The true cause of sinas chinam is yeshus and haughtiness, in that a person esteems and cherishes himself highly, viewing himself as a truly exalted individual. His egotism and his smug, self-satisfied awareness of every detail of himself, - these are the reasons for his being unable to tolerate anyone else.

It is quite simple: His own ego allows no room for anyone else, for his yeshus fills all of existence. Yet the other person must take up space as well, for[13] "there is no thing that does not have its place." Thus, when he in his yeshus and arrogance bloats and swells to such a degree that he displaces everyone else, it is inevitable that the other person diminishes his own being. He therefore cannot tolerate him.

Thus, the main reason [for his sinas chinam] is his own yeshus that causes the other person to be viewed by him as his opponent. This does not result from the other's opposing him in some particular way; rather, the [seeming] opposition stems from the other person's very existence: the individual concerned is pained by the mere fact that the other person exists at all, for this diminishes his yeshus. [He thus feels] the other person is in opposition to him, and cannot tolerate him.

This is not so in the realm of holiness, whose mainstay is bittul. There each individual is united and intertwined [with the other]; since he is self-effacing he leaves room for another and unites with him. As to him who exists in a state of yeshus, however, his yeshus does not leave room for anyone else; he thinks of any other individual as an opponent because of the very fact that he exists. This itself is the cause of his sundering himself from the other and his inability to tolerate him.

This is [the meaning of what our Sages have said]:[14] "A person should always be as soft (i.e., supple) as a reed and not be as hard (unbending) as a cedar." Hardness and softness relate directly to corporeality: the greater the yeshus of a thing, the coarser will it be; that which is in a lesser state of yeshus will be softer. The yeshus of a coarse object causes it to be unbending, while that which is softer is capable of being bent.

The same holds true with regard to man's character traits: He who is filled with yeshus and is over-aware of his own existence is so coarse that he is completely unbending, while he who is less so is pliable.

"Hard as a cedar" thus refers to the middos of Tohu while "soft as a reed" refers to the middos of Tikkun, for the Sefiros of Tohu existed in a manner of yesh, [being overly conscious of their own existence, while the Sefiros of Tikkun are characterized by bittul].

Although the lights [that illuminated the vessels] of Tohu were extremely holy, and moreover, the degree of Tohu precedes that of Tikkun, nevertheless [their inadequacy was in that] they were mainly in a state of ratzo ["advance" and longing to be united with their source]. And it is known that the state of ratzo alone [without a corresponding measure of shov, or "return"] does not constitute true bittul, but rather expresses an awareness of self.

It is specifically in the quality of shov that bittul finds its main expression, as the verse states,[15] "The world was not created for [the state of] Tohu [whose main quality was ratzo; rather] it was created for [the state of] sheves [lit., 'being settled,' but hinting at shov]." Sefer Yetzirah states:[16] "If your heart runs forward [toward G-d, i.e., if it is in a state of ratzo,] return (shov) to Echad [- to G-d's Oneness with this world]." That is to say: If your heart runs forward in a [passionate] longing for G-d that may result in the soul's fleeing the body, "return" to Echad by nullifiying your desire in the face of G-d's desire. For His desire is that one should be in a state of shov [of a soul clothed within a body] below, engaging in Torah and mitzvos, since it is only thereby that one makes [i.e., transforms this world and all it contains into] vessels for G-dliness.

Since the mainstay of Tikkun is shov [which is motivated by the quality of bittul], the emotional attributes of Tikkun are thus supple. Tohu, however, whose primary aspect is the state of ratzo, has unbending emotional attributes. This, then, is the cause of their divisiveness and separation [from one another].

Summary: Yeshus in one individual does not allow room for another; it therefore leads one to sinas chinam. Ratzo, involving a feeling of self, is dominant in Tohu; it therefore results in emotional attributes that are unbending and divisive. This is not the case in Tikkun.

   

Notes:

13. (Back to text) [Avos 4:3.]

14. (Back to text) [Taanis 20b; explained in Toras Chayim on Bereishis, p. 9a ff.]

15. (Back to text) [Cf. Yeshayahu 45:18.]

16. (Back to text) Quoted in Sefer Yetzirah, ch. 1. In current editions the text reads, "return LaMakom." However, Sefer Yetzirah is quoted as saying "return to Echad" in: Tanya, ch. 50; Likkutei Torah, beginning of Parshas Chukas, and Parshas Re'eh, beginning of maamar entitled VeChol Banayich; the supplement to the maamar in Torah Or entitled Al Kein Kar'u, ch. 2; et al. In the introduction to Tikkunei Zohar (6a) we find stated: "If your heart runs forward, return to achor ['back']; (a variant reading: 'return to Echad')." Kisei HaMelech prefers the latter version. Since in innumerable places Chassidus quotes the above sentence ("If your heart...to Echad") without indicating any source, it could be that the reference is to Tikkunei Zohar.