Category Archives: Uncategorized

Nephesh Hachaim 1:2

Nephesh Hachaim Gate 1, Ch. 2


But, just how are we like G-d? To know that, though, we’d first have to realize that we’re actually told that we were created “in the image of E-l-o-h-i-m1. R’ Chaim underscores the fact that that’s the name of G-d that speaks to His being in control of all the universe’s resources and capacities 2.

And how much is G-d in control of all the universe’s resources and capacities? Completely. For, when we humans build something out of wood, for example, R’ Chaim points out, we don’t start off by actually creating wood: we simply take whatever available pieces of wood we need and set them in place. And when we’re finished, we leave, and the edifice we built stands on its’ own.

But when G-d (as E-l-o-h-i-m) “built” the universe He created it out of sheer nothingness by means of His limitless ability 3. And each and every moment literally He willfully imbues the world and its contents with “being and new light” 4. In fact, were G-d to withhold that for an instant, everything would then simply return to sheer nothingness 5. That’s why The Men of the Great Assembly worded the prayers to read “He renews the act of creation daily” 6, which means to say that G-d does that literally, moment by moment 7.


Thus G-d is said to be in control of all the universe’s resources and capacities as signified by the term E-l-o-h-i-m 8 in that each and every resource and capacity is under His control, He provides them all with their capacity and power each and every moment, and He alone is capable of changing them and setting them in order as He sees fit 9.

And we’re somewhat like that, too, as we’ll see.



1                We’ve translated the term as “the image of G-d” of course, since E-l-o-h-i-m is one of G-d’s names, but that translation is still and all somewhat misleading as we’ll see.

                  Now, we find that particular names depict specific characteristics. Someone named Shmuel, for example, may be called “Shmulie” by family, “Shmulke” by friends, “Samuel” (its English equivalent) by co-workers, “Sam” by others, etc. And this same man will likely act and be perceived by others according to the name in question. The same could be said about G-d, if you will. He too is represented by different names, seven of which are sacred (see Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 6:2) and scores of which are more like “appellations” (see Chizkuni to Exodus 14:22), and each represents a trait.

R’ Chaim’s point is that particular names of G-d depict specific Divine characteristics and that we’d need to know which characteristic is being expressed here by the use of the name E-l-o-h-i-m.

2                R’ Chaim refers to the citation of that in Shulchan Aruch, Orech Chaim 5:1.

3                This depiction explains the following detail: E-l-o-h-i-m is the name for G-d that’s used in the recounting of creation (rather than the usual name Y-h-v-h).  So we’d have expected R’ Chaim’s point to be that our having been created “in the image of E-l-o-h-i-m” implies that we’re creative beings. Instead R’ Chaim points out just how unlike G-d we are on that level. For while humans certainly affect change, we still and all arrive in the middle of things then leave. We’re thus a vital element in the universe, but only an element nonetheless. Indeed, R’ Chaim is underscoring the idea that we humans are not creative so much as re-creative.

And he cites Zohar 2, 96a in a note below which differentiates between the names E-l-o-h-i-m and Y-h-v-h, and he addresses the subject in 3:9 below.

As for G-d creating the universe out of sheer nothingness, see 1:13, 3:2 below, as well as Ramban and Gra’s Aderet Eliyahu to Genesis 1:1, and Ramchal’s Da’at Tevunot 194.

4                “New light” means to say, additional degrees of animation.

See note to 1:13, 3:11 below and R’ Chaim’s remarks in Ruach Chaim 4:22, as well as Ramban to Genesis 1:4, Maharal’s Netzach Yisrael Ch. 1, and Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 1:1,

5                See Shabbat 88a and Ramban to Genesis 2:17.

A point to be made is that since everything can thus come undone and become sheer nothingness if G-d so willed it, and yet He hasn’t brought that about, G-d clearly intends for the universe to go on and isn’t utterly displeased with it, as some might think.

6                This is found in Yotzer Ohr before Kriat Sh’ma.

7                R’ Chaim also offers the fact that G-d is said to “be making” them now rather than to have made “the great luminaries” (Psalms 136:7) in the distant past.

He then offers a note here, his first in a long series of them throughout the book. We’ll offer the gist of this one and others like it that help us understand the point at hand, but few others.

