21. A similar additional law is found here. Rambam writes: “A piece of the most sacred offerings, or of piggul [an offering disqualified by improper intent] or notar [sacrificial meat left beyond its permitted time], cooked with other pieces: those pieces are forbidden to non-priests but permitted to priests.” “Meat of the most sacred offerings, or of offerings of lesser sanctity, cooked with ordinary meat is forbidden to the ritually impure but permitted to the pure” (the most sacred offerings to pure priests; offerings of lesser sanctity to pure non-priests).

This seems difficult: piggul and notar are forbidden even to priests. Nevertheless, since the other pieces suffice to nullify the prohibition, they are permitted to priests. Why, then, should the prohibition attaching to sacred offerings not also be nullified when the other pieces suffice to nullify it, making the mixture permitted to non-priests and the impure?

The explanation is that nullification does not apply to consecrated property, because “wherever it is, it is in the Merciful One’s treasury,” as it is written, “The earth and its fullness belong to Hashem.” Wherever a sacred piece is, it remains in the Holy One’s treasury. It therefore cannot be nullified by becoming mixed with other pieces so that we forget which piece is sacred: “It is not classified as mixed, for it stands on its own.”

Even if such a situation existed, one could not be liable for that dismantling. At the time of dismantling it was always uncertain whether the rebuilding would take place at the same site or elsewhere, so the warning could only be a doubtful warning, for which one is not liable. Alternatively, should we learn from this that one is liable even following a doubtful warning, since only in this way could dismantling in order to rebuild have occurred in the Mishkan?

We may explain the Gemara’s answer, “Since it is written, ‘At Hashem’s command they encamped,’ it is considered dismantling in order to rebuild in its place.” Since both dismantling (their journeys) and building (their encampments) were at Hashem’s command, they were determined neither by the location nor by the person, but by His command. This removes distinctions of place: wherever they are is “the Merciful One’s treasury,” containing His command, which transcends place. Consequently, all distinctions arising from place fall away.

Concerning the future redemption, our Sages said, “The son of David will not come until all the souls in the Guf have been exhausted.” Rashi explains that this refers to the storehouse of souls called Guf. Why is it so important that all these souls be exhausted? Wherever souls are, they are “in the Merciful One’s treasury.” Why must they specifically be drawn down and enter this lower world?

The explanation is that the new achievement of Mashiach, the son of David, is a dwelling for Him in the lower realms. Everything, including the souls, must therefore enter the place in which the Holy One wishes to dwell: the lower realms.

Their declaration “We will do and we will hear” was only a beginning—“they had begun to do.” In the days of Achashverosh, during Haman’s decree, came the acceptance: “The Jews accepted.” The discourse notes how astonishing this is. At the giving of the Torah, Israel stood at the highest level: materially, in an exceptionally favorable state of freedom; spiritually, with a revelation of G-dliness of the highest order. In Achashverosh’s days, Israel was at its lowest. Beyond the concealment of every exile, when “darkness covers the earth” through many contractions and concealments, the concealment during Haman’s decree was greater still. Materially too, they were utterly downtrodden, facing a decree, G-d forbid, “to destroy, kill, and annihilate all the Jews, young and old, children and women, in one day.” Yet at Sinai, at their highest, there was only the beginning; during Haman’s decree, at their lowest, they specifically accepted what they had begun at Sinai. The explanation is that during the decree they observed Torah and mitzvos with self-sacrifice.

Moreover, Purim is a weekday on which work is permitted. This indicates that even when the Torah permits someone to engage in weekday activities and he does so, he is required at that very moment to live the reversal of “it was turned about” and “they assembled and stood for their lives.” Every matter of Judaism, Torah and its mitzvos—even a minor detail of the Sages’ words, and “the custom of our fathers is Torah”—must touch his very soul: “stood for their lives.” It concerns the bond between the soul’s essence and the very Essence of the blessed Infinite One.

Even in concealment, as in the days of Purim, when “I will surely hide My face on that day” applied, he stands with self-sacrifice and thereby breaks through and nullifies every concealment. As is known, “on that day” itself denotes concealment; that “day” is itself hidden, and not merely once, but “hide, I will hide”—twice.

