The First Tzimtzum

I'll translate the document from Hebrew to English while keeping the Judaic/Torah/Chabad terms as they are. I'll structure it with headings as requested.

The First Tzimtzum

The first Tzimtzum, also called Tzimtzum in the way of removal, is the primary source for the formation of worlds, where Hashem, as it were, contracted the Infinite Light (Ohr Ein Sof) and left an empty space in which the worlds could come into being. It is explained that if the world had been created in the manner of cause and effect, there could not have been the formation of finite worlds, and therefore it was necessary to have a Tzimtzum in the Infinite Light, after which separate and limited worlds could come into existence.

Source of the Concept

The Tzimtzum is explicitly mentioned for the first time in the writings of the Arizal, and its description is briefly presented by Rabbi Chaim Vital, and these are his words:

"Know that at the beginning of everything, all of existence was a simple light called Ein Sof, and there was no empty space or any vacant air. Rather, everything was the light of Ein Sof. When it arose in His simple will to emanate the emanated beings for a known reason... He then contracted Himself in the middle of His light at the central point within it, and there He contracted Himself to the sides and surroundings, leaving a void in between. This was the first Tzimtzum of the Supreme Emanator, and this place of the void is circular, equal on all sides, such that the world of Atzilut and all the worlds are placed within this void. And the light of Ein Sof surrounds it equally from all sides." — Otzrot Chaim, at its beginning.

He then continues with the description of the extension of the Kav (line of light) into this void:

"And behold, when He contracted Himself, then through another side of this circular void, He extended light through one straight, thin line, like a channel of light drawn from the Ein Sof into this void, filling it. But there remained an empty space between the light within this void and the light of Ein Sof that surrounds this void as mentioned, which contracted to its sides. And the end of this line below also does not touch the light of Ein Sof itself, because if it did, the matter would return to how it was, and this light within the void would reconnect with the light of Ein Sof together as at first."

This matter is presented at great length (with many additional details) in the writings of the Arizal, also in Etz Chaim, and in Mavo She'arim (at its beginning, First Gate, Part One, Chapter One).

History

Already at the beginning of the spread of the doctrine of Tzimtzum by the Arizal and his disciples, disputes arose among the Kabbalists in the interpretation of the concept of Tzimtzum. Some of them, led by the Kabbalist Rabbi Emanuel Chai Ricchi in his book "Yosher Levav," believed that the meaning of Tzimtzum is "Tzimtzum kipshuto" (literally), and in their view, the Creator removed Himself from the place of the world, and watches over it like "a king looking through his window at a matter of filth." According to him, one cannot say that the Tzimtzum is not literal because then it would mean that the Creator is found "in the lowly physical things that are not honorable and even in the despised," which would be degrading to Him.

However, many Kabbalists disagreed with this view and argued that the meaning of Tzimtzum must be "not literal" (lo kipshuto). The father of this approach is considered to be Rabbi Yosef Irgas, who in his book "Shomer Emunim" (the early one) states, "Anyone who wants to understand the matter of Tzimtzum literally falls into several misconceptions and contradictions of most principles of faith." In his words, it is not fully explained what Tzimtzum actually is, but only that "Tzimtzum is a metaphor to make it comprehensible to the ear." He establishes his opinion from a careful reading of the Arizal's words but brings many proofs for his approach. Among his arguments: based on the belief that the Creator is absolutely beyond our comprehension, and is devoid of any form or measurement, it is necessary that Tzimtzum is not literal, because otherwise there would be a form and comprehension in divinity - a circle, a line, and an empty space. He also argues that it is necessary that the Creator is not subject to changes, and even His actions to create the many creations do not cause any change in Him at all, which necessitates that Tzimtzum is not literal, because otherwise it would mean that a change occurred in Him during creation. Besides, the concept of Tzimtzum is one of the incidents of a body, in which movement is possible: ascending, descending, and so on, something that is completely negated when speaking of divinity. In the continuation of his words, he explains that this is also required even if we interpret that the Tzimtzum was not in the Light itself, but only in His will, as per the approach of the Rama of Fano.

Some claim that Rabbi Avraham Azulai (a student of Rabbi Israel Sarug, who was a student of the Arizal) also holds this view.

On the other hand, Rabbi Emanuel Chai Ricchi argues in his book "Yosher Levav" that the opposite is true, and from the words of the Arizal in Etz Chaim, one can deduce the opposite, that Tzimtzum is indeed literal. To the argument that if we say Tzimtzum is literal, it would limit and form the Creator, he claims that this is not a valid argument, since the form and limitation came from Him and by His will He can cancel it at any moment, there is no diminishment or deficiency in this. The deficiency in a limited thing - according to him - is when the limitation stems from the definition of the reality of the thing, and not when the limitation originates in His will. According to him, his approach regarding Tzimtzum is not defined at all within the boundaries of intellect, because the belief in His ability necessitates that He can create a world even without Tzimtzum at all, and only through the Kabbalah from the Arizal do we know that creation was through Tzimtzum, and therefore we are unable to understand, to obligate, and to investigate this matter with our intellect, how this Tzimtzum is.

