Hilchos teshuva 8

Good morning, let's start Perek Beis.

איזו היא תשובה גמורה? זה שבא לידו דבר שעבר בו ואפשר בידו לעשותו ופירש ולא עשה מפני התשובה ולא מיראה ולא מכשלון כוח.

And presumably lo miyira means yiras basar vadam. If it's from yiras ha'onesh or יראת הקדוש ברוך הוא so that's a form of teshuva gemura here is not illustrating teshuva me'ahava. Right. The Rambam doesn't in this description that follows, Rambam's not commenting on necessarily that he's doing from ahavas Hashem. There is no such indication. So therefore he's not depicting teshuva me'ahava as opposed to teshuva miyira so the pshat is lo miyira means yiras basar vadam. He's not what he did wasn't against secular law and it's not as if he's afraid of being imprisoned and the fact that it's in one breath with velo mikishlon koach also points to that meaning it's a mundane yira. ולא מיראה ולא מכשלון כוח. Keitzad?

הרי שבא על אשה בעבירה ולאחר זמן נתייחד עמה והוא עומד באהבתו בה ובכוח גופו ובמדינה שעבר בה ופירש ולא עבר זהו בעל תשובה גמורה.

So it's pashut that the Rambam obviously does not mean again this is from the Gemara in Yuma, Rambam doesn't mean that a person in order to have done a complete teshuva needs to put himself into that situation. Of course he doesn't mean that at all. ולאחר זמן נתייחד עמה so there's an issur yichud so he obviously what he's describing is that this is sort of the ideal snapshot of teshuva and the way a person does it is that his resolve having done the teshuva is so great that were this to happen so this is how things would play out. But he obviously doesn't mean that a person is supposed to recreate the circumstances of cheit.

ולאחר זמן נתייחד עמה והוא עומד באהבתו בה ובכוח גופו ובמדינה שעבר בה

so all the circumstances are the same the only variable is that

ופירש ולא עבר זהו בעל תשובה גמורה. הוא ששלמה אומר וזכור את בוראיך בימי בחורותיך.

So this what we commented on I think already if you go ahead I think we pointed this out also if you jump ahead to פרק ג הלכה ד for a moment.

אף על פי שתקיעת שופר בראש השנה גזירת הכתוב רמז יש בה כלומר עורו עורו ישנים משנתכם ונרדמים הקיצו מתרדמתכם.

I think the Frankel has uru uru twice does anyone looking in the Frankel? Yeah twice right so the twice means there's a sense of urgency that's what the repetition in this type of context connotes.

עורו עורו ישנים משנתכם ונרדמים הקיצו מתרדמתכם וחפשו במעשיכם וחזרו בתשובה וזכרו בוראכם.

So here too the teshuva culminates in the zichru bore'achem and here too the uzechor bori'acha in our halacha is the Rambam's prooftext for doing teshuva as we discussed. Culminating in zichru borachah. If not shav back to our halacha here bet aleph, if not shav, but biyemei ziknuso,

ובעת שאי אפשר לו לעשות מה שהיה עושה, אף על פי שאינה תשובה מעולה,

mo'ales hi lo, u-ba'al teshuvah hu. אפילו עבר כל ימיו ועשה תשובה ביום מיתתו, v'meis b'teshuvahso, kol avonosav nimchalin,

שנאמר עד אשר לא תחשך השמש והאור והירח והכוכבים ושבו העבים אחר הגשם שהוא יום המיתה.

I think there is a three volume, not sure what the right description of it, called Sefer HaTshuva on Hilchos Tshuva. It is partially perush, it is partially sort of treating the Hilchos Tshuva as a type of Shulchan Aruch and using it as a point of departure for the inyanim. It was written by the same one, רב צבי פסח פראנק'ס grandson-in-law, רב אברהם נח פאלי, who was a big talmid chacham. So here is this three volume work on Hilchos Tshuva called Sefer HaTshuva. So he just points out that the case of the person who does teshuva b'yom misaso, so the Rambam does not refer to him as a ba'al teshuva. When he does teshuva with part of his life still in front of him to be lived, so then the person is a ba'al teshuva, meaning he is, if I buy a house, so henceforth I am a ba'al habayis, right? I am a ba'al habayis. If I do teshuva, and then moving forward, I am a ba'al teshuva. That madrega of being zoiche to be a ba'al teshuva, so when the person does it b'yom misaso, so then with no path of his life in front of him, so that appellation of ba'al teshuva does not apply, but again, the teshuva is effective in that kol avonosav nimchalin. ובכלל שהם זכה בראו ושב קודם שימות נסלח לו. u-mah hi ha-teshuvah?