In truth, even a great Torah scholar needs acceptance of the yoke. Achitofel was great in Torah, yet his Torah did not protect him because he lacked fear of Heaven. Nevertheless, the evil inclination can outwit a person, being “a master of its craft”—in my father-in-law the Rebbe’s expression, “the clever little fellow.” Our Sages say, “Such is the craft of the evil inclination: today it tells him, ‘Do this,’” and so forth. It does not tell a Jew not to observe Torah and mitzvos, since he would certainly not listen. Instead, it approaches each person according to his particular inclinations. To a Torah scholar it brings proofs from Torah. This is also alluded to in “Where is Haman in the Torah? ‘Have you eaten from the tree?’”—the verse about the Tree of Knowledge sin brought about by the serpent. It can even offer 150 arguments to declare an impure creeping creature pure: 150 reasons to permit something the Torah forbids.

The greater a Jew’s stature, the more cunningly the evil inclination approaches him: “Whoever is greater than his fellow has a greater inclination.” My father-in-law the Rebbe quoted his father, the Rebbe Rashab, that sometimes it dresses in a silk coat. Its cunning is so great that the Sages say the Holy One regrets having created it, as it is written, “And whom I have harmed.”

The way to keep a snake from poisoning the water is not to leave it exposed, but to cover it. In divine service, studying only the revealed Torah—uncovered water—is not enough. One must also study the hidden Torah; then one can walk securely on Hashem’s path.

We must understand the explanation and its practical consequence in divine service. As my father-in-law the Rebbe wrote and repeated many times, the whole purpose of intellectual understanding is preparation for divine service. From every intellectual concept one can derive a practical “therefore”; consequently, one is obligated to do so.

2. The explanation is this. The Gemara says, “Where is Esther in the Torah? As it is written, ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” The supernal “face”—“My face”—is concealed. Although “He has no body and no bodily likeness,” it is known that above there are nevertheless the categories of front, right, left, and back.

The converse is also understood: everything we see in the world must have some foothold and evidence in Torah. In the Gemara’s words, “Where is Haman in the Torah?” Not only Mordechai and Esther exist in Torah—“Where is Mordechai in the Torah?” and “Where is Esther in the Torah?”—but even Haman must have a place there. Otherwise, he could not exist.

Therefore, when we see something in the world that requires correction—especially something connected with Torah and mitzvos—we should examine that matter as it appears in Torah. Through this we find the way to correct it as it exists in this physical world.

“Most beautiful among women” has the numerical value 502, the total years of the Patriarchs’ lives. This is the integration of the three lines: Avraham served through kindness, Yitzchak through strength, and Yaakov, the choicest of the Patriarchs, represents the middle line, Torah—“dwelling in tents.” All this is included in “most beautiful among women.”

4. Yet there is a condition described as “If you do not know, most beautiful among women”: the general state of “because of our sins.” Something is lacking in form, appearance, or both, and consequently “we were exiled from our land.” The community of Israel is then called Esther, indicating concealment, as the Sages say: “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” The two expressions, hester and astir—concealment of the hei and concealment of the alef—correspond to beauty of form and beauty of appearance. As explained above in section 3, for service through the 248 positive mitzvos, rooted in the letters vav and hei, to be complete—the beauty of form—there must be a drawing down from the intellectual faculties, contemplation, represented by the hei of the name Havayah.

The first is like the miracle of the splitting of the sea: an open miracle at a time of complete redemption. The second is like Esther’s miracle: miracles occurring in the time described by “I will surely hide My face on that day,” the time of exile, when “we are still servants of Achashverosh.” Nevertheless, even “in the evenings,” in a state of “he crouched and lay down,” there is the experience of “all the ends of the earth saw” the miracle of “it was turned about.” So too throughout exile: even in doubled and redoubled darkness, there are sometimes miracles seen by all the ends of the earth—open miracles beyond nature.

This goes so far that Chassidic discourses describe “Esther’s conduct: she did everything on her own, without Mordechai’s advice.” At first this is difficult to understand. The name Esther, from “I will surely hide My face on that day,” indicates a situation in which it is unclear what should and should not be done. Surely in such a situation Esther should have asked Mordechai and clarified his view, rather than acting entirely on her own? The explanation given there is that, as the mainstay of the home, “all matters of governing the world belong to her, and her husband Mordechai … ‘her husband’s heart trusts her’ that she will certainly do nothing improper, G-d forbid; therefore she acted on her own.”

