Hilchos teshuva 7

Halacha Gimmel.

בזמן שאין בית המקדש קיים ואין לנו מזבח כפרה אין שם אלא תשובה. התשובה מכפרת על כל העבירות. אפילו רשע כל ימיו ועשה תשובה באחרונה אין מזכירים לו שום רשע שנאמר ורשעת הרשע לא יכשל בה ביום שובו מרשעו. ועצמו של יום הכיפורים מכפר לשבים שנאמר כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם.

So how do we how do we just understand the beginning of the halacha בזמן שאין בית המקדש קיים ואין לנו מזבח כפרה meaning there’s no Beis Hamikdash and mimaila אין לנו מזבח כפרה meaning the significance of Beis Hamikdash is whether or not there’s a mizbeach kaparah. There’s no mizbeach kaparah so we don’t have the chatos, we don’t have the ashamos, we don’t have the sa’ir, we don’t have the sa’ir hamishtaleach. But it probably means more than that. Sorry just one second. Perek Yud Dalet, Hilchos Sanhedrin, Halacha Yud Alef.

אין דנין דיני נפשות אלא בפני הבית. והוא שיהיה בית דין הגדול שם בלשכת הגזית שבמקדש. שנאמר בזקן ממרא לבלתי שמוע אל הכהן או אל השופט. מפי השמועה למדו שבזמן שיש כהן מקריב על גבי המזבח יש דיני נפשות והוא שיהיה בית דין הגדול במקומו.

So the peshat is, if the Rambam would have just said אין לנו מזבח כפרה, so then we would have sort of understood how that prevents us from having the kaparah afforded the devarim hamachaprim of chatas and asham, sa'ir hamishtalei'ach, vechulu. But in Halacha Alef, the Rambam also mentioned that misas Beis Din and malkus are also devarim hamachaprim. What's that got to do, so by saying ein sham, ein Beis Hamikdash, the Rambam's saying I mean more than korbanos. I mean more than korbanos. The extra phrase, yitochein is to telegraph that the significance of Mikdash goes beyond the kaparah of korbanos, it takei prevents us from having the kaparah of misa umalkus. מלכות במקום מיתה עומדת, the same din applies that we don't have חיובי מיתה בזמן הזה either, so we don't have the kaparah which is afforded by misas Beis Din or malkus either. Halacha Gimmel is hard to understand. The balance here of Halacha Gimmel is hard to understand for two reasons. Number one, the Rambam writes תשובה מכפרת על כל העבירות, and you know, before the ink is dry and he begins to write Halacha Dalet, he tells you about the chilukei kaparah and tells you that the truth is only for mitzvas asei is teshuva sufficient. For everything else, teshuva is necessary but not sufficient. A mitzvas lo sasei you require Yom Kippur as well, and chamuros you require yisurim as well, and Chillul Hashem requires even, even misa. And just minei uvei Halacha Gimmel, he says bazman hazeh no kaparah, the only kaparah left is teshuva. And then in Halacha Gimmel guf he tells you that עיצומו של יום מכפר, that Yom Hakippurim mechaper. So it's not true that the only davar hamachaper that we have bazman hazeh is teshuva. No, we still have two. We have teshuva and we have Yom Hakippurim. But let's ask a different question. Why didn't the Rambam add on to Halacha Alef? So in Halacha Alef the Rambam says וכן בעלי חטאות ואשמות, even though chatas and asham are mechaper, but they're only mechaper lashavim vehamisvadin. And even though misas Beis Din and malkus are mechaper, but they're only mechaper lashavim velamisvadin. So why didn't the Rambam say, even though in Halacha Alef he should have said, even though Yom Kippur is mechaper, it's only mechaper lashavim velamisvadin. Shouldn't Yom Kippur should have been, it follows the same pattern? It follows the same pattern. So why didn't the Rambam add Yom Hakippurim to Halacha Alef? So yitochein is as follows. Let's take a look here at, I don't know if this is going to help, but it's also going... It's clear on the Rambam from that formulation in the Rambam, it's clear that the way to understand the combinations, be it the combination of teshuva and Yom HaKippurim for a regular lo ta'aseh, be it the combination of teshuva with Yom HaKippurim plus yisurim for karet and mitat beit din, that it's sort of not, they're not equal ingredients in the kapara. The kapara is brought about by teshuva contingent upon such and such. And that's what the lashon of

