Sources: all collections; answered in English in the Teacher style.

The Question and the Answer

The sources do not directly address the tension between maintaining a sense of self in the presence of a rabbi or authority figure. What they do address — extensively — is the related inner question: what does self-nullification (bittul) actually mean, and does it require erasing the self entirely? The answer that emerges is nuanced. True bittul is not the destruction of selfhood but its redirection: one surrenders willfulness and ego, not one's intellect, identity, or capacity to argue. Moses is the paradigm — he argued until his last breath. The self that remains after genuine bittul is more itself, not less. This creates a rich framework for discussing how to be both genuinely subordinate to a teacher and genuinely oneself.

Learning Goals

- Distinguish between bittul as self-erasure and bittul as the redirection of will toward something greater. - Recognize that authentic selfhood — especially the intellect — is preserved, not dissolved, in genuine subordination. - Identify Moses as a model of someone who held authority and maintained fierce personal integrity simultaneously. - Examine the difference between deference to a teacher as a spiritual practice and deference as self-abandonment.

Key Terms

- Bittul (ביטול) — Self-nullification; literally "cancellation"; the surrender of ego or private will, not of personhood. - Tzaddik — A righteous master or teacher to whom one "binds" oneself in Hasidic thought. - Hitbodedut — Secluded personal prayer; the private inner space that bittul requires and protects. - Da'at / Sekhel — Intellect or mind; in several sources, the faculty that must remain active even in bittul. - Ratzon (רצון) — Will; the specific thing one is asked to surrender, as distinct from identity or mind.

The Sources in Teaching Order

[Likkutei Etzot, Hitbodedut.6]

> "Everyone must strive to be totally merged with the Source of his being. To achieve this requires bittul — self-nullification. The only way to attain bittul is through secluded prayer with God. When a person goes aside to converse with God he nullifies everything else and attaches himself only to God."

What to point out: Bittul here is achieved in private — in hitbodedut, alone with God. It is not performed in front of a teacher or authority. The self has a protected interior space. Ask students: where does the self go during bittul? Is it destroyed or relocated?

Guiding questions: - If bittul requires going aside to be alone with God, what does that suggest about the role of private inner life alongside public deference to a teacher? - Can you nullify yourself before a human authority in the same way you nullify yourself before God? Should you?

[Likkutei Etzot, Divine Attainments.14]

> "When a person 'returns' from the state of self-nullification to his normal state of awareness and sense of self, a trace of the awesome light which he perceived still remains with him, giving him an apprehension of the unity of the Infinite and His goodness."

What to point out: Bittul is described as a temporary state one returns from — with the self intact and enriched, not dissolved. The self that comes back is not the same, but it is still a self. This is critical: genuine bittul does not produce a permanently selfless person. It produces a person whose self has been recalibrated.

Guiding questions: - What does it mean that one "returns" from bittul? What would it mean if one never returned? - Is a student who loses themselves entirely in a teacher's worldview experiencing genuine bittul, or something else?

[Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman on Tiferet Yisrael, .16:69]

> "והאדם צריך לבטל את עצמו כלפי ה' דוקא במיוחד שבו, כי המיוחד שבו הוא מהותו... ועיקר מעלת האדם היא שכלו... כל עוד שלא תהיה התבטלות אל ה' עוברת דרך שכלו, הרי מהותו של האדם עדיין לא תהיה מקושרת בעילתו." > > "A person must nullify himself before God specifically through what is most unique in him, because what is most unique in him is his essence... The primary excellence of a person is his intellect... As long as the nullification before God does not pass through his intellect, the person's essence is still not connected to his Source."

What to point out: This is the most philosophically precise source on the topic. True bittul must pass through the intellect — it cannot bypass it. A person who surrenders their mind has not achieved bittul; they have merely abdicated. The most individual part of a person — their unique intellect — is precisely the channel through which genuine subordination must flow.

Guiding questions: - According to this source, what would it look like to defer to a rabbi without engaging your intellect? Is that real bittul or something more dangerous? - How does this change how you think about the phrase "blind faith in a teacher"?

[Talmud Series; Shemitah, Mei HaShiloach.20]

> "הבעיה שלנו היא שאיננו מוותרים באמת. אולי אנחנו מוותרים על הרצון, אבל לא על הרצון לרצות... הוויתור לא היה מביא להיעלמות הרצון, כי יש שני סוגים של רצון: ישנו הרצון השתלטני, החיצוני, שמבחינה פנימית הוא סוג של שעבוד." > > "Our problem is that we do not truly give up. Perhaps we give up the will, but not the will to will... True surrender would not bring about the disappearance of will, because there are two kinds of will: there is the dominating, external will, which internally is a kind of slavery."

What to point out: The Mei HaShiloach distinguishes between two kinds of will. The external, controlling will — the one that insists on its own way — is itself described as a form of slavery. Genuine surrender of that will is liberating, not diminishing. This reframes the question: losing the ego-driven self is not losing oneself; it may be finding oneself.

Guiding questions: - Which "self" are we worried about losing when we follow a teacher — the dominating ego-will, or something deeper? - Is it possible to follow a rabbi's guidance freely, without the "will to will" — and if so, what does that look like in practice?

[Leadership in the Wilderness, Part III, Chapter 15.20]

> "Moses argued from the moment he became a leader to the moment of his death. It is not surprising that when he finally died, Deuteronomy 34:7 reads: 'And Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died; his eyes were not dim, nor his natural force abated.'"

What to point out: Moses — the paradigmatic servant of God, the most humble man on earth (Numbers 12:3) — argued constantly. His humility and his argumentativeness coexisted. His "natural force" was not abated because his self was not consumed by his role. This source provides a narrative model to set against the more abstract Hasidic sources.

