Nefesh HaChaim is is a sefer about Avodas Hashem. It it contains fundamental insights and clarifications into what our Emuna is in HaKadosh Baruch Hu and fundamental insights and understanding into the system of of Torah Mitzvos through which we oved Hashem. In contemporary times, we we have the impression and and to a degree it's it's probably accurate in in our generation and in in recent generations that one of the what one of the differences maybe even one of the defining differences between the the olam HaChasidus and the the olam HaMisnagdim and the different drachim in Avodas Hashem is the place which is assigned to Chochmas Hanistar and to the study of Be'ur HaZohar or Kisvei Arizal that we associate that with with the olam HaChasidus with Chasidim and and don't associate it with the olam of Misnagdim. Historically, that certainly wasn't the case and it isn't an accurate understanding of of what separated the Gaon from Chasidus. Even the most perfunctory reading of Nefesh HaChaim, Nefesh HaChaim is ruba d'ruba Zohar's marei mekomos to to Kisvei Arizal ruba d'ruba is is Chochmas Hanistar. Parenthetically, for that reason, it's important to realize even if there isn't much we can do about it, it's important to realize that that really to fully understand Nefesh HaChaim one would have to be not just oriented in but immersed in the Chochmas Hanistar from which he's drawing. The fact that that we're not and not only we're not and not ra'uy to be either shouldn't deter us. I think it's clear from from what Rav Itzele writes in the Hakdama how his father's tzava'a was that he wanted Nefesh HaChaim published and disseminated. You get the impression that that Rav Chaim Volozhiner clearly wrote in such a way that that everyone can understand Nefesh HaChaim on on his level. That ein hachi nami, those who are yodei chen will understand it in on many levels and in many dimensions that we won't but that even without that background he he wrote it in such a way that that even on a superficial level it's a profoundly rich and and insightful sefer. So what what separated the the Gaon from Chasidim was not the place of of of Chochmas Hanistar but rather their understandings. They had they had different understandings or whatever, but it wasn't the it wasn't the the place of Chochmas Hanistar in in the hierarchy of Talmud Torah. When the Be'ur HaGra is the famous Be'ur HaGra in Yoreh De'ah where he's massig on the Rama and the Rambam and says that that what they thought is pardes is not pardes, it's quite clear what that the Gaon identifies pardes with with Chochmas Hanistar and the Gaon was very much osek in it. What created the difference, it was rather a difference of interpretation and emphasis. None of that is intended as a veiled pitch that we should be learning Chachmas haNistar. A person has to be raoy lekach. But even if a person is not raoy lekach and is therefore not doing it, a person should still have an accurate understanding of what the attitudes were of the Gaon and other gedolei olam. Okay. So the sheet should cover us for today, maybe next week as well, and hopefully after that people will be able to bring a copy of the sefer. ויברא אלקים את האדם בצלמו בצלם אלקים ברא אותו וכן כתיב כי בצלם אלקים עשה את האדם. הנה עומק פנימיות עניין הצלם הוא מדברים העומדים ברומו של עולם והוא כולל רוב סתרי פנימיות הזוהר. אמנם כמה נדבר במילת צלם בדרך הפשטנים הראשונים זל על פסוק נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו. והוא כי מילת צלם ודמות כאן אינו כמשמעו כי כתוב מפורש ואל מה תדמיון אל ומה דמות תערכו לו.
So the word mashmao, let's say you have it in Rashi the phrase pishuto kemashmao. Pishuto kemashmao. So mashmao seems to mean its literal, the literal meaning. And when Rashi says pishuto kemashmao, what he means is that the simple meaning is like the literal meaning. That's not always the case, right? The simple meaning doesn't have to necessarily be what the literal meaning is. Ayin tachas ayin. So the literal rendition is an eye for an eye and the simple pshat is that ayin tachas ayin means mamon. So that's what the Nefesh haChaim is saying is that for his purposes there's no need to tell us what the difference is between tzelem and dmus, so he doesn't. The words tzelem and dmus literally what they would suggest is let's say when we use the word image in English, let's say you have the phrase that you can say that a son is the spitting image of his father. So what it means is that he looks like a carbon copy of the father that all his facial features are the same and maybe the way he walks and the way he talks and everything is the same. So that would be the literal meaning. So that's what Rav Chaim Volozhin says והוא כי מילת צלם ודמות כאן אינו כמשמעו כי כתוב מפורש ואל מה תדמיון אל ומה דמות תערכו לו אלא פירושו דמיון מה באיזה דבר.
