing thing. And, it's really the pinnacle of the story, in the Chumash, and it's certainly the pinnacle of the story [as] the Rabbis describe it, and that is, she is ready to sacrifice herself, lest he be shamed. That's what happens, right? She's there, about to be burned, and she sends to him, apparently in a box, or someone that other's wouldn't see it, she sends to him "you know, the one who this signet and cloth belongs to?" – sorry, "staff, belongs to? That's the one who I've been made pregnant by." Now, the Rabbis even have it more intense: hi mutzeit. They have it she was already set on fire. In Hebrew hatzata means to "ignite it." With an alef means "she's been taken out," but without the alef , it means she's been "set on fire." So she's already burning. And she sends it to him in a discreet fashion, for him to decide whether he wants to expose himself or not. I mean, come on! Come on! Just tell them it's Yehuda! He's the one, actually, who declared "she shall be burned." Ah. So the Rabbis say, and Rashi brings it mamashi like a pshat, even though it's a Rashi in which his issue, I don't think, is in the structural problems in the pasuk, but rather it's in the content problems in the pasuk: "why is she doing this! [she's] in danger!" So he says, "well, you know what? You know what she was? She was observing the rule, which is 'it's better to be burned in an oven than to shame someone.'" Better you burn, then that they burn. Basically. Better that you burn, literally, then that they should burn in shame. It comes down to halacha! I mean, I don't know exactly what the precise application of the din would be, but the Gemara takes it very literally, and tells stories about people who actually lived that way, and almost died that way. But you see the pinnacle of the story of Yehuda and Tamar is that she will not shame him. And that becomes him saying tzadka mimeini, "wow; she is far more righteous than I am! She's mode to that." He learns that from her. This thing about not shaming. He learns that from Yosef's feminine version.

So, you know, the same root, in Hebrew, for on is the word that the Rabbis use for shaming another, and degrading them: it's called ona'ah. Ona'at devarim. It's when you say to someone "you stinking nothing; who do you think you are, to have something to say about this matter? Why, just last week I saw you eating pork!" Or, if you don't have him on something, "I know who your parents were!" Or, if you don't want to…

"Hona'ah?"

Ona'ah. Hona'ah is "trickery." Ona'ah is causing this kind of destructive pain to another, but it's a very specific kind of pain. On is pain, it's a power pain. That's why in Hebrew the word on means both power and pain. It's a "power pain," in which you use their pain to become empowered over them. By shaming them. Or, if you're not going to shame them, so then you just "toy" with them. Like, if you walk into a store, the Mishna says, and you ask the guy "how much does this cost," while you're snickering – either inside or with your buddy – "how much does this cost?" "Well, I'll look it up;" he's like, working it all out, looking it up, and, you know, "how much is that, and how much is that, and how much is that;" you've got the guy, like, ping-ponging around the whole store, you know, like – what's that machine called? Like a pinball machine. And like, "yuk, yuk, yuk, hah, hah, hah!" Well, that evil laugh is the laugh of ona'ah, the rabbis say. Now, there, you're not even embarrassing him. 'Cause you could actually walk out of the store without him knowing what you were up to. But what you were doing is a power ploy. In which you're using his weakness and his needs to lord yourself over him, by making him more and more worthless. That's why the rabbis, by the way, say "just like there's ona'ah, with commerce, there's also ona'ah with devarim. Same thing. When I overcharge you, or you under-buy me: same thing." What do you mean "same thing?" Doesn't look like the same thing; it's exactly the same thing. It's a power-play: I've got you being taken advantage of in my little play-thing. Right? That's what the picture is: my little play-thing. That's a different madreiga, the one with playing with him in the store, or playing with the prices. But the more painful one is when it's "you are nothing. Why, just a year ago, you were eating this or that, doing this or that." Using shame against them. As a ploy of power: that's ona'ah. Is that related to on, or onen? Yeah, sure it is. It's just all the self-involved use of my power, my charisma, my standing, my eyes, in the act of the precise inversion of reliability, integrity, and faithfulness. It's the exact inversion of it. That's what it looks like, it's oneinut. So, guess what? That word, on, the Radak says, is also written in Hebrew in the Tanach sometimes, like in Yishaya, in a word cherev hayona. The yona comes from the same root. It's the sort of destructiveness in that pasuk. I have a whole list of them. In Yermiyahu 25, verse 38; Tzefania chapter 3, verse 1.

