Okay, so we're continuing now with part two of this second shear, and we saw in the previous shear, there was a lot of logic pointed out that number one, there seems to be a lot of contradictory evidence in the rambam about whether there is a mitzvah to chew the or not. On the one hand, we started off by saying kishiyasa jula, bhakai of lisvados, there were pramananah ronam who indicated that based on this, the ramam felt that, in their opinion, there is a mitzvah to do chuva, but if you do, you must do vidui, you must confess. And our salveachik rejects this soundly and wholeheartedly, logically he thinks it's absurd, moreover he brings all sorts of proofs, both from Sukhim and from other passages and other formulations in the ramam, where he thinks it's clear that all of this indicates that there is a mitzvah to do chuva, and as I mentioned logically, he thinks there must be a mitzvah to do chuva. So how is he going to resolve this? Because our salveachik does acknowledge that that initial formulation, kishiyasa jula, sounds like a very passive voice, it doesn't sound like there's a mitzvah to do chuva, and yet he's convinced that there is. So in order to understand this from salveachik, began in the second half of last year to develop a broader theme in the prasannut of the ramam, and understanding how the ramam defines mitzvos. And said our salveachik, the ramam, believes that there are two types of mitzvos. Certain types of mitzvos, the misa or the pula, the act, and the kiyim, the fulfillment are simultaneous. He gave examples such as such as lulov or spherasomer. The mitzvah is to take the lulov, and the fulfillment is to take the lulov. The mitzvah is to count spherasomer, and the fulfillment is to count spherasomer. That's the act and the fulfillment. However, serve salveachik, there are other mitzvos, where there's an action, but the fulfillment is something additional and emotional. So we act one way, but the real kiyim, the fulfillment is the way we feel. And he gave two examples of that, and the opposite ends of the emotional spectrum. Morning, there are mitzvos about how we act, no leather shoes, sitting on a low chair, no eating meat, when we're at onane, or no bathing, when we're at algal. But the real mitzvah is the way we feel, the pain we feel at our heart. And the opposite end of the spectrum, the mitzvah of synchosumptive, the idea that we have to bring a carbon, or even nowadays, have meat and drink wine, or wear nice clothing, but the real kiyim, serve salveachik, is the feeling of happiness in our heart, because we feel close to ashim. So now, picking up where we left off, serve salveachik, maybe the best example of this second category, is the mitzvah of krioshima, and then we'll see he talked about tila as well. When it comes to krioshima, he says, "pula samitzvahib kriya sa parcios, or parchasah creational." There's a big maklokus, how many parts of shmah are really the daraysa, but however we define it, the action of the mitzvah is to say that those plukim, those sections of the shmah, amirabhic pat, the verbal mitzvah, but serve salveachik, obviously, that's not enough. The actual full film of the mitzvah is not just because you've said something, rather kiyim, it's that he's a kabbalus, al mahushamayim, no purpose of krioshmah, so we accept the yoke of having upon ourselves that our shmah is some dominion over us, and we're obligated to listen to him. So there we have a prime example yet again of something we have to say, but the real mitzvah is how we feel. Finally, serve salveachik, as I mentioned, the maybe best example of this phenomenon is tkila, is prayer. On the one hand, kazal, tell us that the Prophet teaches vivatam esa shmah al-pikim, the cholavatram, we serve hashim with all of our heart. In the komara, kazal say, "What does it mean to serve God with your heart? Is that what a shmah believe? Have you omer zu tila?" That is tkila, so we see here clearly that on the one hand you say certain things in Davening, it's a mitzvah to say this one, that's right, but it is defined not as an action or a mitzvah of debore, but rather a mitzvah that's really from the heart. If salveachik points out here at the bottom of page 41, that in the final chapters of the mourd hukim, he adds in parentheses that the various scholars and philosophers who studied the rambam in the guide to the perplexed, the mourd hukim, often don't get to these essential final chapters and to quote of salveachik here, it's in these last chapters when he's discussing mitzvos, the hem mitzvah, lonoharambamamit, fishe, in anu makirimotum and aprakim aristatilim shivimorah. This is the more familiar rambamtas, the one that is more familiar to us than the original chapters and opening chapters where he is speaking more in postatilian philosophy, but even as it may, when