The note raises the question as to why none of this moment-by-moment activity is discernible to us. And it offers that it’s because all of that goes on below the surface of things, in each thing’s spiritual “elements” and “fathers” (i.e., its non-material roots and antecedents) (R’ Chaim cites Zohar 1:23b as illustration of that fact. See 3:10 below for this same citation. Also see R’ Yitzchak’s note to 1:1 and Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 4:1-2, 5 on this idea), which are themselves rooted in the four letters of G-d’s name Y-h-v-h (see 3:11 below), and which all join together to produce each and every thing moment by moment as is also spelled out by the concept of the different “parts” of time (see Hilchot Kiddush Hachodesh 6:2 and Pardes Rimonim 2:1).

Also see R’ Chaim’s note to 1:13 below.

8                … specifically, which is a plural term, thus alluding to G-d as E-l-o-h-i-m being in control of infinite numbers of things…

9                R’ Chaim’s next note at this instance makes the point that the term E-l-o-h-i-m is sometimes used in other contexts in the Torah, as when it refers to idols and national overlords (see Psalms 96:5, Micha 4:5, Zohar 3:8a, 208a), and judges (see Exodus 22:9 and Rambam about that in Moreh Nevuchim 2:6). But given  that none of these have inherent so much as G-d-given abilities (see R’ Chaim’s Ma’amarim 3 and Hilchot Yesodei Hatorah 1:1-4), they’re clearly un-G-dly.

(c) 2017 Rabbi Yaakov Feldman

Feel free to contact me at


Rabbi Feldman’s new annotated translation of Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag’s “Introduction to the Zohar” is available as “The Kabbalah of Self” on Kindle here. His annotated translation of Maimonides’ “Eight Chapters” is available here and his annotated translation of Rabbeinu Yonah’s “The Gates of Repentance” is available here.

He has also translated and commented upon “The Path of the Just” and “The Duties of the Heart” (Jason Aronson Publishers).

Rabbi Feldman also offers two free e-mail classes entitled “Spiritual Excellence” and “Ramchal” that can be subscribed to.

Nephesh Hachaim 1:1

Nephesh Hachaim Gate 1, Ch. 1


Amazingly enough, we’re said to have been created “in the image of G-d” (Genesis 1:27, 9:6). But what exactly does that mean? It surely speaks to a core-central part of our being that we’d have to comprehend if we’re ever to understand ourselves. So the greater part of this first Gate goes about explaining it while the idea reiterates through the entire work either overtly or subtly.

In point of fact, most of the mystical teachings of the Zohar focus on this seemingly other-worldly phenomenon 1. But we won’t be exploring the Zohar’s understanding of that here so much as the more implicit meaning of our having been created in His image as the earlier Literalists understood it 2.


Now, the idea of our having been created in G-d’s “image” certainly isn’t to be taken literally, as G-d hasn’t an “image” per se 3. What it implies is that we have something in common with Him 4 — something vitally important as we’ll see.

Let’s explain the analogy between our beings and G-d’s image this way. It’s written for example that “I was like a bird of the wilderness; I was like an owl of the wasteland” (Psalms 102:7). That’s certainly not to say that the person who’s speaking here has wings or a beak, or that he’d literally become a bird; but rather, as the Literalists explained it 5, that he’s somewhat bird-like in that he might, for example, wander about the desert in solitude the way certain birds do or the like, but nothing more than that 6. So our having been created in G-d’s “image” implies that we’re somewhat like G-d. We’ll soon see what it means 7.


1                See Eitz Chaim 1:2 for this point.

The Zohar (Parshat Ki Taitzai 279b, Tikkunei Zohar 19, 42a) uses the term Adam Kadmon (“Primordial Man”) when discussing this, thus referring to a more abstract notion of humankind. But R’ Chaim’s point is that he’ll be speaking about us specifically (though the term Adam Kadmon will be cited in 3:8).

Ari refers to Adam Kadmon very often in Otzrot Chaim, Sha’ar HaIggulim, and in Drush Adam Kadmon. He uses the expression Tzelem Elokim (“The Image of G-d”) in Otzrot Chaim, too. R’ Chaim’s son R’ Yitzchak (who wrote the Introduction above) added a lengthy and comprehensive treatment of the idea of Tzelem as explained in the Kabbalistic literature here which we won’t be addressing.

2               The so-called “Literalists” included Rambam (in this instance most especially and specifically, as we’ll see in note 6 below), Rashbam, Ibn Ezra, Radak, and others. They were termed literalists because they strove to explain what the Torah was actually expressing. And so, for example, Rambam cited our ability to think as what likens us to G-d, while Ibn Ezra attributed it to the fact that we have an immortal and exalted soul.