It means a certain point of resemblance. It doesn't mean that it's again the literally in the image because one can't ascribe any image, not only physical, one can't ascribe any dmus to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. כמו דמיתי לקאת מדבר כי לא נעשו לו כנפיים וחרטום.
It doesn't mean when the Navi says damisi lekaas midbar like a bird of the desert, it doesn't mean that he had wings and a beak. ולא נשתנה צורתו לצורת הקאת רק שנדמה אז במקרה פעולותיו שהיה נוד ונע כקאת מדבר שהוא ציפור בודד ומעופף ממקום למקום.
It means that there's a point of resemblance, there's a similarity in terms of wandering. כך הוא לפי הפשטנים הראשונים זל וכן על דרך זה הוא עניין מילת צלם כי המה דומים במשמעם מצד מה.
Again, the tzelem and dmus for his purposes have this common sense meaning a point of resemblance. אמנם להבין עניין אומרו בצלם אלקים דווקא ולא בשם אחר.
Why is it if we're being told that the adam was created in the tzelem of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, so why is it of the שבעה שמות שאינם נמחקים that we're told בצלם בצלם בצלם אלקים? Why not one of the other shemos? Right, what underlies the question is that with the exception of Yud-Kei-Vav-Kei, so the other shemos of Hakadosh Baruch Hu can be used bilshon chol. Right? מי כמוך באלים השם. So Eil... on a pasuk doesn't mean doesn't mean God doesn't mean divinity it means strong yesh le'el yadi. Similarly with Elokim so Elokim when we say it is such as Kodesh but it can be chol also it can refer to a dayan. Elohim lo tekalel so you're referring to a dayan. So the the other shemos of Hakadosh Baruch Hu can be used can be associated with with people as well. So therefore in terms of being candidates to be used in this phrase of betzalem so take it's not a kasha why it doesn't say betzalem Havayah that that you can't associate with with a person the Shem HaMeforash can never be used that way but the other shemos of Hashem can be. Ki Shem Elokim so why is it that when the Torah tells us it's בצילם אלוקים ולא שם אחר כי שם אלוקים ידוע פירושו שהוא מורה שהוא יתברך שמו בעל הכחות כולם כמו שמבואר באורח חיים סימן ה.
That's a very very important siman in the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch of what the kavana is supposed to be when we pronounce Shemos Hashem at least within the context of brachos. The Machaber says that when we say Baruch Atah Hashem י-ה-ו-ה so we're supposed to be mechaven both to the ksiv as well as the krei so we're supposed to be mechaven to אדון הכל היה הוה ויהיה. That's what Machaber says that one should be mechaven to adon hakol reflecting the the krei the pronunciation of adnus as well as the ksiv הויה היה הוה ויהיה. The Gra there's a long Biur HaGra there the Gra disagrees and the Gra says that with the exception of pasuk rishon of Krias Shema it's enough when saying Ado-shem to be mechaven adon hakol. Even in pasuk rishon of Krias Shema when one should be mechaven for the ksiv for the Havayah as well so there the Gra thinks that one should not be mechaven that haya hoveh veyiheh isn't the correct but one should be mechaven to matzuy kayam. That Hakadosh Baruch Hu is matzuy kayam. Since Hakadosh Baruch Hu exists outside of time you can't even express Hakadosh Baruch Hu's eternity the Gra says in terms of haya hoveh veyiheh but you're supposed to be mechaven to matzuy kayam. So that's the kavana you're supposed to have for adnus. Again according to the Gra outside of pasuk rishon of shema it's enough to have adon hakol according to the Machaber it should be always be אדון הכל היה הוה ויהיה in pasuk rishon of shema the Gra says it should be adon hakol and matzuy kayam. What about with Elokim Elokeinu? So what's the kavana you're supposed to have there? So take בעל היכולת בעל הכחות כולם. So that's one that's what Nefesh HaChaim is now going to amplify what does it mean when we think of Hashem when we identify Hashem Elokim as ba'al hakochos kulam. So the simple pshat without the Nefesh