What
Is
the
Difference
between
a
Field
and
a
Man
of
the
Field,
in
the
Work?
Article
No.
6,
1988
It
is
written
in
The
Zohar
(Toldot),
“‘And
Isaac
loved
Esau
because
he
had
game
in
his
mouth.’
He
wrote
here,
‘a
skillful
hunter,
a
man
of
the
field,’
and
it
is
written
there,
‘He
was
a
mighty
hunter.’
As
there,
it
means
that
was
hunting
people’s
minds
and
misleading
them
into
rebelling
against
the
Creator,
so
here,
‘a
man
of
the
field’
means
in
order
to
rob
people
and
to
kill
them.
He
is
a
man
of
the
field
because
his
inheritance
is
not
in
an
inhabited
place,
but
in
a
desolate
place,
in
the
desert,
in
the
field.
For
this
reason,
he
is
called
‘a
man
of
the
field.’”
Concerning
Isaac,
we
also
see
that
it
is
written
“field,”
as
it
is
written
(Genesis
24:63),
“And
Isaac
went
out
to
wander
in
the
field.”
Also,
it
is
written
about
Jacob,
“And
he
said,
‘Behold,
the
scent
of
my
son
is
as
the
scent
of
a
field
that
the
Lord
has
blessed.’”
We
should
understand
the
difference
between
the
fields,
where
it
was
said
about
Esau,
who
is
called
“a
man
of
the
field,”
that
The
Zohar
interprets
“to
rob
people
and
to
kill
them,”
whereas
concerning
Isaac,
it
is
written,
“to
wander
in
the
field,”
which
is
a
great
thing,
as
our
sages
said
that
Isaac
established
the
afternoon
prayer
because
of
the
verse,
“And
Isaac
went
out
to
wander
in
the
field.”
We
should
also
understand
why
it
is
written
about
Jacob
that
Isaac
said,
“The
scent
of
my
son
is
as
the
scent
of
a
field
that
the
Lord
has
blessed.”
Therefore,
we
should
understand
the
differences
between
“a
man
of
the
field,”
“to
wander
in
the
field,”
and
“the
scent
of
a
field.”
It
is
known
that
Malchut
is
called
a
“field.”
Since
Malchut
has
many
changes
because
of
the
Tzimtzum
[restriction],
Malchut
has
many
names,
one
of
which
is
a
“field.”
When
we
speak
of
Malchut,
the
rule
is
that
we
speak
of
Malchut
of
Ohr
Yashar
[Direct
Light],
where
she
was
using
the
will
to
receive
for
herself.
In
that
respect,
there
are
no
changes
in
her
but
is
as
the
Emanator
created
the
will
to
receive
in
order
to
receive
the
delight
and
pleasure
that
He
wished
to
impart
upon
the
creatures.
This
is
called
Malchut
with
respect
to
the
Ohr
Yashar
in
her.
For
this
reason,
this
Malchut
is
called
Ein
Sof
[infinity/no
end],
for
Malchut
did
not
put
a
stop
on
the
upper
light,
meaning
she
did
not
say,
“No
more!”
I
do
not
want
to
receive
with
my
self,
called
“receiving
in
order
to
receive.”
While
she
was
receiving
with
her
self,
there
were
no
changes,
which
is
why
it
is
called
by
the
name,
“Everything
was
one
light.”
However,
afterward,
Malchut
desired
equivalence
of
form,
called
“decoration,”
at
the
point
of
desire.
That
is,
she
did
not
want
to
receive
in
order
to
receive,
but
in
order
to
bestow.
In
that
respect,
we
can
call
Malchut
by
the
name
“field,”
meaning
that
the
field
must
be
plowed,
and
plowing
means
inverting
that
which
is
below
and
placing
it
above,
and
that
which
is
above,
we
place
below.
Likewise,
here
in
Malchut,
who
is
called
a
“field,”
for
the
will
to
receive,
reception
is
important
and
is
considered
“of
superior
importance,”
while
matters
of
bestowal
are
of
inferior
importance.
In
Kedusha
[sanctity/holiness],
there
is
the
matter
of
plowing,
that
we
must
till
the
land,
meaning
turn
the
will
to
receive,
which
is
on
top,
to
be
below,
and
the
will
to
bestow
to
be
on
top.