The lesson for our time, amid the great darkness of exile and “I will surely hide My face,” is that there are matters Jewish women must undertake on their own judgment. Indeed, in those matters the husband should follow his wife’s view.

When the power of self-sacrifice is revealed, Israel is called Rachel. Sometimes, however, this power is concealed. This does not mean, as people mistakenly think, that self-sacrifice is absent: it is always present in its full strength, but hidden. Israel is then called Esther, from “hide, I will hide,” as the Sages say: “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide.’”

When Israel is as it should be and is called Rachel, its service is described by “Rachel was beautiful in form and beautiful in appearance.” Form concerns the arrangement of the limbs, corresponding and proportionate to one another. Above, the limbs are the King’s 248 limbs within Ze’er Anpin. Ze’er Anpin comprises nine sefiros; nine times nine, each with a beginning, middle, and end, together with the five chasadim that cause growth, totals 248.

Concerning Hadassah, from hadas, myrtle, Pardes and Me’orei Or explain that it refers to Malchus as it unites with Tiferes, which encompasses the sefiros, particularly Chesed, Gevurah, and Tiferes. This is the myrtle, “a branch of a thick-leaved tree”; the mitzvah requires three myrtles, corresponding to those three sefiros. When Malchus unites with and receives from the three myrtles, it is called Hadassah.

Esther, from “hide, I will hide”—as the Sages say, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day’”—refers to Malchus as it descends from Atzilus into Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, as in “She rises while it is still night.” Thus “Hadassah, she is Esther”: even when she descends into those worlds and is called Esther, she remains Hadassah, possessing the inward dimension of Malchus as when it unites with Tiferes.

4. This can be understood from the earlier explanation of “I will surely hide My face on that day,” said of exile. Even amid concealment, “My face” remains: the inward dimension of Malchus. This is not Malchus as it is in Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah, nor as it is in Atzilus, nor even in the sefiros of Adam Kadmon—the light that is the source of the sefiros—which can be described as a small spark of the Creator. Rather, as explained above, it is the inward dimension of Adam Kadmon: the level of Atik above the “skull” of Adam Kadmon, beyond both its sefiros and the line of light clothed within it, as explained at length.

This is also “Hadassah, she is Esther.” Hadassah refers to Malchus united with Tiferes. Even within Esther, concealment, there is Hadassah, the inward dimension of Malchus. In human divine service, the illumination of “My face” during exile awakens self-sacrifice, which shines specifically then. As explained at length, the thirst during exile exceeds that in the Temple era. This is also alluded to in Hadassah: “He stood among the myrtles,” referring to Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah, who stood with self-sacrifice.

3. We can explain why the removal of death—resurrection—is connected specifically with water, a mikveh. First: of humanity’s creation it is written, “Hashem G-d formed the human, dust from the ground.” On this account he was called Adam. The Sages say that after Adam named the animals, the Holy One asked him, “And what is your name?” He replied, “It is fitting that I be called Adam, for I was created from the adamah, the ground.”

He was named specifically for the ground, not for the dust—“dust from the ground”—or another of the earth’s names, because the novelty of humanity’s creation compared with other beings was not formation from dust itself. Other beings were likewise formed from it: “Everything came from dust.” Rather, the novelty was formation from “dust from the ground.” The difference is that ground is dust with water added…

The point is this: the Sages’ statement that all the Prophets will be nullified in the days of Mashiach does not mean a change in Torah, which is eternal. Rather, it is like “What use is a lamp in daylight?” When sunlight shines, a lamp’s light is not noticeable; it counts for nothing beside the sun’s abundant light. So too with the revelations conveyed through the Prophets, through whom “Hashem’s spirit spoke, and His word was on their tongue.” In the future, when “I will pour My spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and daughters will prophesy” is fulfilled, their revelation will be unnoticeable beside the revealed source and overwhelming light of that time.

Megillas Esther, however, will not be nullified even then. Of its period it is said, “I will surely hide My face on that day”: Israel experienced concealment of the divine face, detailed in tractate Chagigah. Although Chaggai, Zechariah, and Malachi still lived in Mordechai and Esther’s time, in Shushan, where the decree occurred and was later completely reversed, the concealment was so great that the Holy One’s name is not explicitly mentioned even once in the entire Megillah!

