Give everyone time to come, and we'll start. This is a שיחה in לקוטי שיחות חלק י״ד, and this week's פרשה, פרשת כי תבוא, and it's on the beginning of the פרשה. The beginning of the פרשה talks about the מצוה of ביכורים, that when the יידן entered ארץ ישראל, they conquered the land, they settled, so then they had to bring every year ביכורים, which means they had to take from the fruit, from the fruit that grew that year, a specific fruit only from those seven kinds of fruit that ארץ ישראל was praised about, and they would have to bring it to ירושלים, bring it to the בית המקדש, and bring it to the כהן. And besides bringing the ביכורים itself, there was a concept called מקרא ביכורים. They had to speak, they had to say a certain פרשה, and the פסוקים here goes into the פרשה of what the people used to say when they brought the ביכורים. So, we'll start the שיחה. שיחה starts like this: בתחילת פרשתנו, at the beginning of the פרשה, the פרשה מקרא ביכורים, sorry for all this, in the beginning of the פרשה, when it talks in the about the מקרא ביכורים, about what they said when they brought the ביכורים, נאמר, it says like this: וענית ואמרת, you should answer and say, and the תורה tells you what you should say. And this is how it starts. It says, you should say like this:

first you start off with ארמי אובד אבי. ארמי goes on לבן, לבן is called לבן הארמי, so he made my father get lost. My father goes on יעקב אבינו. יעקב אבינו went to לבן, and there לבן wanted to destroy יעקב. And as we'll see, רש״י says that even though he didn't do anything בפועל, he didn't חס ושלום destroy יעקב and his family, but he wanted to. And since he wanted to, the תורה considers it as if he did it. So ארמי אובד אבי, he says, ארמי destroyed my father. Then after that וירדו וירד מצרימה, my father, which means the יידן, יעקב אבינו went to מצרים, ויגר שם במתי מעט, he lived there in a small amount, ויהי שם, and he was there, and the פסוקים go in he became a great nation there. And then it says, doesn't bring it here, you see the dots, he just leaves it open, but the פסוק says: וירעו אותנו המצרים, the מצרים were bad to us and they made us work very hard, and we screamed to השם, and השם heard our suffering, and finally ויוציאנו השם ממצרים ביד חזקה, השם took us out of מצרים with a strong hand, ובמורא גדול ובאותות ובמופתים, all kinds of miracles. And then we finish off, ויביאנו אל המקום הזה, and He brought us to this place, which is to ארץ ישראל, ויתן לנו את הארץ הזאת, I'm reading from the חומש even though the שיחה doesn't bring it, but in the פרשה it says: and He gave us this land, a land of milk and honey, and now I'm bringing the fruit from the land to thank השם. That's what the פסוקים say. So the

רבי continues: והנה הטעם על מה זה שבביכורים מזכיר המביא ב׳ ענינים האלו, the reason why the one that brings ביכורים mentions these two things, what does he mention? He mentions the fact that לבן wanted to destroy יעקב אבינו, and we went to מצרים, we had problems in מצרים: ארמי אובד אבי, ארמי made my father get lost, והכוונה להדגיש הצלתו מלבן, he means to say that he was saved from לבן. It's interesting, the פסוק doesn't say that we're mentioning that יעקב was saved from לבן. It says לבן wanted to or destroyed my father, which means he wanted to destroy יעקב. But the כוונה behind it is not we're telling what happened, that what he wanted to do, but what he meant to say, he tried to destroy us and the אויבערשטער saved us, as he says in אות ג, the רבי says here, אות ב I mean, he brings from תרגום יונתן, and he says when it says in the פסוק that ארמי אובד אבי, ושזביה מימרא דה׳ מידיה, and השם saved us from his hands. So we're mentioning that השם saved us from לבן, and then we mention וירידת בני ישראל למצרים, the יידן went to מצרים, וגאולתם מגולה זו, and they were redeemed from this גלות. What's the reason why we mention these things here? He's bringing ביכורים to thank השם for ארץ ישראל or for the fruit that he has. Why mention these things? נראה בפשטות, we understand simply why, שזהו שבח והודאה להקדוש ברוך הוא, this is a praise and thanks to השם, על חסדים אלו, for this kindness, שהציל הקדוש ברוך הוא את אבותינו, that השם saved our forefathers, מהיות אובדים וכלים, from being lost and destroyed, על ידי לבן, through לבן, ובגלות מצרים, and גלות מצרים, עד שהביאם אל ארץ זבת חלב ודבש, till He brought us to the land of milk and honey. So this is a thanks to השם for saving us from לבן and saving us from מצרים. והודאה זו שבדיבור, we thank השם with words, נתבטאת גם במעשה, but it also expresses itself in an action: הבאת, we bring, מראשית פרי האדמה בביכורים לה׳, we bring from the first fruit of the land as a ביכורים to השם, as a thanks to So we express the thanks, so we mention these two things because we thank השם for saving us from these two people. That's the way רש״י learns פשט in the פסוקים.

