An Aspiring Mekubal

The confessions of a Rabbi and would be mystic

The Kabbalah of Nursing…

[WARNING: This post contains direct quotations from the Eitz Haim therefore two specific warnings are in order: 1) By its nature is very deep and thus needs to be seriously contemplated, a casual reading may lead to grave misunderstandings.  2) It contradicts much of what is found in Tanya, so if you will be offended by that please do not read further. (As always my own remarks and explanations are in parantheses and italics like this)]

It is amazing what parents will do to see their children successful in the Torah world.  They will change their minhagim to get their children accepted into the “right” schools.  Mother’s especially seem to take the burden as it seems that increasingly Orthodox society wants to place the burden on them.  Typically this comes down on the element of tzniut and hyper tzniut.  As atested in this undercover story, it is one of the driving forces for women wearing shawls and veils, and becoming “Taliban Mothers.”  Unfortunately all of this craziness has little if any actual validity within Torah sources.

What astounds me more, is that in the midst of all of this seeking to be tznua enough for your child to become a Gadol, one of the things that has fallen directly under attack has been nursing.  My wife(and I) hear it all the time.  Extended nursing is not tznua.  That we should wean our children early for the sake of tzniut, so that they will have a “proper” upbringing.  Well truth be told this is exactly opposite the truth.

Let’s first look at the Halakha.  The Shulhan Arukh Yore Deah 61:7 says, ותינוק יונק  עד סוף ד’ שנים  לבריא, וה’ לחולה אם לא פירש. אבל אם פירש, שגמלוהו שלשה ימים  מעת לעת אחר כ”ד חדש, לא יחזירוהו A child may nurse until four years if he is healthy, five years if he is ill, if there is no separation, but if there is a separation, which he weans himself for three days from hour to hour after the 24th month he cannot return to nursing. So we see that the halakha permits nursing until four years under normal circumstances.  Just as an aside, if the Shulhan Arukh says you can do it, it is tznua.  The Pithei Teshuva(seif katan 16) says that it is an issur from the Gemara to stop nursing before 24months.

From there the Ben Ish Hai goes on to state in his own Sefer from which he draws his most common appellation:

People believe that weaning  a child early will cause it to be more successful in later years in its study of Torah.  This is false, and it is actually forbidden to wean a child before its twenty-fourth month, unless the mother becomes pregnant again, or for some other important reason(Pithei Teshuva citing the Adhne Paz).  This is also the opinion of our teacher the Ari z”l(Sha’ar RaFaH chapter 7), and one should certainly not wean a child before it reaches two years of age.(Year 2 Parashat Emor 13).

Before I directly quote the piece the Eitz Haim that the Ben Ish Hai says is relevant, at little bit of an introduction is necessary.  First Sefirot are only metaphors in the attempt to explain barely graspable spiritual realities, and in this case serve as a spiritual explanation for what today is solid scientific data regarding a child’s mental development.   In Sha’ar HaGilgulim 1 the Ari explains that when we are born we have only nefesh, it is not until we turn thirteen that we have the possibility of attaining Ruah, and then only if we have been properly purified, and then Neshama if we merit when we are 20.  In the Eitz Haim Sha’ar HaMohin the Ari z”l explains that these levels of the soul correspond to three specific times, pregnancy, nursing, and then adulthood.  Likewise within those times correspond to specific sefirot.

The Shemen Sasson, one of the important commentaries of the Eitz Haim, feels the need to bring a piece from the Eitz Haim 20:5 as an introduction.

Here at the time of pregnancy enters into it(the child) the nefesh only, concerning this matter know that it is impossible for the child to be formed by any means other than by the nefesh which gives it power.  Therefore this nefesh is not able to enter until the body of the child begins to form and thus it is necessary that first the man and the woman bestow a physical drop of seed and this is drawn from the liver(it is metaphorically called the center of the nefesh) of the man and woman themselves and contained within that physical drop is also a spiritual aspect as is known which is drawn from the mother and father themselves.  Thus there is already light there to be separated, and it is separated gradually by the mother only through her eating(For this reason there is an inyan that a woman should follow whatever cravings she has during pregnancy except for those of brain, heart or liver) and by means of this(her eating) there is added to the child both physical demension as well as aspects of the nefesh from the what is separated, which is the the beginning of the separation of the of the aspects of kelim, sparks and lights of the nefesh that need to be separated gradually.  Therefore the drops of seed that come from the physicality of the father and mother, also contains within them the actual nefesh of the father and mother.