55. The explanation is this. The Gemara says, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide.’” Esther’s name signifies exile—not merely an ordinary exile, a single concealment, but “hide, I will hide,” twice. This is especially so according to the explanation in works of Mussar and Chassidus that the concealment itself is concealed: people do not know there is concealment at all. They think only what is openly visible exists, unaware that something remains hidden for the moment and must be sought. Esther’s role is to bring about a miracle precisely in that state of doubled concealment.

A further question arises. The Gemara says, “Her name was Esther. Why was she called Hadassah? After the righteous, who are called myrtles”—whose fragrance is good—as in “He stood among the myrtles.” She was called Hadassah because she was righteous. Elsewhere the Gemara says, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face.’” This implies that the name Esther, “I will surely hide My face,” is the opposite of the level and service of the righteous. Since an awakening below produces an awakening above, and the reverse applies as well, the state of “I will surely hide My face” results from concealment of the divine soul’s face. This is the opposite of the righteous person’s service, walking securely on his path. Accordingly, her principal name should have been Hadassah, not Esther.

The continuation of the talk concerns what was discussed at the Purim gathering, section 29: Mordechai and Esther established the Purim festival, whereas Esther alone established the Megillah’s reading and writing. This is indicated by “to establish these days of Purim,” followed by “as Mordechai the Jew and Queen Esther had established for them,” and then “Esther’s command established … and it was written in a book.”

The distinction is that from Mordechai’s standpoint—light—remembering the miracle in thought and spirituality suffices. Specifically from Esther’s standpoint, “I will surely hide,” representing Malchus descending into Beriah, Yetzirah, and Asiyah where vessels matter, remembrance must take the form of reading and writing. This also distinguishes the Jerusalem Talmud, where “Mordechai and Esther sent to our teachers,” from the Babylonian Talmud, where “Esther sent to the Sages”: light and the refinement of darkness within Torah itself. Likewise, establishing Purim mentions “Queen Esther,” whereas writing the Megillah mentions simply “Esther’s command,” corresponding to the distinction between lights and vessels within Malchus itself, whether in Atzilus or descending into the lower worlds.

The explanation is that Mordechai himself differs when sitting in the Sanhedrin and when acting in his own capacity. When Mordechai and Esther sent their requests to the Sages about establishing Purim, each requested what accorded with their own perception.

Esther dealt with this-worldly matters. Beyond every woman’s role in helping a man, who brings wheat, by making it into human food, Esther merited to reign over 127 provinces, virtually all outside the Land of Israel. She even had to deal with Haman himself to transform the situation. She therefore asked the Sages, “Establish me” and “Write me”—in speech and action. Mordechai’s main occupation, by contrast, was with Jews in spiritual matters of holiness. He requested what he considered necessary: remembrance of the miracle in thought alone. Similarly, he wanted work forbidden on Purim, although it became clear that the generation’s condition did not allow the revelation to be drawn down and shine sufficiently to prohibit work, as the Alter Rebbe explains in Torah Or.

35. This also distinguishes Mordechai in his own capacity from Mordechai sitting in the Sanhedrin. When considering how Purim should be established from his own exalted level, he viewed his contemporaries accordingly. The Baal Shem Tov taught that one sees a fault in another only when one has at least the subtlest trace of that fault oneself; otherwise one would not see it in the other. Mordechai therefore thought their level allowed a prohibition of work on Purim, as explained in section 32. He considered remembrance of the miracle in thought sufficient, with no need to extend it into speech, much less action, and sent the Sages a request only about the festival, not the Megillah’s reading and writing.

But sitting in the Sanhedrin, he is not acting alone at his own level. He joins its complete assembly together with the Holy One—“Hashem is with him,” and “G-d stands in the divine assembly; among the judges He judges”—to decide “between blood and blood, judgment and judgment, affliction and affliction,” and to render a woman, the community of Israel, pure for her husband, the Holy One. Studying the law is insufficient for this: one must descend into practical affairs, getting one’s hands soiled with blood, fetal membranes, and placenta to determine purity or its opposite. Mordechai’s separate identity then gives way to the task of fulfilling “I will dwell among them,” specifically in the world of action, where the purpose is completed, as the Alter Rebbe explains at length in Tanya.

When Esther—“hide, I will hide”—therefore requests what the generation needs, extending Purim into speech through reading and action through writing, to the “end of the whole night,” Mordechai agrees to fulfill “Establish me” and “Write me.” Yet it was Esther, not Mordechai, who devoted herself to it with self-sacrifice; hence the Megillah is named after her.

