Time in the Teachings of Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi

‘am 
(nation) is related etymologically to the 
world 
‘omemot 
(concealed, dimmed),
9
for they are separate entities, distinct 
and distant from the level of the king. For, even if the king had very many 
sons, the name kingdom would not apply to them, not even to the nobles 
alone. Only “In the multitude of people is the king’s honour” [Prv 14:28].
10 
In Rashaz's allegory, as mentioned above,
11
God is a king who needs to express his 
power. He cannot accomplish this by subduing to his will only family members or 
courtiers, as they already constitute a part of his domain. He must therefore exercise 
5
On the attitude of rabbinic literature to history, see Yerushalmi, 
Zakhor
, 21-4. 
6
On the centrality of creation in Rashaz’s teachings, see Schwartz, 
Mahashevet Habad
, 15. 
7
See Jacobson, “Torat Ha-beri’ah,” 308-68; Schwartz, 
Mahashevet Habad
, 23-137; Hallamish, 
“Mishnato ha-‘iyunit,” 112-135. 
8
See Bahya bar Asher, 
Midrash Rabenu Bahya
, Be-reshit 38:30, Ba-midbar 22:1. 
9
See Rashi to Jgs 5:14. 
10
T2, 7:81b [Appendix 1]. 
11
See chapter one, section 2.4. 

---

67 
his power over the common folk, that is to say, over people who, owing to their 
multiplicity and low status, appear to be diametrically opposed to his own unique 
and exalted status. Rashaz uses wordplay to convey this message: following Rashi, 
he employs an invented etymology to link the word 
‘am 
(nation or folk) to the word 
‘omemot 
(those which are dimmed).
12
Hence in his allegory, the common folk are as 
‘dimmed’, namely remote and separate from God, as the dimmed coals are remote 
and separate from the source of fire. God creates a multiplicity of ostensibly separate 
beings in order to demonstrate that they, too, belong to his dominion. This also 
underscores the notion that no existence is possible that is not a product of the divine 
will, as even those entities whose very existence would seem to contradict God’s 
unity are nevertheless a part of His creation. In addition, the use of the allegory of a 
king ruling over his people points to the attribute of 
Malkhut 
in the sefirotic tree – 
the attribute responsible for God's presence in the worlds and thus the source of both 
time and space, as described in chapter 1.
13
In this model of the creation, the divine contraction [
tsimtsum
] and the 
breaking of the vessels [
shevirat ha-kelim
] arise as an integral part of the creative 
process; they precondition the emergence of all non-divine entities and enable God 
to become “king with [His] people.”
14
The notions of the contraction and the 
breaking of the vessels are thus stripped off the negative connotations that mark 
them in their original Lurianic context,
15
where the shattering of the containers 
designed to hold the infinite divine light causes a violent rupture in the creative 
process, as a result of which the demonic forces assume an ontological status of their 
12
Rashi sees in the verse: “After thee, Benjamin, among thy people [
‘amamekha
]” [Jgs 5:14] the 
prophecy of Barak and Deborah foretelling the rise of King Saul from the tribe of Benjamin, who will 
“stone and slacken [
ya’amim
] him [Amalek] like dying [
‘omemot
] embers.” 
13
On God as king reigning over people in Rashaz’s concept of creation, see Jacobson, “Torat ha-
beri’ah,” 340-5. 
14
See also