Now to Eitz Haim 18:6 which the Ben Ish Hai cites:

The time of nursing is 24 months and that is because their remains three sefirot to be separated and clarified.  You already know that the woman when she gives birth she discharges blood, and that matter which we already explained is that in the innards of the mother the child is formed, and it happens that gradually over the course of days the child is formed until we come to the end of the time of gestation and thus is finished and formed and clarified all that is able to be formed and clarified.  From what is clarified is formed the body of the child and thus the child grows gradually in the innards of the mother.  The child’s body is clarified and the impurities that remain, which have no purpose, become the impure blood, and so when she gives birth and her womb is opened there comes out from her the impurities as the impure blood and the child clarified and perfected.  All of these impurities they are from the 7 sephirot mentioned above(Keter Hokhmah Binah [Da'at] Hesed, Gevurah, Tiferet) and three sefirot remain that were not clarified(technically four, however for reasons that I am not going to go into here we are dealing with three) at all.  These remain with their impurities inside of the mother, though the Kelim themselves certainly exit with the child as he is not born deficient(meaning that is only the sparks, lights and various levels of the soul that are yet missing).    Therefore their impurities are yet mixed with with holiness, as they were not able to be clarified, and thus remain within the mother in her blood.

Thus with the time of nursing they are purified within her(within the mother) and they become milk, and this is done by means of the blood flowing to the place of the breasts as will be exlained Bez”H the secret of how blood is clarified and changed into milk.  When the 24months is divided by the three sefirot there will be 8 months for each sefirah(according to the meforshim, specifically the Yafe Sha’ah and the Beit Lehem Yehuda this is not exact, they say it is 7mos for Neztah, 8mos for Hod, and 9 mos for Yesod) and the reason that it takes eight months for each of these three sefirot is because the milk is not suckled all in one day, rather it is suckled gradually, and by means of his(the child’s) suckling he grows.  In this understand why the child does not eat on his own for the first two years, rather that he needs to nurse milk(this is not to be interpreted as to say that the child does not need solid foods during the first 24 mos, only that it’s sustenance, at least spiritually, is primarily from nursing).  The reason is the she(the mother) needs to clarify for him those three sefirot that remain and the child does not have the ability on its own.

The milk that the child suckles is caused to go first to his own Keter, and after that to the Mochin(Hokhma and Binah [and Da'at]), and after that to the body(Hesed, Gevurah and Tiferet). From the Keter until the Neztzah ther are 8 sefirot and thus the eight months for each to be clarified.  Thus also 8 mos for Hod and for Yesod.  For the three sefirot that are clarified in the time of nursing are Netzah, Hod and Yesod, the three bottom sefirot of Zeir Anpin, for Malkhut, the feminine aspect  of Zeir Anpin nurses also the full 24mos on her own(these happen simultaneously) and thus comes out the sefirah of Malkut and she is settled into her place(at the same time as Yesod).

From here understand the reason why the child, when it is first born is not capable of walking, only according to the time it suckles is it given the power to walk upon its feet, until the very end of the time of nursing when it is walking like a grown human.  The reason is that Zeir Anpin he is the six extremities where are from Hesed until Yesod.  During the time of gestation he is three contained within three which are Neztah, Hod, and Yesod contained within Hesed, Gevurah and Tiferet(in reality to this point all of the sefirot only contain their specific Neztah, Hod and Yesod, thus the General Neztah, Hod, and Yesod of the Child are subsumed into the Hesed, Gevurah and Tiferet to complete it in the meantime.  Thus all of the sefirot are being completed in their specific Hesed, Gevurah and Tiferet, and thus general Neztah, Hod and Yesod are able to be produced, and the child will, with the course of time, be able to recieve Ruah according to the purity achieved here) thus when the child is born and he is able to nurse the Netzah, Hod and Yesod are formed and clarified and they expand into the Neztah Hod and Yesod of the child, which are his legs, and thus he is able to walk upon his feet.  Also you will see that sometimes in a year and a half the baby is able to walk and the reason is that after the Netzah and Hod are rectified he is already able to walk(meaning that the Yesod does not need to be rectified and that according to the meforshim Hod does not need to be completely rectified before the child begins to walk.  However, also according to the meforshim one should not cease from nursing until the child is able to walk, up to four years if the child is otherwise healthy and five years if he is not) even though the Yesod is not yet clarified because the essential of walking depends upon the legs.(This was also in answer to the makhloket in the Gemara Gittin 75b where the Tanna Kama says that one should nurse until 24mos and R’ Yehuda says only until 18mos because the child is walking by then.  According to the Arizal the makhloket there was over the issue of when the Sefirot are clarified).

