A person has become tense and weighed down. Then someone tells him a silly, clean joke. He laughs. A little of the pressure loosens, and he becomes more able to daven, to speak kindly to his wife or children, or to begin the work waiting for him.
We have been learning how that moment can help the body make room for the simcha of the neshamah. Reb Noson now gives a further explanation. The little pleasure in the joke can itself be part of a tikkun. A spark of simcha has been brought back toward the place where it belongs.
To understand that, we need to follow his account of how joy comes to be in exile. The main passage is Likutey Halachos, Hilchos Nefilas Apayim 4:4–5. The rav selects parts of the discussion rather than teaching every paragraph of sections 4–7.
The earlier explanation concerned the body getting in the way of the neshamah's joy. In the spiritual framework of the four elements, the body's earth element is associated with heaviness, atzvus and sluggishness. Worries can begin weighing on a child as well as an adult, depending on his surroundings and experiences. This account explains why the avodah needs active renewal; it does not mean that a person's distress proves a spiritual failing.
The rav also applies Avos 5:16 to simcha. The Mishnah says that love depending on something falls away when that thing disappears. His analogy is that joy depending entirely on a particular circumstance cannot sustain a person through every change in life. We need ways of reaching the deeper joy of the neshamah when the outward reason is absent. A little permitted silliness can be one of those ways.
The joy of Purim has a direction
Reb Noson begins with Purim:
כַּיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר־נָחוּ בָהֶם הַיְּהוּדִים מֵאֹיְבֵיהֶם וְהַחֹדֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר נֶהְפַּךְ לָהֶם מִיָּגוֹן לְשִׂמְחָה וּמֵאֵבֶל לְיוֹם טוֹב לַעֲשׂוֹת אוֹתָם יְמֵי מִשְׁתֶּה וְשִׂמְחָה וּמִשְׁלֹחַ מָנוֹת אִישׁ לְרֵעֵהוּ וּמַתָּנוֹת לָֽאֶבְיֹנִֽים׃
Like the days on which the Jews rested from their enemies, and the month that was transformed for them from sorrow to joy and from mourning to a festival, to make them days of feasting and joy, sending portions to one another and gifts to the poor. (Esther 9:22)
The seudah, mishloach manos and matanos laevyonim bring other people into the day's simcha. A poor person needs food with which to celebrate. A friend receives an expression of affection. The joy is expressed through what we do with and for one another.
Megillah 5b distinguishes the celebration accepted on Purim from a Yom Tov prohibition of melachah. Reb Noson's emphasis here is on filling the day with mishteh and simcha. The costumes, playful remarks and unusual ways of celebrating belong to that setting.
The direction of the joy matters. Megillah 12b comments on the beginning of Achashverosh's drunken demand:
בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי כְּטוֹב לֵב־הַמֶּלֶךְ בַּיָּיִן אָמַר לִמְהוּמָן בִּזְּתָא חַרְבוֹנָא בִּגְתָא וַאֲבַגְתָא זֵתַר וְכַרְכַּס שִׁבְעַת הַסָּרִיסִים הַמְשָׁרְתִים אֶת־פְּנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרֽוֹשׁ׃
On the seventh day, when the king's heart was merry with wine, he said to Mehuman, Bizzesa, Charvona, Bigsa, Avagsa, Zeisar and Carcas, the seven chamberlains who served before King Achashverosh. (Esther 1:10)
The Gemara contrasts the Torah and praise with which Israel begins its eating and drinking on Shabbos with the indecent conversation of the royal feast. The contrast asks where the enjoyment is leading. The simcha we are trying to develop should bring a person toward avodas Hashem.
Purim is therefore a good place to learn about milei dishtusa. The rav mentions a Purim rav, a play, a gathering, jokes and playful mishloach manos as ways of increasing simcha. There is playfulness, including for someone who does not drink. Its place in the avodah is to help joy emerge and give it a good direction.
What follows the failure
Reb Noson connects Haman and Amalek with the nachash and the chet of the Eitz HaDaas. The rav recalls the teaching that Hashem's Name and throne remain incomplete until Amalek is erased, a teaching stated by Rashi on Shemos 17:16. It places the struggle with Amalek within the work of restoring the revelation of kedushah. Chullin 139b finds the letters of Haman in hamin haetz, the question addressed to Adam:
וַיֹּאמֶר מִי הִגִּיד לְךָ כִּי עֵירֹם אָתָּה הֲמִן־הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִיךָ לְבִלְתִּי אֲכׇל־מִמֶּנּוּ אָכָֽלְתָּ׃
He said, “Who told you that you are naked? Have you eaten from the tree from which I commanded you not to eat?” (Bereishis 3:11)
The verse asks about nakedness and eating from the forbidden tree. The inward application here asks what happens next in a person's avodah. He has done wrong. Does he now turn back toward Hashem, or does he hide and decide that his failure has become his identity?