I guess sometimes it happens that way, right? The same yona can become the birds in Hitchcock's "Birds." That's what's so like, mastery of terror in that film, 'cause, "huh? Little birds?" But, yeah, 'cause, [sigh] that's the way it is in life, you know. Like, I don't know how graphic to get, but it's like, you can be a giver of life or you can pish on people. That's the way… we use that term. You know? Pish on. It's like, they're both functions of yesod. Weird. It's not so weird, because when you want to understand these powers, so you understand how they're mamash both in the same place, they're mamash in the same place. Because the opposite of ne'emanut and emuna is ona'ah. And so the opposite of the yona, who's the bird of peace and the bird of faithfulness, and the bird who looks in the other's eyes with empowerment and appreciating the infinite wellsprings of the other, is also the yona who pecks to death. And lords over. And abuses and shames. Same word in Hebrew.

So here's the [1:07:14.5 ?] perspective of what we were looking at last week of how Yosef – were we looking at it last week? How Yosef tells them "what you thought was going to be evil, G-d has turned around to good." Correct? We were there? I don't entirely remember why, but I can tell you why we're there again this week, because here's the deeper aspect of that: and that is that Yosef as asaf Hashem et cherpati is watching his brothers writhing in shame and telling them "enough of that." Not that you don't have to pass through that. He lets them experience that, and he actually purposely does it. First he says ani Yosef achi, excuse me, Ani Yosef. The first time he meets them, he says "I am Yosef; is my father still alive?" V'lo yachlu dabr – they couldn't talk to him, ki nivhalu mi panav – 'cause they were in total pandemonium of embarrassment. And of fear. I think primarily of embarrassment. Yeah. I think that's how Rashi says it: boshu mi panav. [checks the Rashi] Yeah, nivhalu mi panav: mipnei habusha. And I think he does it on purpose. How do I say that; why do I say that? Ha'od avi chai? Is my father still alive? Got it? It's not like he didn't know whether our father was still alive: they've been talking about the father the whole time! They've been telling him that they can't take Binyamin 'cause "our father will die, nafsho k'shura b'nafsho." Yehuda's been pleading [with] him, that "send him back, because our father, our father…" Yeah, he knows how to use it when he needs to! "Is my father still alive? Or have you killed him? Yet. Like you almost did." Well, then once that's been passed through, that's Yosef, the yona. That's the cherev, man. Careful! Then, Yosef says to them: ani Yosef achichem, "I am Yosef your brother, whom you sold to Mitzrayim." And then, right away, he says "and now, don't be sad, and let it not be harsh in your eyes that you sold me here. Because it's all been for the good. Thank you for what you did." 'Cause it's all been for the good, and he means it. And the way he reveals it to them is when he says: ani Yosef achichem. That's the shift. "I'm your brother." "That's great! You're our brother?" "I'm your brother." "How do we know you're our brother?" "'Cause I'm going to now sew the whole thing together for you," that's ichui - ach, "going to sew the whole thing together for you now. You know, all those things you thought you were doing that were bad, they were really – not only good – they increased light in the world." But he'll only tell them that after they've done real teshuva. Don't play with this one; people like to play with this one. And they go to it too quickly: "it's really ok." Pat, pat, pat. Psychology-psychology-psychology, positive-, positive-, positive. "really, ok, ok, ok, ok. I'm OK; you're OK. Everyone's OK, blah, blah, blah." [next 2 sentences are unclear to me.]You can if you go there too fast, then, you have a [lived? 1:12:01.1] life. [Not a first? 1:12:05.0] ani Yosef, ha'od avi chai? "Huh? Is my father still alive? Not your father; not the way you treated him." Nivhalu mi panav. OK? Shame. Fine. Next. Ani Yosef achichem: "don't be sad, it's ok; everything you did has been for the good."