There is a great deal more that could be said about this, for instance the Ben Ish Hai in the very next note says that a nursing mother should not eat Brain, Heart or Liver for the duration of the 24mos.  There is also to be said that a nursing(or pregnant mother) should take exceeding care with the kavanot of the berakhot over foods, as all of this has an effect on the quality of the clarification and thus the child.  However this should suffice for now.

Single Post Navigation

21 thoughts on “The Kabbalah of Nursing…

  1. In what sefer does the Ben Ish Hai talk about all this? And if you could also give the reference. thnx

  2. I Have to take issue with the claim that Tanya contradicts anything said above from the eitz chaim. Although I kind of see were the thought came from.

    • Where is Tanya is this discussed?

    • Uh wrong:
      Likutei Amram Tanya Chapter two(take from the Chabad website so there can be not insinuations of my own distortion):

      פירוש: כמו שהבן נמשך ממוח האב

      That is to say, i.e., the significance of the Jew’s being called G-d’s child is that just as a child is derived from its father’s brain — his inner and essential being,
      נמשך ממוח העליון שהיא חכמה עילאה כביכול

      all are derived, as it were, from the Supreme Mind which is Chochmah Ila‘ah (Supernal Wisdom).

      In order to help us better understand why the levels of individual souls vary so widely despite their common source, the Alter Rebbe now returns to the analogy of a father and son (used earlier to illustrate the description of Jews as G-d’s “children” who are derived from Chochmah Ila‘ah — G-d’s “brain”, as it were).

      An explanation in brief: In the analogy we observe that the child’s entire body is derived from a drop of semen originating in its father’s brain. Yet the many physical components which constitute the child’s body are by no means uniform. They vary greatly, from the brain — the highest component— to the nails of the feet, the lowest.

      These radical differences come about through the presence of the drop of semen in the mother’s womb during the nine months of gestation. It is this period of physical development that produces the differences between one organ and another: the more materialized a particular component of the drop becomes, the more it diverges from its original state and becomes an entity with its own unique physical characteristics. We thus observe that though all the organs share a common source, nevertheless in the process of development there arise differences as radical as that between brain and nails…

      כמשל הבן הנמשך ממוח האב, שאפילו צפרני רגליו נתהוו מטפה זו ממש

      [The manner of the soul’s descent] is analogous to a child who is derived from his father’s brain: even the nails of his feet come into existence from the very same drop of semen which comes from the father’s brain. How then were nails created from it?

      על ידי שהייתה תשעה חדשים בבטן האם, וירדה ממדריגה למדריגה, להשתנות ולהתהוות ממנה צפרנים

      — by being in the mother’s womb for nine months, descending degree by degree, changing continually, until [even] the nails are formed from it.

      Though the child’s organs all derive from the same source — the drop of semen which comes from the father’s brain — yet they develop into entities as radically diverse as the brain and the nails.

      ועם כל זה עודנה קשורה ומיוחדת ביחוד נפלא ועצום במהותה ועצמותה הראשון, שהיתה טפת מוח האב

      Furthermore: Although the drop has been so altered as to become the substance of the child’s nails, yet it is still bound to and united in a wondrous and mighty unity with its original essence and being, namely, the drop of semen as it came from the father’s brain.

      וגם עכשיו בבן, יניקת הצפרנים וחיותם נמשכת מהמוח שבראש

      Even now, in the son, the nails receive their nourishment and life from the brain that is in his head.

      This is in direct contradiction to the Eitz Haim quoted above, and every other place(I can give you quite a list of if you want) in the Kitvei HaAri, which says the child’s soul(nefesh) is derived from the liver of the Father and Mother. And a person does not receive a Neshama from father or mother, but according to his own deeds determines the level of Neshama if he so merits. Enough with that for now.
      והנה מקום משכן נפש הבהמית שמקליפת נוגה בכל איש ישראל הוא בלב

      The abode of the animal soul derived from kelipat nogah in every Jew, i.e., the place where the animal soul (nefesh habahamit) resides and is most manifest, is in the heart; for, as mentioned in previous chapters, the animal soul is predominantly emotional, and the heart is the seat of emotion.

      בחלל השמאלי, שהוא מלא דם — וכתיב: כי הדם הוא הנפש

      More specifically, the abode of the animal soul is in the left ventricle, as it is filled with blood, and it is written,1 “For the blood is the soul” (nefesh) — indicating that the soul resides in that ventricle filled with blood, the left ventricle.