There are other מפרשים, like the אבן עזרא learns a different פשט in the פסוק. He learns ארמי אובד אבי tells us something else. ארמי goes on יעקב אבינו. יעקב is called ארמי. He was in ארם. And ארמי אובד אבי means that יעקב was a lost person. Our father was lost. He was poor. He had nothing. And then the פסוק continues, we went to מצרים. And we'll see in a second what they learn, how they learn the side of אבן עזרא, side of the ספורנו learned a different פשט in פסוק. But רש״י learns that ארמי אובד אבי means that לבן הארמי wanted to destroy us, and השם protected us, and the same thing is when we came מצרים. אמנם צריך להבין, the Rebbe says we have to understand, אם הטעם הוא בכדי להזכיר חסדי המקום, if the, the reason why he mentions this is to mention the kindness of השם to us, that's all, we're thanking Him for this, kindness, things that He did, that's according to רש״י. See, according to the others, as we'll see in a moment, when we mention לבן and we mention מצרים is not to thank השם for saving us from there. On the contrary, we'll see in a second after we'll learn the הערה. But according to רש״י that He's telling us the kindness that השם did to us and we're thanking Him for it, so we're thanking השם for the חסד, חסדי המקום שעשה לאבותינו, that He did to our fathers, החל starting מ״ארמי אובד אבי״ from ארמי, לבן, who tried to destroy us, עד ביאתם לארץ, all kinds of kindness He did to us from the time of לבן, when יעקב was by לבן, until we got into ארץ ישראל. So he mentions that we were by לבן, he wanted to kill us, we were in מצרים, they wanted to kill us, and השם saved us. מדוע אינו מזכיר אלא ב׳ חסדים הללו? Why does he only mention these two kindnesses, which הצלה מלבן וגאולה ממצרים, being saved from לבן and being saved from מצרים, ולא שאר הניסים והחסדים שעשה הקב״ה עמהם, not all other miracles, kindness that השם did to the יידן קודם שבאו לארץ, before He brought them to ארץ ישראל. See, we're starting off with לבן and we're going all the way till you bring the ביכורים in ארץ ישראל, and we're trying to say all the kindness השם did to us till this moment. So a lot of things He did to us in between of that time, not only saved us from לבן and took us out of מצרים. קריעת ים סוף, He split the sea. מלחמת עמלק, there was the war with עמלק and השם saved us. וכן החסדים שבמדבר, also the kindness He did in the desert, המן, gave us the מן, והבאר, and the water, וכולי, and more. כי עליהם שעמדו לאבותינו, these are the things that stood for our fathers להיות חי וקיים, to be alive and exist בלכתם מ׳ שנה במדבר, while they were going 40 years in the desert, הגדול והנורא, terrible, terrible desert. ולבוא אל הארץ הזאת, the fact that we had the מן and the fact that we had the water and we had, that made possible for us to come to ארץ ישראל, if not for that we wouldn't be exist. So those things made us exist and made this possible that we should come to ארץ ישראל ולהביא מפירותיה, ביכורים, and to bring ביכורים. ובדוגמתם עוד כמה חסדים, other other kindness, כמו אשד הנחלים. אשד הנחלים, we know, is in פרשת חוקת, that when the יידן were, they were passing through like a narrow space between two mountains, when they, towards the end of the 40 years, so the enemies, there were like caves in the mountains, hid there and said, "When they will pass by, we will throw rocks, we will shoot arrows and we will kill them." What השם did, He made a miracle that the two mountains came together and crushed them and killed them. This a miracle, this saved the יידן, this is ממש a great miracle! Why don't you mention that? מלחמת סיחון ועוג, the war with סיחון and עוג and the אייבערשטער helped the יידן and they won the war! These are all kindness. So if we're saying that he, what he's telling, what we're saying is thanking השם for the kindness, why don't we thank for the rest of the things? So now let's learn הערה 3. Because this קושיא is only according to רש״י who learns that the reason we mention לבן and מצרים is to thank השם for the kindness. מה שאין כן לכמה, לשאר מפרשי התורה, but according to other מפרשים that's not the פשט. And he brings the other מפרשים, and he even will say why רש״י doesn't learn like them. For instance, he brings the אבן עזרא says, like I said before, ארמי אובד אבי means כשהיה ארמי עובד היה אבי יעקב. ארמי goes on יעקב, and we're mentioning, the one that brings ביכורים mentions that יעקב, when he was in ארם, he was very, very poor, he was lost. והטעם כי לא ירשתי את הארץ מאבי, and that's the reason we're saying, why didn't we get the land from יעקב? The אייבערשטער promised אברהם אבינו already, so why didn't we get it earlier? So he says we couldn't get it when, the time of יעקב was in ארם, כי עני היה כאשר בא אל ארם, he was poor, so he had nothing. So how could we inherit the land? Then when we mention מצרים is also for that reason. גם גר היה במצרים, when he came to מצרים he was a stranger, והוא היה במתי מעט, very few people, how many people? 70. And ואתה השם הוצאתנו מעבדות, and you, השם, we're telling the one that is bringing the ביכורים says, "You took us out from there, ותתן לנו ארץ, you give us a good land." So when we mention לבן, and when we mention מצרים, it's not to thank השם for the חסדים. It's just telling that why then we couldn't get the land, and now we got the land. So according to that פשט, there is no קשיא, why don't we mention the rest of the miracles or the kindness? Because the פסוק is not interested in telling us the kindness that השם did, it's just giving us a strategy why we didn't get the land till now. That's according to the אבן עזרא. The ספורנו, I think ספורנו has a new פשט, שיעקב היה לו, לא היה לו בית מושב. יעקב did not have any settled place. ולכן לא היה מוכן להעמיד גוי הראוי לרשת ארצות. He wasn't settled, וממילא he wasn't ready to bring up a nation that should be able to get the land. ואחר שהיה גוי, and after he was a nation, which means when he that was by לבן he was not able to because he was not ready, he wasn't settled there. When he came to מצרים, and there he already had a nation, by the children and grandchildren, לא היה ראוי לקבל מתנה, it wasn't deserving that he should get the present of ארץ ישראל, because had he gotten it, since he was an עבד שהיה תחת עבדות מצרים, ומה שקנה עבד קנה רבו, since he