he's discussing mitzos here at the end of mourd hukim, he does discuss what is of rishabalaif, and he does this not only in mourd hukim, but also the mushatorah in hil host chuva, and there he speaks about the mitzvah of hava sasham and in the tenth parak of the host chuva, he tells us kaysi tih hava, how does a person love hasham, haruya in the right way? It says the rambam, you have to love hasham, hava gidola, great love, yessera, excessive love, asam, oh, a strong passionate love, hashat, hey, nashoshurah, hava sasham, until you love hasham, your heart is just totally tethered hasham, and you are thinking about God constantly, hiloh, hava, as if you're a lovesick over God, shain daitop, nuyam, hava soshisha, as if a young man who has fallen head over heels, he's totally in love and lovesick with a certain woman, and he can't stop thinking about her all the time, so too, that is how we have to feel about hasham. So we see here, says our salivate chick, that the rambam is defining the vodasha-belave, which is the combination of this ahava, it is something that is makifah, it kholha-daam, it consumes the entire person, the kumah, sha-tsila, inobah, amira, satsila, ela, belave. So says our salivate chick, it's obvious that, just saying the words of shwan estray, or any other part of the ovening, is not the mitzvah, if tila is part of hava sasham, so obviously the way the rambam is describing hava sasham is much more than melding a few words, clearly it's not something that isn't just fulfilled with the misa of saying the words, that's important, but the actual kyum is the way you feel in your heart. He continues here on the bottom of page 42, voharaya, here's another proof. Hava sakkavana petrila, ina kishura, but pugso in mitzvifah, sksavana, imla, harygama, ligabe, has silver, mitzvifah, sksavana, sksvila, sksavana. There's a famous mahlo guess, whether mitzvos require kavana or not. In other words, if you are doing an act, which is perfectly the way mitzvah needs to be done, but you didn't have in mind that you're doing it for a mitzvah, a classic example might be loving the shofar, but you're doing it just to make music. So you did exactly the right sounds, but you didn't tend to do the mitzvah, or something like that. There's a mahlo guess, if that's sufficient to fulfill the mitzvah or not. However, since they're solaceic, that is true about other mitzvos, they're such a debate. When it comes to teela, there is no debate, even the view that generally thinks of mitzvos, ina natsuchas kavana, the mitzvah, the opinion that usually says mitzvos don't need kavana, even that opinion thinks that teela needs kavana, why? So, in Slavic, the answer is obvious. Tfilah aina asherit, klalu klal, lee kavana. She came kolkuma, he believed, the kavana, because teela, by definition, requires your heart, because the whole cube, the whole fulfillment, is in your heart. It is a version of a leva, as we said, so it's by definition absurd and impossible to imagine Tfilah as anything other than a fulfillment of the heart. It's got nothing to do with the technical question in general, whether mitzvos kkavana. Here, it's not an extra point. It is the definition of mitzvah, of the mitzvah itself. "Teer in the scab, there shall see it in ashem, this idea, this lofty ability, and description, I should say, of our ability to have a conversation with ashem, whether the ultimate example was Moshe, but every Jew is hyped to try on their level to have that kind of conversation intimately with ashem three times a day, kizen vahrze. Only this is the definition of teela. Not the words, those are the pulah. The keel is in one's heart." Now, with all this already established, or solvitch, it points out, nevertheless, when you look in the beginning of chostila, the ramam is really just discussing the laws of what you have to say and how you have to say it, and we don't seem to find in the body of the text, in the beginning of chostila, any reference to this lofty ideal of the emotional component of teela, that which we felt since the Marnavuchim, and then in other parts of the Mishnah Torah, in Hehros tushubah, seems to be obvious. So, what happened? So, there's a logic, we see a pattern. It's even though in the body of the text, in the Hehros teela, he's speaking about the actions, however, in the coterret, in that introductory statement, before he gets to the actual halaahos, there the ramam says, "The language of the ramam and the coterret is "la vod et ashhem, bechol yom petrila." The emphasis is not on the words, but "la vod et ashhem." "Kan ain hu muchtamei shibbe, minuach shibbe hala hot atzman lihit paleil." Here he's not speaking about the actions that are acquired, which is to say the words lihit paleil. Rather, ramam in the coterret, in the introduction, is focusing on "la vod," which