This explains the precise wording “on that night.” “That,” a term indicating what is hidden, adds concealment to “night”: two concealments. Beyond the concealment of exile generally, the darkness in Achashverosh’s days was greater still, doubled concealment. Thus the Gemara says, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide.’” According to the Baal Shem Tov’s teaching that the doubled wording means the concealment itself is hidden, we may explain “on that night” similarly: the night of exile is itself concealed. People do not feel that exile is night and darkness; they take darkness for light.

(An unedited transcript.) “On that night the king’s sleep was disturbed.” The Purim discourse, based on my father-in-law the Rebbe’s discourse, explained the custom of raising one’s voice from “on that night” when reading the Megillah: this is the central miracle. Its force was expressed in the disturbance of the King of the world’s sleep. Although it was night, the time of sleep—the general state of exile, “I sleep in exile”—and indeed “that night,” the utmost concealment, “hide, I will hide,” nevertheless the King of the world’s sleep was disturbed.

2. We can further explain night as the time of sleep in human divine service, which brings about the corresponding condition above.

As he continues to explain: “This is the advice the Sages gave in tractate Gittin: ‘Rise early and remain late over them’—be above them, far higher than they are, through engagement in Torah, which is exceedingly lofty and is the source of their vitality. They therefore perish and are nullified of themselves, and are consequently driven away.”

In other words, everything has a root in Torah—not only Moshe, Mordechai, and Esther, but even Haman, as the Sages say, “Where is Haman in the Torah?” Therefore, when David needed to be rescued “from the hand of all his enemies” and to nullify his opponents, he had to act through their root and source. He invoked Torah’s quality as the root—the vitality and continued existence—of the worlds, to sweeten them at their root.

47. The explanation is this. Esther’s meaning is expressed in the Sages’ statement, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide.’” So too in Kabbalah and Chassidus: Torah Or explains that Israel is called either Rachel or Esther. Rachel describes a state of revelation; Esther describes exile, “I will surely hide My face.”

This is also the content of the Megillah, hence its name, Megillas Esther. It recounts the miracle that saved the entire Jewish people, every individual, since the decree applied to “all the Jews throughout Achashverosh’s kingdom,” “young and old, children and women, in one day.”

42. Here we see something astonishing. The Gemara says, “Where is Haman in the Torah? ‘Have you eaten from the tree?’” Thus the undesirable reality of Haman is associated with a tree. Similarly, the Arizal explains the verse “If a man has a sin deserving a sentence of death, and he is put to death, you shall hang him on a tree”: when a reason for the death sentence is lacking—chet understood as a lack—because he has done no evil, why should he die? “Hang it on the tree”: his death results from the Tree of Knowledge, through which death was decreed. It thus appears that the tree represents the opposite of all the matters discussed above!

This is “At one hundred, as though dead, passed away and ceased from the world”: his world has been completely refined and its concealment nullified—olam, world, being related to he’elem, concealment. This explains why the Mishnah lists no age beyond one hundred. Even now, some live beyond a hundred, and certainly in the Mishnah’s era. Rabbi Akiva—of whom Sanhedrin says, after identifying the anonymous teachings of the Mishnah and other compilations, that they all follow Rabbi Akiva—lived 120 years. So did Hillel the Elder, like Moshe Rabbeinu, whose life lasted 120 years. This is also alluded to in “inasmuch as he too is flesh”: beshagam has the numerical value of Moshe, and that verse says, “his days shall be 120 years,” as Moshe’s lifespan was. Why, then, does the Mishnah not explain the years beyond a hundred?

The Mishnah addresses only the order of service in refining the world. It therefore lists ages through one hundred, when that work is completed. Long life can continue afterward, but a different kind of service then begins.

5. At the Purim gathering, another point was explained about the Chumash portions studied on Purim and Shushan Purim, Sunday and Monday. Sunday’s portion contains “pure myrrh,” which is related to Purim. The Gemara says, “Where is Mordechai in the Torah?” Rashi explains: “Where is Mordechai’s greatness [alluded to]?” Clearly, this does not mean his greatness generally, such as being head of the Sanhedrin and his other qualities, but his greatness in connection with the Purim redemption. The answer is: “It is written, ‘pure myrrh,’ which we translate [into Aramaic] as meira dakhya.”

