Shaar 1, Ikar 19-20

העיקר התשעה עשר עזיבת החטא בהזדמן והוא בתוקף תאוותו. אמרו רבותינו זכרונם לברכה איזו היא תשובה שתשובתה מגעת עד כיסא הכבוד כשנבחן ויצא נקי באותו מקום ובאותה אשה. ונאמר למה כי הזדמן החטא לידו והוא בתוקף יצרו ועונה בשביבי בטנו כעת הראשונה שחטא וכבש יצרו ונמלט מעוון מיראת השם וגאון פחדו.

So Rabbeinu Yonah is... again as I guess as is usually almost always the case when Rishonim say a pshat in the Gemara, in their eyes it's the pshat pshat, and sometimes for us it's very mechudash because it doesn't necessarily correspond to the way other Rishonim learn pshat. The Emes is, the Gemara that the Rabbeinu Yonah is quoting about באותו מקום ובאותה אשה. So the Gemara doesn't say איזו היא תשובה שתשובתה מגעת עד כיסא הכבוד. I mean the Gemara as we have it simply says היכי דמי בעל תשובה. And

אמר רב יהודה כגון שבאת לידו דבר עבירה פעם ראשונה ושנייה וניצל הימנה או פעם ראשונה ושנייה וניצל הימנה מחוי רב יהודה באותה אשה באותו פרק באותו מקום.

So the Gemara just says היכי דמי בעל תשובה. Apparently, the way Rabbeinu Yonah learns pshat, so this is I think on פ"ו עמוד ב, almost at the midpoint on פ"ו עמוד ב. On the bottom of פ"ו עמוד א begin a whole series of meimras about the incredible koach of teshuvah. So one of those first is that אמר רבי לוי גדולה תשובה שמגעת עד כיסא הכבוד. And then there are several other meimras that are intervening before we get to this Gemara of

היכי דמי בעל תשובה. גדולה תשובה שדוחה את לא תעשה שבתורה, גדולה תשובה שמביאה את הגאולה

or shem'kareves es hageulah v'chulu. So apparently the way Rabbeinu Yonah learns pshat is that the היכי דמי בעל תשובה is not sort of a distinct self-contained meimra. The way Rabbeinu Yonah learns pshat is that it's only the highest madreiga of teshuvah of which it's said מגעת עד כיסא הכבוד and perhaps the other meimras as well. And as a follow-up, meaning in the context of especially that meimra, maybe the others as well, in the context of that meimra the Gemara asks היכי דמי בעל תשובה. So who's a baal teshuvah that of whose teshuvah it may be said that it's מגעת ממש עד כיסא הכבוד? Not only does it erase cheit and not only does he have mechilas avonos, but mamash מגעת עד כיסא הכבוד, היכי דמי בעל תשובה? Either way, the Pachad Yitzchak points out in Pachad Yitzchak that we have here a very fundamental machlokes in Rishonim. If you go back to earlier here in the Sha'ar HaRishon to ha-ikar ha-sheni. So ha-ikar ha-sheni was also about azivas hacheit. Ha-ikar ha-sheni is

עזיבת החטא כי יעזוב רשע דרכו ואיש און מחשבותיו ויגמור בכל לבבו כי לא יוסיף לשוב בדרך הזה עוד.

Right, so he should resolve wholeheartedly that he's not going to repeat, he's not going to... continue along this path. ואם עוון פעל לא יוסיף k'inyan shene'emar שובו שובו מדרכיכם מדרכיכם הרעים ונאמר יעזוב רשע דרכו. So why does he have two ikarim about azivas hachet? So Rav Hutner says it's clear. The first one is azivas hachet. The second one is עזיבת החטא בהזדמן והוא בתוקף תאוותו. There's one darga of azivas hachet. There's a higher darga of azivas hachet that even if the cheit, the possibility for cheit presents itself in the most trying of circumstances. Ich veis, it's one thing for a let's say lemoshal a recovering alcoholic to not go to the liquor store and buy alcohol. It's another thing if there's a wedding and there's a bar and everyone's going over to the bar. It's obviously a higher... the circumstances are much more trying in that latter scenario than they are in the first scenario. So again, whether halacha l'maaseh that's a good example of what Rabbeinu Yonah is saying, I don't know. The point is that Rav Hutner says in Rabbeinu Yonah see a gevaldige chiddush. You see that the basic level of teshuva, a teshuva that's accepted, a teshuva that is mekayem the mitzvah of teshuva, the chiyuv of teshuva doesn't have to be so invincible that it ensures that even if he's tested betokef taavoso that he wouldn't be nichshal again. That's a higher madreiga of teshuva. Like many mitzvos, all mitzvos, I don't know, but something like many mitzvos, so there are dargos within teshuva. It's not that there's just sort of either a person did teshuva or didn't do teshuva. No, there's a whole spectrum of teshuva. And the chiddush here in Rabbeinu Yonah is that the basic level of the chiyuv teshuva, of the mitzvas teshuva doesn't necessarily again ensure that in the most trying of circumstances that the person wouldn't be nichshal again. And Rav Hutner contrasts it with the Rambam that the better known to us in perek bais of teshuva: u-ma hi ha-teshuva. So this u-ma hi ha-teshuva meaning basic teshuva, not

