Cheilek Eloak Mima’al

I don’t think too many non-chabadnicks interpret it as literal as you charge. The concept is kabbalistic in nature and therefore, obviously, not literal. Except for chabad and maybe some other chassidut.

Neshama comes from under kisei hakovad with G-dly features and arrives to earth to gain its keep and not get a bread of shame which it did not work for. Part of it is left above and through our prayer we are connecting ourselves to the root. See the Sefer Habris, 2nd Part.

The arizal famously writes that it’s *mamash mamash” but how is that understood? My rebbeim told me that it’s referring to godliness, that just as a flame is not diminished, decreased or divided by igniting something else, Hashem kavayachol made a tiny fire of godliness called a neshoma.

I cant say I have a mekor for this; these ideas are heavily dependent on having a rebbe and a mesorah.

The fact that chabad and others might use kabalah to go off the derech was predicted by the Gaon and the tzlach as one of their criticisms of chassidus. However, the chofetz chaim famously said that the Gaon’s opposition would, in his time, only be to chabad and (some say) breslov. All other chassidishe groups have become more down to earth.

From the Tanya חלק א פרק ב:

וְנֶפֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִית בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל הִיא חֵלֶק אֱלוֹהַּ מִמַּעַל מַמָּשׁ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב1: “וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים”, וְ”אַתָּה נָפַחְתָּ בִּי”2, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּזֹּהַר3: מַאן דִּנְפַח מִתּוֹכֵהּ נְפַח, פֵּרוּשׁ, מִתּוֹכִיּוּתוֹ וּמִפְּנִימִיּוּתוֹ, שֶׁתּוֹכִיּוּת וּפְנִימִיּוּת הַחַיּוּת שֶׁבָּאָדָם מוֹצִיא בִּנְפִיחָתוֹ בְּכֹחַ. כָּךְ עַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל נִשְׁמוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל עָלוּ בְּמַחֲשָׁבָה, כְּדִכְתִיב: “בְּנִי בְּכוֹרִי יִשְׂרָאֵל”4, “בָּנִים אַתֶּם לַה’ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם”5. פֵּרוּשׁ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁהַבֵּן נִמְשָׁךְ מִמֹּחַ הָאָב, כָּךְ כִּבְיָכוֹל נִשְׁמַת כָּל אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל נִמְשְׁכָה מִמַּחֲשַׁבְתּוֹ וְחָכְמָתוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ, דְּאִיהוּ חַכִּים וְלָא בְּחָכְמָה יְדִיעָא6, אֶלָּא הוּא וְחָכְמָתוֹ אֶחָד וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הָרַמְבַּ”ם7,
