I have a chavrusa, I apologize, I must go, but I will come back later today and check/respond in conversation or comments.

@msj121 you are a mentsch and mamash a ben Torah dear Yid. I'm sure you meant well. mochel mochel mochel

I understand this topic is full of warnings and it is scary to deal with, and is confusing and risky

Just popped out - I will delete the word kefira. I really don't think the Rebbe spoke such a thing - didn't enter my mind. Nor do I think you said anything like Kefira. I fear that someone who misreads it could go down the wrong road like they can change Hashem; wheras, as you pointed out it is only at best because Hashem either a) wants this, or b). Hashem affects himself (which I think is the same thing as "a" but more so). My apologies. Really didn't mean it in a bad way

After - rereading my comment I can see that it goes too far

I have deleted the first comment since I cannot edit out that line. I have re-written it below - confusing. Perhaps we should delete intervening comments for a reader, but not a big deal to me.

"Note: I explained what the phrase צורך גמור הוא means regarding the "lower level", as well as what the discussion builds the idea to on the higher level in my answer" after re-reading your post I agree, but this was not obvious to me initially.

I will when I get a chance re-read from Daled onwards, but reading daled I didn't find any mention, perhaps can you be more specific so I don't accidentally miss it?

Also - just so you know - I did not down vote your answer.

I also don't see why you think my quote of the Ramban is wrong - I did include the full quote in case someone would not be mislead. But refinement to me is principally for our own good. Did you disagree with that?

@msj121 the phrase "עצמות ומהות א"ס ב"ה" appears 4 times in ג, and another 4 times in ד (one time it is abridged). I am fine with deleting comments, but even your last comment might want to be rethought once you see these mentions of Hashem's עצמות in the maamar?

@msj121 This is a topic that I have expertise in, and also I am under my Rav in how I choose my phraseology and develop the understandings. If you would like to discuss it in depth, I would be glad to. You've touched on some points here that would be worth discussing

@msj121 So actually the maamar we are discussing will answer this question (hover the cursor over this to see which one I mean). I.e. no, the Rebbe would disagree. The refinement of mankind is not for mankind. It's for Hashem. Of course, this can be confusing i.e. tautologically, the refinement of mankind is refinement, i.e. it is good for us, definitionally, and I am not disagreeing with that...

...Performing mitzvot is infinitely good for us, and Hashem loves us and is glad that it is good for us, and expects us to do what is good for us. Fine, absolutely, this is not controversial.

The point I am trying to make is that your answer is expressing that Hashem doesn't have any stake or purpose in us performing mitzvot at all, it's purely our problem and is irrelevant to Him. This is not correct, and the maamar I brought is an amazing explanation of that. If you'd like to sit down and learn it, and possibly the other maamar I brought, we can discuss further. Or we can discuss without that, if you trust me now that I haven't misunderstood ithings?

No rush, just please remember to reply to or @mention me otherwise I won't have any alert and might miss a question

@RabbiKaii I will print out the maamar under discussion, I don't see any other maamar you are referring to? Please send me a link to it. Thanks

@msj121 he.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4279908

Thank you - will take a look when I get a chance

@msj121 your comments are no longer applicable, so shall we delete them all?

i.e. the ones on my answer

One thing that is really really important. The end point of this discussion is that He needs us. Not that He "needs us to change Him" or any other form of "needs us to..". This will perhaps be clearer after the second maamar