Nach-pe-sa…v’nachkora

Let's take a look a little bit at Sha'ar HaShlishi. מפני שחובת התשובה חפש דרכיו וכמה לו עוונות וחטאות. And the baal teshuva is commanded to scrutinize his ways, his actions, so as to ascertain how many avonot and chata'ot he has. ואחרי אשר תם חיפוש הדרכים. After the exhaustive search is completed, יחקור גודל כל חטא מחטאיו. And the next stage is to inquire, to investigate the magnitude of each of his chata'ot. כמו שנאמר nachpesha dracheinu venachkora. So Rabbeinu Yonah has a very interesting and yesod'dike pshat in the pasuk in Eicha: nachpesha dracheinu venachkora. The question is what are those two teshuva activities that Yirmiyahu HaNavi speaks of? The chipus drachim and then the chakira. So Rabbeinu Yonah says the chipus drachim is the taking inventory, the scrutinizing one's actions to identify chet, and then nachkora is to investigate the chet in the sense of assessing the magnitude of the chet. So maybe we'll first see how he fleshes that out and then bezrat Hashem look at one or two other pshatim in that pasuk in Eicha. Vehorah elav that it should be known to him כל חטאיו אשר חטא, each of his sins, כמה הגדיל אשמה בה, within that sin how great is his guilt. Again to have a sense for the magnitude of the chet. כי יש אשמה עד לשמים גדולה. Chata'im vary in their magnitude. There can be an instance of guilt where the guilt is as it were ad lashamayim. And that's why you can't measure chata'im just quantitatively because ויש רעה כנגד כמה חטאים גדולה שקולה. Because you can have a single instance of ra'ah that in terms of its weightiness it's the equal of several chata'im. Now why is it necessary to know the magnitude of the chet? Why doesn't it suffice that a person is aware of the chet? והתשובה הגדולה כפי היות גודל החטא, chikrei lev yavo'u. Because the teshuva will be commensurate—the teshuva will only rise to the level of the person's awareness of chet. So the mashal is as follows. And let's— And let's say a person takes a step backwards and he doesn't realize that there's someone behind him and he steps on the person's foot. Okay, so you feel bad, but let's say unbeknownst to him, the person has a broken toe or something. And when he stepped backwards, it wasn't just sort of a mild discomfort that he caused the person, but it was an intense excruciating pain. So clearly, the teshuva as it were is not- it only reflects the person's understanding and perception of the cheit. And if he were to know how much pain he had caused the person, I mean it was still inadvertent, but af pi chein, if he would be aware of how much pain he had caused the person, it would in his mind take on different proportions and his teshuva would vary accordingly. In one of the Chumash drashos a similar concept in a very different context. The vort tells the story about the Beis Halevi. That once elections, appointments to a certain communal oversight party in Brisk and there was someone who was known to be close to the Beis Halevi who was a candidate to be elected, appointed to this communal oversight body. And af pi chein the Beis Halevi didn't support him. So when they asked the Beis Halevi mai hai? He's one of your mekuravim. So the Beis Halevi quoted the din from Bava Metzia. He said, let's say you give something to a shomer and a piece of jewelry or and he's under the impression that you're mafkid silver. In reality it's gold, which is more valuable. So if he's poshea, the halacha is that he only has to pay as though it had been silver. What difference does it make? Either way, he was mekabel upon himself shmira and he was poshea in the shmira. So the Gemara says no, because נטירותא דכספא קבלי עלי נטירותא דדהבא לא קבלי עלי. He was mekabel upon himself shmira for silver, he wasn't mekabel upon himself shmira for gold. A person's sense of, again, in this context, in the Bava Metzia context, a person's sense of achrayus is commensurate to his conception, his perception of what he's dealing with. So the Beis Halevi says, and I think maybe the oversight committee was for chinuch or something. He says, this candidate, he's a good person, I like him, close. For him, chinuch is, as the mashal is, is silver. He says, but for me, it's gold. So a person's understanding, a person's perception will dictate his attitude, his reaction, how he deals with it. So that's what the Rabbeinu Yonah says, af she-yizkerenu, first that a person has to identify chato'av. But then even once he identifies it as a cheit, as something which he shouldn't have done or something which he should have done, so then he has to understand what the true magnitude of that cheit is. Va'od perek beis, to'il chakiras