מה היא תשובה הכי מעולה, מה היא תשובה שמגעת עד כיסא הכבוד. מה היא תשובה הוא שיעזוב החוטא חטאו ויסירו ממחשבתו ויגמור בליבו שלא יעשהו עוד שנאמר יעזוב רשע דרכו ואיש און מחשבותיו וכן יתנחם על שעבר שנאמר כי אחרי שובי נחמתי ואחרי הודעי ספקתי על ירך ויעיד עליו יודע תעלומות שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם.

Oh, excuse me, ויעיד עליו יודע תעלומות. A person should call Hakadosh Baruch Hu as witness שלא ישוב לזה החטא לעולם. A person calls Hakadosh Baruch Hu and says Ribono Shel Olam, lifanecha galui v'yadua, so You know that right now my resolve is set that I will never ever do this cheit again. So it's clear that for the Rambam the standard of kabala l'haba of teshuva is that a person is not going to repeat the cheit under any circumstances. Again, it doesn't... it doesn't imply according to the Rambam that if it happens that it's necessarily iglay milsa lemafraya that the teshuva b'shasa wasn't a teshuva. No, it could be the teshuva b'shasa was a teshuva, but then he regressed. At the time, the tokef of his kabala l'haba was such that he would pass the... he would've passed the test or he did pass the test of yodeia taalumos. So lav davka that according to the Rambam again if he is rachmana litzlan subsequently nichshal that it's iglay milsa. But there clearly is, that's what Rav Hutner says, a very fundamental machlokes here that for Rabbeinu Yonah to be able to have such a kabala l'haba that even under the most trying of circumstances a person wouldn't be nichshal is not meakev in the basic, in the baseline of teshuva. Again, you have to know exactly, you know, where the... With that line is of tokeph taavoso and so what the analog is to the Gemara's example of the אותו פרק ואותו מקום but v'oso isha. See, it sounds like this. In Perek Zayin of Hilchos Teshuvah, so the Rambam famously tells us that

אל תאמר שאין התשובה אלא מעבירות שיש בהן מעשה כגון זנות וגזל וגניבה כשם שצריך אדם לשוב מאלו כך הוא צריך לחפש בדעות רעות שיש לו ולשוב מהן.

Don't think that teshuvah only relates to concrete maisim. No, the same way teshuvah relates to maisim assurim, it also relates to deos raos, to character flaws, to character blemishes.

כך הוא צריך לחפש בדעות רעות שיש לו ולשוב מהן מן הכעס ומן האיבה מן הקנאה מן התחרות מן ההיתול ומרדיפת הממון והכבוד ומרדיפת המאכלות וכיוצא בהן מן הכל צריך לחזור בתשובה ואלו העוונות קשים מאותן שיש בהן מעשה שבזמן שאדם נשקע באלו קשה הוא לפרוש וכן הוא אומר יעזוב רשע דרכו ואיש און מחשבותיו.