Specifically
by
this
can
we
yield
crops
that
are
good
to
eat.
Otherwise,
there
is
no
way
we
will
be
able
to
eat
food
of
Kedusha,
as
it
is
written
(Proverbs
14:4),
“Much
crop
comes
by
the
strength
of
the
ox.”
That
is,
the
force
of
the
ox
yields
much
crop.
The
meaning
of
“ox”
is
as
our
sages
said,
that
Malchut
[kingdom]
of
heaven
must
be
as
an
ox
to
the
burden
and
as
an
ass
to
the
load.”
Baal
HaSulam
said
that
“an
ox
to
the
burden”
means
that
the
burden
of
faith
must
be
as
one
places
the
yoke
on
the
ox
so
as
to
plow
the
field,
without
any
consideration
of
its
will,
if
it
agrees
with
it.
Instead,
we
place
the
yoke
on
it
against
its
will.
Likewise,
man
must
take
upon
himself
the
burden
of
the
kingdom
of
heaven,
since
an
ox
means
knowing,
as
it
is
written,
“The
ox
knows
its
master.”
For
this
reason,
faith
is
regarded
as
a
burden
to
one
who
needs
knowledge.
It
therefore
follows
that
a
field
is
Malchut
with
respect
to
self-reception,
which
requires
plowing,
which
is
the
correction
of
the
field
to
turn
the
vessel
of
reception,
which
is
of
high
importance,
and
make
it
low
importance,
while
the
vessels
of
bestowal,
which
are
of
low
importance,
raise
them
so
as
to
be
of
high
importance.
It
is
known
that
the
will
to
receive
is
in
mind
and
heart,
and
both
require
correction.
In
the
mind,
the
correction
is
faith
above
reason.
In
the
heart,
the
correction
is
that
every
pleasure
he
receives
will
be
in
order
to
bestow.
And
more
precisely,
every
act
he
does
will
be
in
order
to
bestow;
otherwise,
he
will
not
make
a
single
move.
Accordingly,
we
can
interpret
why
it
is
written
about
Esau,
“a
man
of
the
field,”
meaning
that
while
he
is
in
a
state
of
“field,”
and
must
assume
the
burden
of
the
kingdom
of
heaven
as
an
ox
to
the
burden,
he
thinks
he
is
complete
and
does
not
need
any
corrections.
This
is
called
“for
he
had
game
in
his
mouth.”
This
is
as
it
is
written
in
The
Zohar
(above),
“And
Esau
said
that
he
was
in
the
field
in
order
to
pray,
and
he
hunted
and
deceived
Isaac
with
his
mouth.”
In
the
work,
we
should
interpret
that
“he
had
game
in
his
mouth”
means
that
his
mouth
and
heart
were
not
the
same.
His
mouth
is
externality,
meaning
that
in
actions,
he
was
righteous,
because
there
is
nothing
to
add
to
actions,
but
in
his
heart,
meaning
the
intention,
he
was
not
as
the
act.
The
act
that
is
apparent
to
people
implies
that
he
wants
to
observe
the
commandments
of
the
Creator
in
order
to
please
Him
by
doing
His
will
in
observing
the
Mitzvot
[commandments/good
deeds].
But
in
his
heart,
he
thinks
only
about
his
own
benefit
and
not
about
the
benefit
of
the
Creator.
Thus,
his
mouth
and
heart
are
not
the
same.
Therefore,
in
action,
Esau
appeared
complete,
like
a
completed
person.
This
is
the
meaning
of
“Esau
was
a
man
of
the
field,”
meaning
that
he
had
no
more
work
to
do
in
the
field,
since
the
work
of
the
field
begins
with
plowing,
which
is
about
inverting
the
vessels
of
reception.
This
is
not
for
him
because
it
is
enough
for
him
to
keep
everything
in
externality,
which
is
called
“his
mouth,”
meaning
that
his
mouth
and
heart
are
not
the
same.
This
is
why
Esau
is
called
“a
man
of
the
field,”
meaning
that
a
field
is
receiving
for
oneself,
and
in
this
he
is
complete
and
has
nothing
more
to
add.
This
is
not
so
with
Isaac
and
Jacob.
