Time in the Teachings of Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Liadi

Shekhinah
was 
with them,”
62
for Scripture says: “I will go down with thee into Egypt” [Gn 
46:4], that is, 
Malkhut
[of the world] of Emanation
 
actually
 
clothes itself in 
[the worlds of] Creation, Formation and Making. Thus the 
Shekhinah
’s exile 
to Egypt [
Mitsrayim
] means that the 
Shekhinah
, which is 
Malkhut 
[of the 
world] of Emanation, is in exile within limits [
metsarim
] and borders 
[
gevulim
].
63 
In this passage, Rashaz inscribes the Egyptian exile in the theosophical structure of 
the 
sefirot
. Despite the presence of a biblical reference to the historical Egyptian 
exile, the actual enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt seems to be less significant 
here, with the main interest focused on the dynamics of the 
sefirot 
within the four 
kabbalistic worlds. The transition from history to theosophy is facilitated by a pun on 
the Hebrew name of Egypt, 
Mitsrayim
, which – if vocalised differently – can be read 
as 
metsarim
, meaning limits. This reading transforms Egypt from a political entity 
into the metaphysical category of limitation and boundaries, which mark the lower 
worlds of Creation, Formation and Making and distinguish them from the supernal 
world of Emanation. The exile of the 
Shekhinah 
into Egypt is therefore explicated as 
the descent of the 
sefirah
Malkhut
from the World of Emanation, characterised by its 
complete unity with the divine,
64
into the worlds that are characterised by plurality, 
division and limitation. In other words, the Egyptian exile represents the transference 
of the divinity from infinitude to finitude. In the instance of the world of Making, the 
lowest of the four worlds, the divine immanence is captured within the “real 
limitation” [
gevul mamash
] of time and space, as this world is limited in time by the 
six thousand years of history, and in space by the distance of five hundred years' 
walk from earth to the firmament;
65
for this reason, the world of Making is explicitly 
62
b
Megilah 29a. 
63
TO 64d [Appendix 12]. 
64
See for example T1, 39:52b, 40:55a, 42:59a, 51:72b, T2, 5:80a, T4, 6:110a; TO 64d. See also 
Schwartz, 
Mahashevet Habad
, 50. 
65
See for example TO 64a-c. Elsewhere Rashaz attributes the creation of limits and borders in the 
lower worlds to the influx from the vessels [
kelim
] of the attributes of the World of Emanation. See 
TO 102a. 

---

83 
called by the name of Egypt [
ha-‘olam ha-zeh bikhlal nikra Mitsrayim
].
66
Thus the 
description of the exile in Egypt, and in particular the re-interpretation of its Hebrew 
name, turn it into the eponymy of exile in general, understood as God’s creation and 
continued maintenance of the non-divine reality. Moreover, the submission of the 
Israelites to Pharaoh's authority features throughout Rashaz's teachings as the 
drawing down of the divine influx into the “hind-parts” [
ahorayim
] of the sefirotic 
structure, thus enhancing the power of the evil forces. Here, too, the Egyptian exile is 
interpreted on the basis of word play: the name 
far’oh 
(Pharaoh) read backwards 
yields 
‘oref
(the back of the neck), namely, the rear part of the body.
67 
This idea is further reinforced by other readings of the name