HaChaim is that we would think that ba'al hakochos kulam simply means that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is omnipotent but that it's there isn't one koach that Hakadosh Baruch Hu has but he has he has all all the kochos. Nefesh HaChaim says it means much much more than that. וענין מה שהוא יתברך נקרא בעל הכחות כי לא כמדת בשר ודם מדת הקדוש ברוך הוא כי האדם כשבונה בנין דרך משל מעץ אין הבונה בורא וממציא אז מכחו העץ רק שלוקח עצים שכבר נבראו ומסדרם בבנין ואחר שכבר סדרם לפי רצונו אם שכחו סר ונסתלק מהם עם כל זה הבנין קיים אבל הוא יתברך שמו כמו בעת בריאת העולמות כולם בראם והמציאם הוא יתברך יש מאין בכחו הבלתי תכלית כן מאז כל יום וכל רגע ממש כל כח מציאותם וסדרם וקיומם תלוי רק במה שהוא יתברך שמו משפיע בהם ברצונו יתברך כל רגע כח ושפע אור חדש.
So we mentioned that that part of the of what the Sefer Nefesh HaChaim again a sefer about avodas Hashem part of what it provides is just the insight and clarification into what our our the basics the fundamentals of our emunah. So here is is the first fundamental that the Nefesh HaChaim talks about that when it means Hakadosh Baruch Hu is ba'al hakochos kulam what it means is not simply that he's omnipotent. But he exclusively is a baal koach. There is no other force in the world other than Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That baal hakochos kulam in a sense of exclusively, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is exclusively the baal, the baal of all kochos in the world. And that it's not the case that when Hakadosh Baruch Hu created the world, then he infused within the world its own charge. It's like a battery that has a charge. So now the battery is no longer dependent; it has its own charge. No, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is the baal hakochos, baal hakochos kulam, and that's what it means that just as when Hakadosh Baruch Hu at the first moment of Bereishis bara Elokim, so he brought into existence yesh mei'ayin. So כן מאז כל יום וכל רגע ממש, every moment, כל כח מציאותם וסדרם וקיומם תלוי רק בהמשך יתברך שמו משפיע בהם ברצון יתברך כל רגע כח ושפע רוחני חדש. ואילו היה הוא יתברך מסלק מהם כח השפעתו אף רגע אחת,
and if Hakadosh Baruch Hu would remove the force of that overflow of that infusion, כרגע היו כולם לאפס ותהו. So everything would revert to nothingness. וכמו שיסדו אנשי כנסת הגדולה as the Anshei Kneses Hagedolah introduced that we say twice in the first bracha of Birkas Krias Shema, המחדש בטובו בכל יום תמיד מעשה בראשית, היינו תמיד ממש כל עת ורגע.
Verayaso meforashes, le'oseih orim gedolim, שלא אמר עשה אלא עושה. And he says the raya that the Anshei Kneses Hagedolah quote is explicit, that the pasuk in Tehillim doesn't refer to Hakadosh Baruch Hu in the past that asah orim gedolim, but rather le'oseih orim gedolim, present tense. So the shaila is what the Nefesh Hachayim, what the Anshei Kneses Hagedolah have in mind with that raya. Because the question is as follows. If you take a look, the Gemara has it in Berachos and daf lamed ches. The Gemara has a machlokes between the chachamim and Rabbi Nechemiah making a bracha on pas. So tanu rabanan, mahu omer, המוציא לחם מן הארץ? Rabbi Nechemiah omer, מוציא לחם מן הארץ. So amar Rava, במוציא כולי עלמא לא פליגי. Everyone agrees that motzi, if the matbeia haberacha would be ברוך אתה ה׳ אלהינו מלך העולם מוציא לחם מן הארץ,
that's certainly good. The shaila is can you have the hei? Can it be as we say it, המוציא לחם מן הארץ? So what does that depend on? So the Gemara explains amar Rava במוציא כולי עלמא לא פליגי de'apik mashma. The reason motzi is correct according to all opinions is because motzi is mashma past tense, de'apik mashma. It's mashma the past. Dechsiv, Kel motzi'am mimitzrayim. Ki pligi behamotzi. The question is what are the semantics of hamotzi? רבנן סברי המוציא דאפיק משמע. Rabanan say hamotzi also has also has the same semantics of he brought forth in the past. והראיה דכתיב המוציא לך מים מצור החלמיש. ורבי נחמיה סבר המוציא דמפיק משמע.
