Time in the Teachings of Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi

2.
 
An eternal God in a temporal world.
Since Rashaz pays attention primarily to the creative aspects of the divine,
19
he does 
not say much about the transcendent and supra-temporal God.
20
In his temporal 
discourse God mostly acts through and in time. Still, Rashaz struggles to find a way 
of describing God’s presence within the creation without compromising His 
18
See also TO 37a. In another sermon Rashaz combines Vital’s and the Maggid’s arguments. On the 
one hand, following the Maggidic concept, he underscores that “the world is in the nature of time, and 
the influx of worlds [
hashpa‘at ha-‘olamot
] is in the nature of time” (MAHZ
Parshiyot
, i, 126
 
[Appendix 7]). As such, temporality is a product of the creation. On the other hand, as Rashaz points 
out, the creation follows a cosmic stage of unity and concealment, after which division is introduced 
by the powers of Judgements [
Gevurot
], an observation which resembles Vital’s argument on the 
duration of the emanation that preceded the creation. Rashaz’s refutation of Vital’s argument is 
elaborated upon by his son and successor, Dov Ber Shneuri. See his 
Imrei binah
, Sha’ar keri’at 
shema‘, 39d-40c. See also Gotlieb, 
Sekhaltanut
, 63, where he discusses this issue in the writings of 
the third Habad leader, Menahem Mendel, the Tsemah Tsedek. This resolution of the question of the 
timing of the creation had already been formulated by Sa‘adyah Ga’on: “If, again, that individual 
were to ask, ‘Then why did He not create them [the beings] before this time? Our reply would be: 
‘There was no time in existence as yet that one could ask about, and furthermore it is of the very 
nature of Him that acts by free choice to do what He wants when He wants.’” 
Emunot ve-de‘ot
, 
Ma’amar 1, 22b, Appendix 8]. 
19
See Schwartz, 
Mahashevet Habad
, 15, where he presents the creation as the main topic of Habad 
thought. 
20
However, Rashaz does delve occasionally into the issues related to the transcendent and infinite 
God. See Schwartz, 
Mahashevet Habad
, 46-57. Rashaz’s discussion on the time of the creation also 
belongs to this aspect of his thought, since 
‘Ets hayim
, to which he refers, presents this issue as being 
“close to the question of what is above and what is beneath, what was before, and what will be after 
[
m
Hagigah 2:1] […] and since the question is very profound, so much so that one comes close to 
danger when one looks deeply into it. We reply as the Sages had said in the above mentioned 
mishnah: ‘whoever looks into these four things, it is better for him not to have come into the world.’” 
(Vital, 
‘Ets hayim
, Sha‘ar 1, ‘anaf 1, 25) [Appendix 9]. 

---

31 
transcendence. Thus in one of his teachings he explains that even though one can 
grasp God through contemplating His acts in the world, this does not reach the 
essence of the divine being, while contemplating time and space is a possible way of 
achieving such cognition: 
[As in the case of knowing a person by his deeds], so, as it were, in the case 
of comprehending the divinity [
elohut
], which we comprehend through the 
act and creation of the worlds and all that fills them. This is why He is called 
existent [
matsui
], for He brings space and time into existence [
mamtsi
],
21
as 
there is not a thing in the world that is not subject to time, and which cannot 
be referred to as past, present, and future. Consequently, that which brings it 
to life [
mehayeh
] must of necessity possess this quality and power [of time] 
in order to be a life giver. There, however it is not divided at all, and 
therefore He is described as being above time. Yet at the same time He is 
called by the letters HVYH, which refer to “He is, He was, and He will be 
[