5. This also explains “Moshe implored”: he made the bitter sweet, the transformation of bitterness into sweetness. At Marah the bitter waters became truly sweet, as it is written, “The waters became sweet”; he sweetened them concretely below. An illumination of this level of Moshe was also present in Nachum Ish Gam Zu, but its main expression is in Moshe. The Gemara says, “Where is Moshe in the Torah? ‘Inasmuch as he too is flesh’”: beshagam has the numerical value of Moshe. Moshe draws down the quality of “This too is for the good.” This is “Moshe implored”: sweetening Israel’s bitterness and turning back His wrath from destruction.

As explained above, transforming bitterness into sweetness—even turning the opposite of good into actual good—comes through revealing the higher name Havayah, that of Atika Kadisha. This belongs to Moshe Rabbeinu, who drew down the thirteen attributes of mercy, which do not return unanswered. The Zohar says that Moshe drew them from Atika Kadisha into Ze’er Anpin: the higher name Havayah, drawn down specifically through Moshe.

The Chumash portions for Purim and Shushan Purim are the first two portions of Ki Sisa, up to the third aliyah. Here we see how every detail of Torah corresponds precisely: these portions relate to the content, even the inward meaning, of Purim.

The first portion’s connection to Purim follows the Gemara: “Where is Mordechai in the Torah? It is written, ‘pure myrrh’”—“Take for yourself choice spices, pure myrrh”—“which we translate as meira dakhya.” The second portion, studied on Shushan Purim, also one of the Purim days, recounts the Golden Calf and is likewise connected. Regarding the reason for the decree, “because they bowed to an image,” the Gemara asks, “Is there favoritism here?” If they indeed bowed to an image, how did they merit a miracle?

“He has plans and notebooks to know how to build … so the Holy One looked into Torah and created the world.” It follows that every detail in the world—heaven and earth and all their hosts, and every detail of the chain of spiritual worlds—is alluded to in Torah and drawn from Torah into the world. This is also found in the revealed Torah. The Gemara says, “Where is Haman in the Torah?” Why must Haman be in Torah at all? Because Haman could not exist in the world unless his existence were present in Torah.

Rosh Chodesh thus joins two extremes, concealment and revelation. Before it there is concealment not only of the sun but even of the moon—the utmost concealment, “you will be missed.” Precisely through this comes revelation, “you will be remembered,” including revelation of the sun. As on every Rosh Chodesh, so on Rosh Chodesh Nissan: it joins Purim, the theme of Adar, with Pesach, the theme of Nissan.

Purim was a state of “I will surely hide My face.” Throughout the Megillah the name Havayah is absent, and even Elokim, numerically equivalent to “nature,” is absent, as Shaar HaYichud VehaEmunah explains that name’s relation to nature. Purim’s miracle was clothed in natural events, analogous to the concealment of the moon, associated with Elokim or Adni, at Rosh Chodesh.

Nissan, by contrast, reveals the sun, the name Havayah—“Hashem is a sun.” The Rebbe Maharash’s discourses explain—this year being the centenary of his first year of leadership—that twelve permutations of Havayah shine through the twelve months. In other months the letters are not in their written order; in Nissan they are, alluded to by the initials of “Let the heavens rejoice and the earth exult.” Havayah shines openly in Nissan, whereas the other permutations themselves express concealment.

So too in Jewish history. When the Temple stood, G-dliness was visibly perceived: “Ten miracles were performed for our ancestors in the Temple.” In exile, however, “We do not see our signs … none among us knows until when.” The discourse elaborates on the doubled and redoubled darkness: miracles are not seen, nor apparently even individual providence, unless one contemplates without deceiving oneself.

A Jew therefore asks: if “a person takes leave of his friend”—itself certainly a matter of individual providence, with the Holy One concealing Himself, “I will surely hide My face on that day”—how can he be required to remember Him?

The answer: Torah indeed requires taking leave. In the familiar analogy, the king wishes his son to show his strength not only in the palace but in a distant country. To prevent him from being swallowed up there, to preserve his stature as a prince and enable him to return when his father calls, whole in body, soul, and Torah, the counsel is to part “with a matter of halachah.” He takes a ruling of the Shulchan Aruch with him, showing how to live even in exile.