The Need for Tzimtzum

Before the Tzimtzum (contraction), reality existed in a state of "He and His Name alone," where the Ohr Ein Sof (Infinite Light) was united with the Atzmut Ein Sof (Essence of the Infinite). Since if the worlds had been drawn down in a cause-and-effect manner, they too would have been infinite (and Hashem wanted worlds that are limited, a dwelling place in the lower realms) - there needed to be a Tzimtzum in the light in a way that is incomparably different.

Chassidut explains the necessity for Tzimtzum with a parable: When a teacher wants to teach a student a deep concept that is beyond the student's level, if the teacher were to convey the full depth of the concept as it exists in his own mind - the student would not grasp (understand) anything at all. Rather, the teacher must first conceal within himself the entire depth of his understanding until only a trace remains (like a single point from all the depth and breadth) - and only then can the student receive and understand it.

The Difference Between the First Tzimtzum and Other Tzimtzumim

To understand the reason for the difference between the first Tzimtzum and other Tzimtzumim, we must first understand what the difference is between them:

The Tzimtzumim (veils) in the order of Hishtalshelut (chain of worlds) are like the parable: where an intellectual concept is clothed in something completely different, which inherently has no connection to what it represents. In other words, the veil constricts the light so it is revealed in a lower level. Such a Tzimtzum is only effective when there already exists a reality. But in the Ohr Ein Sof before the Tzimtzum, there is no existence of Sefirot (and not even a source for them), therefore no Tzimtzum of this type can transform (simple) unity into multiplicity (Sefirot). In other terms: the Sefirot are a reality of existence, while in the Ohr Ein Sof such a reality does not exist, nor is there a source for such a reality. For the Ein Sof to "be able to" create a reality of "existence" without any prior source, a completely different type of Tzimtzum is needed - the first Tzimtzum.

The Essential Difference Between the First Tzimtzum and Other Tzimtzumim

The nature of the first Tzimtzum is opposite to other Tzimtzumim: other Tzimtzumim lower the divine light (to reveal it in a lower matter and level), while the first Tzimtzum involves the elevation of the light and its inclusion in its source and root. The parable for this in Chassidut is of a person who has thoroughly studied a certain tractate until he is completely knowledgeable and masters it completely. When he moves on to study a different tractate, the first one seemingly "disappears," and in a revealed way it does not exist even for him. But if after some time he returns to discuss it, it will be revealed that it is all still completely with him.

When the Ohr Ein Sof elevates and is included in its source - in the Ein Sof itself, it seemingly "disappears," thereby revealing the power of limitation within the Ein Sof. This limitation is the first in a chain of Tzimtzumim that ultimately results in the formation of the ten Sefirot.

The Approaches Regarding Tzimtzum

As mentioned, the "first Tzimtzum" is first mentioned in the writings of the Arizal. However, the Arizal did not specify whether he meant that the Tzimtzum was literal or not (meaning, whether it was just a matter of withdrawal and concealment), nor whether it was in the light or in the source. As a result, the Arizal's words can be understood in four ways:

• The Tzimtzum was literal - both in the light and in the source.
• The Tzimtzum was literal - but only in the light.
• The Tzimtzum was not literal - but also in the source.
• The Tzimtzum was not literal - and also only in the light (not in the source).

The Vilna Gaon held the first possibility, and their proof was from Torah laws that prohibit prayer in unclean places, mezuzah in a place of disgrace, and the like.

Rabbi Chaim of Volozhin disagreed with his teacher (apparently influenced by Chabad books in general and the Tanya in particular), and held the third approach - that the Tzimtzum is indeed not literal, but it is also in the source itself.

However, the Alter Rebbe determined (according to what he received from his teachers) that the Tzimtzum is not in the source but only in the light (and even this only in its lowest level) - and even this not literally.

Hachra'at HaChassidut (and Details of the Matters of Tzimtzum)

The Necessity for Tzimtzum Not According to its Simple Meaning

The Alter Rebbe completely rejected the understanding that the Tzimtzum is to be taken literally, as he wrote in Tanya: "From here, one can understand the error of some who think themselves wise—may Hashem forgive them, who erred and were mistaken in their study of the writings of the Arizal—and understood the concept of Tzimtzum mentioned there literally, that the Holy One, blessed be He, removed Himself and His Essence, Heaven forbid, from this world and only supervises from above with particular providence over all creatures, both in the heavens above and on the earth below." He elaborates that this view is refuted both from the perspective of logic and from the perspective of Kabbalah:

From the perspective of logic, since in the Maor (Source of Light) which is Infinite itself, the concept of Tzimtzum, Heaven forbid, and concealment are not applicable, because "it is impossible to speak of Tzimtzum in its literal sense, which is a physical attribute, regarding the Holy One, blessed be He." On the contrary, "the Maor is revealed, and therefore even children know that there is a G-d who exists, etc., even though they have no comprehension of how or what."