was under the rulership of מצרים, whatever he would get, whatever the יידן would get would automatically go to מצרים, because the דין is whatever a slave has belongs to his master. So the person who's saying the ביכורים is mentioning that by לבן we couldn't get ארץ ישראל, and by מצרים we couldn't get. So according to them, there is no קשיא why we don't mention other things. But according to רש״י, it is a קשיא. But then the question is, why doesn't רש״י learn like them? And if רש״י would learn like them, he would we wouldn't have a problem. How come he doesn't mention the rest? So the רבי says, כי הפירושים אלה, according to these פשטים, אין נפקא מינה כלל פרטי קושי השעבוד. The פסוק also mentioned that we say we were in מצרים, and it was very hard for us, and they made us all kinds of problems. According to their פשט, that's not the point here, not telling us how hard it was, it's not נוגע. The point is either according to the אבן עזרא or according to the ספורנו. מה שאין כן לפירוש רש״י שהרי זה מגיד חסדי המקום, according to רש״י, that the purpose is to tell us the greatness, the kindness of what השם did, yeah, we're mentioning all the problems we had, so the more problems we had and השם saved us shows greater חסדים. But anyway, the קשיא of the שיחה is, according to רש״י, why doesn't the one that brings the ביכורים mention other kindness what השם did? ואף אם תמצי לומר, and even if you're going to want to say, the רבי says, דשאני הצלה מיד לבן ומן הגלות מצרים, maybe those are two special ones, that's why we mention them. Why are they special? שהם חסדים עיקריים וכלליים, they were main חסדים, kindness, and very general, שבהם ועל ידם הציל הקדוש ברוך הוא את אבותינו ואת כל בני ישראל מכליון ואבדון גמור, that in these cases, these two cases, השם protected us from complete destruction. By לבן was like that, because he wanted to destroy יעקב when he chased him, and מצרים they wanted to destroy us. מה שאין כן שאר החסדים והניסים הנ״ל, but the rest of the kindness and the miracles that we mentioned before, the מן, and the water, and then everything, שהנם כמו המשך של ניסים פרטיים והסתעפות של החסד דיציאת מצרים, those are not in themselves special miracle, they're miracles, but a continuation to יציאת מצרים, כדי להביאם לארץ. In order to bring them to ארץ, they had to happen these miracles. But main thing is, you took us out of מצרים, taking us to ארץ ישראל. And in middle happen certain things, but those are not things כללותדיקע, שאין הנס דיציאת מצרים בשלימותו מבלי הניסים שבאו אחר כך. The main thing is יציאת מצרים. If those miracles later wouldn't happen, then the going out of מצרים wouldn't be complete. For instance, קריעת ים סוף, המן, הבאר, those are all a continuation. You took us out of מצרים, you had to split the sea, you had to give the מן, and to give us the water. So ממילא you could say, we only mentioned these things and not the rest, because these are the main ones, the general main things. הרי עדיין קשה, but we still have a קשיא. למה אינו מזכיר בהודאת הביכורים את החסד שנעשה ליעקב ובניו, why don't we mention when we bring the ביכורים the kindness that he did to יעקב and his children בין הזמן דארמי אובד אבי ובין הזמן דוירד מצרימה, something that happened in between the case of לבן and going out of מצרים, ושהיה בהצלה עיקרית וכללית, it was השם saved a separate thing of saving יעקב and his family, saving from destruction. What is that? הצלת יעקב ובניו מיד עשו ואנשיו. Saving יעקב and his children from עשו and his people. שעל זה אמר יעקב אבינו בתפילתו, and יעקב דאוונט, when he was afraid of עשו and he דאוונט, what did he say? "הצילני נא, save me, because I'm afraid he will come, והכני אם על בנים, and he will hit the mother with children, means he'll kill us." So we see that the danger when he was challenged by עשו was a danger of being killed, and השם saved us. And that has nothing to do with לבן and has nothing to do with יציאת מצרים. So that's a separate time when השם saved us from, saved יעקב and his children, his family, saved us from destruction. Why don't you mention that? And if you see in הערה ח', הערה ט', so the Rebbe mentions the same thing with אשד הנחלים, we say when those they hid in the mountains and השם saved them, also that's something from destruction. And then in הערה, that's ח', הערה ט' he says, after שמעון ולוי killed the whole city of שכם, so יעקב was really afraid that all the nations are going to gang up on them and kill all יעקב and his family, and השם made a miracle that they were afraid to do it. So here also there was a miracle that saving them from destruction, why don't we mention that also? ומכיון שקושיא זו בפשוטו של מקרא, and since this קשיא is a קשיא in the simple פשט of the פסוק, הרי תמוה, so the question is, מדוע אין רמז ליישוב קושיא זו בפירוש רש״י? Why don't we find רש״י answering this? שענינו, כידוע, we know that the whole ענין of רש״י, what is רש״י's commentary? רש״י took upon himself לבאר וליישב כל דבר הקשה והדרוש ביאור בפשוטו של מקרא. Any פסוק that there is something not understood in פשט, sometimes things are not understood in דקדוק, in in הלכה, but that that's not רש״י's thing. רש״י's thing is פשט. So any question that there is in the פסוק that's not understood in פשט, רש״י answers it. So why doesn't רש״י answer this קשיא? This is a very simple קשיא. ומזה גופא ההכרח, that proves שאין זו קושיא מעיקרא. That it's not a קשיא, for some reason רש״י feels it's not a קשיא. והענין מובן ומוסבר בפשטות כל כך, that the ענין is so clear, so much so, עד שאין צריך רש״י לפרש אפילו לבן חמש למקרא. רש״י doesn't have to explain it. רש״י wrote his commentary that even a child who starts learning חומש and has any problem in understanding the פשט, learn רש״י, we'll get an answer. So if רש״י doesn't answer this question, shows that רש״י holds that in this case it'll be understood. Now sometimes the Rebbe in parentheses says, או שמובן התירוץ ממה שפירש רש״י לפני זה. Sometimes when רש״י does not answer a certain question on a פסוק, it could be for a different reason, because רש״י hopes that the one that learns his פשט remembers what he learned before. So sometimes based on what he learned before, if you remember it then it answers this קשיא. But sometimes it's not like that. Sometimes because it's not a question