5. We may suggest that the transition from natural conduct, Tishrei, to supernatural conduct, Nissan, comes through the intermediate stage of Purim, the central event of Adar, the month before Nissan. The Holy One’s name does not appear anywhere in the Megillah, not even Elokim; thus even according to Torah there is concealment. The Gemara says, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” This is doubled concealment, “hide, I will hide.” As the Baal Shem Tov explains, the concealment itself is hidden: people do not even know it is concealment, like “taking darkness for light.”

This is also “The Jews had light,” and so forth. The Gemara says that whoever rejects idolatry is called a Jew. First comes self-sacrifice, in which they stood during Purim. This is “Open for Me an opening like the eye of a needle”—self-sacrifice. Afterward come the four levels of light, joy, gladness, and honor.

Likewise, “There was a Jewish man in Shushan the capital, whose name was Mordechai.” “Where is Mordechai in the Torah? ‘Pure myrrh,’ translated as meira dakhya,” as explained in Torah Or. “Jewish” denotes self-sacrifice: Yehudi derives from acknowledgment beyond reason and understanding. This awakened self-sacrifice in everyone, so that all were called Jews, reversing their earlier condition of bowing to the statue, as the Gemara recounts. From this self-sacrifice the influence then extended into the four letters of Havayah—light, joy, gladness, and so forth—until there was literal light, joy, gladness, and honor here below, within ten handbreadths of the ground.

This prepares for redemption, the theme of Parshas HaChodesh, which speaks of the Exodus from Egypt. That redemption was complete: they left with great wealth and an uplifted hand, and Pharaoh actually drove them from his land. The future redemption will be likewise: “As in the days of your departure from Egypt, I will show him wonders.”

There is another kind of redemption, like Purim, when “we are still servants of Achashverosh.” Though Purim’s redemption was miraculous—we therefore recite Al HaNissim—the miracle was not open. People could think salvation came naturally because “we have a sister in the king’s house.” Thus the Gemara says, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” “My face” is concealed. For this reason Havayah is not openly mentioned in the Megillah, but only hinted at in initial and final letters, as explained in Kabbalistic works.

It was explained above, section 26, that everything we see in the world contains a lesson, whether how to act or what to avoid. Everything in the world derives from Torah. Even matters of the opposing side must have a source there. The Gemara asks not only “Where is Mordechai in the Torah?” but also “Where is Haman in the Torah? ‘Have you eaten from the tree?’” That was their first and only commandment, but after a chain of descent it became the opposite of fulfilling the Creator’s will: the Tree of Knowledge sin. This is Haman’s source in Torah. Those who study Torah properly can therefore learn everything from it—even how long a snake’s gestation lasts is derived from a verse.

The discourses explain the general difference between exile and the Temple era. When the Temple stood, miracles were openly seen: “Ten miracles were performed for our ancestors in the Temple.” Jews saw them with physical eyes when they came to the Temple, ascending to appear and to see—“before the Master, Hashem.” There was actual sight, openly perceiving the Holy One’s mastery over all worlds.

Exile, by contrast, brings concealment. The Sages say, “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” Exile is therefore called night, unlike redemption and the Temple era, of which it is said, “Hashem will be your everlasting light,” a state of light and day. The difference between night and day is that all the same realities exist at night, but we do not see them.

Yet the very need for a natural covering is distress. In a state of expansiveness, the Holy One would not need to conceal Himself from Israel through nature’s garments. In Esther’s miracle she had to appeal to Achashverosh; he had to summon Mordechai, send messengers, and seal the decree with his ring. Only then was the decree annulled—unlike the splitting of the sea, when Moshe raised his staff and the sea split.

This distress is emphasized by “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” Conduct like that in Esther’s time, requiring nature’s garments, occurs because the Holy One says there will be a time when He conceals His face. “My face” is indeed present: He turns to Israel with His face and inward being. But it is doubly concealed, covered by nature. As noted, He is called neither Havayah nor Elokim nor another divine name here, but “Achashverosh.” Someone could even claim never to have heard the Midrash that interprets Achashverosh as the Holy One, “to whom the end and the beginning belong”!

Nevertheless, inwardly this too contains “Arise, Hashem.” Similarly, although Havayah is not mentioned in Megillas Esther because of “I will surely hide My face” (Deuteronomy 31:18; see Chullin 139b), it is nevertheless hinted at in initial and final letters and so forth (see Pri Etz Chaim, Gate of Purim, chapter 6).