And the Rambam says here the teshuvah is a more formidable challenge because if the person has the mida, it means it's mushrash as well. Ma she'ein kein, it could be a person just did something once, it's somewhat flukish. Lav davka that it means that it's a mida that's mushrash as well. Maybe, I don't know, the yetzer hara caught him off guard and he was nichshal, but lav davka that it reflects a mida mushrashas as well. So let's say a person is let's say sounds a type of hypothetical, halevai it was so hypothetical, but let's say a person is looking to be mekayem what the Rambam says in this halacha. So mekubalim anu that obviously the tikkun hamidos can be a very long drawn out process as the Rambam himself here is indicating because a person is shakuah, שבזמן שאדם נשקע באלו קשה הוא לפרוש. So what happens l'halacha l'maise during Elul, during Aseres Yimei Teshuvah, Yom Kippur? So let's say a person is I don't know kaas, eivah, whichever kinah, whichever whichever mida I'm working on. So I would say viduy on it with a kabbala l'haba? Or no, I'm not ready to be מעיד עלי יודע תעלומות because I have no reason to think that I'm gonna have kfitzas haderech in this long path of tikkun hamidos. So does this depend upon machlokes Rabbeinu Yonah and the Rambam that we're talking about now? Is it that for Rabbeinu Yonah the answer is clearly that the viduy would be appropriate because the kabbala l'haba, the baseline chiyuv of kabbala l'haba doesn't have to ensure 100% success l'haba? And but according to the Rambam no? So yitachen that the answer is even according to the Rambam that a person can and should be misvadeh. Ay, but again tikkun hamidos... ruba d'ruba d'ruba takes a long time. And if the middah is mushrashas bi, how likely is it? Can a person really be modeh? Can I really be מעיד לפניך יודע תעלומות that tomorrow it's never ever going to happen again? So the Rambam has in perek beis of de'os that just as there's such a thing as being a choleh ha-guf, a person can be choleh ha-nefesh. Just as a person can have a physical malady, he can have a spiritual or moral malady as well. The same way for a physical malady, you consult an expert, a rofei ha-guf, so too for a spiritual or moral malady, a person has to consult the rofei ha-nefashos.

ומה תקנת חולי הנפשות ילכו אצל החכמים שהם רופאי הנפשות וירפאו חליים בדעות שמלמדים אותם עד שיחזירו לדרך הטובה.

And they'll write a prescription. They'll write a prescription. What's the prescription that the chakhamim write for cholei ha-nefashos referring to again middos ra'os, that's what the term means in this context? v'keitzad hi refuasom? מי שהוא בעל חימה, a person who has a temper, a person who has the middah of ka'as,

אומרים לו להנהיג עצמו שאם הוכה וקולל לא ירגיש כלל וילך בדרך זו זמן מרובה עד שתיעקר החימה מלבו.

He's not allowed to react kihuzah. A person who has a problem with anger, with a temper, so he's not allowed to react even to when legitimately it would be legitimate to react. But he should go, meaning that basically the Rambam is saying you go to the, as he'll generalize at the end of the halakha, if I find myself with one extreme, the refuah for that machlah is to go to the other extreme.

ועל קו זה יעשה בשאר כל הדעות. אם היה רחוק לקצה האחד ירחיק עצמו לקצה השני.

If a person recognizes in himself that he's too stingy, he doesn't give enough tzedakah, so then he has to for a period of time he has to give what under other circumstances would be considered too much tzedakah. He has to give away what again ordinarily would be considered too much money. וינהג בו זמן מרובה. Again, right, clearly that there's no, we're not expecting a kefitzas ha-derech here.

וינהג בו זמן מרובה עד שיחזור לדרך הטובה. והיא המדה הבינונית שבכל דעה ודעה.

So when he's doing this, right? So earlier in perek alef the Rambam told us that v'halakhta b'derakhav means the middah ha-beinonis. So when the person is going to the other extreme, so that's a hora'as sha'ah. It's sort of mi-din d'chiyas issur. It's a hora'as sha'ah. It sounds like it's a hora'as sha'ah, but on the other hand, so lekhoira it is an extreme, right? If you're telling this person who's stingy, doesn't give enough tzedakah, you're telling him he should give away sixty percent of his paycheck, so that's an extreme. That goes against the middah ha-beinonis. You're telling this person that he shouldn't even walk away if someone is hitting him or cursing him, he shouldn't react kihuzah because he needs to train himself behaviorally because that will affect the person, it'll affect the internal as well. He needs to be okeir that middah of ka'as. So that's extreme behavior, so that's against the middah ha-beinonis. So what's the sort of, it works, but what's the conceptual justification? So lekhoira what you have to say, which anyway is probably indicated in the Rambam, that the mitzvah of v'halakhta b'derakhav, a person is being, which is lekhoira the source for why all these deios ra'os are avonos, so that's if you want to sort of pinpoint the source within the Mishneh Torah Rambam for why these deios ra'os are avonos, it's because they're all violations of v'halakhta b'derakhav. The pshat is that v'halakhta b'derakhav means that a person is working on cultivating a middah ha-beinonis. That's why when a person turns bar mitzvah, so he's now a bar mitzvah, so he's now a metzuveh. lav davka that he's already on the kav hayashar, on the derech hatovah. So what, he's just an honest rachmana litzlan until he gets himself there? No, klar, the mitzvah is that a person's engaged in the tikkun hamiddot. itachen that that's even that the Rambam already indicated that earlier because in perek aleph the Rambam says

ומצווים אנו ללכת בדרכים אלו הבינונים והם הדרכים הטובים והישרים שנאמר והלכת בדרכיו.