3                After all, isn’t it written, “To whom can you compare G-d, and what likeness can you arrange for Him?” (Isaiah 40:18)?

4                That is, there’s a remote resemblance between G-d and us.

5                See Sha’ar HaHakdamot 5d for a discussion of the Literalists in this context.

6                This explanation of the extent of the metaphor is derived from the very first chapter of Moreh Nevuchim. Also see Ramban’s comments to Genesis 1:27.

7              Also see Ruach Chaim 2:1 and 2:2,5 below for a different discussion of this, as well as Ramchal’s Da’at Tevunot 80 and Kinat Hashem Tz’vaot 2.

(c) 2017 Rabbi Yaakov Feldman

Feel free to contact me at


Rabbi Feldman’s new annotated translation of Rabbi Yehuda Ashlag’s “Introduction to the Zohar” is available as “The Kabbalah of Self” on Kindle here. His annotated translation of Maimonides’ “Eight Chapters” is available here and his annotated translation of Rabbeinu Yonah’s “The Gates of Repentance” is available here.

He has also translated and commented upon “The Path of the Just” and “The Duties of the Heart” (Jason Aronson Publishers).

Rabbi Feldman also offers two free e-mail classes entitled “Spiritual Excellence” and “Ramchal” that can be subscribed to.



R’ Chaim of Volozhin never wrote an introduction to Nephesh Hachaim but his son R’ Yitzchak did so in his place, and we’ll be encapsulating it here, in this first part 1. R’ Yitzchak’s first point is that ordinarily an author would write an introduction himself that would humbly and modestly offer why the work was written and what its objectives were. But since his father didn’t write one, R’ Yitzchak set out to offer an introduction that would, ironically, almost boldly do all it could to cite his father’s greatness 2. We’ll encapsulate that introduction in this first part and go on from there to highlight the makeup of Nephesh Hachaim itself.

R’ Yitzchak says that he’d hardly know where to begin to express his father’s greatness, and that he himself was unworthy of the task. But R’ Chaim’s reputation is already well known, he then says, and he goes on to depict something of the great man’s personality and accomplishments. For one thing, aside from being a great, prodigious, and righteous scholar, he is also known for having established the great Yeshiva of Volozhin – the first actual yeshiva as we know it — and for having had many hundreds of students 3.

But even when he was young he was known to have been an amazingly diligent student who’d study day and night. At first he was a disciple of the well known author of Sha’agat Aryeh – R’ Aryeh Leib Gunzberg (c. 1695 – 1785), whose legal decisions were oftentimes accepted by Chassidim and Mitnagdim alike.

Then he became the principal disciple of the great and world-renown Gaon of Vilna, R’ Eliezer (1720 – 1797). The Gaon was not only a scholar of great depth and accomplishment but also an ascetic, kabbalist, philologist, and arguably the greatest Jewish scholar of the post-Talmudic era, and the one man who could lead the charge against the nascent Chassidic movement that seemed to threaten Jewish life at the time 4. R’ Chaim not only absorbed his teacher’s wisdom, he also served him humbly, and shivered in awe even many years later when he related things that his teacher had said.

So humble was R’ Chaim that he had no compunctions about drawing close to the poor and unlettered, he’d lecture about things that would not only speak to scholars but to those same simple individuals, and he’d somehow purposefully and unpretentiously address both in the course of his public teachings. He cared little about his physical settings or accoutrements, or his honor (never taking offense about anything untoward said about him), so humble was he. And he never took solace in all of the good and holy things he’d done, but always expected more of himself and questioned his own motivations.

Most tellingly, R’ Yitzchak, his son, remembers his father constantly asking him if he were doing enough to help others with their troubles, “since people weren’t created for their own situations in life (alone) but to help others as much as they can”.

The Introduction ends in a rather poignant way. R’ Yitzchak reports that on his death-bed R’ Chaim handed R’ Yitzchak his handwritten copy of Nephesh Hachaim and directed him to do two things after R’ Chaim would pass: to publish Nephesh Hachaim as soon as possible, and to see to the well-being of the by-then successful and world-famous Volozhin Yeshiva; and he then died.