according to רש״י. Now this שיחה is what we used to call, the Rebbe had every שבת, every פארברענגען for many many years used to explain a רש״י, we called it a רש״י שיחה. Then there were times when the Rebbe asked questions like this, not on רש״י, on the פסוק, which is asking why doesn't רש״י answer it, and then he explains why it's not a question. So we would call that a not-רש״י רש״י שיחה. It's a רש״י שיחה when רש״י doesn't say anything, but it's a רש״י שיחה. It's not a שיחה on other, it's a רש״י a שיחה in פשט, and a question on רש״י when רש״י doesn't say so, I mean the question why doesn't he say anything. Now the ראיה the Rebbe brings that רש״י took upon himself to answer every question, maybe רש״י doesn't answer every question? So this is one of those he doesn't answer. He answers all other questions, because we see there are quite a few times, not so many, but quite a few times that in רש״י, where רש״י writes on a certain פסוק that there is a question and I don't know the answer. Now if רש״י didn't take upon himself to answer all the questions, why does he mention? Don't answer it and that's it! That shows that רש״י feels that he answered all the questions, so if he didn't have an answer, he writes I don't have an answer. So whenever רש״י doesn't write that, means that he does have an answer. So why doesn't he write the answer? Means that רש״י holds it's so simple he doesn't have to answer it. So what is the פשט here? והנה ביישוב קושיא זו, אפשר לומר לכאורה, says first he says maybe there's an answer, a possible answer. דמה שאינו מזכיר מביא הביכורים גם את חסד הצלת יעקב מעשו, that the reason why the one that brings the ביכורים doesn't mention the חסד of השם of saving יעקב and his children from עשו, הרי זה מפני שלא היה באופן של הצלה, הצלה מצרה שבאה בפועל ובמעשה. It wasn't saved from something of action, not the פשט something happened, he did something and השם protected. Let's say if עשו would throw rocks and אייבערשטער made a נס that the rocks didn't hurt anybody, that would be a נס he saved them. Here עשו wanted to do, but בפועל he didn't do anything. If you learn חומש in פרשת וישלח, he didn't do anything. כי אם, the אייבערשטער saved us from סכנה הצפויה במחשבה, something that he planned in his mind. שהרי בפועל לא עשה עשו שום מעשה רע ליעקב. עשו did not do anything bad בפועל, actually, to יעקב. So ממילא, that's not something to mention. We only mention things that there were actual danger that he did something to bring a danger. Now one could ask right away, by לבן was the same thing, לבן didn't do anything. When did לבן want to destroy יעקב? When יעקב ran away, he chased Then what did he chase him for? To destroy them. But he didn't do anything. The fact is that when he came and he met

יעקב, he didn't do anything. So השם made him not do it, but also he didn't make a miracle from something that he did, it shouldn't damage anybody. He didn't do anything. So the Rebbe asked, ואף שגם לבן לא הוציא את מחשבתו הרעה אל הפועל, לבן also didn't take out his bad thought into action, בכל זאת הרי זה כאילו נתקיימה מחשבתו בפועל ממש. By לבן, it's considered as if he did it. Why? דכיוון שחשב לעשות, since he planned to do it, חשב לו המקום כאילו עשהו. השם considers it as if he did it. Why? So רש״י says this, שהאומות עובדי כוכבים חושב להם הקדוש ברוך הוא מחשבה כמעשה, כפירוש רש״י. רש״י says that by גוים, if a גוי has a מחשבה to do thought to do something bad, even though for some reason he didn't manage to do it, it's as if he did it. That's the difference between a איד and a גוי. By a איד, מחשבה רעה אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מצרפה למעשה. A bad thought, השם doesn't consider it as if he did it, but by a גוי, yes. ולכן אומר המביא, ארמי אובד אבי, that's why we mention, yes, לבן destroyed us. איי, he didn't actually do anything, but he wanted to, which is as if he did, and השם saved us, so we mention that. But by עשו, that

doesn't apply. שאין כן עשו, but by עשו, ישראל מומר היה. עשו was not considered a גוי. The גמרא says עשו was a איד, the גמרא in קידושין says עשו was a Jew. He was a ישראל מומר, a Jew that went off the path, that became a רשע, but he was a Jew. And by a Jew, אין מחשבתו הרעה נחשבת כמעשה, the bad thought is not considered like an act. ומכיוון שבפועל לא עשה את אשר זמם לעשות, since the בפועל he did not do what he planned, ואין זה אלא ביטול רוע שאיפתו בכוח, and השם only stopped the bad action from potential, potentially it was going to be bad, but it never happened, לכן אינו מזכיר הצלה זו, that's why we don't mention this protection, ביחד עם ב׳ העניינים שבאו במעשה, together with the other two things that came into action, או כמעשה, or considered like an act. So maybe that's the answer, cuz the main קושיא that we have here is בנוגע why we don't mention השם saving us from עשו. See, why השם doesn't mention the מן and this, we already said, we could we could answer that, that it's not a thing for itself, it's only a continuation to יציאת מצרים, and that it's not from a סכנה, it's it's it's a פרט. But the question was, but from עשו, that's a real thing He saved us. So the answer is, we don't mention it because he didn't do anything. לבן didn't do, but לבן is considered that he did because לבן is a גוי, עשו is a איד, so it's not considered that he did, and that's why we don't mention it. The Rebbe says, אולם אי אפשר לומר כן. We can't say that's why רש״י feels that there is no need to answer the question because it's obvious, it's not so. First of all, נוסף לזה שלא מצינו ממשמעות הכתובים, besides the fact we don't find in simple פשט of the פסוק, על פי פשוטו של מקרא, according to פשט, שעשו היה לו גדר דין ישראל מומר, that עשו had a דין of a איד, a רשע איד, but we don't we don't find that. ובנוגע לאבות בכלל, and בכלל concerning the אבות till מתן תורה, אין הכרח מפשטות הכתובים, there's no proof from the פסוקים, שחל עליהם הגדר והדין של ישראל, that they all had a דין of of a איד, כפי שהוגדרו בני ישראל לאחר מתן תורה, as they were after מתן תורה. Just to mention, there are discussions in the מפרשים, did the אבות have a דין of ישראל, or did they have a דין of בני נח, of גוים? So there's opinions here, opinions there. In פשט, רש״י doesn't mention that anywhere, and in חומש it's not משמע, so before מתן תורה didn't, not