Fine. So initially the definition the Rambam says, the Rambam talks about action: ומצווים אנו ללכת בדרכים אלו הבינונים. You can argue with his diyuk whether it's really a diyuk, but I think what we're saying in perek tes is correct either way. This hosofah is a little dubious. In halacha zayin the Rambam says it differently: כיצד ירגיל אדם עצמו בדעות אלו עד שיקבעו בו. So here the Rambam is clearly speaking of the mitzvah not just in terms of how a person is acting, but clearly the Rambam says that ultimately the mitzvah is that the deyos eilu sheyikavu bo, right? The mitzvah is not only to give the right amount of tzedakah but to be charitable. The mitzvah is not only to act compassionately but to be compassionate vechulu. That's clear, right? כיצד ירגיל אדם עצמו בדעות אלו עד שיקבעו בו. So itachen the vort is like this. A person is the mitzvah is complete, the mitzvah is bishlemusa when the deyos are nikba'os bo. But it's not the case that a person is violating vehalachta bidrachav until he achieves that goal. kol zman that he's working towards that goal, kol zman that he's margil atzmo kedei sheyikavu bo, so he's not in violation. He's that's also in terms of being mekayem the mitzvah. So itachen if the person is takeh resolved to be doing his best in terms of the tikkun hamiddot, agam that the reality is, as the Rambam says, that it takes zman merubeh. The norm is that tikkun hamiddot takes us a long time. That it's zman merubeh. The Rambam doesn't purposely doesn't tell us how long, obviously it's going to vary from individual to individual basher hu adam. But as long as the person's doing his best, so itachen that he's no longer over. And that therefore he takeh could, even according to the Rambam when it comes to the to teshuvah and vidui of deyos ra'os, that he would be able to legitimately, sincerely, and appropriately l'olam eini chozer, meaning eini chozer to this midah. I'm moving away from this midah, which is what the mitzvah of vehalachta bidrachav is. And that doesn't isn't going to be measured by whether or not in terms of a ma'aseh it's going to be measured by whether or not that ma'aseh ever happens again. In terms of the midah, it's going to be measured by is he moving away from the by the direction, is he moving away from the midah. iyen sham. veha'inyan continues: ומי שלא הזדמן לידו כעניין הזה. A person who's not subjected to this test of being provoked, of being tempted vehu betokef ta'avaso. And the person should not look to stage the test, right? When Chazal say, when Chazal give this example, they don't mean that the person should put himself in that position. Person לא נצטווה להביא עצמו לידי ניסיון. If he found himself in that position and and this were to be his reaction. so then that would be the teshuva gamura. That a person doesn't put himself in that situation. L'fi pshuto

ומי שלא הזדמן לידו כעניין הזה יוסיף בנפשו יראת השם יום ביומו ככה כל הימים.

A person should look and Rabbeinu Yonah is not speaking hyperbolically here. A person should look to daily try to improve his yiras Hashem. Just on a daily basis a person should be looking to enhance to add to his yiras Hashem. Kochah kol hayamim and he'll do that continuously day in day out

וכאשר יחליף כח היראה תהיה כבוש בכח הזה יצרו ומיסס מושלו בעוצם התאוה הלא בוחן לבות יבין ונוצר נפשו הוא ידע כי אם יבוא לידי נסיון ויגיע לידו כעניין הראשון יאצל נפשו מיד יצרו.

In order for the teshuva to be gamura it doesn't actually have to happen. Ribono Shel Olam will know when a person is at that stage that were that nisayon to present itself that the person would react successfully. See Rabbeinu Yonah earlier also if you go back to ha-ikar hachamishi in os yud zayin. Ha-ikar hachamishi is about de'agah. So os yud zayin, so what's the de'agah about? So the second thing the de'agah is about Rabbeinu Yonah says is

ועוד ידאג בעל תשובה פן יתגבר עליו יצרו כמו שאמרו ז"ל אל תאמין בעצמך עד יום מותך.

He shouldn't be overconfident. It happened once, he should have a healthy, it can be unhealthy also, he should have a healthy skepticism.