אלוקי בושתי ונכלמתי להרים אלוקי פני אליך ובהיותו בושה על נפשו לפני השם יתברך אחרי הביטחון בסליחתו

ke’inyan shene’emar lema’an tizkeri uvosht

וגם בכפרי לך לכל אשר עשית ולהיות נגד עיניו גדלות חסד הכפרה

ke’inyan shene’emar ki chasdecha leneged einai. So Rabbeinu Yonah actually has busha at two different stages in these three lines that we just read. Although I think it could be it's more correct to say that actually in this paragraph he has the busha at two stages. I'm not sure when you go back to, if you go back to

שער הראשון העיקר השישי הבושה כעניין שנאמר בושתי וגם נכלמתי כי נשאתי חרפת נעורי.

So here Rabbeinu Yonah is mentioning busha even before bakashat hamachila, right? Here the busha is one of the twenty ikkarei hateshuva that it's an essential part of teshuva that a person should have a sense of busha before Hakadosh Baruch Hu about his chata’im independent of bakashat hamachila. Like there's no, I don't think here in Sha’ar Aleph at this point it's not linked to mechila. Why is busha so important? Why is the sense of busha before Hakadosh Baruch Hu so important? So Rabbeinu Yonah goes on to explain the following: leaving aside the category of a tinok shenishba whose chata’im are just rooted in unfortunate deprivation in terms of knowing Torah, knowing what to do, but let's say for the rest of us, our chata’im. So on the one hand, sort of each chet has its own dynamic; it's a different yetzer hara, it's a different weakness, it's a different character flaw. Each chet has its own dynamic. But me’idach gisa there is a common denominator to every chet and that common denominator is the following. משל למה הדבר דומה. Let's say you have someone, it's his life's dream to, I don't know, to go to medical school. And so it's the day of his final in organic chemistry. And for whatever reason he's not adequately prepared. And if he does poorly, he's convinced that he'll never get accepted to medical school. So he rationalizes for himself that he's going to cheat. Okay? He's going to cheat. So he devises his system and comes into the exam and he's ready to cheat. So he looks up and he sees that the proctor is looking at him. Proctor's just staring right at him. Okay, so he's not going to cheat yet. So he waits a few minutes, looks up again, proctor's still staring at him. So the entire exam goes by and every time he's ready to act, he sees that the proctor is staring at him. So what happens? He doesn't cheat. Not because he's such a tzaddik, but because all of a sudden he had an epiphany that it's so wrong to cheat. But no one cheats if they can't get away with it. And if you're going to get in trouble for cheating, no one cheats. So how is it that we're not inhibited from chet or whatever the flaw is, whatever the weakness is, whatever the yetzer hara is? So how is it that we're not inhibited by the fact that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is watching? So Rabbeinu Yonah goes on to explain ki b'shasha, it's because we're oblivious to the presence of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. That's the common denominator, again leaving aside the tinok shenishba category of chet. That's the common denominator of every chet is that אין זה אלא היסח השם יתברך ורחוק מכליותיו Rabbeinu Yonah says a few lines later. Which is why teshuvah, which involves tikun hachet, has to include bushah. Because the definition of bushah, what's sort of unique about bushah, other feelings a person knows pain. Let's say a person trips and falls and he bangs his arm. He'll feel pain. Will he feel embarrassed that he tripped? So that's going to depend. If no one was around and no one witnessed him take a fall, so then he's not going to feel embarrassed. If there was a room full of people, so then he's going to feel very embarrassed. So bushah is when a person's weakness, foolishness, inconsistency, whatever it is, is exposed. That's when we're embarrassed. So why do I have to be embarrassed over my chata'im? Most of my chata'im people don't know about, so why do I have to be embarrassed about them? The answer is here, the Ribbono Shel Olam knows. And when a person feels embarrassed about his chata'im, so then that represents a tikun hachet because the chet happened in the first place because one was oblivious to the presence of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. And if a person can genuinely does genuinely experience bushah, so that means he's aware of the presence of Hakadosh Baruch Hu. How did Rebbi define the lashon of klimah that he uses, or boshti vegam nichlamti? So Rabbeinu Yonah goes on to say that klimah is a more intense form of bushah. So maybe it would be something similar to in English embarrassment and humiliation. Humiliation is something much, much more intense than embarrassment. That's why whenever you have the two leshonos, it's always bushah first and then klimah second. Boshti vegam nichlamti בושתי וגם נכלמתי להרים אלהי פני אליך it's always the klimah always comes after the bushah. To go and ask to do an aveirah like lechat'chilah knowing that Hashem is watching him, then how does bushah fix that? Ein hachi nami, there's a lot of other repair that needs to be done first, ein hachi nami. So that's one role that bushah plays. And again, and the bushah. So here again in Sha'arei Teshuvah. This element of busha is sort of a baseline of busha, doesn't require the nachkora, just the baseline of busha is that a person is embarrassed to have betrayed Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Here Rabbeinu Yonah is adding two other contexts for which busha is pivotal. The first one is in terms of she'elat hamechilah. When a person asks mechilah, so that too has to be done with a sense of busha. The busha will be commensurate to the person's understanding of the magnitude of chet. And then additionally Rabbeinu Yonah says