Imagine really being looked at that way. Like [by] someone you really did wrong to. But not in a way in which you become, like "I can't believe I did this to this person." But, rather, he really, really, really, really, not only, means it, he brings you to mean it and to know it. As it says later v'yedaber el libam, he speaks to their heart. Wow, I'd love to meet someone like that! That's the depth of the yona revealing the infinite wellsprings that you have brought into the world even when what you were doing was seemingly working against it. That's real love. That's the level of yonati. It's not "I've such faith in you, it doesn't matter what you do." "Love means never having to say you're sorry." It's not that. It's after you've said you're sorry. Then, now, let's go someplace together. [And with?] what's really happened. And come of this.

That's Yosef's on. Not his negative on, but his empowering on. That's Binyamin ben oni. The son of – the real on. 'Cause, the other kind of an on doesn't have children. And, thank G-d they don't. Wouldn't want to be a child of an onen. Their little play-thing. And we all have a little of that in our parenting. Gotta be careful of your children being your decoration. Your proof of success, your rectitude. Your accomplishment. It's all onenut. You don't want to be a child of a parent like that! You want to be a child of a parent who knows how to shame you, and then right away say "and now I want to tell you something about what you did and where it went. And grow from that. Let's grow from there." It's the exact opposite of the malbin panei chavero b'rabim." It's the exact opposite of one who brings another to shame. Tamar would never do that. She'd rather die than do that. And that's why she has this funny play in her name, that she is the beginning of the aperture to tamati. To the final level of tamati, of the perfect reflection . Perfect twinning. Perfect revelation of what reality holds. Must have been quite a personality. Must have been, because she gave birth to the other shever person, whose name is Peretz, who breaks-out! And becomes the father of David, and of malchut, and ultimately of Moshiach. Came out of that zivug. This is why this transition point is so crucial and it plays exactly into, if you remember how we saw Yehuda as the man who has hoda'a, by virtue of Leah's personal realization. But in order to get from Yehuda to a malchut which functions rightly, which is not involved in its own persona and its own mechanisms and its own kelim, you have to pass through Yosef. The belief in the other person. And the commitment to them, so that the kelim serve that, and not that they serve the kelilm. [That would be? Gotta be? 1:19:00.2] looking outside itself. Seeing itself in its own mirror-image all the time. You must pass through yonati to get to tamati correctly. And Tamar is the transition point. Ateret hayesod.