כל שכן האיש שנצח לבו כבר כי ראוי להשמר מן היצר האורב בכל עת ולהוסיף בנפשו יראת השם יום יום.

He says it again in this same ikar hachamishi if you just turn to os chaf within the ikar hachamishi.

אמר אחרי כן אשרי אדם מפחד תמיד ומקשה לבו יפול ברעה פירוש אף על פי שהוא מודה ועוזב יש לו לפחד תמיד אולי לא השלים חק התשובה כי התצריך למדרגות רבות ויוסיף אומץ בכל יום להשיג המדרגות גם יפחד אולי יתחדש עליו יצרו וישמר ממנו בכל עת ויוסיף יראת השם בנפשו תמיד.

It doesn't need any obviously any comment isn't needed to explain away some difficulty as to why it's part of the program of teshuva for a person to enhance his yiras shamayim but just to a little bit articulate Cheit again not talking about cheit of tinok shenishba or that type of category. Cheit attests to a chisaron in yiras shamayim. How does one know that? It's a pasuk ובעבור תהיה יראתו על פניכם לבלתי תחטאו. If we would have proper yiras shamayim so we wouldn't be chotei. That's what the pasuk says. ובעבור תהיה יראתו על פניכם לבלתי תחטאו. But maybe the pshat is as the Ramak quotes from the Rambam. And in Siman Alef in Shulchan Aruch, but שיוויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד that really the problem is not a lack of Yira'as Shomayim, the problem is our hesech hadas that שיוויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד is the klal gadol because אם יושב אם ישים אדם על לבו that Hakadosh Baruch Hu

אשר הוא מלא כל הארץ כבודו עומד עליו ורואה במעשיו

so miyad the person has Yira'as Shomayim. So the chisaron is in our hesech hadas. But the emes is hainu hach. If the eichus of our Yira'as Shomayim were what it should be, hesech hadas wouldn't be possible. Let's say you have doctors, nurses who treat patients whose sickness is highly contagious. Right, whether it's highly contagious if a needle that was used on the patient will then prick the medical professional or whatever the way rachmana litzlan it's communicated. So the eichus of that fright of it being communicable is such that they're not masiach da'as from the necessary precautions that they have to take. So whenever there's sort of a break in our on the graph in our Yira'as Shomayim, sort of you would think it's just quantitative, how much of the time we have Yira'as Shomayim, but the quantitative element of Yira'as Shomayim is a function of the qualitative element of Yira'as Shomayim. How often it's possible for a person to be distracted, as we are, from our Yira'as Shomayim is a function of how deep that Yira'as Shomayim is. If the Yira'as Shomayim is what it should be, a person doesn't get distracted from it the same way the doctors and nurses working in these units, they don't get distracted from the precautions that they need to take. So cheit, so that's what the pasuk says ובעבור תהיה יראתו על פניכם לבלתי תחטאו. If we would have adequate Yira'as Shomayim, there wouldn't be cheit. Mimeila says Rabbeinu Yonah, clearly, clearly part of the program, again, not only to ensure azivas hacheit, not only to prevent cheit in the future, but just sort of the to be mesakein what the cheit revealed is a miss, is in needing of tikun, is that a person looks to improve constantly in his Yira'as Shomayim. והנה הוא לפני ה' במדרגה העליונה מן התשובה. Again, if the person would now be able under the most trying of circumstances would not succumb to the cheit, so then, again, this is already the highest madreiga of teshuva.

בחסד ואמת יכופר עון וביראת ה' סור מרע. פירוש ביראת ה' לסור מן הרע אם יזדמן לידו.