And Rabbi Nechemiah says no, hamotzi is mashma present tense. It's not mashma de'apik, it's mashma demapik, it's mashma present tense. Shene'emar, right? We just had the pasuk, המוציא אתכם מתחת סבלות מצרים, that Hakadosh Baruch Hu who is bringing you out mitachas sivlos mitzrayim. Verabanan, so what do they do with that pasuk? ההוא הכי קאמר להו קודשא בריך הוא לישראל כד מפקינא לכו אעבידנא לכו מילתא כי היכי דידעיתו דאנא הוא דאפיקית יתכון ממצרים דכתיב וידעתם כי אני ה׳ אלהיכם המוציא וכולי.
And the Rabanan say no, the pshat is... So what you see from this Gemara is the following: that, that brachos are supposed to be mashma in the past. Motzi is, has, has that connotation of past. The machlokes of Rabbi Nechemia and the Rabanan is about Hamotzi. So the Gemara's kulo pela, no? So everyone, right, everyone, everyone learns dikduk, right? So he took out is hotzi. He will take out is yotzi. He is taking out is motzi. So what is the Gemara talking about that motzi is apik mashma? Tosafos says no, that motzi is apik mashma, so that's, that's opgerecht. That's, that, that's clear. Everyone, everyone agrees with that. The question is, what's the mashmas of Hamotzi? The Gemara taki has a good raya, Keil motzio mimitzrayim. But what, what does it mean? What does it mean? So l'chora, it's muchach umuchach that what the Gemara means is like this. Let's say you want, let's say you know a certain talmid chacham and right now as we speak he's writing a sefer. Writing a sefer. So how would you say that he's writing a sefer? So you would say hu mechaber sefer. That's what you would say. Right now he's sitting right now at 11:56, he's sitting and he's writing a sefer, you would say hu mechaber sefer. Okay, fine. Let's say, let's say Rav Neuburt Shlita would come to give a shiur and, and you would, you'd be called upon to introduce him. So how would you introduce him? So you'd introduce him as a הרב הגאון מחבר ספר שמירת שבת כהלכתה. So what, it means he's writing right now he's writing? That's, that's clearly what that would be correct usage in Lashon HaKodesh. Right now he's not writing Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa right now. So the answer is that what we call the present tense in Lashon HaKodesh really means two different things, right? It means in English what we call the present, he is writing, but it also means the writer of and as an apposition, right? So you, so it would be Rav Neuburt, comma, the writer of, the author of Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa, comma. So that's what we call the present tense in Lashon HaKodesh really means two, l'chora means two distinct things. Maybe, maybe it really only means one thing, but let's say superficially it seems to mean two different things. It certainly means, it certainly has the sense again of author of, writer of as opposed to he is writing. So l'chora that's what the Gemara means. When the Gemara says אל מוציאו ממצרים דאפיק משמע, it means the same way when you say that Rav Neuburt is the mechaber of