      ולכן כל התאות והתפארות וכעס ודומיהן הן בלב

      Because the animal soul resides in the heart, therefore all lusts and boasting and anger and similar passions are in the heart,

      ומהלב הן מתפשטות בכל הגוף

      and from the heart they spread throughout the entire body,

      וגם עולה למוח שבראש, לחשב ולהרהר בהן ולהתחכם בהן

      rising also to the brain in the head,2 to think and meditate about them and to become cunning in them —
      Again as stated in the Eitz Haim above and as is explained at great length in the Eitz Haim 26:2 the nefesh is confied to the liver. The Ruah is located in the heart and manifest in the blood. The nefesh cannot in anyway influence the Neshama, which is in the Moah.

      Yes the Eitz Haim quite clearly contradicts the Tanya. Now please excuse me while I go scrub my eyeballs with bleach to wash away the impurity.

      • go easy on the bleaching. I still maintain (not just me but most) that there is no contradiction. I’ll post tommorow if i get a chance.

      • Funny… Who do you consider to be most? The Ben Ish Hai, Rav M. Sharabi, Rav Kaduri, Rav Darzi, Rav Attias, Rav Hedayya, Rav Shalom Shmueli and Rav Tzion Berakha all consider the Tanya to contradict the Eitz Haim.

      • in addition i’ll show that the Leshem says almost the exact same thing as tanya in sefer hakadosh.

      • Personally I don’t study the Leshem. Rav Kaduri told me regarding that particular sefer that it represented the unique system of its author as well as being very deep and confusing to all but the most experienced Kabbalists so that it was difficult for him to understand. He and many of the other Mekubalim feel that the Leshem should not be opened until one has learned the entirety of the Kitvei HaAri b’Iyun.

      • By most I meant those who learn Tanya. They don’t consider it contradicting the kite ari. I actually should have said all not just most.

      • That is unsurprising. If they thought it contradicted the Ari they probably wouldn’t study it. However, even R’ Aiden Steinsaltz(a devoted Lubavitcher Hasid) in the introduction to his commentary on Tanya states that much of what the Alter Rebbe quoted from the Kitvei is not actually found in the Kitvei that the Alter Rebbe was developing his own system, and did not want it to seem that way.

      • Actualy that may be the case for most of the leshems books. But Sefer hakdamos vshearim was meant to be learned as an introduction Kabbala as the author himself says and in Sefer פתח שער השמים by r. Yaacov Moshe hilell he recommends this Sefer as a starter as well.

      • Funny. In Rav Hillel’s introduction to Kise Eliyahu that his Yeshiva published, he makes no mention of the Leshem, but rather follows the same order of works(with minor modifications) that should be studied that I had earlier sent you:
        Shomer Emunim(hakadmon)
        Kise Eliyahu
        Da’at U’Tevunot
        Otzrot Haim
        Eitz Haim
        Sha’ar HaKavvanot
        My understanding from those that learn in his Yeshiva is that the Leshem is mostly learned by Ashkenazim as it would better fit with their general hashkafa.
        The rest of the Kitvei.

      • I’m traveling now so I’ll try to do the best with my bad memory, the books I have available and the little time I have. 

        1) Tanya is not intended to be a kabbalistic book written for kabbalists it was written as a practical guide in service of Gd (as explained in it’s intro) and it was written for an audience not necessarily proficient in kabbalistic literature but quit proficient in the classical mussar books (including some more kabbalistic ones such as reishit chochma and shaar hakedusha of r. C. Vital.) Therefore it uses more mussar terminology than typical kabbalistic terms.

        2) let’s take another source for comparison. This is a source I have with me. The leshem was from the school of the Gra, (vilner gaon). Nothing to do with chabad or Tanya or chassidus in general for that matter. Let’s see how he understands the ari. In Sefer  שער ג פרק ד  הקדו״ש he writes that it’s the נפש שבנפש that is in the liver the נשמה שבנפש is actually in the קרומין דמוח and the נשמה שברוח is in the מוח ממש and so עכ”פ נמצא כי שניהם  הם במוח שבראש (his words). 

        Then he goes on to explain that the רוח שברוח is in the right side of the heart (and the lowest level of neshama is מלובש in the נשמה שברוח in the מוח which in tern has an affect on the רוח שברוח in the right chamber of the heart) while the רוח שבנפש resides in the left side of the heart which is full of blood. (the similarity to Tanya should be apparent to those familiar with the book).

        So we see that while the main aspect of נפש is in the liver there are higher aspects that are in the head and heart and in the heart all three levels נפש ,רוח and הארה of נשמה are brought together in one organ.

        3) leshem writes in שער ג פרק ה that הרוח ונפש שבנשמה הכללי אשר במוח are the שורש of the נשמה שבנפש הכללי אשר בכבד and so the נשמה שבנפש is derived from the נפש שבנשמה שבמוח and from this is derived all the other aspects of the נפש הכללי אשר בהכבד as well.