יש עבירות שהן מתכפרות בשעתן ויש עבירות שאין מתכפרות אלא לאחר זמן,

meaning the kapara brought about by teshuva is contingent upon such and such. But it's not accurate to say, at least initially, maybe later you can say it for shorthand, but initially you can't say that you need the mechaper of teshuva and yisurim, that you need the mechaper of teshuva and Yom HaKippurim. No, the mechaper is teshuva. Sometimes that's unconditional, and sometimes the kapara of teshuva is contingent upon, but it's very different between, there's a world of difference between saying that the teshuva is the mechaper contingent upon such and such as opposed to saying that teshuva and yisurim together are mechaper or teshuva and Yom HaKippurim together are mechaper. And lichora that's the pshat, that's why the Rambam in halacha gimmel says b'zman hazeh all we have is teshuva. B'zman hazeh all we have is teshuva, agav that teshuva sometimes is contingent, which is why lichora Yom HaKippurim again is not a second exception to the rule, the same way yisurim are not a second exception to the rule of what mechaper do we have b'zman hazeh. Because they're more, again, conditions within the kapara of teshuva than they are mechaper. The se'ir hamishtaleach was mechaper. A chatat was mechaper. The teshuva of chamurot is contingent upon yisurim. The teshuva, the kapara of teshuva of lo ta'aseh is contingent upon Yom HaKippurim. And that's one reason, there's another reason as well, but that's one reason, that's one answer for why the Rambam didn't add Yom HaKippurim to halacha aleph. The combination of Yom HaKippurim and teshuva is not parallel to the combination of a chatat and asham and teshuva, of misa and malkus and teshuva. Halacha daled.

אף על פי שהתשובה מכפרת על הכל ועצמו של יום הכיפורים מכפר יש עבירות שהן מתכפרות בשעתן ויש עבירות שאין מתכפרות אלא לאחר זמן כיצד עבר אדם על מצות עשה. עבר אדם על מצות עשה שאין בה כרת

ve'asa teshuva אינו זז משם עד שמוחלין לו מיד uve'eilu ne'emar

שובו בנים שובבים ארפא משובותיכם. עבר על מצות לא תעשה שאין בה כרת ולא מיתת בית דין,

excuse me,

עבר על מצות לא תעשה שאין בה כרת ולא מיתת בית דין

ve'asa teshuva תשובה תולה ויום הכיפורים מכפר uve'eilu ne'emar

כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם לטהר אתכם מכל חטאתיכם לפני השם תטהרו. עבר על כריתות ומיתות בית דין

ve'asa teshuva

תשובה ויום הכיפורים תולין ויסורין הבאין עליו גומרין לו הכפרה ולעולם אין מתכפר לו כפרה גמורה עד שיבואו עליו יסורין

uve'eilu ne'emar ופקדתי בשבט פשעם ובנגעים עונם. Bamei devarim amurim beshelo chillel Hashem aval hamchalel Hashem אף על פי שעשה תשובה והגיע יום הכיפורים v'omer bitshuvoso uvau alav yissurin

אינו מתכפר לו כפרה גמורה עד שימות אלא תשובה יום הכיפורים ויסורין שלושתן תולין ומיתה מכפרת.

The leshonos of the Rambam reflect the leshonos of the Braisa here in Yuma, and there is a shift which is omer darsheni. By Mitzvos Asei, it's אינו זז משם עד שמוחלין לו. Everything else is kapara. Right?

עבר על מצות עשה אינו זז משם עד שמוחלין לו.

But then once the Rambam switches to lo sa'asei, it's תשובה תולה ויום הכיפורים, not brings about mechila but is mechaper. And that's the way it continues for the balance of the halakha. And again, the diyuk is not in the leshonos of the Rambam, the diyuk is already in the leshonos chazal. So what's pshat in that? Why not say by Mitzvos Asei אינו זז משם עד שמכפרים לו? So lekhora the teretz is as follows. Leaving aside the possibly the exception of teshuva mei'ahava which the Rambam is certainly not talking about at this point. So leaving aside maybe teshuva mei'ahava is different. But leaving aside that, so we'll be non-committal on that. So the difference is as follows. Yeah, listen up, this distinction is not my chiddush. Let's say, I don't know, parents ask a child to do something, to clean up his room, and he doesn't. So even when the child is contrite and does teshuva, so he's forgiven, but the room is still a mess. Right? It was still a mess as of people were coming to see the house, looking to sell the house, and they wanted everything to be neat by 10 AM, and he didn't do it. Okay, so in the afternoon, so he does teshuva and he's contrite, but lema'aseh the room is a mess. It wasn't done. It wasn't done. Ma she'ein kein by a lo sa'aseh, it's not only that teshuva results in mechila, but teshuva also undoes the effect of the aveira. Teshuva on a mitzvas asei doesn't substitute for the benefit of the mitzvah which was lost, but teshuva on a mitzvas lo sa'aseh undoes the negative effect of the aveira. And that's the difference between the lashon mechila and kappara. Mechila means I forgive you. I forgive you. I mean, we're still way behind in what we were looking to accomplish because you didn't do what you were supposed to do an hour ago, but I forgive you. And no liability moving forward and v'chulu. Ma she'ein kein on a lo sa'aseh, so there the kappara, again as I think Rashi says, what does Rashi say in Sefer Bereishis by ואכפרה פניו במנחה ההולכת לפני? So Rashi says that kappara is lashon kinuach. It means to clean, to cleanse. The teshuva on a lo sa'aseh undoes the fallout from the original aveira, whereas the teshuva on the mitzvas asei doesn't substitute for the lack of the kiyam. So hence the response to teshuva on the asei is muchal lach, you're forgiven. The response to the teshuva on the lo sa'aseh is not only that you're forgiven, but you should know that the fallout from the aveira has been cleansed. That lichora is the again one way to understand the difference in the leshonos. Aren't there some lo sa'asehs that do have a last effect though? If I if I hurt somebody, they're still hurt. You mean

מעוות לא יוכל לתקן וחסרון לא יוכל להימנות זה שבא על הערווה והוליד ממזר.