sefer Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa, you'll say it's de'apik mashma, it's de'kasav mashma. So too Keil motzio mimitzrayim is de'apik mashma. Which is why l'chora the correct translation when we make brachos, when you make a borei pri ha'etz, so the correct translation is not who creates the fruit of the tree, but is Creator of the fruit of the tree, because the Gemara says that brachos are supposed to be mashma l'shavar. Okay. So that being the case, so the first kasha on, on this Nefesh HaChaim again, it's not really a kasha on him, it's כה אמור לעושה אור. The taina is not on the Nefesh HaChaim, the question is what Chazal have in mind. So what's the raya from l'oseh orim gedolim? It's not muchach. Again, you read it like this, so you think, yeah, so l'oseh is present tense, shoin. So it's a rayaso mifuarshes. But emes it's not so poshut at all. Because the same way Motzi is de'apik mashma, so l'oseh is de'avad mashma, or at least potentially. It's certainly not muchach that it has to mean that. So what does it mean rayaso mifuarshes? But zos ve'od, the kasha's even more, because if you go through that kapitel, לגוזר ים סוף לגזרים. So לגוזר ים סוף לגזרים l'chora certainly doesn't mean that he's right now dividing yam suf. Oh, maybe it does. But, from our understanding... it would seem that the character translation of lemakei melachim gedolim and לגוזר ים סוף לגזרים is not that right now Hakadosh Baruch Hu is being makeh melachim gedolim, that right now he's being לגוזר ים סוף לגזרים, but he is the one, he's the mechaber, he's the, he is the one who is the, again, in an apposition, the way you use describing someone as a mechaber. That's a tzarich iyun. What does the Nefesh Hachaim telling us when he says v'yosu m'furaishas? A, it doesn't have to mean that, and aderaba, within that Kapitel there's a hechreich that sometimes it lichora means davka the, it has the other meaning, the way the Gemara uses it here in Brachos lamed ches. So, that's a tzarich iyun to to understand what the what the Nefesh Hachaim means here. וזהו שנקרא הוא יתברך שמו האלוקים בעל הכוחות כולם שכל כוח פרטי הנמצא בכל העולמות הכל הוא יתברך שמו הבעל כוח שלהם שמשפיע בהם הכוח וגבורה כל רגע ותלויים בידו תמיד לשנותם ולסדרם כרצונו יתברך.
So all of the the laws of nature, the laws of science, all the forces of nature, everything, everything that all the biological processes, so none of these are are independent kochos, all of these again are concentrated exclusively again kavyachol as it were in Hakadosh Baruch Hu's hand, and every moment Hakadosh Baruch Hu has to has to will that that the world be renewed. כן בדמיון זה כביכול הבורא יתברך סידר והשליט את האדם שיהא הוא המדבר והמנהיג אותם על פי כל פרטי תנועות מעשה ודיבור ומחשבה וכל סדרי הנהגתו הן לטוב או להיפך חס ושלום כי במעשה ודיבור ומחשבה הטובים הוא מקיים ונותן כוח בכמה כוחות ועולמות עליונים הקדושים ומוסיף בהם קדושה ואור כמו שכתוב ואשים דברי בפיך לנטוע שמים וליסוד ארץ וכמאמרם ז"ל אל תקרי בנייך אלא בונייך כי המה המסדרים עולמות העליונים כבונה המסדר בניינו ונותנים בהם רב כוח.