הגהה: וְהוֹדוּ לוֹ חַכְמֵי הַקַּבָּלָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּפַרְדֵּס מֵהָרַמַ”ק. וְגַם לְפִי קַבָּלַת הָאֲרִ”י זַ”ל יַצִּיבָא מִלְּתָא בְּסוֹד הִתְלַבְּשׁוּת אוֹר אֵין סוֹף בָּרוּךְ הוּא עַל יְדֵי צִמְצוּמִים רַבִּים בְּכֵלִים דְּחָכְמָה בִּינָה וָדַעַת דַּאֲצִילוּת; אַךְ לֹא לְמַעְלָה מֵהָאֲצִילוּת. וּכְמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר, שֶׁאֵין סוֹף בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְרוֹמָם וּמִתְנַשֵּׂא רוֹמְמוֹת אֵין קֵץ לְמַעְלָה מַעְלָה מִמַּהוּת וּבְחִינַת חַבַּ”ד עַד שֶׁמַּהוּת וּבְחִינַת חַבַּ”ד נֶחֱשֶׁבֶת כַּעֲשִׂיָּה גּוּפְנִיִּית אֶצְלוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב8: “כֻּלָּם בְּחָכְמָה עָשִׂיתָ”.
שֶׁהוּא הַמַּדָּע וְהוּא הַיּוֹדֵעַ כו’, וְדָבָר זֶה אֵין בִּיכֹלֶת הָאָדָם לַהֲבִינוֹ עַל בֻּרְיוֹ כו’, כְּדִכְתִיב9: “הַחֵקֶר אֱלוֹהַּ תִּמְצָא”, וּכְתִיב10: “כִּי לֹא מַחְשְׁבוֹתַי מַחְשְׁבוֹתֵיכֶם” וגו’.
וְאַף שֶׁיֵּשׁ רִבְבוֹת מִינֵי חִלּוּקֵי מַדְרֵגוֹת בַּנְּשָׁמוֹת, גָּבוֹהַּ מֵעַל גָּבוֹהַּ לְאֵין קֵץ, כְּמוֹ גֹּדֶל מַעֲלַת נִשְׁמוֹת הָאָבוֹת וּמֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ עֲלֵיהֶם הַשָּׁלוֹם עַל נִשְׁמוֹת דּוֹרוֹתֵינוּ אֵלֶּה דְּעִקְּבֵי מְשִׁיחָא, שֶׁהֵם בְּחִינַת עֲקֵבִים מַמָּשׁ לְגַבֵּי הַמֹּחַ וְהָרֹאשׁ. וְכֵן בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר יֵשׁ רָאשֵׁי אַלְפֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁנִּשְׁמוֹתֵיהֶם הֵם בְּחִינַת רֹאשׁ וּמֹחַ לְגַבֵּי נִשְׁמוֹת הֶהָמוֹן וְעַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ, וְכֵן נְפָשׁוֹת לְגַבֵּי נְפָשׁוֹת, כִּי כָּל נֶפֶשׁ כְּלוּלָה מִנֶּפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה. מִכָּל מָקוֹם שֹׁרֶשׁ כָּל הַנֶּפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה כֻּלָּם, מֵרֹאשׁ כָּל הַמַּדְרֵגוֹת עַד סוֹף כָּל דַּרְגִין הַמְּלֻבָּשׁ בְּגוּף עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וְקַל שֶׁבְּקַלִּים, נִמְשָׁךְ מִמֹּחַ הָעֶלְיוֹן שֶׁהִיא חָכְמָה עִלָּאָה כִּבְיָכוֹל, כִּמְשַׁל הַבֵּן הַנִּמְשָׁךְ מִמֹּחַ הָאָב, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ צִפָּרְנֵי רַגְלָיו נִתְהַוּוּ מִטִּפָּה זוֹ מַמָּשׁ, עַל יְדֵי שְׁהִיָּתָהּ תִּשְׁעָה חֳדָשִׁים בְּבֶטֶן הָאֵם, וְיָרְדָה מִמַּדְרֵגָה לְמַדְרֵגָה לְהִשְׁתַּנּוֹת וּלְהִתְהַוּוֹת מִמֶּנָּה צִפָּרְנַיִם. וְעִם כָּל זֶה עוֹדֶנָּה קְשׁוּרָה וּמְיֻחֶדֶת בְּיִחוּד נִפְלָא וְעָצוּם בְּמַהוּתָהּ וְעַצְמוּתָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁהָיְתָה טִפַּת מֹחַ הָאָב. וְגַם עַכְשָׁיו בַּבֵּן, יְנִיקַת הַצִּפָּרְנַיִם וְחַיּוּתָם נִמְשֶׁכֶת מֵהַמֹּחַ שֶׁבָּרֹאשׁ, כִּדְאִיתָא בִּגְמָרָא [נִדָּה שָׁם11]: לֹבֶן שֶׁמִּמֶּנּוּ גִּידִים וַעֲצָמוֹת וְצִפָּרְנַיִם.
[וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב בְּעֵץ חַיִּים שַׁעַר הַחַשְׁמַל בְּסוֹד לְבוּשִׁים שֶׁל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן בְּגַן עֵדֶן, שֶׁהָיוּ צִפָּרְנַיִם מִבְּחִינַת מֹחַ תְּבוּנָה].