is describing the chiyom, the fulfillment. In other words, as he says here, to conclude this section, "haminuach has shomeb in a coterret lihit paleil," it's not a coincidence that when it comes to teela, in the introductory comments, the coterret, the ramam, focuses on the qiyom, "la vod et ashhem," and in the body of the text, afterwards, he's discussing the cracked halaahos. Says the ramam, this is, says the sousi, says the sousi, says the sousi, "shita ikviti, bemishnato shala ramam." This is a consistent pattern and policy of the ramam in his mishnatoa, shibbe hala makum shibbe, minuach shikimbe haleil, uba pula ta bemaseh. Whenever the ramam describes and confronts the mitzvah of this second category, where there's a difference between the action and the qiyom, the action is either something you do physically or you verbalize, but the qiyom is believed. Whenever we have such examples, the ramam will always differentiate between these two phenomenon in the halaahos themselves. That's a practical halaahos to some extent from the ramam. So everybody's talking about what to do, the miseh mitzvah, the pula mitzv. However, in the introductory, the coterat, shibbe hala ta hahadara, bhakda mala hahala hahad, because there the ramam is giving you an introduction and the essence of the mitzvah. There the ramam always isn't the bear, al qiyom hameh mitzvah, the whole, the low mashmah utah, fully embracing the essence of the mitzvah. Therefore, it's not a contradiction at all, but it's perfectly complementary. In the introduction and the coterat, ramam speaks about the essence, the qiyom. In the case of filah, la rho detashem. When it comes to the mission of Torah and the body of the text that follows, there the ramam is elucidating in all the details of the practical halaahos, the miseh mitzvah, the pula mitzvah. They're both true, because in fact, the stern five of the mitzvos, they both exist. Next to each other, but separate from each other. With all of this introduction in mind, and all of this background, says they're salahic, we are now ready to turn our attention back to why we've got into all of this, which is the semen contradiction in the ramam in hilchos teshuvah. On the one hand, we're salahic, because we have to acknowledge that the opening body of the text, kishiyas, teshuvah, hai alisvah, those sounds like truth is not the mitzvah, only be the way. Yet we're salahic, again, we have seen, thought that that was number one absurd, number two contradicted by sukim, also number three contradicted by other passages in the ramam, notably the coteris, where there the ramam said, you are obligated to the teshuvah, and when you do teshuvah to save you doing it. So there it was clear that teshuvah was mitzvah, hai, it seems like a contradiction in the ramam. So now, in light of everything, the rub has been establishing these other areas, notably tila, but also these other areas. Now, we won't at all be surprised, we can clearly predict how salahic is going to resolve this contradiction, or the seeming contradiction, in the ramam when it comes to teshuvah. Tshuvah, binine hai ramam, binine hai, hai wa rishabalik. From the ramam's perspective, tshuvah is very salar teshuvah, it's a form of worship of the heart. Zuhim, mitzvah shiikah, hai nimim mitzvah shiikah, hai nim mitzvah shiikah, hai nim mitzvah shiikah, hai nim mitzvah shiikah, hai alisvah shiikah, hai shaikah, hai kara, hai dahm shiik, nidlah taqid mihayah, hai kasha shaikah, baddidud, etc. Salahic, the essence of tshuvah is not the actions that are required, or rather what is the emotional feeling of the person, something which could be a very long, almost lifelong, a process where a person goes through feelings of regret or shame or even loneliness because of their sin and real regret, through the verus and real sense of shame over it. Haat teshuvah, eine kshuvah, mice echah, mahriah, the essence of true is not a particular action, this or that. Ellech, so mahat vigideilah, tse mihat, iti tte mumu shahat, rather it is an emotional state which is something that evolves and grows step by step, bit by bit, slowly but surely. Ad shaikah, beviyah, etaadam, le mein amorphaza, until eventually a person has a metamorphosis. And then after they've totally changed, they are truly a different person. Then if a person has gone through all of that and truly has this emotional inter-transformation, now you're ready for the action which accompanies tshuvah, that is vidui, all of that emotional shame, angst, regret, commitment, transformation, put into words and verbalized, vidui. That's why the ramam says kishiy asa chuvah, when you've done that, when you have the essence, the hum of teshuvah, you really feel that way, then do the mitzvah, hai hai abli taadot. That language which is clearly focusing on vidui is in the body