Hilchos Teshuva 2: Diyukim in the Viduy

Whatever a person sees, maybe we have some answers for him. כיצד התוודה על עוון שעבר omer Ana Hashem חטאתי עויתי פשעתי לפניך ve-asisi kach ve-kach

והרי נחמתי ובושתי במעשי ולעולם איני חוזר לדבר זה זהו עיקרו של וידוי.

So it's clear that the Rambam is illustrating viduy when a person is doing teshuva for a particular aveira. Because when he speaks about kabbalah l'haba the Rambam says ולעולם איני חוזר לדבר זה in the singular. So there's no ambiguity about that. What's the idiom of asisi kach ve-kach? So kach ve-kach in the idiom I think maybe the English idiom such and such and so and so probably has a similar sense. It doesn't mean this and this in a literal sense that a person is referring to two distinct discrete items or events or in this case two aveiros. So for instance the Rambam has in the beginning of Hilchos Shabbos he says

וכן כל מקום שנאמר אין עושין כך וכך או אסור לעשות כך וכך בשבת העושה אותו דבר בזדון מכין אותו מכת מרדות.

The Rambam tells us what the terms are going to mean throughout Hilchos Shabbos. So he says if I tell you that אין עושין כך וכך so then that's not going to be there's not going to be any chiyuv chatas associated with that, there's not going to be any chiyuv kares associated with it, it'll be makkas mardus. And clearly he doesn't mean kach ve-kach when I'm going to tell you that A and B are asur. So the idiom of kach ve-kach means this. It doesn't imply a lashon rabbim. The bigger question is what does the Rambam then mean by chatasi avisi pashati? So the Gemara as you know says that chatasi is shogeg, avisi is meizid, and pashati is rebelliously. But he's the Rambam is speaking of where the person is doing teshuva for one discrete aveira. So what was it? Was it shogeg, was it meizid, was it rebelliously? So Minchas Chinuch suggests you know how in the Siddur let's say if you turn to the Tefilla Shalosh Regalim so when you get to ותתן לנו ה' אלקינו את יום so then you have one column which says יום חג המצות הזה זמן חירותנו, one חג השבועות זמן מתן תורתנו, and one חג הסוכות זמן שמחתנו. So he says that's why the Rambam is supposed to be read: and omer Ana Hashem one column chatasi, avisi, pashati, you fill in the blank. So it's not so easy to understand even in context. My brother Hashem yikom damo points out that it doesn't seem to be tenable in Hilchos Ma'aseh Hakorbanos where the Rambam has the exact same lashon. That the Rambam speaks of that the Rambam says that the person does smicha and then if it's a chatas he's misvadeh on the avon of the chatas, if the korban is an asham he's misvadeh the korban of the asham, and if it's an olah so then he's misvadeh on the aseh or the לא תעשה שניתק לעשה. And then the Rambam writes in the last halacha in perek gimmel of Ma'aseh Korbanos Keitzad misvadeh omer חטאתי עויתי פשעתי ועשיתי כך וכך. So clearly here the chatas and the chatas is only shogeg. It's even more difficult to sustain that havana here in the end of Hilchos Ma'aseh Korbanos. So then what does it mean in Hilchos Teshuva? So two possibilities. So the Rav zecher tzadik livracha said that what it means is that even when a person's action is classified he did something intentionally, he knew this was chelev and he ate it, he had a ta'ava and he ate it. So we classify that as meizid, he wouldn't bring a chatas, he'd be chayav kares Rachmana litzlan. But there obviously is an element of shogeg to it as well because a person really really was in his right mind and understood what it meant to go against devar Hashem so he wouldn't be doing that b'meizid. And m'idach gisa it's true he's doing it l'teiavon but even to go against devar Hashem l'teiavon is a shtikel merida. And similarly with shogeg so he doesn't know. If the person really really was machshiv mitzvos and aveiros ki-de-ba'i he would learn and he wouldn't be shogeg. So he doesn't know. If the person really, really was machshiv mitzvos and aveiros k'dabay, he would learn and he wouldn't be shogeg. And in that respect, when a person really, really cares, he makes far fewer mistakes and there are far fewer accidents than otherwise. So even though we have a primary classification, but but really there are strands of shogeg, meizid, and rebelliousness in every action. One context the Rav said, pshat, maybe there's another possibility also which is the following. Let's say משל למה הדבר דומה. Let's say Reuven gets into an altercation with Shimon and in the course of that altercation he gives him a misheberach and he punches him and he rips his suit. So he's got a whole long laundry list of things to do teshuva for. So let's say he's right now he doesn't have the money yet to pay for the suit or whatever, he's not doing teshuva for that, but he's coming to apologize for insulting him. So he comes over and says, you know, I apologize. But l'chora, if if he'll just say I apologize for insulting you without referencing that even though he's not doing teshuva now for the rest, without referencing, you know, that there are other things outstanding, there's something wrong with that, there's something amiss. So even when you're doing teshuva for one cheit, there has to be an acknowledgment, Ribono Shel Olam, right now I'm only being misvadeh on on cheit A, but Ribono Shel Olam, I'm acknowledging that that, you know, there are other accounts that that I need to to settle. And in that sense, so ein hachi nami, so the the chatasi avisi pashati is he's referring to avonos that we classify as shogeg meizid. The difference is when the Rambam says harei nichamti v'boshti, what the next word is. Is the next word b'ma'asai or do you have to say a word that we're not used to, but I don't think there's anything grammatically problematic about it was b'ma'asi. Is the Rambam talking about my action or is he talking about my actions? Have a good day.