From the perspective of Kabbalah, as it is explicitly stated in several places in the Zohar: As written in the Tikunim, "There is no place devoid of Him, neither in the upper worlds nor in the lower worlds," and in Ra'aya Mehemna, "He grasps everything and no one can grasp Him... He surrounds all worlds... and none can leave His domain, He fills all worlds... He connects and unites kind to kind, above and below, and there is no closeness among the four elements except through the Holy One, blessed be He, when He is among them."

This chapter is incomplete. Please contribute to ChabadPedia and complete it. There may be more details on the discussion page. Reason: The necessity for Tzimtzum not according to its simple meaning from the perspective of "I, Havayah, have not changed" (Likutei Torah, Vayikra).

Concealment and Not Removal

The explanation of Tzimtzum not according to its simple meaning resolves a question: Since the light did not actually disappear—how were the worlds created? Rather, as explained by the Alter Rebbe in Likutei Torah, the concept of Tzimtzum is not the absence of light, but that it is included within the Maor (Source of Light) (and therefore remains in its place, only that it is not revealed). To illustrate this, he provides an analogy of a scholar who thoroughly knows a tractate in its depth and breadth. Whether he is engaged in it or has turned to study other tractates and matters—it remains engraved in his brain's memory. The only difference is that when he is engaged in it, it is revealed in his thought, and when he is not engaged in it, it is concealed within his memory—and since it is concealed, he can study another tractate because the previous subject is not currently revealed, but it certainly and obviously remains there.

Another analogy for this is provided by the Rebbe Rashab, from the power of movement in the hand. Sometimes we see that a person is unable to move his hand (due to cold or because he lay on it, etc.), yet after a short time, he will again be able to move it. The inability to move the hand stems from the lack of revelation of the power of movement in the hand, which due to causes has withdrawn and cannot perform its function. However, from the fact that after some time the person will again be able to move his hand, it is proven that the concealment of the power is not absolute but only its externality and revelation has been concealed, while the essential power of movement (abstract and hidden (hiyuli)) remains in the hand as before, even when he is prevented from moving his hand. Similarly, in the matter of Tzimtzum, only the light and radiance were constricted, while the essence of the light (the Maor, which is beyond revelation) remained in the place of the Tzimtzum.

Essence Does Not Conceal Essence

Another concept that stems from the understanding of "Tzimtzum not according to its simple meaning" is that the Infinite Light is revealed even after the Tzimtzum and in the place of the void (though this revelation is from the perspective of the light and is not felt by the recipients).

The Alter Rebbe explains, and the content of his words is: The concealment effectuated by the Tzimtzum on the light is only regarding the created beings (recipients of the light) and not regarding the Divinity that is the provider. That is to say, the effect of the Tzimtzum on the light is only that the created beings should not feel it—but it does not affect the light itself, and it remains revealed even after the Tzimtzum and in the place of the void.

That is, the entire purpose and goal of the Tzimtzum is for the sake of revelation (and moreover—even after the Tzimtzum, a trace (reshimu) of the light remains)—therefore (despite the fact that for the created beings the light is concealed), this does not conceal at all regarding the light.

As an analogy for this, the Alter Rebbe brings a person who previously studied a tractate well, and now is not engrossed in it deeply but studies it superficially. A person who hears his reading does not sense any depth at all (for him, the Tzimtzum creates concealment, as he does not sense the depth that exists in the memory of the learner), but for the learner himself, there is no concealment at all. When he reads the letters, all the deep concepts that exist in his memory from the time he studied in depth illuminate within them.

This matter was explained at length in the discourses of our Rebbes, beginning with the discourses of the Alter Rebbe in which the defining and compelling argument for this concept is presented, namely that after we know that even the Tzimtzum is from His power, then according to the principle that "essence does not conceal itself," there is no concealment whatsoever regarding Him in the Tzimtzum.

The Tzimtzum that is Not Literal - The Fundamental Foundation of Chassidus

Expanded Topic - Everything is Divinity

This chapter is incomplete. Please contribute to ChabadPedia and complete it. There may be more details on the discussion page. Reason: The non-literal tzimtzum is the foundation for the Baal Shem Tov's approach regarding Divine Providence - as explained at the beginning of Shaar HaYichud VeHaEmunah.

For Further Reading

• A New Light on the Topic of Tzimtzum, in 'Heichal Lubavitch' Journal, Issue 4, 11 Nissan 5783 (2023), page 123
• Yosef Yitzchak Triester, Astounding Tzimtzum, HaTamim Journal Issue 55, page 34

External Links

• The Tzimtzum Controversy Among Great Thinkers, Mayanotecha.