To
them,
the
work
of
the
field
was
labor
and
prayer
in
the
field,
as
it
is
written
about
Isaac,
“And
Isaac
went
out
to
wander
in
the
field,”
which
is
prayer.
It
is
as
our
sages
said,
that
Isaac
established
the
afternoon
prayer,
when
he
prayed
to
raise
the
Shechina
[Divinity]
from
the
dust,
meaning
that
the
vessel
of
bestowal,
which
should
be
in
the
kingdom
of
heaven
in
mind
and
heart,
will
be
in
order
to
bestow.
However,
Esau,
who
was
a
man
of
the
field,
corrected
nothing
so
as
to
work
in
order
to
bestow.
Rather,
with
him,
everything
was
only
for
his
own
sake.
This
is
why
The
Zohar
interpreted
“‘a
man
of
the
field,’
to
rob
people
and
to
kill
them.”
The
Zohar
also
interprets
“a
man
of
the
field,”
since
his
inheritance
is
not
in
an
inhabited
place,
but
in
a
desolate
place,
in
the
desert,
in
the
field.
This
is
why
he
is
called
“a
man
of
the
field.”
When
one
works
only
for
oneself,
that
state
is
regarded
as
stealing
the
aspect
of
man
that
is
in
him,
meaning
the
aspect
of
“You
are
called
‘man,’
and
the
nations
of
the
world
are
not
called
‘man.’”
That
aspect
is
robbed
from
him
when
he
works
for
his
own
benefit.
Even
worse,
because
transgression
induces
transgression,
he
kills
the
man
when
he
is
for
himself.
This
is
the
meaning
of
the
words
of
The
Zohar,
“And
to
kill
them.”
It
says
about
it,
“Because
his
inheritance
is
not
in
an
inhabited
place,”
where
“an
inhabited
place”
is
where
people
dwell,
as
in
“You
are
called
‘men,’”
“but
in
a
desolate
place,”
the
place
of
the
breaking
of
the
vessels,
for
because
the
will
to
receive
for
himself
was
revealed
there,
the
world
became
desolate.
However,
it
is
written
about
Jacob,
“And
he
said,
‘Behold,
the
scent
of
my
son
is
as
the
scent
of
a
field
that
the
Lord
has
blessed,’”
since
Jacob
established
the
evening
prayer,
as
it
is
written,
“And
he
came
to
a
place,”
meaning
he
established
the
evening
prayer.
It
is
also
written
about
Jacob,
“And
behold,
a
well
in
the
field,
and
three
flocks
of
sheep
lying
there
beside
it.”
The
Zohar
interprets
(VaYetze,
Item
92),
“‘And
he
looked,
and
behold
a
well
in
the
field.’
He
saw
the
well
of
above,
which
is
the
Nukva,
one
opposite
the
other,
meaning
that
the
well
of
below
was
directed
opposite
the
well
of
above.”
We
should
interpret
that
when
Jacob
established
the
well
of
below,
his
intention
was
his
own
well,
which
is
the
field,
meaning
that
he
established
it
to
be
as
above.
That
is,
as
above,
Malchut
of
Kedusha
is
a
Masach
[screen],
meaning
that
on
the
will
to
receive
for
himself,
there
is
a
Masach
that
raises
Ohr
Hozer
[Reflected
Light],
meaning
that
everything
she
wants
to
receive
is
because
she
wants
to
bestow.
Likewise,
he
established
himself
so
that
all
his
actions
would
be
in
order
to
bestow.
Hence,
when
Jacob
came
to
Isaac,
since
Jacob
is
the
middle
line,
where
all
the
wholeness
appears,
this
is
why
it
is
written
that
Isaac
said,
“And
he
said,
‘Behold,
the
scent
of
my
son
is
as
the
scent
of
a
field
that
the
Lord
has
blessed.’”
That
is,
when
the
kingdom
of
heaven,
called
a
“field,”
received
the
correction
of
the
middle
line,
it
is
called
“a
field
that
the
Lord
has
blessed,”
meaning
that
here
appear
the
delight
and
pleasure
that
the
Creator
has
prepared
for
the
creatures.
This
is
the
difference
between
“a
man
of
the
field,”
“wander
in
the
field,”
and
“as
the
scent
of
a
field.”