Our inner flame of Torah and the Rama

Question

The posuk in parashas Tzav writes:

and the fire of the altar shall be kept burning in it.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe in Likkutei Sichos (Vol. 1, p. 217; parashas Tzav) explains that the Torah we study must be with continuous excitement. Not only the study, also the application of what we study. The Divrei Emes (from Rabbi Yaakov Yitzchak Horowitz, the Hoozeh of Lublin), also echoes this idea, e.g. to serve him with enthusiasm.

The Rama in Orach Chayim, siman 264:9 writes:

And in all cases our custom is to light the wick and to then extinguish it so that it may be charred (before [re]kindling them for the sake of the mitzvah) [so that] the flame should catch on well.

According to the explanation of the Rama, the flame gets stronger when it's extinguished once before, and then re-kindled. This got me thinking. The posuk, and the deeper meaning behind it, tells us to not extinguish our "inner flame" and to serve G-d with continuous excitement and enthusiasm (Likkutei Sichos and the Divrei Emes). But, are there sources that discuss the idea that our "inner flame" and our Torah gets stronger, if we, G-d forbid , lose excitement for a moment (this is compared to what the Rama writes; extinguish the flame, then re-kindling it). Is that a concept?

As always, please cite any sources. Answers explaining the concept @shmosel talks about are also welcome.

Please note that I am not asking if the "inner light" needs to be completely distinguished (G-d Forbid), but rather if diminishing of this light, e.g. we experience less excitement for a while, is to make sure that it returns to us in stronger form.

Answer 1

This is a quote from Tanya (Chinuch Katan)

אַךְ הִנֵּה יָדוּעַ לַיּוֹדְעִים, טַעֲמָא דִקְרָא מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״כִּי שֶׁבַע יִפּוֹל צַדִּיק וָקָם״, וּבִפְרָט שֶׁהָאָדָם נִקְרָא ״מְהַלֵּךְ״ וְלֹא ״עוֹמֵד״, וְצָרִיךְ לֵילֵךְ מִמַּדְרֵגָה לְמַדְרֵגָה, וְלֹא לַעֲמוֹד בְּמַדְרֵגָה אַחַת לְעוֹלָם, וּבֵין מַדְרֵגָה לְמַדְרֵגָה, טֶרֶם שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ לְמַדְרֵגָה עֶלְיוֹנָה מִמֶּנָּה, הוּא בִּבְחִינַת ״נְפִילָה״ מִמַּדְרֵגָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. אַךְ, ״כִּי יִפּוֹל – לֹא יוּטָל״ כְּתִיב, וְאֵינָהּ נִקְרֵאת נְפִילָה, אֶלָּא לְגַבֵּי מַדְרֵיגָתוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, וְלֹא לְגַבֵּי שְׁאָר כָּל אָדָם חַס וְשָׁלוֹם, שֶׁאַף־עַל־פִּי־כֵן, הוּא לְמַעְלָה מִכָּל הָאָדָם בַּעֲבוֹדָתוֹ, כִּי נִשְׁאַר בָּהּ בְּחִינַת רְשִׁימוּ מִמַּדְרֵיגָתוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה.

Now, those who are familiar with the esoteric meaning of Scripture know [the explanation of] the verse, “For a tzaddik falls seven times and rises up again.” Especially since man is called “mobile” and not “static,” he must ascend from level to level and not remain forever at one plateau. Between one level and the next, before he can reach the higher one, he is in a state of decline from the previous level. Yet, it is written, “Though he falls, he shall not be utterly cast down.” It is considered a decline only in comparison with his former state, and not, G–d forbid, in comparison with all other men, for he is still above them in his service [of G–d], inasmuch as there remains in it an impression of his former state.

The Rebbe explained this concept to someone by using a parable, that if someone wishes to jump over an obstacle, he first must step back in order to get over it