שיעזוב החוטא חטאו ויסירו ממחשבתו ויגמור בלבו שלא יעשהו עוד, שנאמר יעזוב רשע דרכו,

and the pasuk says that, and Frankel, do they have the next three words here from the pasuk or no? v'ish aven machshevosav. What does it say in Frankel? It has v'ish aven machshevosav. It is clear that the Rambam has in mind to, I do not know, understand it for some reason it is v'gomer after ya'azov rasha darko, but it is quite clear that the Rambam means v'ish aven machshevosav as well. That is the makor of what he is saying of v'yesiro mimachshavto. What does it mean practically? What does it mean v'yesiro mimachshavto? So the meshal perhaps, or a meshal is as follows rabbosai. Let's say you have two people with similar lifestyles and they both go to the doctor for a checkup. They both are chain smokers, live a very sedentary lifestyle v'chulei. And... middle-aged. And they both go to the doctor for the checkup and basically the doctor reads each of them the same riot act in terms of how this lifestyle is gonna kill them unless they make major changes. They have to stop smoking and they have to start exercising and they have to start eating a healthy diet etc. And the responses are similar. So patient number one responds and says it's a tall order, but I hear you doc, I'm going to do my best. It's a tall order. It's a tall order, but I'm going to give it my best effort. And patient number two says that I don't know how I'm going to do it, but one thing I'm absolutely sure of, if this current lifestyle is killing me, I know I'm going to find a way to do what you're telling me. What's the difference between the two responses? The two reactions? Patient number two, it's unthinkable that he'll go back. It's unthinkable to him. It's not 99% that he's going to do it, it's 100% because he realizes there is no alternative. There is no viable alternative. So this is what's going to be. It's absolutely unthinkable. I'm not going to touch another cigarette vechulu. It's absolutely unthinkable. The other one, what's the difference between 1%? The difference is that if it's 99%, it's not an absolute. If it's not an absolute, then there's a very good chance that it doesn't happen. A very good chance that it doesn't happen if the resolve is not absolute. Yisreim mimachshavto means that there's no hava amina sheba-hava amina to engage in that behavior again. That's one possible havana in what the yisreim mimachshavto is. וכן יתנחם על שעבר shene'emar

כי אחרי שובי נחמתי. ויעיד עליו יודע תעלומות שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם

shene'emar ולא נאמר עוד אלהינו למעשה ידינו. So that line seems to be misplaced here in the halacha, no? Veyaid alav again, so I think this we already mentioned from the Lechem Mishneh, right? That ויעיד עליו יודע תעלומות doesn't mean yaid, the subject of yaid is not yodea ta’alumot, so not Hakadosh Baruch Hu who's yodea ta’alumot will testify שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם, but it's rather he, the baal teshuvah, will call as a witness that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is my witness that right now my resolve is such that I've resolved to never ever repeat this chet. But that's part of the יגמור בלבו שלא יעשהו עוד, no? So why did the Rambam begin the halacha

מה היא התשובה שיעזוב החוטא חטאו ויסיר ממחשבתו ויגמור בלבו שלא יעשהו עוד?