Guiding questions: - What does it mean that Moses' "natural force" was not abated? What would it have looked like if it had been? - Is Moses a model for how to relate to human authorities — teachers, rabbis — or only to God? What's the difference?

[Likkutei Etzot, Arrogance and Humility.18]

> "True humility means seeing one's own lowliness and understanding the greatness of the Jewish people and being willing to sacrifice oneself for them, like Moses did."

What to point out: Humility here is defined relationally and actively — it involves seeing clearly (one's own lowliness, others' greatness) and acting (sacrificing for others). It is not passivity or self-erasure. Moses is again the model, and his self-sacrifice is an act of a strong, intact self, not an absent one.

Guiding questions: - Can you sacrifice yourself for others if you have no self to sacrifice? - How does this definition of humility differ from simply doing what a teacher tells you?

[Likutei Tefilot, Volume I.113:3]

> "Help me connect myself wholeheartedly to Tzaddikim and to the worthy, pure-hearted people of the generation who serve the true Tzaddikim and receive from them a true and straight way of life."

What to point out: The language is "connect myself" (likasher et atzmi) — the self is the subject doing the connecting. The self is not absorbed into the Tzaddik; it binds itself to the Tzaddik while remaining the agent of that act. The prayer is in the first person, asking for help maintaining a relationship, not for dissolution into it.

Guiding questions: - Who is speaking in this prayer? Is the "I" present or absent? - What is the difference between "connecting to" a Tzaddik and "becoming" a Tzaddik's follower in a way that loses yourself?

Discussion Questions

- The sources describe bittul as passing through the intellect [Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman on Tiferet Yisrael, .16:69] and as a state one returns from [Likkutei Etzot, Divine Attainments.14]. What does this suggest about what it means to be a student? Is there a point at which following a teacher too completely becomes a failure of bittul rather than its fulfillment?

- Moses argued constantly and his "natural force was not abated" [Leadership in the Wilderness, Part III, Chapter 15.20], yet he is the model of humility. The Hasidic sources ask us to surrender our will. How do you hold both of these together? Is there a contradiction?

- The Mei HaShiloach [Talmud Series; Shemitah, Mei HaShiloach.20] says the dominating will is itself a form of slavery. Can a student be enslaved to a teacher by following them too compliantly — not because the teacher demands it, but because the student's "will to will" has simply attached itself to the teacher's will instead of to God?

- The prayer in [Likutei Tefilot, Volume I.113:3] asks to "connect myself" to the Tzaddik. The prayer in [Likutei Tefilot, Volume I.87:7] asks to "cleave" to Tzaddikim. Are these the same relationship? Does one preserve the self more than the other?

- If true bittul requires hitbodedut — a private, interior space of conversation with God [Likkutei Etzot, Hitbodedut.6] — what does that mean for a student who has no such private space, whose entire religious life is mediated through a rabbi or community?

Where Students Go Wrong

Misreading 1: "Bittul means erasing yourself." Students often read bittul as total self-dissolution — becoming nothing. The sources correct this directly. [Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman on Tiferet Yisrael, .16:69] states explicitly that bittul must pass through the intellect — the most individual faculty — and that bittul which bypasses the mind fails to connect the person's essence to God at all. [Likkutei Etzot, Divine Attainments.14] shows that one returns from bittul with a self intact and enriched. Erasure is not the goal; reorientation is.

Misreading 2: "Deferring to a rabbi is the same as bittul before God." Students may assume that the Hasidic language of bittul before a Tzaddik means the same thing as bittul before God. But [Likkutei Etzot, Hitbodedut.6] locates genuine bittul in private, secluded prayer with God — not in the presence of a human authority. The Tzaddik is a conduit, not the destination. [Likutei Tefilot, Volume I.113:3] frames the relationship as connecting to the Tzaddik, not dissolving into them. Conflating these can produce a form of unhealthy dependence the sources do not support.

Misreading 3: "Arguing with a teacher is arrogance." Students may read humility as requiring silent compliance. Moses refutes this. [Leadership in the Wilderness, Part III, Chapter 15.20] presents Moses as someone who argued constantly, and whose physical and mental vitality was undiminished at his death — precisely because his self was not consumed. [Likkutei Etzot, Arrogance and Humility.18] defines humility not as passivity but as clear-eyed self-awareness combined with active concern for others. Argument from genuine da'at — engaged intellect — is not arrogance; it may be the opposite.

References

1. Likutei Tefilot, Volume I.113:3
2. Likkutei Etzot, Torah Learning.18
3. Kuntres HaHitpa'alut.9:14
4. Notes by Rabbi Yehoshua Hartman on Tiferet Yisrael, .16:69
5. Panekha Avakesh, .5:28
6. Covenant and Conversation Family Edition, Vayeitze, II; When the "I" Is Silent.32
7. Leadership in the Wilderness; Authority and Anarchy in the Book of Numbers, Part III, Chapter 15; Losing a Leader.20
8. Likkutei Etzot, Arrogance and Humility.18
9. Peninei Halakhah, Days of Awe, .7:15:3
10. Peninei Halakhah, Prayer, .21:2:2
11. Peninei Halakhah, Women's Prayer, .17:2:6
12. Likkutei Etzot, Divine Attainments.11
13. Likkutei Etzot, Hitbodedut.6
14. Likkutei Etzot, Divine Attainments.2
15. Sefat Emet, Deuteronomy, For the Month of Elul.2:3
16. Likutei Tefilot, Volume I.87:7
17. Talmud Series; Shemitah, In Mystical Thought, Mei HaShiloach.20
18. Sha'arei Avodah, Fifth Gate.3:7
19. Likkutei Torah, Bamidbar.14:18
20. Likkutei Torah, V'Zot HaBerachah.2:6
21. Likkutei Torah, V'Zot HaBerachah.2:12