Believing that his father would have understood just how much work was required to keep up the yeshiva, R’ Yitzchak focused on doing that, and thus didn’t have time to publish Nephesh Hachaim until some time had passed. But R’ Yitzchak took the tragic and haunting facts that his newest baby passed away about a week after his birth and that his “precious, beautiful, charming, and beloved” eight year old son Simcha Naftali Hertz also died within that period as signs from Heaven that he shouldn’t have delayed publishing Nephesh Hachaim in fact. So he set out to do that.

Thus ends the gist of the Introduction to Nephesh Hachaim.


A lot of theories have been enunciated about R’ Chaim’s intentions when he wrote Nephesh Hachaim. Was it perhaps meant to be a diatribe against the Chassidic movement, in line with the thoughts and actions of his teacher, the Vilna Gaon – or perhaps an acquiescence to the movement’s strength and numbers by that point? Was it a revelation of just how much the two schools of thought converge — or how they differ? Was it meant to be the embodiment of non-Chassidic Kabbalistic standards – or a statement to the affect that while there are differences, they aren’t fatal and that the schools are closer than thought despite the marked differences? Many argue one way or the other.

In any event we’re presented here with a glorious text of Mussar, Kabbalah, and Jewish Thought that serves as the most fundamental statement of “Lithuanian”, “Yeshivish”, non-Chassidic attitudes and perspectives. And it has allowed for great Yeshivish thinkers like R’ Shlomo Elyashiv, the author of the magisterial Leshem Shevo Vachlama; for the many Mussar masters, from R’ Yisrael Salanter onwards to contribute to Jewish Thought; and for the very many students of their thoughts to grow in the service of G-d in ways that would not have been possible without Nephesh Hachaim.

The book is comprised of four “Gates” and a section entitled “Chapters” that lies between the third and fourth gate. The first gate discusses just what our having been created “in G-d’s image” means; our ability to affect heaven and earth; the potency of our words and thoughts; our souls and their connections to G-d; the nature of repentance, and more.

The second gate discusses Jewish prayer and the import of the wording; the consequences of sin; what’s involved in “whole-hearted prayer”; intentions in prayer, and more.

The third gate is the most esoteric and complex, and it’s actually skipped by many because of that as well as because of the knotty implications that can be drawn from it. We’ll be especially careful in our wording and explanations there. It discusses the idea of G-d being the “site” upon which the universe stands; the danger in discussing this along with the need to discuss it in our day and age; G-d’s perspective of things versus our own; the nature of G-d’s having apparently withdrawn His being in order to allow for the creation of mortal beings, and the pros and cons of discussing this; G-d’s absolute rule, and more.

The “chapters” section discusses the dangers of egocentrism; purity of heart and altruistic service to G-d; the idea of attaching oneself onto G-d’s presence; practical mitzvah-observance and prayer; fearing G-d’s exaltedness versus fearing retribution, and more.

And the fourth gate encapsulates what had been said before and expands upon ideas like the importance of Torah-study and studying it altruistically; the fear of G-d; attaching oneself onto G-d’s presence and onto His Torah; the significance of original Torah insights; the personal and universal impacts of studying Torah; the fact that G-d’s presence dwells in this world when people study Torah, and more.

May G-d grants us the wherewithal to draw from the wisdom within Nephesh Hachaim and to thus serve Him wholeheartedly.


1 R’ Yitzchak included a number of rather erudite scholarly footnotes to this Introduction which we’ve omitted since they would have taken us far afield and wouldn’t have served our purposes here. He provided notes throughout the book, too, which we also won’t be offering.

2 Though it’s not generally known, in fact most introductions are the very last thing written in a book. For it’s the venue through which the author presents the gist of the ideas that he’d come to realize after having written the book and dwelled on the points he made. R’ Chaim consequently didn’t write an introduction because he was still editing and adding on to the book right before his passing.

3 Before the establishment of the Volozhiner Yeshiva gifted young men would study with their local rabbi or perhaps from a more accomplished and learned rabbi of another town or city until he himself earned ordination and went on to be such a rabbi and teacher. But R’ Chaim perceived that that system could no longer thrive — or compete with the Western university system that was beginning to attract intelligent and inquisitive young Jewish men.

So the Volozhiner Yeshiva (and the entire yeshiva system) was created so as to be the hub of Jewish intellectual life. It was lively, intense, and thrilling, and there were always people studying there and parrying with each other in a search for truth.

4 Though it’s hard to imagine now, at the time the Chassidic movement seemed to be a threat to traditional Jewish life with its new practices and areas of concentration.