only עשו didn't have a דין of a איד, even the אברהם, יצחק, יעקב didn't have a דין of a איד, the the שבטים didn't have a דין of a איד. So how can we say that the reason why עשו is not mentioned because his thought doesn't count? By a גוי, thinking to do bad counts, by him it doesn't, and ממילא we don't mention it? He was a גוי! In פשט, he was a גוי. Now, we know the Rebbe learns, and it has ראיות from different places, that even things which we know clearly על פי הלכה is a certain way, but it doesn't necessarily mean that על פי פשט it's the same way. In פשט, the פסוק could mean something, a different הלכה which is different than הלכה. We don't follow that, because הלכה we have to follow הלכה, we can't follow the פשט, but nevertheless, there is a לימוד, a way of learning a פסוק, the פסוקים in חומש, דרך הפשט, pure פשט. So here, even in הלכה it's not so פשוט, the גמרא does mention that, but well, in פשט for sure we don't know find that עשו was a איד to say that the fact that he planned to kill is not counted. And you know, the אבות בכלל, ממילא we can't say that's why רש״י feels that it's not mentioned. But besides that, ממה נפשך, אם נאמר שיש להזכיר בוידוי הביכורים רק אלו החסדים וההצלות שהיו מתוך מצר וסכנה מעשית, if we're going to say, like we said, that we're only mentioning when the אייבערשטער saved us from an actual act of danger, that's only we mention, על דרך שהיה במצרים, like במצרים, וירעו אותנו המצרים, says the מצרים were bad to us, ויענונו, they made us suffer, ויוציאנו, then השם took us up, out. So we, there it was actually they did something to bring us into a danger. And that's what you mention. But if that's the way we're going, that we only mention a danger that was there in action, אי הכי לא הווה ליה למימר גם ארמי אובד אבי. So you shouldn't mention לבן either. מאידך, since סוף סוף, after all, לא הגיע מזה לאבי לאבינו יעקב שום רע בפועל ממש, סוף כל סוף יעקב did not suffer anything from לבן as far as a danger. It was only in his mind, in לבן's mind. איי, we said before that by a גוי the אייבערשטער considers their מחשבה like מעשה? So he says true, I'll just say it by heart before we read in the inside, that's only לגבי לבן. Will לבן be punished for his thought of killing? Yes. But as far as יעקב is concerned, by him it doesn't save him from a סכנה of מעשה. והרי מידה זו שמחשבה כמעשה, this idea that the מחשבה is like a מעשה, נוגעת רק לגודל חטאו ועונשו של לבן, that's how great his sin is and his punishment, אבל אין בזה נפקא מינה בנוגע ליעקב. לגבי יעקב, who cares what he had in his mind? דבין כך, whichever way, whether או בין כך שמחשבה כמעשה, whether we consider the מחשבה like action, או בין כך שאינה כמעשה, even if we say it's not like action, לא נגע בו לבן כלל, לבן didn't do anything. So the רבי says you can't say that the difference between לבן and עשו is because with עשו we don't count his מחשבה, by לבן we do count. Who cares if we count his מחשבה? We count the מחשבה means that he will be punished for wanting to do that. But לגבי the person who was saved, you can't say, if you don't if you don't want to mention any any danger of מחשבה, you couldn't mention לבן either. אלא מאידך גיסא צריך לומר, on the other hand you could say like we started saying ממה נפשך. If we're going to learn that we only think mention things of מעשה, then don't mention לבן. Now if we do mention לבן, you have to say שאף על פי שסכנת האובדן מידו של לבן לא היתה אלא בכח המחשבה, even though the danger from לבן was only in potential and in thought, בכל זה nevertheless שפיר קרי המביא ארמי אובד אבי, we mention it, the one that brings the ביכורים and says says this, הרי זה בכלל חסדי המקום, we still consider it a חסד of the אייבערשטער that he saved us from the thought of לבן, הוה ליה להמביא להגיד גם כן על חסד שעשה הקדוש ברוך הוא ליעקב להצילו מידי עשו. So the אייבערשטער, so he should have mentioned also that he saved him from עשו. So, in other words, this idea that there's a difference whether you count the מחשבה like a מעשה or not, what the רבי is saying here that has nothing to do with the person that's saved. That's only how the אייבערשטער deals with the person who had this bad מחשבה. So you can't answer that the difference between עשו and לבן because by לבן you count it like a מעשה and by עשו you don't count it like a מעשה. Makes no difference. לגבי יעקב it's the same. So if we only count things of מעשה, we shouldn't have counted this לבן. If we count things which also of מחשבה, then we should count עשו also. So the

bottom line, המורם מהנ"ל, the bottom line from everything he said is על כרחך צריך לומר, we must say, ששני חסדים האמורים בכתוב, the two kindness mentioned in the תורה, which is that השם saved us from לבן and saved us from מצרים, יש להם שייכות מיוחדת למצות ביכורים, they have a special connection to ביכורים, מה שאין כן בכל שאר חסדים, but the rest of the חסדים has nothing to do with ביכורים. That's why we don't mention it, and these two, yeah. What is it? What is the connection between ביכורים and דווקא these two and not the rest? הביאור בזה, so the רבי explains it like this. במצות ביכורים לא נתחייבו בני ישראל, the מצות ביכורים the יידן were not obligated, אלא לאחר שבאו לארץ, only after they came into ארץ ישראל, וכבשוה, they conquered it, וישבו בה, and they settled in it. כמו שפירש רש"י, like רש"י says on the פסוק, when the פסוק says when you will come to the land you should bring ביכורים, the פסוק adds וירשתה וישבת בה, you will inherit it and settle. So רש"י says what does that mean? מגיד, this tells us, שלא נתחייבו בביכורים עד שכבשו את הארץ וחלקוה, they did not become מחוייב in ביכורים till after they conquered it and they divided the land. And the way the רבי explains in a different שיחה, even though took took seven years to conquer, seven years to divide and to settle everybody. Now there were some people who got their share earlier, took seven years till everybody got. Nevertheless, those people who got their share earlier did not have to bring ביכורים. It only started after everybody got their share. When we got to ארץ ישראל, they conquered it, and they settled in it. מזה מובן, from that we understand, שמצוה זו דהבאת ביכורים, that the מצוה of bringing ביכורים אינה רק הודאה על עצם נתינת הארץ מהקדוש ברוך הוא לבני ישראל, it's