וְכָכָה מַמָּשׁ כִּבְיָכוֹל בְּשֹׁרֶשׁ כָּל הַנֶּפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁל כְּלָלוּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַעְלָה, בִּירִידָתוֹ מִמַּדְרֵגָה לְמַדְרֵגָה עַל יְדֵי הִשְׁתַּלְשְׁלוּת הָעוֹלָמוֹת אֲצִילוּת בְּרִיאָה יְצִירָה עֲשִׂיָּה מֵחָכְמָתוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ, כְּדִכְתִיב12: “כֻּלָּם בְּחָכְמָה עָשִׂיתָ”, נִתְהַוּוּ מִמֶּנּוּ נֶפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁל עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וּפְחוּתֵי הָעֵרֶךְ; וְעִם כָּל זֶה עוֹדֶינָה קְשׁוּרוֹת וּמְיוּחָדוֹת בְּיִחוּד נִפְלָא וְעָצוּם בְּמַהוּתָן וְעַצְמוּתָן הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁהִיא הַמְשָׁכַת חָכְמָה עִלָּאָה, כִּי יְנִיקַת וְחַיּוּת נֶפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁל עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ הוּא מִנֶּפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁל הַצַּדִּיקִים וְהַחֲכָמִים רָאשֵׁי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבְּדוֹרָם.
וּבָזֶה יוּבָן מַאֲמַר רַזַ”ל13 עַל פָּסוּק14 “וּלְדָבְקָה בּוֹ”, שֶׁכָּל הַדָּבֵק בְּתַלְמִיד חָכָם, מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִלּוּ נִדְבַּק בַּשְּׁכִינָה מַמָּשׁ. כִּי עַל יְדֵי דְּבִיקָה בְּתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים, קְשׁוּרוֹת נֶפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁל עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וּמְיוּחָדוֹת בְּמַהוּתָן הָרִאשׁוֹן וְשָׁרְשָׁם שֶׁבְּחָכְמָה עִלָּאָה, שֶׁהוּא יִתְבָּרַךְ וְחָכְמָתוֹ אֶחָד וְהוּא הַמַּדָּע כו’. [וְהַפּוֹשְׁעִים וּמוֹרְדִים בְּתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים, יְנִיקַת נֶפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁלָּהֶם מִבְּחִינַת אֲחוֹרַיִם שֶׁל נֶפֶשׁ רוּחַ וְנִשְׁמַת תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים]:
וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּזֹּהַר15 וּבְזֹהַר חָדָשׁ16 שֶׁהָעִקָּר תָּלוּי שֶׁיְּקַדֵּשׁ עַצְמוֹ בִּשְׁעַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ דַּוְקָא, מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּנֵי עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ כו’, הַיְנוּ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁאֵין לְךָ נֶפֶשׁ רוּחַ וּנְשָׁמָה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ לְבוּשׁ מִנֶּפֶשׁ דְּעַצְמוּת אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ. וְכָל הַמִּצְווֹת שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה, הַכֹּל עַל יְדֵי אוֹתוֹ הַלְּבוּשׁ כו’, וַאֲפִלּוּ הַשֶּׁפַע שֶׁנּוֹתְנִים לוֹ מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם, הַכֹּל עַל יְדֵי לְבוּשׁ זֶה. וְאִם יְקַדֵּשׁ אֶת עַצְמוֹ, יַמְשִׁיךְ לְבוּשׁ קָדוֹשׁ לְנִשְׁמַת בְּנוֹ. וַאֲפִלּוּ הִיא נְשָׁמָה גְּדוֹלָה, צְרִיכָה לְקִדּוּשׁ אָבִיו כו’. אֲבָל הַנְּשָׁמָה עַצְמָהּ, הִנֵּה לִפְעָמִים נִשְׁמַת אָדָם גָּבוֹהַּ לְאֵין קֵץ בָּא לִהְיוֹת בְּנוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם נִבְזֶה וְשָׁפֵל כו’, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב הָאֲרִ”י זַ”ל כָּל זֶה בְּלִקּוּטֵי תּוֹרָה פָּרָשַׁת וַיֵּרָא וּבְטַעֲמֵי מִצְווֹת פָּרָשַׁת בְּרֵאשִית.
מראי מקומות

