Concerning names, which point to revelations of the actions of the Creator, the name relates to the instruction of the action. All the actions are revealed in the lower ones, specifically in the attaining individual. Nevertheless, the attained in itself certainly does not have the same form as that which is apparent to the one who attains, since there is a merger of two things here, which adds a third form, a form that is born out of two forces, from the qualities of male and female.
In other words, when the filling comes because of the lack, there is a new phenomenon. That is, we must discern which form the deficient one has before he receives the filling. We should discern it after he receives the filling.
We should make two discernments in the filling itself, meaning which form it has before it comes in contact with the lack, meaning the matter in itself, which is called an “abstract force, not combined with a Kli [vessel].” And we should also discern after it is assembled in the Kli. Since the root of creation is not more than Kelim [vessels] of a lack, we therefore have no attainment in a light without a Kli.
Hence, when we say that the Creator is called “Mighty,” it is precisely when the quality of “might” appears on us. However, calling names that we do not attain, meaning without the filling of “might,” before the abundance comes into it, at that time we do not say that the Creator is called “Mighty.”
It follows that he says that the Creator has the quality of might although this quality is not revealed to him. Thus, he gives forms to light without a Kli. This is a lie, for a light without a Kli has no form. This is why they did not want to say “the Mighty God,” if this quality did not appear to the lower ones.