of the text. And as we've seen now consistently with so many examples, in the body of the text that our mam always focuses on, the putua, or the misa, the objective concrete action. That is vidui, those are specific words, and the way I say them and the way you say them are basically the same, just like the way we shake the lua is the same, the way we go, the shofar is the same, because it's a concrete objective action, or words that have to be said. However, when it comes to the s of the mitzvah, the keem of the mitzvah, that the ramam is discussing that in the body of the text, but in that introduction, what salvechik has been calling the koteris, and there the ramam is describing, in only a few words, with the deep profound psychological emotional metamorphosis, shayoshvah, kotay, michatot, lich nashhem, the real keem, says our salvechik, is clearly teshuvah, that is the ultimate goal, the taqawavidu, without chuvah, is absurd. The action and kanami, the concrete action, in this case, is the verbalization, but the essence of the mitzvah, of course, that is the chuvah on the emotional psychological level. haramba maggishvoh, mairbhabhah, viduizah, hum mitzvah, sah sei, ayi, the pulus of mitzvah, is chuvah, of chuvah, is the viduah, the confession, however, chuvah itself, humah, the fulfillment, that is a necessary prerequisite, without that, the viduah, the confession is completely worthless and meaningless, and therefore, sasra salvechik, that is the essence, the keem, because viduah, without teshuvah, would be like a guf, without an ashamah, chuvah, without viduah, and ashamah, without a guf, a person needs both, we have to have the emotional feeling, and then the Torah says, the halacha says, you also have to verbalize it, but we have many examples where we have to do things, but the essence is really how we feel, like yahato sashama lukhah, yahapala re'aha, and we saw simhra al-xavaelus, all of those things have my sim, but they also have an essence, a reggish in the lathe, and that is the essence of teshuvah, the emotional feeling of distance, alienation, shame, all that hard stuff, okay, but that's what generally chuv is, you got to really feel it, if you don't feel it and you just clap all hate, that is meaningless, but on the other hand, it's not enough just to feel it, you have to do the mycing mitzvah, there are two different aspects of the mitzvah and they are not identical, and it says rasalavicic, that is a pattern that the ramam has identified with numerous mitzvahs, and whenever the ramam gets to one of these mitzvahs, he always delineates this distinction by dividing up his emphasis, in the introduction to coterez, he focuses on the key of the fulfillment in the heart, but in the body of the text, he always discusses the more concrete objective action, as be they with our hands or with our mouth, that a person must do. So to summarize, what we have seen over these last two shure, which is the first part of this remarkable essay, is as I said in the outset, really rather famous, arguably one of the famous things in the whole safe air, and even perhaps in rasalavicic's overall approach to tora and mitzvahs in his insights, this basic fundamental insight that the ramam often identifies mitzvahs that have two components, one objectively physical or verbal, and the second one more subjective and emotional in the heart, and that number one, that such a distinction exists, that applies to certain mitzvahs, and number two, that when such a new distinction exists, when we're talking about a certain mitzvah which fits into that category, the ramam distinguishes between how he introduces the mitzvah, there he gives the fulfillment, and then the body of the text of mitzvah tora, where he discusses the actions. He saw his ability to explain numerous mitzvahs like this, and for our purposes, the essence is the example of teshuvah, and now he just explains a halakhic distinction, but rasalavicic really waxed poetically and profoundly about highlighting the essence of teshuvah. The essence of teshuvah is this feeling, the feeling of genuine regret, of embarrassment, of shame, of alienation, but then from that also pivoting to a feeling of commitment to a better future, genuine desire to be better, genuine commitment to change, and those incredible feelings, then, and only then when we truly have those, then verbalizing those with confession and with a veto. That is like teshuvah, thus, emerges the heart of salacha, is this complex two-step process. You have to have the emotional component, that's really the essence, then you take that essence and it's truly felt, and you verbalize it into words, but one without the other would be insufficient, and the essence is the feeling in your heart, and the way we manifest that, the puller, the mitzvah, is by verbalizing the