not just thanking השם that he gave us the land, כי אם גם ובעיקר על זה שבאו נחלה בהתיישבות קבועה בה. Not that we have a land now, and we have fruit from the land and we're able to have our fruit. It goes more than that. We have to We're thanking השם that He brought us to a settled place. Now we have a נחלה, an inheritance, which is we're settled in it. כי רק אז מביאה היא את טיב ששמנה בה. Only then, when you have that you're settled, you have the proper good. וביכורי פירותיה מביאים לה'. And the fruit from this settled place we bring to השם. So we're we're thanking השם for a process, for the fact that You made us settle in the land and in such a land that brings us the best fruit. That's what we thank for. ומכיון שתכלית ענין הביכורים היא תודה לה' על חסדיו וטובו, and since the whole purpose of ביכורים is to thank השם על חסדיו וטובו for His kindness and goodness, שנתן לנו את הארץ הזאת, ארץ זבת חלב ודבש, לשבת בה בקביעות, like He gave us this land of milk and honey to be settled there in a permanent way, ולאכול מפריה ולשבוע מטובה, and to eat from its fruit and to be full from its goodness, so that's what we're thanking. לכן, בכדי להדגיש גודל החסד הזה, in order to show how great this חסד is, that He made us settle in a land where it's a גוואלדיקע good land and it has the best fruit, but the settling of the land is part of what thanking השם, מזכיר המביא, so the one that brings the ביכורים mentions, גם כן רק דוגמתם. Which things does he mention to thank השם? Things which are in the same category, meaning את חסדי המקום שנעשו לאבותינו, the חסדי חסדים, the kindness of השם that He did to our forefathers, בעת היותם במקום קבוע, when they were in a settled place, ושבמקום ההוא לא הגיע להם טוב, saying, look at the contrast we're showing: we were settled once before, and nevertheless it wasn't good. And now You settled us in a place where it's good. So we're saying like this: we were in a place settled, but no good came out of it. כי אם אדרבה, on the contrary, באותו באותו מקום ביקשו לכלותם, in that place they wanted to destroy us, which is תכלית הרע, not good. Here it's we settled and we have good things, there we were settled and only bad came. והקדוש ברוך הוא עשה עמהם חסד והצילם, השם protected us from there, עד ש והביאנו למקום הזה, You protected us from the bad that happened in those settled places, You brought us to this place, וניתן להם טוב הבא מהמקום עצמו, ובתכלית טוב זה. So You brought us here, and this place, and this is a good place, and a place that gives the good fruit, gives us the best. So what are we so we're not just mentioning ניסים, we're thanking השם for settling us in a place which is good, while there were other places where we were settled was not good. וזהו שמזכיר דווקא את חסדי המקום שנעשו לאבותינו בארם, this is why we only mention the חסדים that השם did to us when we were in ארם ובמצרים, and in מצרים, because במקומות אלו, these places, ישבו אבותינו בישיבה קבועה, there they were settled permanent. עשרים שנה בארם, in ארם it was twenty years, ורד"ו שנה במצרים, and 210 years in מצרים. So we were settled to a certain degree, and nevertheless it was bad. ויומתק גם כן הטעם שמזכיר לפי סדר זה: ארמי אובד אבי, ואחרי זה וירד מצרימה, and this explains why we start off thanking השם with ארמי אובד אבי, לבן in ארם wanted to destroy us, and then we went to מצרים, בכדי להדגיש כנ"ל, to stress like we said, שמצד המקומות עצמם של ארם ומצרים, because of the places themselves, היתה צפויה להם סכנת כליה ואבדון. Those were places that were only places that caused or wanted to cause or caught was a סכנה to cause destruction. והקדוש ברוך הוא בחסדו הצילם וגאלם, השם saved us, עד שהביאם אל המקום הזה שהוא בעצמו מלא ברכת ה', till He brought us to a place which is full of the ברכה. So we're mentioning the other side. So mention other ניסים, you don't have to. מה שאין כן הצלתו של יעקב מעשו, the fact that יעקב was saved from עשו, שזה, that didn't happen in a settled place, that's a נס, שבא בעת שמצאו בדרך, it happened when he was on the way, so it's not a contrast to now. על דרך זה בשאר החסדים שנעשו לבני ישראל בלכתם במדבר, the other things, the מן, and the סיחון ועוג, all the other things that happened, the miracles happened, מלחמת עמלק, it all happened in the מדבר. So there it was on a it was in the middle of a trip. Besides it, גם כי הוא בעצם אינו מקום ישוב לבני אדם בכלל, the מדבר is not a place where people could live, not a settled place to begin with, but certainly in their way it was only in middle of a trip. הרי הם חסדים שאינם בדוגמת ההודאה לה' שבאה בהבאת הביכורים כנ"ל. So it's not the same like we thank השם for, like ביכורים, that we thank השם for settling us in a good place versus before settling us in a bad place. So we only mention those things. So So we're טאקע mentioning the חסדים, השם saved us from those bad to bring us here, but not because we're just looking for which חסדים we're thanking השם, that we could bring many other. That answers also why in in the הערה that we said before, where we said, "ויהי חתת אלקים" after שכם, so the אויבערשטער made a miracle that the גוים did not attack יעקב, it's a miracle. There's nothing to do with a place that he was, and this this place was a bad settling place, he wasn't settled there. This was in the middle of the way also. וממילא, this is the reason why we bring this. This is all על פי פשט. בפנימיות הענין יש לומר, now to explain it על פי חסידות, it's like this: מבואר באור התורה, it says in אור התורה from the צמח צדק, בענינה של מצות הבאת ביכורים, what is the רוחניות'דיקע meaning, the spiritual meaning, the פנימיות'דיקע meaning, the חסידישע, kabbalistic meaning of the מצוה of ביכורים? So it says like this:

פרי האילן הוא בחינת הנשמה שנתלבשה בגוף. Fruit of a tree is the level of the נשמה that's in the body. We all know it says in חסידות not the whole נשמה of a person goes into his body, only a חלק. Most of the נשמה stays למעלה in the שורש, in its root, and only a small part of the נשמה comes down. That's represented in fruit of a tree. A tree is the tree itself, and fruit come out from the tree. Same thing you have, the נשמה itself, that's the tree; the fruit of the tree, that is the part of the נשמה that is goes away from the שורש and comes away into the body. מצות ביכורים, what's the מצוה of ביכורים, that when we take the fruit and we bring it to the בית המקדש, לקשר ולחבר בחינת הנשמה שלמטה בשרשה, we take the fruit, which represents the נשמה the way it's down here, and we want to connect it back to the part of the נשמה that's up there. And that part is called ביכורים עליונים. The נשמה, the way it's in הימל, in heaven, is called ביכורים עליונים. It's called ביכורים. We know בכלל a איד is called ביכורים. כמו שכתוב, like it says, "כי כבכורה בתאנה ראיתי אבותיכם", the אויבערשטער says, פסוק in הושע, like ביכורים in a fig, I saw your parents, which means the אידן are like ביכורים, and the נשמה למעלה is ביכורים עליונים. So what do we do? We bring the ביכורים to connect the נשמה down here, the fruit that represents the חלק, part of the נשמה that's down here, we bring it to the בית המקדש as ביכורים to connect it to the שורש, at the higher level of the נשמה. ומבאר שם, and the צמח צדק explains, שב' ענינים בזה. There are two things that happen. When we want to connect, בכלל when we want to connect two things, two things could could happen, or you could have both: or the one from, let's say you want to connect something on top to the bottom, the top one could come down, or the bottom one could go up. So they're both things here: when you bring ביכורים, two things happen. Number one, הבאת ביכורים היא העלאה ממטה למעלה. The bringing of ביכורים is we're bringing our fruit, which represents the נשמה down here, to the בית המקדש, we're elevating it, we're bringing it, connecting it to the נשמה למעלה. And then you have the second part of ביכורים is the קריאה, the מקרא ביכורים, when you read those פסוקים, והקריאה של פרשת הביכורים היא המשכת אלקות ממעלה למטה. Bringing ביכורים is ממטה למעלה, and מקרא ביכורים is ממעלה למטה. Why is מקרא ביכורים ממעלה למטה? Because מקרא, the word מקרא means to call. מקרא means to read, also, but it also means to call, ויקרא means he called. What does פשט you call? When you call somebody, you make like, "Come here." So מקרא ביכורים means you're calling, you're bringing down, not you're going to, you're calling it. So when we say ביכורים connects you to the נשמה למעלה, the חלק הנשמה למעלה, it's bringing down that חלק. So the bringing ביכורים is when you elevate the נשמה למטה up, and when the מקרא ביכורים is the second part, the המשכה למטה, דהיינו להמשיך בחינת ביכורים של הנשמה ממעלה למטה, to ממשיך that level of ביכורים which is in the level of the נשמה למעלה down here, שיתחבר ויאיר בחינת הנשמה שלמעלה בהנשמה המלבשת בגוף. So the נשמה that's למעלה should connect to the נשמה down here, so you're bringing it down. And the main thing the רבי is stressing here is this part. You see, there's the first part also, when you bring the ביכורים ממטה למעלה, but that was written in parentheses, because that's not נוגע to to the חסידות of the קשיא why we mentioned לבן and מצרים, but he mentions the fact is that there is a part also when we go למעלה. But then the main thing that we're discussing here is that, and we're talking about what he said, the מקרא ביכורים is the המשכה מלמעלה. ועל פי זה יש לבאר שזהו הטעם שבקריאת הפרשה של ביכורים מוזכרים ב' ענינים. Now we'll understand why we mentioned these two things. The קשיא was why do we mention only these two things, only being by לבן and מצרים? We'll understand. Now that we said ביכורים is ממשיך from a very high level down, We'll skip the parentheses for a second, because both היו בבחינת חסד והמשכה מלמעלה למטה. סיי ענין of לבן and סיי ענין of מצרים represent the same idea of המשכה מלמעלה למטה. And in the parentheses he says, בשני הענינים, in both פרטים, because in each one of the two you have two things: by לבן you have two things, you have going there, יעקב went to לבן, left לבן. מצרים, we went to מצרים, left מצרים. So the רבי says in both ענינים, סיי the going to לבן and סיי the coming from לבן represents המשכה מלמעלה. Going to מצרים and leaving מצרים represents המשכה מלמעלה, which is what מקרא ביכורים is in רוחניות. And he explains why. When יעקב went to לבן it says, ויצא יעקב מבאר שבע. ויצא means he went away, that means he was נמשך. He was נמשך from באר שבע, באר שבע is a very

high מדרגה, it's ארץ ישראל, למעלה מעלה. וילך חרנה, and he went to חרן, which means he was נמשך from a very high מדרגה to למטה מטה into the עולם. וביציאה משם, when he left, it says, וישכם לבן בבוקר, לבן got up in the morning. חסידות has a very interesting פשט. We know that לבן למטה was a terrible guy, but in חסידות לבן represents בחינת לבן דקדושה. There is a לבן which is לבן דקדושה ובחינת לובן העליון. לבן means white. White is very is an עצמות'דיקע color. The real ענין of white is a גוון עצמי, it's not a color. It could contain all the colors. It's a very עצמות'דיקע essential thing. So לבן העליון לובן העליון is בוקר דחסדים it says. לבן represents חסד. White is always חסד, a דבר עצמי, shows a very high מדרגה. ועל לבן כתיב, on לבן it says, וישכם לבן בבוקר, and he met יעקב and then he left, it says he woke up in the morning, so חסידות says that means שבכל יום every day מתגבר ונמשך אור חסד עליון. לבן, which is חסד העליון, is awakened and is נמשך בבוקר every morning. Then it says,

ויעקב הלך לדרכו, and then יעקב left to his way, להמשיך בחינת לובן העליון הנ״ל למטה מטה, to bring that מדרגה down. So what do we see here? יעקב's going to to לבן is מלמעלה למטה. He went from a high place, going נמשך lower. When יעקב left there, and it was connected and לבן chased him, and then it says that what happened? וישכם לבן בבוקר, and יעקב took along that לבן העליון, לובן העליון, and יעקב הלך לדרכו, he took it along with him. It's again המשכה מלמעלה. So that fits to what the מקרא ביכורים is. על דרך זה בירידה למצרים, going to מצרים. ויתירה מזה, when he went to מצרים, is like the same thing. He went from ארץ ישראל to מצרים, just like יעקב went from ארץ ישראל to חרן, which is a called a המשכה from a high מדרגה to a low מדרגה. But יעקב also, he went from ארץ ישראל to מצרים, from a high מדרגה to a low מדרגה, so that's also המשכה. But besides that, even before יעקב himself came, it says, ואת יהודה שלח להורות לפניו. He sent יהודה ahead, for what? לתקן לו בית תלמוד, to establish a ישיבה in in מצרים. That means it's נמשך, he's ממשיך the ענין of תורה, whatever it is, into מצרים. וכל זה, that's when going to מצרים.