The rav presents a strong counterfactual: had Adam turned immediately toward Hashem with teshuvah and simcha, instead of hiding in despair, the repair could have been simple and he could have remained in Gan Eden. He attributes the idea generally to sefarim; its exact source has not been located. It is his explanation of the cost of the aftermath, not a statement explicitly made in the pasuk.
The yetzer hara wants more than the aveirah itself. It also wants the aftermath: “There is no hope for me. This is who I am, and this is what I will keep doing.” That conclusion makes it harder for a person to return.
Adam answers:
וַיֹּאמֶר הָֽאָדָם הָֽאִשָּׁה אֲשֶׁר נָתַתָּה עִמָּדִי הִוא נָֽתְנָה־לִּי מִן־הָעֵץ וָאֹכֵֽל׃
The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” (Bereishis 3:12)
Bereishis Rabbah 19:12 reads vaochel homiletically as achalti veochel, I ate and I will eat. The avodah application here hears the danger of treating the failure as a settled future: I have done this, so I will do it again.
The Midrash's derash is distinct from the plain translation of the verse. The practical point is the danger of giving up. Even where a person has a real recurring struggle, his next response need not be decided by the fact that he has failed before.
A remez brought here uses the words for the tree:
וּמֵעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ כִּי בְּיוֹם אֲכׇלְךָ מִמֶּנּוּ מוֹת תָּמֽוּת׃
But from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil you shall not eat, for on the day you eat from it you shall surely die. (Bereishis 2:17)
The last letters of eitz, hadaas, tov and vara are tzadi, tav, beis and ayin. Rearranged, they give the letters of atzvus in a spelling without the vav. It is a letter association rather than the word appearing in its usual order. Its point is the aftermath of the chet, the heaviness that follows and tries to prevent a return.
The Torah itself uses the language of itzavon in the consequences of the chet:
וּלְאָדָם אָמַר כִּֽי־שָׁמַעְתָּ לְקוֹל אִשְׁתֶּךָ וַתֹּאכַל מִן־הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִיךָ לֵאמֹר לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ אֲרוּרָה הָֽאֲדָמָה בַּֽעֲבוּרֶךָ בְּעִצָּבוֹן תֹּֽאכְלֶנָּה כֹּל יְמֵי חַיֶּֽיךָ׃
To Adam He said, “Because you listened to your wife's voice and ate from the tree from which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it,’ the ground is cursed on your account; with toil and pain you shall eat from it all the days of your life.” (Bereishis 3:17)
The nachash is told:
וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ אלוקים ׀ אֶֽל־הַנָּחָשׁ כִּי עָשִׂיתָ זֹּאת אָרוּר אַתָּה מִכׇּל־הַבְּהֵמָה וּמִכֹּל חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה עַל־גְּחֹנְךָ תֵלֵךְ וְעָפָר תֹּאכַל כׇּל־יְמֵי חַיֶּֽיךָ׃
Hashem Elokim said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, you are cursed more than all the cattle and all the beasts of the field; upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life.” (Bereishis 3:14)
The explanation joins the dust with the downward pull we have discussed through the element of earth. The force of discouragement wants to drag everything down with it. Reb Noson connects the language of atzvus here with the later account of grief in the generation of the Flood. The rav recalls the earlier contrast between neginah and yelalah, song and wailing. These are connections in the spiritual account of the chet and its consequences.
Against that pull, teshuvah gives a person a way to acknowledge the wrong and approach Hashem again. The rav puts it strongly: a supposed teshuvah that only leaves a person sunk in hopelessness is the yetzer hara's version of teshuvah. Genuine return should lead toward renewed avodah and simcha. This does not deny brokenhearted remorse or tears; the Zohar passage discussed below includes them.
A remaining point of fragrance
Several Purim associations are introduced alongside this account of the Eitz HaDaas. Bnei Yissaschar, Adar 1:9–10, notices the senses used in the story: seeing, touching, tasting and hearing. Smell is not mentioned in the same way.
He writes that the sense of smell was not damaged as much as the other senses. That qualification belongs to his words. He connects its more spiritual character with the Gemara's description of a pleasure from which the neshamah benefits.