ולהיות בשתו על נפשו לפני השם יתברך אחרי הביטחון בסליחתו.

There's yet another context in which there should be busha, and that is even when we feel confident that Hakadosh Baruch Hu has forgiven us. So as it were that the contrast between our chet and the magnanimity of Hakadosh Baruch Hu in forgiving us should also generate a sense of busha. Right, that contrast between the way we acted and the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu responds is also a source of busha, but in each case the degree of busha will reflect a person's appreciation of the degree of chet. And hence nachpisa dracheinu venachkora. We have to identify the chata'im, but then we have to investigate what the magnitude of the chet is. And again that's for two reasons. Reason A because the teshuvah has to reflect an accurate understanding of magnitude of chet. And B in order to have the appropriate degree of busha, there also needs to be an understanding of what the magnitude of chet is. This last din of busha, the busha of after receiving the mechilah, Rabbeinu Yonah talks about that earlier as well in Sha'ar Rishon in the ikar hashishi. So we mentioned one or two other possible additional pshatim in what the pasuk nachpisa dracheinu venachkora, what the nachkora is. So I saw quoted that the Zohar HaKadosh says as follows. So this is printed out in Hebrew translation. The Zohar is speaking of Chizkiyahu, Chizkiyahu Hamelech. The pasuk describes Chizkiyahu after he, I think it's after Yeshayahu gives him the mussar, that he turns to the wall and he davens. So the Zohar says

מכאן למדנו שמי שיש בידו עברה ורוצה לבקש רחמים על עצמו יכווין פניו ומחשבותיו לתקן את עצמו מאותה עבירה ואחר כך יבקש תפילתו כמו שאמר נחפשה דרכינו ונחקורה.