What what does it mean in general when when you have, right, we we encounter it all the time when Chazal have al tikrei. So אל תקרי בנייך אלא בונייך. But the pasuk says banayich, so what do you mean אל תקרי בנייך אלא בונייך? So so some understand it to mean that it just means it's a asmachta again in the Rambam's sense of what asmachta is. means, ein hachi nami, the pasuk doesn't really mean this, but that to help remember תורה שבעל פה, so you have a right to associate the ideas of תורה שבעל פה with the Torah She-biketav bederech asmachta. But there is another another understanding of al tikrei. The other understanding of al tikrei, again, so some of the al tikrei's are are easier in the sense that basically here, it's only changing the the nikud. You're not really changing the the letters. Some of the al tikrei's Chazal mamash tell us as though you change the letters. אל תקרי ושננתם אלא ושלשתם. So those those al tikrei's are more challenging. Here, it's easier to understand that what Chazal are saying is that even though we have a a tradition that when you read the pasuk, that the pasuk should be vocalized in such a way, but in terms of drashos, it's supposed to be darshened with other vocalizations as well. And that even though we it's supposed to be vocalized with a kamatz banayich, but it should in terms of drashos, it should also be be vocalized with a cholam chaser with the bonayich. So in in these al tikrei's the emes is it's it's easy to understand how it can function as a as a real drasha. And then you have that k'seder in Chazal even when they don't say the lashon al tikrei, they'll darshen limadtem, limadtem. The same the same word will be darshened both ways. That even though it's that that that the kabbalah that we have is again when you read the pasuk to read it a certain way, but it's nitan le-hidoresh according to other forms of nikud as well. But the problem is not all al tikrei's do that. Some of the al tikrei's simply say אל תקרי ושננתם אלא ושלשתם. So that's not a question of of nikud. So what's the pshat there? So itachen that in those cases, and then based on that, could be that this is true even when it's only a question of the nikud, although again, when it's only the nikud it's not a kasha. Is that be-emes what Chazal are telling us is there even without the al tikrei. And the al tikrei just as a way of of seeing explicitly what is anyway implicit in the pasuk. So for instance, so אל תקרי ושננתם אלא ושלשתם. So what did Chazal darshen? לעולם ישלש אדם שנותיו שליש במקרא שליש במשנה שליש בתלמוד.
That a person has to divide his time amongst the three chelkei HaTorah of mikra, mishna, and and talmud. So lechora what Chazal are saying is the following. What does veshinantam mean without without v'al tikrei? So the Gemara in Kiddushin says שיהיו דברי תורה מחודדים בפיך שאם ישאלך אדם דבר אל תגמגם אלא אמור לו מיד.
That if a person has this ability, so to the best of one's ability, so kol haTorah kulah should be shagur befiv. That a person should have it on the tip of his tongue and he shouldn't have to stutter and and hem and haw, but emor lo miyad. Al tikrei that that's what veshinantam means without an al tikrei. שיהיו דברי תורה מחודדים בפיך. So say Chazal, lemayseh, how's that going to happen? How's that going to happen? How's a person if if he's capable of it, not everyone's capable of it, but if he's capable of it, so how is a person to the best of his ability going to achieve that? So it's going to happen through of אל תקרי ושננתם אלא ושלשתם that לעולם ישלש אדם שנותיו שליש במקרא שליש במשנה שליש בתלמוד.
So it's not as if Chazal are making something up based on on this game of al tikrei. So itachen that over here as well, again, so the pasuk is וכל בנייך למודי השם ורב שלום בנייך. So I'm not sure about this, but maybe what it means is that I'm not sure at all about this, but that again even though the bonayich meaning of of Klal Yisrael who are also who are also banim la-Makom. So what does it mean to what's what is implied in that designation? What that designation at least in part implies is that this incredible status that Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave. So it's clear from the Nefesh HaChaim that this is only true when when the Nefesh HaChaim talks about that ברא הוא יתברך שמו את האדם והשליטו על ריבוי רבבן כוחות ועולמות אין מספר,