At this point he should have said ויעיד עליו יודע תעלומות שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם. And then he should have said, and you know what, teshuvah is not only looking forward, but teshuvah also involves what the attitude is when one looks back. There has to be an attitude of charata as well. So this line lich’ora is misplaced. So the peshat is that the peshat is the Rambam holds, and he sees this indicated in the pasuk of acharei shuvi nichamti, the sequence of teshuvah is initially azivat hachet. And again, azivat hachet obviously involves a kabbalah l’haba, otherwise there's no azivat hachet. If I just, if he just finishes his neveilah sandwich, that's not azivat hachet. is with the is with with the Kabbalah l'haba, Acharei shuvi then nichamti. But the metzius is this. The metzius is again the yisirenu mimachshavto notwithstanding one's best faith effort to yisirenu mimachshavto notwithstanding, you tell me but on top of that yes the metzius is this. Without the yisnachem al she'ovar the Kabbalah l'haba won't be complete. There can be an initial Kabbalah l'haba. But it's sort of partially parallel to what we have in Rabbeinu Yona, right? Think back to what we mentioned in Rambam and Rabbeinu Yona that the Pachad Yitzchak highlights. And how Rabbeinu Yona has sort of two different dargos of azivas hachet. He has azivas hachet under the normal circumstances, under ordinary circumstances, and then he has an azivas hachet even under extra extraordinary circumstances where there's tremendous provocation. Now the Rambam take holds as Rav Hutner points out that that isn't just to have a Teshuva Me'ula. No, that's necessary for teshuva, but lichora what the Rambam is saying is that that degree of azivas hachet that a person will be able to under all circumstances remain true to his resolve and not succumb to provocation, extreme provocation and temptation, that bimtzius will only happen if he's misnachem al she'ovar. If there's a sense of anguish over what happened. Rabbeinu Yona talks about talks about talks about the ikkarim at the beginning of Sha'arei Teshuva when he talks about the fallout from procrastinating in doing teshuva. So he says that part of the fallout from delaying in doing teshuva is that if a person does teshuva in a timely fashion so that would help prevent recurrence of the cheit because having experienced the anguish of hakoras hacheit and and the profound remorse so that association with the cheit will help deter future, right? The teva of a person is let's say a person eats something and maybe it was spoiled or something and it makes him sick, so there's now psychologically a person associates that reaction with the food. He'll associate that reaction with with the food. If there's yisnachem al she'ovar, it's sort of a little bit of a mirror image, a two-dimensional mirror image of this idea. If the person was misnachem al she'ovar so then he can take the Kabbalah l'haba to a higher level. And that's why the Ram and that's why the Rambam says now at this point after the nichamti so then יעיד עליו יודע תעלומות then now he's ready to invite Hakadosh Baruch Hu. He's ready to invite Hakadosh Baruch Hu yodeia ta'alumos and say Hakadosh Baruch Hu I'm ready to have you x-ray my heart and see whether or not my resolve is really 100% for azivas hachet. Could be that that then would answer a couple of other questions also. In halacha aleph when the Rambam again based on the Gemara in Yoma is illustrating teshuva gemura. Heyos that an integral part of teshuva is yisnachem al she'ovar, how do we see that in that snapshot? It's mimayleh in this snapshot of עומד בעבירתו ובאותה מדינה etc. and he's at the same stage of life and פירש ולא עבר מפני התשובה. So that is a snapshot of azivas hachet. But how is that a snapshot of where do you sort of see manifest the the nichamti l'she'ovar? But it yitachen that that's what the Rambam is telling us here in halacha beis, to withstand a a high degree of provocation and not to succumb even when the temptation is very very great, l'mayseh... possible with the nichamti. And in that sense halacha aleph provides a snapshot of Kabalat Teshuvah because it does give you a snapshot of nichamti. yitachen also that the Rambam is also answering another kasha with this sort of two stage. Again basically what we're suggesting is that the azivat hachet and the kabala l'haba happens incrementally in two stages. yitachen that the Rambam is really answering another kasha here as well. It's clear not only from our halacha here in halacha bet but it was certainly clear in halacha aleph when the Rambam gives us the text of the viduy

חטאתי עויתי פשעתי לפניך ועשיתי כך וכך והרי ניחמתי ובושתי במעשי ולעולם איני חוזר לדבר זה.