Again, מי שיש בידו עבירה, a person realizes that he's guilty of an aveira, ורוצה לבקש רחמים על עצמו, he wants to ask Hakadosh Baruch Hu for rachamim. So before he does that yechaven panav umachshavotav, he should focus his thoughts. lesakein es atzmo to rectify himself me'osah aveira and only afterwards ואחר כך יבקש תפלתו k'mo she'amar nachpisa d'racheinu v'nachkora ve'achar kach v'nashuva. So how does the posuk prove what the Zohar Hakadosh is saying that before asking for mechila a person has to be מכוון מחשבותיו לתקן את עצמו מאותה עבירה? So I think, I'm not sure, I think the Zohar Hakadosh has a different understanding of the posuk. Nachpisa d'racheinu is the same as Rabbeinu Yonah. I'll hold a magnifying glass, it's not necessary for me, but without the magnifying glass I'll look at my actions to identify, to identify chato'im and then v'nachkora. What's the again? Chakira means an investigation, an inquiry. But that's going to be the common denominator to every p'shat on the posuk. That's what the word means again, investigation, inquiry. ודרשת וחקרת ושאלת היטב. And then I'll investigate how to correct the cheit and then once I'll know how to correct the cheit v'nashuva el Hashem. And this is, it's virtually impossible to exaggerate how important this point of the Zohar Hakadosh is. When you think about it rabosai, so one potentially very upsetting element of vidui in Selichos season, יום הכפורים הבא עלינו לטובה, is if a person is copping the al cheit and feels like it's a replay from last year. But how can it be a replay from last year if last year with sincerity and a Jew is sincere on Yom Kippurim, Jews don't posture on Yom Kippurim, whatever we do all year long but not on Yom Kippurim. So how can it be last year a person copped al cheit and a person thought to himself he's kabala lehaba and then this year the same or too many of the same al cheit are relevant? So the truth is that part of the answer may be that they're relevant in a more subtle way and it really does, it is consistent with growth and improvement. And so a person should definitely be mindful of that as well. But sometimes they are relevant too much in the same way. So how do you reconcile that with the fact that last year's teshuvah was sincere? So sometimes, sometimes the answer to that is that if a person does teshuvah but without strategizing how he's going to implement the teshuvah, so then it's not going to succeed. For whatever weakness a person recognizes in himself, whatever kabala, whatever he's resolved lehaba, it has to be accompanied by a very practical strategic plan of action of well how is it that if in the past I have been nichshal on a, b, or c, a, b and c, so how am I going to, what am I going to do differently this year to try to ensure that the results are different? And that's what the Zohar says: nachpisa d'racheinu v'nachkora. I think that's what it means, part of what it means, יכוון פניו ומחשבותיו לתקן את עצמו מאותה עבירה. yachavin panov umachshavosov, yachavin panov umachshavosov, יכוון פניו ומחשבותיו לתקן עצמו מאותה עבירה. Obviously central to doing teshuvah and implementing teshuvah is willpower. That's certainly true. But we're not supposed to rely only on willpower. If a person is a recovering alcoholic, so we don't counsel that person to rely only on willpower. We tell them in addition, you know, don't have any alcohol in the house. Don't go to any gatherings where they're going to be serving alcohol. Obviously there is no teshuvah without willpower, but we're supposed to try to mema'eit nisayon to the best of our ability and that's why what the Zohar says is just so basic and so fundamental that in order to do teshuvah in a way that the teshuvah will stick, there has to be a plan of action that accompanies the teshuvah. The other pshat in nachpesah deracheinu venachkorah is lichora as follows. Again, we mentioned before the nachkorah into the source of cheit. Whatever a person does, he doesn't just do. There's always a certain context. There's always a certain progression. A person doesn't just do something. There's a context. There's a context. There's a history. There's a root. Cheit and in the case of when we're talking about cheit, cheit has a shoresh. It's not a mushroom that just sort of poreach ba'avir. It's not a shehakol. A cheit has a shoresh. Nachpesah deracheinu, so first we identify, I did this that's wrong, I did that that's wrong. But then nachkorah, so how did that happen? How did that happen? I know it's wrong, and then I knew it's wrong. So how did that happen? How did that happen? And the emes is, this and what the Zohar Hakodesh says is really two sides of a coin, right? Because the understanding of why it happened and the plan of action that it shouldn't happen again, obviously those two are linked, they're two sides of a coin.