So what what does it mean there? Right. So then ein hachi nami. So that's gufa what the Masechet Chagiga says, you know, that there are that on one level there are some exceptions to this rule. That's gufa what the Masechet Chagiga's saying. On another level, let's say if you talk about the spiritual fallout. So on another level, you know, lav davka that there are exceptions, but sort of on the olam hazeh-dik level, so ein hachi nami. But that's in sort of in the din shamayim, so then the negative effect is erased. But by the asei, it's not that what I would have accomplished by hanachas tfillin is now inserted in response to my teshuva. No. Whatever the negative effect of eating the neveila v'treifa is is erased, but whatever the positive effect of hanachas tfillin would have been is not provided in response to the teshuva. And that's the lashon mechila by asei and kappara by the lo sa'aseh. The Rambam again, this is this is all the Braisah in Yoma as the nosei keilim hametzayein. The Rambam says במה דברים אמורים בשלא חילול השם. Aval hachillul Hashem, so then there the gemar kappara doesn't happen until the person dies. Now the Rambam initially in Sefer Hamitzvos and then again in פרק ה הלכות יסודי התורה identifies three different categories of Kiddush v'chillul Hashem. One is where there's a chiyuv yehareg v'al ya'avor. If a person is mkayem, it's a Kiddush Hashem. If a person goes against it and avar v'lo neherag, it's a chillul Hashem. That's one type of Kiddush Hashem chillul Hashem. Another one is when a person... And he does something purely l'shem shamayim is a Kiddush HaShem and if he does an aveira when there's no hana'ah to do it and he does the aveira anyway so that's a Chilul HaShem and then the third type of Kiddush HaShem Chilul HaShem the Rambam has bar deidi the אדם גדול בתורה מפורסם בחסידות that if he does things shehabriyos meranenus acharayv he acts in a way that it makes tongues wag and people think he's somewhat of a hypocrite v'chulu whatever so then that's a Chilul HaShem and on the contrary if his behavior and his integrity is so impeccable and his integrity is so uncompromising that he always commands respect and affection so then that's a Kiddush HaShem. So when the Rambam talks about Chilul HaShem here is he talking about all three is he talking about some of the three what are we talking about in this halacha? I'm not sure why there should be a difference but lich'ora the mashma'us is that there is because the lashon ha-devarim is lashon ha-Rambam is במה דברים אמורים שלא חילל השם בעת שעבר. So why does he have those two words b'eis she'avar? Why not just say במה דברים אמורים שלא חילל השם? And what's chilul ha-Shem? Okay עיין לעיל פרק ה מיסודי התורה it could be A, B, or C. But b'eis she'avar sounds like it's only A or B it sounds like A or B in yesodei ha-Torah when you go back is a chilul ha-Shem which compounds it's when a person does one aveira be'ofen that there's a chilul ha-Shem. The third type of chilul ha-Shem of the אדם גדול מפורסם בחסידות the Rambam says meforash that in hei yud-aleph

יש דברים אחרים שהן בכלל חילול השם והוא שיעשה אדם גדול בתורה ומפורסם בחסידות דברים שהבריות מרננות אחריו בשבילן ואף על פי שאינם עבירות.

So lich'ora אף על פי שאינם עבירות is not included in b'eis she'avar. b'eis she'avar means that when he did the aveira he did the aveira be'ofen that that aveira was not only the aveira of whatever but it was also a chilul ha-Shem. So that's true of the Rambam's first two categories of Chilul HaShem. Let's say the second category

כל העובר מדעתו בלא אונס אל אחת מכל מצות האמורות בתורה בשאט נפש להכעיס הרי זה מחלל השם.

A person goes into the supermarket there's basar sh'chuta there's basar neveilah same price equally choice cuts of meat and he buys the basar neveilah. He buys and eats the basar neveilah. So that's not only an issur of achilas neveilah it's a Chilul HaShem. It's a Chilul HaShem. Again the din of yehareg v'al ya'avor if he was mechuyav to be moser nefesh so then it's not only an aveira of avodah zarah but it's also an aveira of Chilul HaShem. So apparently it's only those two ofanim of the Chilul HaShem about which this this chilluk this distinction is drawn. I don't know ayen olov why why that should be. I mean like this we understand this that that the reason for this distinction within kapparah is because of the chomer of Chilul HaShem. So if all three ofanim are the same in that they all constitute a violation of לא תחללו שם קדשי so meheicha tesei only if לא תחללו שם קדשי is compounded with issur neveilah then it's a chomer it needs that tosefes? So how do we understand that? Okay so we'll leave off with that question for now.