The previous post states “litvaks.. in general”. Really? You think that includes Vilna Gaon, Rav Chaim Volozhin, and The Chofetz Chaim etc. These gedolim all write down kabbalah at least in refererence for the klal to be machhezek themselves within their provided context.

With this in mind these holy tzaddikim present their views with open available references and followed to printed the sources publicly. They are many instances of litvishe gedolim maintaining good terms with the chabad rebbeim over the years for example (Third rebbe/Rav Chaim Volozhin – Fifth rebbe/The Chofetz Chaim – Seventh rebbe / Rav Moshe Feinstein)

The basis of the OP is lacking mention of sources kabbalah and/or chassidus, such a critique is obviously baseless. This is a consistent habit of those who have no expereince in such matters. This means the numerous rishonim who write on kabbalah as well.

So again,

Rav Chaim Malinowitz ZTL (editor of Artscroll shas) happens to give shiur in the first chapters of Tanya. With a simple google search they can be found. The rav also gives a yud tes kislev shiur that can be found on youtube.

As far as kefirah, just in Tanya itself there is a chapter titled shaare yichud vhamenuah dedicated to the theme. Please let that be implicit enough, context aside.

To have disagreements thats fine, but to perpetuate hatred within klal yisroel for leisure is a rotten way to live.

וְדָרַשְׁתָּ֧ וְחָקַרְתָּ֛ וְשָׁאַלְתָּ֖ הֵיטֵ֑ב וְהִנֵּ֤ה אֱמֶת֙ נָכ֣וֹן הַדָּבָ֔ר נֶעֶשְׂתָ֛ה הַתּוֹעֵבָ֥ה הַזֹּ֖את בְּקִרְבֶּֽךָ׃

(דברים טו:יג)

How did you learn פשט in the פסוק that ביום ההוא יהיה…אחד. What about now? Also I don’t think anyone disputes the concept of emanations to explain how יש came from אין. That is where your problem starts. How did the world come to exist ? The Rosh Hayeshiva RAS stressed כבוד אלוקים הסתר. Etc.

Tiawd – Thanks for bringing up this very important topic(thanks also to Reb Eliezer and Avira for backing you up).

You are correct in what you say.

In fact, I recently heard a leading Lubavitcher scholar, Simon Jacobson, in a shiur he gave in Tanya on the radio, admit that it was not literal (this was maybe around six weeks ago. You might be able to find it on his website). Of course, less knowledgeable and sophisticated Lubavitchers might take issue with that, but they are not on the level of Jacobson.

It is unfortunate that some non-Lubavitchers have been infected by this misunderstanding too. Hey, if they already are taking things from Habad, let them at least get them from a scholar like Jacobson, rather than from an ignoramus.

The neshama EMANATES from Hashem. Think about that, and it should clarify things.

It says ויפח באפיו נשמת חיים and He (G-d) blew in his nose a living soul, מאן דנפח מדיליה נפח, whoever blows, blows from oneself. So, the soul had to come from Hashem.

This Sefer Habris explains that there are five levels of neshama whidh increases into twenty five levels as sefira’s seven levels.. As the neshamas become greater their potential to elevate in kedusha inreases. A Jew gains a higher level of neshama when he has fought the yetzer hara, overcome and exhausted its potential.

The alter rebbe writes in Tanya iggeret Hateshuvah Chapter 5 (with additional sources provided)

כִּי הִנֵּה, פְּשַׁט הַכָּתוּב מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב “וַיִּפַּח”, הוּא לְהוֹרוֹת לָנוּ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁעַל דֶּרֶךְ מָשָׁל כְּשֶׁהָאָדָם נוֹפֵחַ לְאֵיזֶה מָקוֹם,

אִם יֵשׁ אֵיזֶה דָבָר חוֹצֵץ וּמַפְסִיק בֵּינְתַיִים אֵין הֶבֶל הַנּוֹפֵחַ עוֹלֶה וּמַגִּיעַ כְּלָל לְאוֹתוֹ מָקוֹם,

כָּכָה מַמָּשׁ, אִם יֵשׁ דָּבָר חוֹצֵץ וּמַפְסִיק בֵּין גּוּף הָאָדָם לִבְחִינַת הֶבֶל הָעֶלְיוֹן.

אַךְ בֶּאֱמֶת, אֵין שׁוּם דָּבָר גַּשְׁמִי וְרוּחָנִי חוֹצֵץ לְפָנָיו יִתְבָּרֵךְ,

כִּי “הֲלֹא אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֶת הָאָרֶץ אֲנִי מָלֵא”,
(ירמיהו 23:24) .
וּ”מְלֹא כָל הָאָרֶץ כְּבוֹדוֹ”,
(6:3 ישעיהו)
וְ”לֵית אֲתַר פָּנוּי מִינֵּיהּ”,
(51 תקוני הזהר)
“בַּשָּׁמַיִם מִמַּעַל וְעַל הָאָרֶץ מִתָּחַת אֵין עוֹד”,
(4:39 דברים ).

וְ”אִיהוּ מְמַלֵּא כָּל עָלְמִין וְכוּ'”,
(זהר ג’ 225)

אֶלָּא כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בִּישַׁעְיָה: “כִּי אִם עֲווֹנוֹתֵיכֶם הָיוּ מַבְדִּילִים בֵּינֵיכֶם לְבֵין אֱלֹקֵיכֶם”.

וְהַטַּעַם, לְפִי שֶׁהֵם נֶגֶד רָצוֹן הָעֶלְיוֹן בָּרוּךְ־הוּא הַמְחַיֶּה אֶת הַכֹּל,

כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: “כֹּל אֲשֶׁר חָפֵץ ה’ עָשָׂה בַּשָּׁמַיִם וּבָאָרֶץ”

(135:6 תהילים).

(וּכְמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל, שֶׁהוּא מְקוֹר הַשְׁפָּעַת שֵׁם הַוָיָ’, וְנִרְמָז בְּקוֹצוֹ שֶׁל יוּ”ד).