So, there was once a great man whose name was Akiva ben Yosef. Akiva, child of Yosef. And he was the origin of all the Torah sh'b'al'peh. The rabbis say. He had 5 talmidim that he had in his older age, the most famous Rebbi Shimon Bar-Yochai, but they were all great. And Rebbe Akiva told us a great secret of how to be this way. And, it's whatever happens to you, always say, whatever happens, G-d has done for the good. kol de'avid Rachmana l'tav avid: everything that G-d did he did for the good. And the Maharal says taught that you should say it, because when you say it, you channel the reality towards it. Mamash, the Maharal says this. 'Cause when you say it, so you express the full bitachon in HKB"H. And then, G-d sees you're relying on him, and he provides it. There was one place, by the way, where Yosef failed in that. And that was when he asked the sar hamashkim to tell Paro about him and get him out of jail. The rabbis say because of that this sar hamashkim forgot him, he didn't remember him, and he forgot him when he got out, and he had to spend another 2 years in jail. So the rabbis say "why, I mean, it says about the true tzadik" [pauses to look for a source]. It says about the true tzadik, ”ashrei hagever asher sam Hashem mivtacho,v'lo panav el rabin. [1:22:01.1]" The true tzadik is completely boteach on Hashem. If you lose that, then you lose kol de'avid Rachmana l'tav avid. And you lose the sense of reality as always flowing toward the good. And then you become the manipulator, the spy, the advantage taker, the, all the things where the yona can fall. But if you're reliant on G-d knowing that every place that G-d takes you is to light a greater flame, so then you get out of jail. Otherwise you stay in jail. So, though Yosef never said those words, Rebbe Akiva ben Yosef said those words. That's why when he sees the fox on Har HaBayit he laughs. That's why, when they don't let him stay in the city, and he has to sleep outside, and then the wind blows the candle out, and the cat eats the rooster, and the lion eats the donkey, he just keeps saying, and turns it out that, "it's a good thing you didn't have the candle or the rooster or the donkey or stayed in the town." 'Cause it was ransacked that night. But what was he saying when he was being burned by the Romans? When Eisav finally got the upper hand over the flame of Yosef? What was he saying then? kol de'avid Rachmana l'tav avid? Well, yeah, "my whole life I've been in pain. When will this verse come to me in fulfillment? V'ahavta et Hashem Elokeicha b'chol nafshecha, efilu notel et nafshecah. Love G-d with all of your life, even if He's taking your life? When am I gonna live that?" So, on that story, the Maharal says the most incredible thing. He says "yeah, 'cause, let me tell you a mashal." As if he doesn't know what he's talking about. "Let me tell you a mashal, you know what love is like? Love is like fire. How's love like fire? Well, you know, if a fire is burning, it's always going up. It's always going up. And no matter what you try to do to the fire, you can't make it stop going up! That's just what it is!" That's what love is. It's not like fear, where you're reacting or responding to something else. Love is when it's just the nature of what is, love of G-d, just the nature of what we are as humans beings, we have that love of G-d. The only thing that blocks it is all the blocks of shame about ourselves and embarrassment; we're not worthy and we're not deserving, and all the things that get in the way of the flame flowing. But the truth is, that we've got a flame that's always yearning for G-d. And that's called love of G-d. That's what the Maharal teaches. That's why you bring all the yisurim you want on someone who really loves G-d and -- you don't want – but, if you do, you bring all the yisurim so he just keeps loving G-d and relying on G-d and keeps connected to G-d. That's his essence. Whereas someone who lives in fear of G-d, you know, when it doesn't go good, so, "I'm outta here!" 'Cause, then the fear is not being provided the response that it wants, I mean, after all, "I'm fearing you, G-d, because all the good things I'm expecting of you. Otherwise it's not worth my while. Because, if, anyway, it goes bad for me, so then there's no reason to be in fear of You, because apparently You're not really in charge around here." Or, however it'll come out in that kind of thinking. That's because fear is a reaction. But love, the Maharal says, is an essence. That's why Rebbe Akiva, at that moment, became the burning fire. It's horrible. But, he didn't think so. And it's both, really, because we are committed to life. And then, a most astounding things happens, and we'll end with this, the astounding thing that happens: he was in the reality of "my whole life I've been yearning for this moment, waiting for it to come to realization." And then the story goes on and says "at the end his soul went out saying 'echad.'" So the Maharal asks another simple kashya; he says "wait a minute! Shouldn't his soul have gone out saying 'nafsheicha?' Will all of your soul?" That's the one he wanted to be mekayem his whole life, right? Love has to do with yearning; love has to do with longing for. Love, I add, has to do with listening. Love, in a sense, is never requited. It's never fulfilled; it's the eternal looking into the other's eyes. Because, when it arrives at its fulfillment, it's no longer love. It's just being with. Echad. Just being with the one [? 1:30:23.3]. It wasn't the time to say v'ahavta et Hashem Elokeicha b'chol nafshecha. That's a verse to yearn for. But when that verse is fulfilled, then there's only echad. There's only "at one with." "You are my completion, tamati. We are twins, ta'omati." But when you're inside that, and there's no longer any longing for and yearning for, then it's just "what is." Love is yearning, love is mashber, love is shever. Love comes out of ra'ayati. And moves through yonati. To be realized in tamati. And the ongoing and incessant back and forth. Just the real life of love of G-d and of lover. Questions, comments? Crying? Singing?