So we saw that the viduy is an expression and articulation of the teshuvah. So it's clear that the nichamti is part of the teshuvah. But doesn't this pasuk of achrei shuvi nichamti sort of isn't that a little bit of a tiyuvta on that? Isn't the pasuk depicting that first I did teshuvah, I did teshuvah, and after that nichamti? So how does the Rambam say that the nichamti is not something to supplement teshuvah? Rambam says no, it's an integral part of teshuvah ad k'dei kach that a person can't get up and be mitvadeh which again which is just the ma'aseh mitzvah of teshuvah, it's the external articulation of the teshuvah but doesn't achrei shuvi nichamti say that the teshuvah is the azivat hachet? Again which obviously means kabala l'haba. So the what the Rambam is telling us answers that kasha as well right? The fact that the nichamti achrei shuvi means the initial the initial stage of teshuvah, the initial azivat hachet, the initial kabala l'haba once I have that distance between myself and the chet then nichamti and then that allows the teshuvah to be a teshuvah gemura then he's ready to be יודע תעלומות שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם then you'll have the full azivat hachet then you'll have the kabala l'haba where he's ready to invite Hakadosh Baruch Hu to X-ray his heart as to that kabala l'haba. Because if you look I think and you'll double check this I think you know the Baal HaTanya has an Iggeret HaTeshuvah. But I think the Baal HaTanya writes in contradiction to the Rambam and maybe even quotes this pasuk as a raya achrei shuvi nichamti that the teshuvah consists of the azivat hachet and the kabala l'haba. That's what the teshuvah consists of and lefi amita that pasuk taki does support him. But bechor this is what we're discussing now is the Rambam's response to that kasha. Then the Rambam concludes halacha bet וצריך להתוודות בשפתיו ולומר עניינות אלו שגמר בלבו. Why does he repeat this? I mean we know this already from aleph aleph. Right? That was the first thing that the Rambam told us in aleph aleph. So the different possibilities but one perhaps is the following. Let's say a person again back to alef alef שיעשה תשובה וישוב מחטאו. I mean it's kind of a I guess paradoxical scenario we're about to describe but be that as it may. שיעשה תשובה וישוב מחטאו and then for whatever reason a person isn't misvadeh. He isn't misvadeh. But but again hard to imagine a real to life scenario but let's just think of it as a as a hypothetical scenario. שיעשה תשובה וישוב מחטאו and he isn't misvadeh. So clearly clearly his viduy is a mitzvath aseih, he's being mevatel the mitzvath aseih of hithvaduth avonoth clearly. What about the teshuvah? The teshuvah itself is complete is complete. Again we know again that's what Minchath Chinukh the Rav said from Kidushin

הרי את מקודשת לי על מנת שאני צדיק גמור הרי זו מקודשת שמא הרהר בלבו תשובה.

So we know that the teshuvah is certainly the teshuvah has changed his status from rasha to tzadik. But אף על פי כן is the teshuvah complete? It's just that he's missing viduy and heyoth that kaparah is linked to viduy he's missing the kaparah also? Or no, maybe agam that there is a teshuvah with viduy the full teshuvah has to include viduy as well. You you hear the pshat my rabosai? Again I don't know that is there a nafka mina ledina? I don't know but it doesn't make a difference. It's you only have to give a nafka mina when conceptually it doesn't seem like there's a difference between the two havanos and it just seems like it's different words. But when conceptually it's obvious that there's two different havanos then there doesn't have to be a nafka mina ledina. They tell a story I'm not I don't know I didn't hear this from from the totally reliable line of transmission but they tell a story that the Chaim was once mesupak about what pshat in the gemara was. So someone asked him lemai nafka mina? So he said nafka mina is pshat in the gemara. So itakhen that what the Rambam is telling us in beith beith is that when a person is not misvadeh so again is it me'akeiv in the teshuvah in the sense that the teshuvah is nothing? Of course not. Vahayah ספק מקודשת שמא הרהר בלבו תשובה. So maybe his personal status from being a rasha to a tzadik has has changed. But אף על פי כן lichora the Rambam is saying is mitzad teshuvah as well not just mitzad the individual the excuse me the independent the mitzvath viduy that he's mechuyav to be misvadeh that you already know from alef alef. Here the Rambam is telling us no the fullest teshuvah mitzad teshuvah also a person should be misvadeh. It's it's also it's not again it's an independent mitzvah but it's also that it's lacking in the teshuvah kol zeman that the person hasn't been misvadeh. I think it if we think about it there's something intuitive about that. Itakhen. Let's let's reread maybe for the beginning of alef gimel rabosai. Alef gimel.

בזמן הזה שאין בית המקדש קיים. בזמן הזה שאין בית המקדש קיים ואין לנו מזבח כפרה אין שם אלא תשובה והתשובה מכפרת על כל העבירות אפילו רשע כל ימיו ועשה תשובה באחרונה אין מזכירין לו שום דבר מרשעו.