Berachos 43b derives the blessing over fragrance from:
כֹּל הַנְּשָׁמָה תְּהַלֵּל י־ה הַֽלְלוּ־י־ה׃
Let every soul praise Hashem; praise Hashem. (Tehillim 150:6)
Bnei Yissaschar then connects the names of Purim's two redeemers with fragrance. Esther is also called Hadassah:
וַיְהִי אֹמֵן אֶת־הֲדַסָּה הִיא אֶסְתֵּר בַּת־דֹּדוֹ כִּי אֵין לָהּ אָב וָאֵם וְהַנַּעֲרָה יְפַת־תֹּאַר וְטוֹבַת מַרְאֶה וּבְמוֹת אָבִיהָ וְאִמָּהּ לְקָחָהּ מׇרְדֳּכַי לוֹ לְבַֽת׃
He was raising Hadassah, who is Esther, his uncle's daughter, for she had neither father nor mother. The young woman was beautiful in form and appearance; when her father and mother died, Mordechai took her as a daughter. (Esther 2:7)
Hadass suggests the fragrant myrtle. Chullin 139b connects Mordechai with mor deror, whose Targum gives the sound meira dachya:
וְאַתָּה קַח־לְךָ בְּשָׂמִים רֹאשׁ מׇר־דְּרוֹר חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת וְקִנְּמׇן־בֶּשֶׂם מַחֲצִיתוֹ חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתָיִם וּקְנֵה־בֹשֶׂם חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתָֽיִם׃
Take for yourself choice spices: five hundred shekels of pure myrrh, half that amount, two hundred and fifty, of fragrant cinnamon, and two hundred and fifty of fragrant cane. (Shemos 30:23)
This verse concerns the anointing oil. Its aromatic myrrh supplies the word association; it should not be confused with a verse prescribing ketores. The broader association here is with fragrance and a remaining opening for repair. Bnei Yissaschar also relates this to besamim after Shabbos. The Rambam describes their good smell as gladdening and settling the soul at Shabbos's departure.
Other connections are introduced as directions for further learning. Haman's gallows are fifty cubits high. Adam and Chavah needed clothing after the chet; the rav connects this with Purim's costumes. He reads ad delo yada as reaching above the damaged daas associated with the Eitz HaDaas. He also recalls R Tzadok's way of tracing later spiritual struggles back to that first chet, without identifying a particular passage. These are announced connections rather than completed explanations in this shiur. The common question is how Purim addresses what began with the Eitz HaDaas.
The mitzvah already in front of me
Reb Noson brings us back to a very accessible simcha. A Jew can rejoice in his relationship with Hashem and in the mitzvah he is able to do now. He may be dissatisfied with his past actions. His being a Jew, with a neshamah and a relationship to Hashem, already gives him a reason for simcha. The opportunity to fulfill Hashem's will remains precious.
Reb Noson locates this joy in simple emunah in Hashem and His Torah. He contrasts it with the kefirah and speculative denial he associates with Haman and Amalek. This religious argument belongs to the teaching: doing a mitzvah gives nachas ruach to our Creator and acquires a lasting life beyond this world. It is more than feeling pleased with ourselves. He adds that the inward recognition cannot be fully conveyed in writing; each person has to consider it in his own heart.
A pair of tzitzis can cost very little. A person puts them on as part of an ordinary morning, scarcely thinking about it. Yet Reb Noson describes the mitzvah as joining him to the light of the Ein Sof. In the language of the sefarim, the garment also gives a picture of the surrounding light, the or makif.
The familiar act can conceal its importance from us. I washed, got dressed and put on tzitzis. It all happened so naturally that I passed over the gift. If I stopped to consider what the mitzvah means, I would have something over which to rejoice.
The story recalled about the Grah makes this contrast through his parting from this world. For a few coins here, a person can acquire tzitzis and do a mitzvah. After leaving this world, all the money in the world cannot buy him another such opportunity. The recollection is being used to help us recognize what is available while we are alive.
Koheles asks:
מַה־יִּתְרוֹן לָֽאָדָם בְּכׇל־עֲמָלוֹ שֶֽׁיַּעֲמֹל תַּחַת הַשָּֽׁמֶשׁ׃
What lasting gain does a person have from all his labor at which he labors beneath the sun? (Koheles 1:3)
Tehillim reminds us:
כִּי לֹא בְמוֹתוֹ יִקַּח הַכֹּל לֹֽא־יֵרֵד אַחֲרָיו כְּבוֹדֽוֹ׃
For at his death he will not take everything; his honor will not descend after him. (Tehillim 49:18)
אָדָם לַהֶבֶל דָּמָה יָמָיו כְּצֵל עוֹבֵֽר׃
A person is like a breath; his days are like a passing shadow. (Tehillim 144:4)
Reb Noson's argument is about what can give a person a lasting reason for joy. Wealth, honor and bodily pleasure pass away. Reb Noson says that even a non-Jew with a trace of true understanding can recognize this limit of passing possessions. His argument reaches beyond the particular mitzvah to the need for something enduring. The mitzvah gives a person a relationship and a purpose beyond the passing possession.
This continues the distinction the rav draws through Rebbe Nachman's tale of the Chacham and the Tam. The actual story describes the Tam enjoying plain bread as though it were each delicious food he requests. Later, the Chacham cannot believe that a great king would want someone as insignificant as himself, and reasons his way into denying that there is a king at all. The rav contrasts the Tam's bread tasting like steak with the Chacham's finest steak tasting like dirt. That last contrast is his illustration, rather than the story's literal wording. The problem is a way of looking at life that rejects both the good being given and the possibility of being wanted by the King.