"I feel like that statement, or that place, where Rabbi Akiva was, of saying, or Yosef was, of saying 'all this is for the good.' Obviously it's great for the person who's been on the side of suffering through the not-so-necessarily-experiences-good parts. But what happens when the person on the other side, who's throwing you in a pit, or burning you, says 'don't worry, I mean, it's all for the good, like it's all,' like, isn't that kind of dangerous to…"

Yes it is! And the yonah is a cherev pifiyot – it's a two-edged sword. It's, mamash, cherev hayonah is one of the verses that the yonah has a cherev. Now, I'm sorry; I'm going to mix up images for you. It doesn't mean that, doesn't mean that the dove has a sword. Literally it means that there's a cherev hayona meaning there's a sword of destruction and desolation. Because ona'ah is desolation when it's destroying the other. That's the ona'ah of the desolation of the other. Right? When the onen moves outside of himself, it's perversion and sickness. Right? But, I'm sharing with you that that's right, I mean, those most destructive features of the onen will end up [noise of shuffling 1:35:16.6] described too. "Don't worry" – as you're being smothered under their thumb. "It's all for the good trust me! Trust me!" Right? That's what they'll always say: "Trust me." That's, "ok; I'm putting my trust in you." "Good." That's the precise perversion of the power of yona. I'm getting your trust so that I can desolate you. And one of the most horrifying usages of, abuses, of that is what you just described: "I'm [building? 1:36:01.7] you, and it's all for the good. You don't understand. Trust me. It's all for the good." That comes from a precise opposite of being boteach on Hashem on that person's part, for sure. It has nothing to do with Hashem. They may present themselves as having a lot to do with Hashem. Some of the most perverted and distorted abuse of people is empowered by the person's – who's doing it – presenting a face of being a complete One who relies on Hashem. He has infinite backing for what he's doing. And he has everything that you want. Right? "I have everything you want." So then, [whisper ? 1:36:59.2], that's where yesod ceases to be yesod. It's not a pathway through which it travels. It's all about me. Yeah, you're right; this can be extremely destructive. All these things can be the most destructive ways that people get abused and destroyed, mamash. Just 'cause it's so, it's so pnimi, because it's so much about everything we so, so want. Everything we so much want. That's why, the rabbis say, and this is a lot more destructive – there's a certain sense in which they mean that -- this is a lot more destructive than killing someone. How do I know that that's kind of what we're saying?[not sure I heard last sentence right because of shuffling noises 1:37:44.8] Not sure it's "kind of," that's hedging a little, because I haven't completely thought it through, but the simple pshat is, if someone says about you "either I kill you or you kill them," so you're not allowed to kill them; you have to die. But if you have the water, and they don't, so Rebbe Akiva says "keep the water. Keep the water. He'll die; you'll live." Because, your life comes first. But, if we're right about Rebbe Akiva, and I think we are, that he's clearly faithful also to, rather than shame someone you'll be burned, so, hmmm, so you're not allowed – it comes out equivalent, right? – you're not allowed to kill that person in shaming them; you must rather die. So, it's at least the equivalent of killing a person, that you're not allowed to do. But it may be even worse, because, after all, you don't shame them; they, in a sense, shame themselves. All you do is, "here Yehuda; isn't this yours?" In fact, the rabbis actually say that about busha. They say, e-hu d'avid l’nafshei, a person really shames himself. Right? I can't shame you! I can say all kinds of terrible things, but, in the end the shame is going to be coming from you. So, I didn't do anything to you! It's like, you did it to yourself. So, I can create a situation where you'll kill yourself, I guess, I mean, I don't know, like, do I have to give up my life rather than create a situation where you might come to kill yourself? Lo yodea. I'm not sure; it's an interesting question. I'm not exactly sure what those situations are. You know. Steal all your money. And you're one of those people who works on Wall Street. Who jumps out of the 21st floor when he loses all his stocks. And that's probably going to happen. And I steal all your money. Well, someone said to me, "if you don't steal all their money, we're going to kill you." So [?] pikuach nefesh is doche, that is, sir, and we're allowed to steal your money. Even though I know that you're likely to jump out the window. (Not you, chas v'shalom, none of us…) That person is likely to jump out the window as a result of that. But, probably, al pi halacha, I'm allowed to take the money. Because, if he jumps out the window, that's him doing it. If he says "we'll kill you if you don't push him out the window," that's something else. But if they say "we'll kill you if you don't take his money away, even though he's going to kill himself," b'pashtut, al pi halacha you're allowed to take his money away. And if he kills himself, that's his doing. But I can't do that when it comes to shaming him. If I do that, you're out of Olam Haba. Why?, if he just shamed himself? It's like a really ultimate type perversion and abuse. But it's really our only possibility for tikkun. It's our only possibility for Moshiach and tikkun is in that yona being there, invested in life, invested in other, invested in [the world? 1:41:59.5].