What about יציאת מצרים? Is אוודאי המשכה מלמעלה, שהיה מצד חסד הוי'. The אייבערשטער had חסד, נגלה עליהם מלך מלכי המלכים בכבודו ובעצמו וגאלם, the אייבערשטער came down, revealed Himself, took them out of מצרים. So the ענין of יציאת מצרים represents המשכה מלמעלה מלמעלה למטה. Going to מצרים does. So the whole concept of מצרים is המשכה מלמעלה, the whole ענין by לבן is המשכה מלמעלה למטה. על פי זה יש לומר בענינה של תורה של פירוש רש״י, that will explain the חסידישע פשט in רש״י, מה שפירש, רש״י says, מזכיר חסדי המקום. רש״י says these words, that he's mentioning the חסדים of the אייבערשטער. Now, לכאורה, on both words is a problem, חסדי המקום. Number one, המדובר כאן בהצלת יעקב מלבן ויציאת מצרים, we're talking about saving from אייבערשטער saving from לבן and going out of מצרים, שהם ניסים גדולים, they're ניסים, ולא חסדים, well not חסד, it's not a נס, חסד kindness. והיה לו לומר ניסי המקום, he should have said that that they were showing the אייבערשטער's ניסים, why did you say חסד? And the second שאלה is למה נאמר חסדי המקום, why does he call the אייבערשטער המקום? Yes, true, the אייבערשטער is called המקום, but why here does he choose to say המקום, ולא חסדי הוי', חסד of the אייבערשטער? ועל פי הנ״ל יש לומר, so we can say, שבפירוש רש״י נרמז הטעם שמזכירין ב' ענינים אלו בפרשת ביכורים. This is a רמז why we mention פרשת ביכורים these two things. And we said before why, because ביכורים is המשכה, the מקרא ביכורים, the reading, is המשכה מלמעלה, and these two things represent המשכה מלמעלה, that's why רש״י mentions these words. Because Because ענין קריאת פרשת בכורים is בחינת חסד, חסד is המשכה. חסד is when you give, גבורה is when you don't, you take back. So if we want to mention here that there is a המשכה here, so we use the word חסד, רש"י uses the word חסד. Because חסד means המשכת אלוקות. המשכה, so bringing אלוקות is חסד. And why does he say מקום? Because מקום is place. במקום דווקא! Bringing down אלוקות from very high to very low. What's very low? This world is low. What's this world? Space and time. So space, מקום, is this world. So חסדי המקום means the המשכה מלמעלה into this world. ולכן מזכיר ענין הצלה מלבן ויציאת מצרים, that's why he mentions just these two, saving from לבן and יציאת מצרים, שהם בחינת חסדי הוי' המשכה במקום קבוע כו'. It's the חסדים of the אויבערשטער, it's חסד, המשכה מלמעלה. And only these two. Other things are fine, good things, but there's no ענין in חסידות that they represent specifically המשכת אלוקות מלמעלה למטה. So we

have the answer in פשוטו של מקרא why פסוק, where according to רש"י דרך הלימוד, why the פסוק mentions these and not others, because he only wants to mention where we were in a settled place and it wasn't good, and the אויבערשטער saved us from that and brought us to ארץ ישראל in a settled place where it is good. And על פי חסידות, because מקרא בכורים is המשכה, and these two are המשכה. Then the רבי says, וההוראה מזה בעבודת האדם, the הוראה in עבודה is, אין לאדם להסתפק בעבודתו ועליתו בתורה ותפלה. A person should not be satisfied when he goes higher and higher in his own עבודה, in his תורה and his תפלה, שעל ידי זה הוא מתעלה ומתקשר להוי'. To them he connects himself to the אויבערשטער, true, but that's not enough. אלא צריך גם כן שימשיך אלוקות למטה. You go higher up, very good, but you have to also have the second half. You have to be ממשיך אלוקות down here. וגם בדברי הרשות, also on things which are not holy. ממילא you put on תפילין, that's a holy thing. But you have to bring אלוקות למטה even in גשמיות, into things which are not holy, דברי רשות, things that don't have to do. וגם בדברי ובמובחרים שבהם, and also the best good of גשמיות you should utilize for אלוקות. והיינו לא רק שעניני הרשות לא יתפשו שום מקום אצלו מחמת דביקותו בהוי' Now, don't, he doesn't say I don't mean that you should be so high that you shouldn't care about גשמיות. That's a good thing, very good, but that's not that גשמיות should not mean anything to you because you're connected to השם, אלא שגם בענינים הגשמיים שמתעסק בהם באופן של קביעות, in the גשמיות that you have to do, and you're set, you do it always, you eat, you eat, you always eat, there's no question about it, that's a דבר קבוע, ימשיך בהם אור וגילוי אלוקי, you should bring into them the Godly light, עד שיהפכם לטוב ולקדושה ממש, till you change them over into good and holiness. שיהיה, צריך להיות מראשית פרי דווקא, and you have to, בכורים it says you have to bring from the first fruit, meaning מן היפה והנאה וטוב, the best ones, because when you're bringing אלוקות into גשמיות and you transform the גשמיות into אלוקות it has to be the best. The

רבי in the הערות says, look at the רמב"ם סוף הלכות איסורי מזבח. The רמב"ם says that anything that you do for a מצוה, from גשמיות, has to be the best. You build a שול, it has to be the best thing. You give a poor man food to eat, give him the best food. Because we have to elevate the best of גשמיות. And things which are settled, which is parallel to what he said before in the פשט. So when, that's what you have to do, bring אלוקות into וועלט, שבזה הוא משלים תכלית הכוונה בבריאת העולם, and this fulfills, fills up the purpose of the creation of the world, לעשות לו יתברך דירה בתחתונים, that you make for the אויבערשטער a dwelling place in this low world. And that's the ענין of מקרא בכורים, that's why we mention these two instances, not anything else. Okay. Thank you, Rabbi. Yeah.