it's true when you continue even in this very perek that once there was Bechiras Yisrael, once you have the Avos, the Bris Avos and Bechiras Yisrael, that this is true only of Klal Yisrael. It's not true of the umos ha'olam. This this cosmic influence that we have through our action, that we affect all the kochos in the world, all the olamos elyonim, and then based on that it trickles back down to our world. So that's only true for Klal Yisrael. It's not true for the umos ha'olam. He's going to make that explicit. So maybe that's the pshat that that's part of bonayich, part of bonayich who are also banim lamakom is that they have that koach that Hakadosh Baruch Hu has assigned to them. Again, of being of of having this koach of tzelem Elokim. So in a word, so for the Nefesh HaChaim what tzelem Elokim means is the same way when we say Elokim about Hakadosh Baruch Hu means he's ba'al hakochos kulam. So Hakadosh Baruch Hu chose to create the world in such a way that as it were, even though he is and obviously remains the ba'al hakochos kulam, that he says the way all the kochos in the world are going to be affected, they're going to be affected by our actions. And that's what it means that we're betzelem Elokim. But it's not only actions. What's so remarkable about this scheme is it's ma'asim, dibburim, and machshavos. That that everything is repercussive. Everything is significant. Not only a person's actions, how a person speaks, a person's thoughts. And what's more, we'll we'll hopefully be'ezras Hashem bli neder see that the truth is that the dibburim and machshavos actually reach higher than than ma'asim alone are able to are able to reach. ובהיפוך חס ושלום על ידי מעשיו ודיבוריו ומחשבותיו אשר לא טובים הוא מהרס רזא דכמה כוחות ועולמות עליונים לאין ערוך ושיעור כמו שנאמר מהרסייך ומחריבייך ומחשיך ומקטין אורם וקדושתם חס ושלום ומוסיף כח ועוז במידור הטומאה רחמנא לצלן זהו ויברא אלקים את האדם בצלמו בצלם אלקים וגומר כי בצלם אלקים עשה שכמו שהוא יתברך שמו הוא אלקים בעל הכוחות הנמצאים בכל עולמות כולם ומסדרם ומנהיגם כל רגע כרצונו כן השליט רצונו יתברך את האדם שיהיה הוא הפותח והסוגר של כמה אלפי רבבות כוחות ועולמות על פי כל פרטי סדרי הנהגתם וכל עניינם בכל עת ורגע ממש כפי שורשו העליון של מעשיו ודיבורו ומחשבותיו כאילו הוא גם כן הבעל כח שלהם כביכול.
So Hakadosh Baruch Hu created that again kavyachol, it's as if the kochos now reside with us and it's our action, our speech, our thought that that affects how all the the worlds function. Rabbi Akiva beshem Rivas omer בזמן שישראל עושין רצונו של מקום מוסיפין כח בגבורה של מעלה כמה דאמרת באלקים נעשה חיל. ובזמן שאין ישראל עושין רצונו של מקום כביכול מתישין כח גדול של מעלה דכתיב צור ילדך תשי ובכמה מקומות בZohar
Hakadosh דחוביי בר נש עבדין פגימה לעילא vechu. v'zehu she-amar ha-kasuv tnu oz l'Elohim ובזוהר ריש פרשת בא ויהי היום ויבואו להתייצב על השם
maybe we'll just read the oh excuse me it's not on the xerox so we'll read it this way. In the bottom of this edition and other editions that they have all the the Zohar passages translated into into Hebrew. כד בעאן לקיימא על אינון עובדין דישראל על השם ודאי קיימא דהא כד ישראל עבדין עובדין דלא כשרן
ke-viyachol מתישין חילא דקודשא בריך הוא ke-viyachol we weaken the the force of Hashem. Obviously it doesn't mean literally but what it means is that Hashem takes His cue from us that He lets our actions resonate and and have repercussions throughout all the all the worlds. וכד עבדין עובדין דכשרן יהבין תוקפא וחיילא לקודשא בריך הוא
ke-viyachol again since HaKadosh Baruch Hu takes His cue from us so ke-viyachol when we do maisim ksheirim so then we give strength ke-viyachol to HaKadosh Baruch Hu ועל דא כתיב תנו עוז לאלקים. So tnu oz l'Elohim so the pshuto shel mikra without the this Zohar HaKadosh is tnu in the sense of render in the sense of acknowledge praise HaKadosh Baruch Hu acknowledge as in ten shavach so acknowledge that HaKadosh Baruch Hu's oz and the Zohar HaKadosh says no it it means tnu in the sense of give ke-viyachol that tnu oz l'Elohim bameh? How's a how does one give strength to Hashem ke-viyachol? b'ovdin d'ksharan v'lachein amar l'Elohim and that's what it means tnu oz l'Elohim. If it meant just praise so why the lamed? Why the lamed? But if it means to ke-viyachol to give so then you understand why you have the the preposition of the lamed וכן באלקים נעשה חיל שפירושו בעל הכוחות כולם v'chana'al.