And milas sur makor. It's an infinitive. The infinitive doesn't always have the lamed in Tanach. So וביראת ה' סור מרע means through Yira'as Hashem, so then he will be able lasur mei'ra to turn away from ra. ויורה על הפירוש הזה מה שלא אמר וסור, that it's not in the verb form, in the active form, turn away. עניינו שיסור מן הרע בהזדמן לידו. Ki lo yomar. The lashon Medrash is strange because it's a mishna which is then elaborated by the Gemara. So here in this edition, he says it just al korchacha it's a toas sofer. It should be bamishna. So Rabbeinu Yona here suggests a very interesting pshat. The Gemara in Kiddushin has as follows. The Gemara in Kiddushin quotes that the mishna says כל העושה מצוה אחת מטיבין לו. The person does even one mitzvah, he's going to get schar for it. There's no such thing as a maase mitzvah which is too little or inconsequential. No, there's no such thing as a maase mitzvah which is too little, no such thing as a maase mitzvah which is inconsequential, every mitzvah a person is going to get schar for. So the Gemara is medayek עשה אין לא עשה לא. So apparently schar is only for kiyum mitzvos ase, not for קיום מצוות לא תעשה. U'min'hi ישב ולא עבר עבירה נותנין לו שכר כעושה מצוה. Ai, the braisa says that schar even for avoiding transgressing a lo saase. Amar leh hasam כגון שבא דבר עבירה לידו וניצל הימנו. So I'm not sure how Rabbeinu Yona's pshat works in the hemshech haGemara here. Well, I don't have the Gemara in front of you, but for Rabbeinu Yona, what this means is that a person gets schar for lo saases only when there's intense provocation. Stama dehai a person doesn't get schar for that he didn't go to McDonald's this morning to eat breakfast. No one thought that you should have gone to McDonald's to eat breakfast. But if there's intense provocation, the Gemara tells stories to illustrate that, and Rabbeinu Yona seems to be medayek that the metzius of having once been nichshal is by definition an intense provocation, and the person is betokef taavah is by definition an intense provocation. So you see that Chazal distinguish between the cases of where there's tokef taavah and not in terms of whether or not there's schar for the shev v'al taase in the lo saase, and that reflects his chilluk within Hilchos Teshuva. Perhaps that's the pshat here. והיה אשם להשיב אשמו מעון כאשר תעשה ידו. That to the best of a person's ability he should be mashpia on others, he should be mekarev others,

שנאמר שובו והשיבו מכל פשעיכם. למדנו כי זה מעיקרי התשובה. ונאמר הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך ולא תשא עליו חטא. למדנו כי אם לא יוכיחנו יענש על חטאו. ודוד עליו השלום אמר במזמור התשובה אלמדה פושעים דרכיך וחטאים אליך ישובו.

L'chora what's reflected in this last of of the ikkarim, I guess we had it earlier as well but I don't think we commented on it then. Hagam that Rabbeinu Yonah does quote the pasuk of hocheach tocheach, when he says lehashiv rabbim me'avon, what does that mean? It means that if there's a situation which arises where there's a chiyuv tochecha that he'll be mekayem his chiyuv tochecha. So what's that got to do with an ikkar teshuvah? And that he'll put on tefillin the next morning is also from the ikkarei hateshuvah? So so the pshat is no, it means lehashiv rabbim me'avon means it goes well beyond what any chiyuv tochecha would expect of the person, that he's proactive in being meishiv rabbim me'avon, not just the hara'ah bechaveiro shechoteh, but he's being proactive in in in trying to be meishiv rabbim me'avon. L'chora what the the ikkar the the ikkar here is, sometimes we think of of teshuvah as okay, so when when the person was chotei rachmana litzlan, so משל למה הדבר דומה, he stumbles and falls into the dirt and and gets all dirty. And the teshuvah is that he picks himself up and he dusts himself off and and and goes back to the status quo ante. But the emes is what teshuvah really should do to a degree has to do and to a degree should do is not just restore the person to the status quo ante, not just to get him where he ended up achar hachet, to turn the clock back and get him back to kodem hachet, but it should get him to a higher madreiga. That's really what what teshuvah should do. So to a certain degree in some context that's not a midas chasidus in teshuvah, it's required. Because if the chet happened not accidentally, the chet happened because there was a real flaw in the person, so by definition he can only do teshuvah if if there's going to if he's going to uproot that that shoresh hachet. So by definition the teshuvah has to mean that he's not just getting back to where he was kodem hachet, but but he's improving himself. But lav davka, right? Sometimes the the chet maybe maybe be'akrai. Basically flukish. But even then the vort is that what teshuvah should. The response to cheit and when you think about it, it's intuitive, rabbosai. The response to cheit again is not only that the person should get up and dust himself off, but he should be better. He should be a better person than he was, not just that he should get back to where he was kodem hacheit, but that he should be a better person. And that lich'ora is part of what's reflected here in the lehashiv rabbim me'avon and also, even though there were other rationales for it that Rabbeinu Yonah presented in the ikarei hateshuva, but also in the ikkar of לרדוף פעולות החסד והאמת she'ne'emar בחסד ואמת יכופר עוון. So here too again, the teshuva haretsuya vera'uya is not just to get back to where I was kodem hacheit, but to be a better person at the end of the whole process.