Yet according to the principle “falsehood has no legs,” and the statement concerning the spies that any falsehood lacking some truth at its beginning cannot endure, the very suggestion that America is different must contain some element of truth—truth according to Torah, since everything must have a source in Torah. Thus the Gemara asks, “Where is Moshe in the Torah? … Esther? … Mordechai?”

Moshe, Esther, and Mordechai allude to two states of Israel. Moshe was never in exile: even in Egypt he grew up in the royal palace, besides the fact that the tribe of Levi was not subjected to Egypt’s forced labor; in Midian too he was not in a state of exile. He represents Israel outside exile. Mordechai and Esther represent Israel in exile, since they shared the people’s exile, and “we are still”—even after Purim’s miracle—“servants of Achashverosh.”

Note also the precise wording “a pleasing spirit before Me,” analogous to the Chassidic explanation of “before Hashem” as above the name Havayah. This is particularly alluded to in Megillas Esther. The Alter Rebbe explains why none of the sacred names appears there. Beyond the simple reason that the time was one of “I will surely hide My face on that day,” the concealment itself brought about “on that day.” “That,” a term for what is hidden—as opposed to the visible, called “you” or “this”—became “day,” light and revelation: “G-d called the light day.” In Torah, day is not merely something visible; it illuminates its surroundings.

Here, the sacred names are concealed because “that”—His very Essence, beyond every name, “not hinted at by any letter or point”—was revealed, “by day.” Afterward, this must be drawn into orderly, practical service through tefillin. Tefillin subject the heart and mind to the Holy One. According to the ruling in the laws of tefillin, this is not merely an intention accompanying the mitzvah but an intention that forms part of it, as with certain other mitzvos, including tzitzis and sukkah, of which it says, “So that your generations shall know.”

This includes both interpretations of “He called to Moshe,” where the verse does not identify the caller. One interpretation is that the call comes from Malchus or the angel of the covenant; the other is that it comes from beyond the chain of spiritual worlds, beyond names. Revelation below must pass through the angel of the covenant, but its true source is beyond that chain.

Similarly, there are two explanations for the absence of the Holy One’s name from the Megillah. One is that, since it concerns the kings of Media and Persia, they might interpret the divine name as referring to idolatry. The other is that the light clothed in the Megillah transcends names, as Torah Or explains. These are connected: precisely in doubled concealment—“I will surely hide My face,” not one concealment but two—there is a drawing down from the “concealed of all concealed,” not simply the concealed.

So too here. Mordechai was righteous, head of the Sanhedrin, wholly occupied with Torah and mitzvos. He was therefore not connected with the trial faced by those who “enjoyed that wicked man’s feast,” especially since the feast was arranged “according to each man’s wishes,” including Mordechai’s.

Esther, by contrast, is described by “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” She personally felt the trial of those who enjoyed the feast, living among non-Jews in Achashverosh’s house and needing to avoid its nonkosher food. Her trial was greater even than that of Chananyah, Mishael, Azaryah, and Daniel, who ate only seeds rather than defile themselves with the king’s food. “Esther did not disclose her birthplace or her people”—not merely as an extra stringency, but “as Mordechai had commanded her,” making it a Torah obligation involving a positive and a negative commandment. At the same time, she had to avoid nonkosher food.

All this applies when Torah and mitzvos are observed. But if someone sins, causes damage, and strays from the path, impairing positive commandments and especially negative ones, exile results: “Because of our sins we were exiled from our land,” and “Rachel weeps for her children.” The community of Israel is then called Esther: “Where is Esther in the Torah? ‘I will surely hide My face on that day.’” The light is concealed and withdrawn, the Holy One ascending higher and higher.

The doubled wording, “hide, I will hide,” corresponds to the two kinds of beauty—form and appearance—absent in exile. Damage to the positive commandments, beauty of form, which are the 248 limbs of Ze’er Anpin, causes the Holy One to withdraw upward into Binah rather than illuminate the emotional attributes, Ze’er Anpin. This is hester, “concealment of the hei”: revelation hidden in the higher hei. Damage to the negative commandments, rooted in yud-hei, causes withdrawal higher still, into Arich Anpin within Keser. This is astir, “concealment of the alef”: concealment even beyond “that day,” Binah.