"In terms of the flames, like, so, like, it's sweet to say, like, or, maybe it's not sweet, maybe it's not nice to Yosef to say he got involved – got self-involved – 'cause he's just wanting the creativity. 'Cause I think there's a space also of, ok, so the plains[?] are all there and today they're covered by huge oceans with massive waves that are like, shooooo, spraying out all the time, so if you're a flame, and you're walking around like that, it's right! You have the right to be self-involved sometimes for chizuk, not like self-involved. And I think, like, when you said it, like, he just wants to be in the creative – creativity – [of the learning?] we did earlier, is like, yeah, the creativity, the flow, remembering, hearing Hashem, knowing that Hashem is just giving it to him and, you know. And really, I think sometimes in the world, like, we're so "ok, we're the flame, we gotta go out and ignite the flame and we're all flame, flame, flame." That's great, and I believe in it, and I also believe "good luck!" You're gonna be totally, you're never, unless you understand the way to come back to your creativity, real creativity, you'll totally become "the system," totally become exactly what it is the ona… you'll become everything that you don't want to be. And that, somehow we need, I don't know, I feel that, as Jews, like, in the same way, we're so clogged [clogged? Klal 1:43:36.1] out! Out! And there has to be a space where we say like "no!" Like, "what's wrong with going inside, 'cause you need the creativity." As long – it's right – ok, and I don't get stuck, whatever, it's a balance, but I feel that's a really crucial part, and I feel like Yosef, like bseder, like, 'take it! that's why you could go out, 'cause you took it and knew, like how to take that space!'"

Hmm. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. And it speaks to me on a number of levels; it speaks to me on a level of process, where, an adolescent needs to be an adolescent. Let them be adolescents. It speaks to me in the back and forth, which is so, so much, it reminds me of what we spoke of when we spoke of Avraham as being the root of all living, as being, having, the connection to the bliss of simple being. As being the place where all must begin from, and that never being forgotten. And what you're kind of bringing that down to is "and also, yeah, in the pleasure of who you are." And taking pleasure in things in a self-involved way, sometimes, at the right moment and with the right context. Someone told me the other day, I was working with a group, and she said to me, she said, like, "I'm like ruach. I flow there, I flow here, seeking truth, seeking what's real; I'm like the wind. There are some people who are fire, some people who are water, some people who are earth; I'm wind. And you know, the wind can get lost. Flowing out there and turning around somewhere else. So you know how I re-root myself in myself sometimes? I take" -- she had like this little plate of stuff on the table, "I take a little piece of cake, and I hold it in my mouth and I enjoy it.

"Why weren't Tamar and Yosef together?"

Tamar's for Yehuda's tikkun just like Yosef is for Yehuda's tikkun. In the end, it's malchut. In the end, it's David. In the end, it's the completion, and the bringing into kelim, the brining into realized, manifest reality in vessels. In the end, that's a transition, after all, Tamar and Yosef. They're not a zivug. I don't think they're a shidduch, Tamar and Yosef. They're "for." It's like Chanina ben Dosa, who was also a Yosef personality, milashon 'chen', that the rabbis say "the whole world was fed because of Chanina ben Dosa." But Chanina ben Dosa? He didn't need any food practically; he would just eat a couple of charuvim from week to week. But I don't think you put two people like that together.