Lit – that term doesn’t mean age… I don’t think you’re familiar with how’s it’s used.

It says ‘קדשים תהיו כי קדוש אני ה, be holy because I, Hashem is holy. How do we come close to Hashem? Through the holy nashama that is chelek elokai mimaal.

AviraDeArah:

There is nothing about the idea stated in the Baal Hatanya that contradicts the 13 Ikkarim.

Maybe you understand the difference between “godliness” and Hashem himself, I don’t.

A basic tenet of Christianity is total separation between us and Hashem to the point that an intermediary is necessary, insisting on this kind of separation is dangerously close to that.

Embassies around the world have the legal status of their home country does that mean that there are now “Two” of the given country?

Does Shabbos being מעין עולם הבא mean there are two Olam Habas?

Tiawd’s question is rooted in utter ignorance about the Oneness of Hashem.

One who learns and understands Shaar Hayichud of Chovos Halevavos can see that there is No contradiction whatsoever bet. the words of the Baal Hatanya and the Oneness of Hashem.

Duvidf: “Embassies around the world have the legal status of their home country does that mean that there are now “Two” of the given country?

Does Shabbos being מעין עולם הבא mean there are two Olam Habas?”

The answer is very simple. In the case of the embassies, they may have a legal status, but are not called a cheilek * mamash * of the country whose offices they house. Are gardens in Israeli embassies abroad chayav in mitzvos hateluyos ba’aretz?

In the case of Shabbos, it is called *מעין* Olam Habo, meaning similar to Olam Habo, not literally Olam Habo.

There is an implication that Hashem created the human being, Bereishis, bealef tishri, Rosh Hashana. es hashomayim, his soul, ves haaretz and the body.

It is no surprise that this type of heresy and confusion is emanating from Chabad Lubavitch as they are confused about other similar things as well, related to the distinction and boundaries between G-d, הקדוש ברוך הוא, and man.

For example, they claim that their Rebbe is Divinity in a body. רחמנא ליצלן, similar to claims of Notzrim re Yushka (JC). They also claim that their deceased Rebbe is Moshiach, despite him having passed away decades ago.

It is sad that such a group has adopted Xtian beliefs, but even sadder that some regular Jews have accepted them from Lubavitch. Just because someone has a long beard, that doesn’t mean they know what they are talking about.

Just as Hashem is above Time Matter and Space then so too the Chelek Eloka Mimaal / Godly particle / Godliness or whatever you would like to call it is above time matter and space. That being the case the question this post started with falls away and doesn’t start.

Hashem’s Oneness as explained in Shaar Hayichud of Chovos Halevovos has more to do with Unique / Unequalled / Unlike any other and means a lot more than just the numerical value of one which is obviously the case but largely irrelevant to something that is above time matter and space.

The question posed here that the idea of Chelek Eloka Mimaal implies a “splitting” of Hashem is simply an ignorant and foolish attempt to force physical dimensions on something which is not physical.

This discussion has nothing to do with Lubavitch or Kabbala, this discussion is simply the result of enormous ignorance about what Hashem’s Oneness means.

Tiawd, Learn Shaar Hayichud before you attack / attempt to cross out explicit words of a great sage like the Baal Hatanya.

It says veosu li mikdash veshochanti besocham, create a holy tabernacle and I will rest among them. It does not say besocho, in it as Hashem is everywhere so He rests in each one of us.

I believe I found – B”H – the place where I remember Lubavitch scholar Simon Jacobson discussing the issue that started this thread, and, as stated previously, he says that it is * not * to be understood as literally “a piece of G-d”.

In Episode 13 of his “Tanya Applied with Rabbi Simon Jacobson” (available at YouTube), posted a little over three months ago, at just after 19:45 he states “obviously we are not talking about a piece of G-d”.

(This is not an endorsement of learning Tanya, or his talks in general, just showing that even a leading Chabad Lubavitch scholar is in accord with what tiawd posted at the beginning of this thread on this point.

I.Reb Eliezer and Shimon Nodel are right. The neshameh emanates from God and since Hashem blew the neshameh into a person it is a part of Him that is in each person.

It is not only the neshameh, but the entire world is only God. Were God to desist His countantance from the universe it would cease to exist. We only exist because God Himself is granting chiyas, energy to everything in the universe. I myself do not understand this part, as is God Himself granting chiyas to evil? But yes, that is what it is because God is the source of all energy and matter.

So God is the source of life and therefore we are part of that Source, we are part of God. God is still One, One Being that is the Source of life.