So, the Rambam here is sort of speaking in shorthand because it's not really teshuvah which is מכפר על כל העבירות, right? If you do teshuvah and you're not misvadeh, that's what the Rambam told us in Aleph-Aleph, that it's a m'akev. So it's not shorthand. No, it's not shorthand. Because because really the peshat is that yes, there is such a thing as teshuvah belo viduy, but when there's viduy it's not the peshat that A is teshuvah and now there's B viduy. No, the peshat is there's one darga of teshuvah and there's a higher darga of teshuvah. And it's the teshuvah which is מכפר על כל העבירות, it's just that the full teshuvah, the teshuvah of the higher darga, is a teshuvah that culminates in viduy as well. And that's why the Rambam in Bais-Bais is repeating it and saying mitzad hateshuvah as well. Mitzad hateshuvah as well, if a person wants that the teshuvah should be complete, not just not just to be able to enjoy the the benefits of kapparah, but just mitzad that the teshuvah should be complete, it's tzarich lehisvados bisvaf.

כל המתוודה בדברים ולא גמר בליבו לעזוב הרי זה דומה לטובל ושרץ בידו שאין הטבילה מועלת עד שישליך השרץ וכן הוא אומר ומודה ועוזב ירוחם. וצריך לפרוט את החטא שנאמר אנא חטא העם הזה חטאה גדולה ויעשו להם אלוהי זהב.

So this, as the Kesef Mishneh quotes, this last one in the Rambam of perat hachet is a machlokes tana'im. Rabbi Akiva darshens the pasuk of אנא חטא ויעשו להם אלוהי זהב that Moshe Rabbeinu was saying that to be melamed zechus. Right? Look Ribono Shel Olam, it's not a coincidence that they made an eigel hazahav, it's because of the כסף וזהב שהרבית להם, that's what that's why they chotei. But there is no requirement of perat hachet. Shulchan Aruch says that one is not it's not a chiyuv to be mifaresh hachet, but it's preferable to have perat hachet. Question is what the translation of tzarich is in the Rambam. Let's say is there a diuk when he says tzarich as opposed to chayav? Right? Aleph-Aleph is chayav lehisvados. And here is tzarich. So tzarich is something weaker? I don't know, you have to the there's a number of cases you have to look at. I think Maggid Mishneh siman hashva'ah, Chometz U'Matzah, I think that's tzarich for instance, one of one other cases. So that is there something which is less than a chiyuv in the Rambam? Well I don't know, maybe sometimes tzarich in the Rambam is when he's talking about a detail of the chiyuv. So maybe he uses the lashon chayav for the the general the general din. The general din is sippur yetziat mitzrayim, a prat within it is Mah Nishtanah. The general din is chayav lehisvados, the prat within it is perat hachet, but not necessarily. Not that there's something not even weaker about the lashon. I know there's a bunch of tzorechs in Rambam. Let's just introduce Halacha Daled and then we'll maybe continue with it tomorrow.

מדרכי התשובה להיות השב צועק תמיד לפני השם בתפילה ובתחנונים ועושה צדקה כפי כוחו ומתרחק הרבה מן הדבר שחטא בו ומשנה שמו כלומר אני אחר ואיני אותו האיש שעשה אותן המעשים ומשנה מעשיו כולם לטוב ולדרך ישרה וגולה ממקומו שגלות מכפרת עוון מפני שגורמת לו להיכנע ולהיות עניו ושפל רוח.

So as the Nosei Kelim quote, the Rambam's makor is the meimra of Rabbi Yitzchak in Rosh Hashanah Tes-Zayin: ארבעה דברים מקרעין גזר דינו של אדם, and even if there was already rachmana litzlan a gezar din against the person, each of these has the potential to have that gezar din rescinded. Ve'eilu hen, again the lashon hagemara quoted by the Kesef Mishneh:

צדקה צעקה שינוי השם ושינוי מעשה ויש אומרים אף שינוי מקום,

and he's מסדר דברים אלו באמרם זה רבנו בדברים אלה. So it's interesting, right? The Rambam doesn't sort of quote it in the same context as Rabbi Yitzchak frames it, but the Rambam takes this and he translates it into midarkei hateshuva. It's clear that at least for a certain period of time, question is how long a period, but for a certain period of time, so again teshuva's not a moment but it's sort of a lifestyle, right? להיות השב צועק תמיד לפני השם בתפילה ובתחנונים. The Rambam is describing again a sort of a lifestyle of teshuva, not just sort of teshuva as a moment but teshuva as a lifestyle, as a changed, different lifestyle. Okay bli neder we'll pick up with this tomorrow. We're not having the regular 1:30 shiur today, בלי נדר אם ירצה השם we'll resume both tomorrow.