"אתה אמרתה משהו על אהבת השם ויראת השם. לא [??? 1:47:56.3]"

מצוין שאת שואלת. Yirat Hashem the Maharal says in the Netiv HaAhava that, we see that first passage there, he says v'chen ahava l'shem Yitbarach, shenimshach ha'adam el Hashem Yitbarach mitzad atzmo, so too the love of G-d is the person's being drawn towards G-d from his own essential being. V'shem Yitbarach hu hashlamato. G-d is his completion, ein bitul l'davar ze, you can't take that away from him, sh'hu inyan atzmi lo, this is something which is essential to who he is, v'hashlamato, and his completion. Aval ha'yira, but fear, sh'eino yira rak shelo ya'aseh davar neged r’tzon Hamelech. What is yira? In its lower manifestation. But a person fears that he shouldn't do something against the King's will, lo shayach al davar zeh shehu atzmi al ha'adam. That's not something which is of the essential nature of what he is, mashelo ya'aseh. That which he will not do. 'Cause yira is all about not doing the wrong thing. So, not doing the wrong thing is not something which is an essential expression. It's a holding back. Ein ze hashlamato, this doesn't bring a person to completion. Hu neged ha'adam. That's something which is against the person; in other words, if I do that wrong thing, then I've violated myself. But yira is in the restraint from doing it, so it's not the essential expression of who you are. It's simply the avoidance of those things which are the negation of who you are. In avoiding those things which are the negation of who you are, you might be doing a very true and "integrous" thing. But, nevertheless, you're not doing your essence. You're simply avoiding that which would be the violation of your essence. So, now, to put it more simply, like, when you're longing for something and desiring it and going for it and moving towards it, so you're expressing the essence of who you are. When you're avoiding this or avoiding that, you're simply avoiding, you're pulling back. That's a reaction to. That's a response to. So, if that thing weren't there, I wouldn't have to have the activity of yira. If there wasn't that thing which was standing against me and in opposition to me, I wouldn't have to have yira. Yira is not an essential part of who I am; it's just the way I react to situations that might damage me. Right? Do you hear how… Like, an essential thing will bring you towards, but to react to something outside me that might hurt me, that's not an essential behavior. Rak ha'ahava hu mitzad ha'adam sheohev d’var zeh, you're love is coming from you! Mipnei kach efshar ka’asher ba al ha'adam davar sh'machbid alav, so therefore when something comes upon this person, who'se a lover, that's hard for them efshar sh'[beeping sound 1:51:24] bitul el hayira. He might actually lose his fear at that point, because "I see it's not working. Bad things are happening to me. Things are going against me." [? 1:51.34.6] hayira eina devar atmi b'hashlamato eilav[?]. Because then, you know, he'll just buck it. 'Cause he's not getting what he wanted. He's getting hurt, and the whole point of yira was to avoid getting hurt. So now, when he gets hurt, so he just drops the whole thing. OK?

"But then why do they say that the negative…"

I just want to, pull out of my drawer there; there's another…

"the negative commandments are all…" [lots of commotion here] "Sorry?"

I just wanna. There's two little things [looking for something; asking someone to get him something] Sorry, Sarah, I know you're going to ask something really good. Yeah. Go ahead.

"Why do they say keeping the negative commandments are a stronger connection than, and a deeper bonding with, Hashem, then?"

Who says that? Who says that negative commandments are a stronger bonding with Hashem?

"The ones that we don't do. Keep."

What the ones we don't do, do for us, is they protect us. And, I guess on a certain level, the rabbis say that, the rabbis say that there are 348 bones and 365 sinews, etc., etc., right? So, the Maharal says that, bones, they're called an etzem. So there is something like "atzmi." About the negative commandments. But, really, it5's a mirror image. 'Cause the negative commandments are describing what will be violated, from, like as a neg [end.]