How does Teshuvah work?
This piece attempts to explain the mechanics of Teshuvah in two distinct ways, each corresponding to different conceptions of the purpose of punishment
Yoma 86a correlates the efficacy of Teshuvah to atone with the severity of the sin committed:
עָבַר עַל עֲשֵׂה וְשָׁב אֵינוֹ זָז מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁמּוֹחֲלִין לוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {ירמיהו ג':י"ד,כ"ב} שׁוּבוּ בָּנִים שׁוֹבָבִים
עָבַר עַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה וְעָשָׂה תְּשׁוּבָה תְּשׁוּבָה תּוֹלָה וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְכַפֵּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {ויקרא ט"ז:ל'} כִּי בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם מִכֹּל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם
עָבַר עַל כָּרֵיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין וְעָשָׂה תְּשׁוּבָה תְּשׁוּבָה וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים תּוֹלִין וְיִסּוּרִין מְמָרְקִין שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {תהלים פ"ט:ל"ג} וּפָקַדְתִּי בְשֵׁבֶט פִּשְׁעָם וּבִנְגָעִים עֲוֹנָם
אֲבָל מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ חִילּוּל הַשֵּׁם בְּיָדוֹ אֵין לוֹ כֹּחַ בִּתְשׁוּבָה לִתְלוֹת וְלֹא בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לְכַפֵּר וְלֹא בְּיִסּוּרִין לְמָרֵק אֶלָּא כּוּלָּן תּוֹלִין וּמִיתָה מְמָרֶקֶת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {ישעיהו כ"ב:י"ד} וְנִגְלָה בְאׇזְנָי ה' צְבָאוֹת אִם יְכוּפַּר הֶעָוֹן הַזֶּה לָכֶם עַד תְּמוּתוּן.
Rambam (H Teshuvah 1:4) seems to take it at face value, namely, that Teshuvah is ineffective alone, at least as far as providing כפרה goes, once the sin moves past level 1.
(E.g. וּלְעוֹלָם אֵין מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ כַּפָּרָה גְּמוּרָה עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ עָלָיו יִסּוּרִין.)
On the other hand, Meiri is of the opinion (Yoma, ad loc) that a sincere Teshuvah is always effective. He explains the meaning of the above cited text that as the severity of the sin progresses one typically requires more to prod and spur oneself to a real Teshuvah.
(ודברים אלו הערה להזהר ולהפליג בתשובה לפי חומר העון ולעולם אין הפרגוד ננעל בפני התשובה הגמורה)
I'd like to theorize that these two readings (of Rambam & Meiri) depend on their understanding of the purpose of punishment.
The two ways of viewing punishment can be articulated as follows:
1. Justice: Punishment serves as a response to wrongdoing, ensuring that individuals are held accountable for their actions. This perspective emphasizes fairness, retribution, and upholding moral order.
2. Therapeutic and Corrective: Here, punishment is viewed as a means to promote personal growth and rehabilitation. This approach seeks to address the underlying issues behind the behavior, facilitating change and rehabilitation.
If punishment is viewed as therapeutic or corrective, then Teshuvah naturally fulfills the same purpose as the punishment—moral correction and personal improvement. In this framework, Teshuvah simply makes the punishment unnecessary by achieving the same end through self-driven change.
On the other hand, if punishment is viewed as justice served, then the fact that Teshuvah can stand in for punishment makes the mechanism of Teshuvah extraordinary.
It represents a divine willingness to forgive and forgo punishment based upon an individual's sincere contrition.
Rambam's position (where anything more than 'basic' sins necessitates more than Teshuvah) seems to cohere nicely with the first approach, as Teshuvah alone is unable to meet the demands of justice without YK/Suffering/Death.
In contradistinction, Meiri's opinion aligns better with the latter understanding of punishment, according to which full and sincere self-correction obviates the need for punishment.
Yoma 86a correlates the efficacy of Teshuvah to atone with the severity of the sin committed:
עָבַר עַל עֲשֵׂה וְשָׁב אֵינוֹ זָז מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁמּוֹחֲלִין לוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {ירמיהו ג':י"ד,כ"ב} שׁוּבוּ בָּנִים שׁוֹבָבִים
עָבַר עַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה וְעָשָׂה תְּשׁוּבָה תְּשׁוּבָה תּוֹלָה וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְכַפֵּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {ויקרא ט"ז:ל'} כִּי בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם מִכֹּל חַטֹּאתֵיכֶם
עָבַר עַל כָּרֵיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין וְעָשָׂה תְּשׁוּבָה תְּשׁוּבָה וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים תּוֹלִין וְיִסּוּרִין מְמָרְקִין שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {תהלים פ"ט:ל"ג} וּפָקַדְתִּי בְשֵׁבֶט פִּשְׁעָם וּבִנְגָעִים עֲוֹנָם
אֲבָל מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ חִילּוּל הַשֵּׁם בְּיָדוֹ אֵין לוֹ כֹּחַ בִּתְשׁוּבָה לִתְלוֹת וְלֹא בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לְכַפֵּר וְלֹא בְּיִסּוּרִין לְמָרֵק אֶלָּא כּוּלָּן תּוֹלִין וּמִיתָה מְמָרֶקֶת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {ישעיהו כ"ב:י"ד} וְנִגְלָה בְאׇזְנָי ה' צְבָאוֹת אִם יְכוּפַּר הֶעָוֹן הַזֶּה לָכֶם עַד תְּמוּתוּן.
Rambam (H Teshuvah 1:4) seems to take it at face value, namely, that Teshuvah is ineffective alone, at least as far as providing כפרה goes, once the sin moves past level 1.
(E.g. וּלְעוֹלָם אֵין מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ כַּפָּרָה גְּמוּרָה עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ עָלָיו יִסּוּרִין.)
On the other hand, Meiri is of the opinion (Yoma, ad loc) that a sincere Teshuvah is always effective. He explains the meaning of the above cited text that as the severity of the sin progresses one typically requires more to prod and spur oneself to a real Teshuvah.
(ודברים אלו הערה להזהר ולהפליג בתשובה לפי חומר העון ולעולם אין הפרגוד ננעל בפני התשובה הגמורה)
I'd like to theorize that these two readings (of Rambam & Meiri) depend on their understanding of the purpose of punishment.
The two ways of viewing punishment can be articulated as follows:
1. Justice: Punishment serves as a response to wrongdoing, ensuring that individuals are held accountable for their actions. This perspective emphasizes fairness, retribution, and upholding moral order.
2. Therapeutic and Corrective: Here, punishment is viewed as a means to promote personal growth and rehabilitation. This approach seeks to address the underlying issues behind the behavior, facilitating change and rehabilitation.
If punishment is viewed as therapeutic or corrective, then Teshuvah naturally fulfills the same purpose as the punishment—moral correction and personal improvement. In this framework, Teshuvah simply makes the punishment unnecessary by achieving the same end through self-driven change.
On the other hand, if punishment is viewed as justice served, then the fact that Teshuvah can stand in for punishment makes the mechanism of Teshuvah extraordinary.
It represents a divine willingness to forgive and forgo punishment based upon an individual's sincere contrition.
Rambam's position (where anything more than 'basic' sins necessitates more than Teshuvah) seems to cohere nicely with the first approach, as Teshuvah alone is unable to meet the demands of justice without YK/Suffering/Death.
In contradistinction, Meiri's opinion aligns better with the latter understanding of punishment, according to which full and sincere self-correction obviates the need for punishment.
Excellent very good vort
ReplyDelete