        From this we see that the nefesh in the liver itself is derived from the lowest aspect of neshama which is in the brain. So saying that the child comes from the nefesh in the liver or from the brain are not contradictory since the nefesh in the liver itself is derived from the brain.

        In another Sefer the leshem brings down sources from the writings of the Gra for all this as well (I dont have it in front of me)

        So to conclude if you want to argue with the tanyas understanding of the kitve ari maybe I can swallow that. But to argue with the Baal hatanya the leshem and the Gra’s understanding of Kabbala and still think you are correct makes me a bit skeptical.

      • So we see that while the main aspect of נפש is in the liver there are higher aspects that are in the head and heart and in the heart all three levels נפש ,רוח and הארה of נשמה are brought together in one organ.
        Not quite. I can see why you think that, but the problem is that you are not understanding the Leshem properly because you have not properly studied the introductory seforim to the Kabbalah. As the NaRaNaHY of the NaRaNaHY are explained in great detail in Shaar 1 of the Kise Eliyahu(from p46-p84). In short just because Ruah has a nefesh, which in turn will descend and become the Ruah of Nefesh does not make it any less Ruah, before it has descended, and thus while still in the heart.
        If you are learning the Leshem through the lens of Chabad Chassidus, which you seem to be doing, it will seem that way. However, if you learn it through the lens of the classic Kabbalistic seforim, you will understand it quite differently, more as a shorthand for what is written about elsewhere at great length.

        From this we see that the nefesh in the liver itself is derived from the lowest aspect of neshama which is in the brain. So saying that the child comes from the nefesh in the liver or from the brain are not contradictory since the nefesh in the liver itself is derived from the brain.
        Actually it is only the Neshama(Binah) of the Nefesh is that is derived from the Neshema. In the same way the Ruah(Tiferet) of Nefesh is derived from Ruah, however the nefesh of nefesh, which is the nefesh amitit(which is where the Ari says the child descends from- see the Yafe Sh’ah, Shemen Sasson and Bet Lehem Yehuda on the quoted piece of E”H for a fuller explanation and sources elsewhere in the Kitvei) was emanated as nefesh on its own.

        Quite honestly I have neither the desire nor the time to argue this through with you. I understand that you are very fond of Chabad Chassidus and desire to defend it. I am not fond of Chabad whatsoever. If you would like to keep flying the Chabad banner I suggest that you start your own blog.

      • As for your claim that all those great rabbanim were against tanya I would like to see sources (don’t take this personally I don’t really trust anybody). In Sefer פתח שער השמים r. Y. M. Hillel mentions Tanya as a Sefer that can be learned.

        Also even if those mentioned by you are against Tanya there are many equally great rabanim who are totally pro Tanya so at worst we have to say it is a machloket amoung greats. This won’t be the first time in history.

      • I have done that several times prior on this blog, and really don’t feel like doing it again.

  3. so what? on said:

    What i dont understand is the arizals applications to the physical realm from the fact that the child starts walking at point a, b or c. maybe im biased but i didnt nurse and baruch hashem i was able to walk by around 10 months (some walk by 9). my son isnt nursing and baruch hashem he is well on his way to walking by that time as well. the arizal seems to make a big deal out of the fact that some children could even walk by the time they are 1 1/2 and seems to insinuate that the average child walks at around 2 (3 sets of 8, though he leaves room for not having the last set)the average age today for the similac generation is from 9 to 18 months usually around 12 months.
    basically while i could appreciate the concepts of not having netzach and hod (leaving yesod out as this is unessential to walking) in its full purified form without the purification process of nursing, i dont comprehend how this somehow could be applied to a child walking in the physical realm, i.e. the netzach quite literally affects the right leg and the hod the left. basically whats bothering me is taking spiritual concepts and causing physical outcomes which are easily and readily( at least seemingly) discredited.

    • It is not when they start to walk, which according to the Ari could be as early as 8mos, but rather by which time they are walking normally, which is what he means when he says “walking like a grown human.”

      • so what? on said:

        nonetheless, i shouldnt be walking normally since i never got the purified milk of netzach hod yesod nor should i be normally functional because of lack of malchut.

      • Not quite. As he said the vessels are their, and in the proper amount of time, they will emerge. The issue is whether or not they are in a state of pagum. A pagum here will greatly affect one’s ability to interact with the higher levels of the soul, as well as inhibits cognitive function. There is firm science that children who were breastfed have improved cognitive function and IQ.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 47 other followers