this is not only a great piece but in many ways the basic hiluk and insight that solvajic draws which will start with halaha and then eventually yield ashkaha is actually one of the most famous methodological insights that he has in terms of analyzing the halaha of the rambam and certainly one of the more famous insights of the safer itself so so there's solvajic to begin the piece. bokublam ano we are bokubala manu. excuse me. kirramba madaktake, umudayek, komilahumilah shahotsio ito. we understand this is our accepted tradition that we assume that the rambam was exact and precise in every word that he wrote and spelled out. there are no stammi lim there's no rhetorical flourishes and therefore we have to always bring a precise analytical mind and a keen literary sensitivity careful with every word when we read the rambam. in light of that if that's our assumption which is says solvajic let's start at the beginning. how does the rambam begin? the first chapter, the first halaha, the very opening of hilhasjubah. komil sashivatora bin hasse, bin lotasse, y umabra al-gabala hasmihan, bin muzadam, my mushkago, kishiyasa chuva vyasho mihato, hai hai avli asvados lefneha el baurahu. when a person will sin whether it is a mitzasse, a lotasse, any of the mitzas of the Torah that he violated and whether he did it willfully, the mazid, or accidentally, the shogig, when he'll do chuva and repent from his sin he is obligated to say vidoi, to acknowledge his mistake, to confess his sin efneha ke el baurahu and this is based on the pasuk that talks about vidoi and when it comes to a carbon. zehum vidoi warms says the rambam, this pasuk vyhisvadua shir, es khattasamashir, asu. this is the idea of verbal confession and this vidoi is the mitzasse, and then the rambam concludes the halacha by saying and how exactly does one go about confessing, kisha and mitzvadam, so you say anahashem, khattasam, visipashati, these are words that we are familiar with and you talk about how I am regretful and I am embarrassed by what I did and I will never do it again. the zehum yikaro shil vidoi, and this is the essence of vidoi relatively short, however the rambam adds, pias, halamaba, el isaados, umariha bin yanza, harizah meshubah, this is the bare minimum, but certainly a person can add details and confess with a fuller heart or at least a fuller repertoire of words if a person wants to and they are praised for that. so zehuswavitchi turning the page to page 38, tama min haparshanim haharnim, naseik, ke el harambam, daiku, velashon harambam. many of the various aheronim, those who analyze and comment on the rambam, are midaiku, the inferr, from the opening words of the rambam, famously kishiyya sachuvah, when you do chuva, doesn't sound like you're obligated to do chuva, but if you do, then comes the riyyub, aayebu hyisados, and there was the term riyyub, which is of course the religious obligation that seems to be clearly reserved for confession, not chuva itself, and therefore numerous aheronim refer from this, that the real mitzvah isn't teshuvah, but actually vidoi. and one prominent example of this is the min haharnim, and of salavitchi s uncle also agreed with this in his commentary, the abodas hamallah. they believe as kadabar muskam, as if it's obvious, kichuva la dasarambam, eina mitzvah, ela maase muvannme elav. it's obvious that a person will do it, but it's a good thing, but not that it's an actual kiyyub to do chuva. that is their opinion. however, sazar salavitchi, laddati, kashaat le kabel ha nahazo, despite the presumably legitimate reading that these aheronim are suggesting in the rambam, rambam does seem to use a kind of passive voice, kishiyya sachuvah, and that is clearly in contrast with his arya vidoi sados. nevertheless, sazar salavitchi, i just can't accept the assumption and disposition of the min hahaskanach, eina mitzkabel al-dati. furthermore, he says, i heard this in the name of my father, rambamosha salavitchi, who said in the name of my grandfather, the famous jashir beara salavitchi, actually his great grandfather, the base al avi, kishtarazu, eina lakabla. you just can't accept this sarra. hariyish petera kama, the kama-pusukim, haemba dabimba for ashala chuva, alhammitzvah. because first of all, the rambam is going to bring a number of arguments against this reading. number one, we have other chuqim, numerous chuqim, that do seem to indicate that chuva's emetwa, but salah wa salah wa salah, kadwa amayla, bhakrasayamim, veshshoutatah, shavalakhecha, right, earlier in dvarim paragalad, pasagalaf. that seems to be clearly a tzifuih of veshapta, you must do chuva. so, that's not time for vidoi. furthermore, we're in parashas nitzatam, later in the end of dvarim paragalamad, pas tukim al-thangimwa, paayakebo, a lecha kadra amayla, kabraha, naklaa, et cetera, et cetera, nahashibossa, a levecha, et cetera, et cetera. veshshoutatah, shamalakhecha, again, veshshoutatah, there seem to be echil. veshshoutat, shamalakhecha, shushoutah, veshshoutah, veshshoutah, veshshoutah, veshshoutah, veshshoutah, naklaamim, et cetera, et cetera. here we have the rambam explaining this bhakim, like a haptaha. as he says later, paragzain afhilhas chuvah, halahai, krajitika, torushesokius ralasos chuvah. eventually, we will do chuvah. and yet, here in that very halah, the rambam says, kolanidim, kulan sivu, aha chuvah. so yes, on the one hand, the rambam talks about it. in some context says a prediction, as a promise, not as a hiyok, but in the more immediate context, the rambam says, it's not just a prediction. the reason that niviyim can so confidently predict that we'll do chuvah is because we are obligated to do chuvah. furthermore, yet another proof in the second chapter of hilhas chuvah, halahazain, talking about the asirah sivu, chuvah, the rambam says, the climax of the young kipper, and it says man chuvah la kol. and hai yavam hakol lasos chuvah ulihis vados. so here the rambam makes it clear that the language of hiyav goes on both chuvah and vidoi. and this implies, as rambam chuvah points out, in addition to chuvah, the whole year round sounds like there's some extra emphasis of doing to chuvah on young kipper. and in fact, that is the famous position of urbaner yona, who says in shari chuvah, that there are tumors, chuvah all year round, and chuvah on young kipper. however, rambam only counts for one mitzvah. if you see hiyav, it must be that both young kipper and all year round have one mitzvah and hiyav is chuvah. sassain another proof, turning to the bible page 39, he says there's another proof, another riah ahereta mukhichah, and the rambam sees it as a mitzvah, and that is because in the co-terat, in the introduction to the laws of hiyav's chuvah, there the rambam says, hiyav's chuvah. i'm about to tell you now 10 chapters which are all about the laws of teshuvah, mitzvah sassayah sass, and all of the 10 chapters will be elaborating on one particular mitzvah. and what is that? note the language, who, shiyoshah khoti mihcheto, listening ashem, vi yisvada. it's clear, says our salivijik, that in the co-terat, in the introduction of hiyav's chuvah, the language of ciboi, the language of hiyav, is clearly on the chuvah, and when you're doing chuvah, what you're obligated to do, then the yisvada, you have a complete opposite of what we saw in the beginning of the chuvah, pakah, pakah. there the passive voice was on teshuvah, and the hiyav was on vidwe. here it's clear that the hiyav was on teshuvah, and vidwe just mentioned as a part of the chuvah process. and then our salivijik adds where you feel, you know, it kind of speaks from his kishkus, here on the top of page 40. klum l'rayos main elu un trikrim, do you really need all of these proofs? he thinks these proofs are conclusive, but he says, really, we don't need them. (speaking in foreign language) could anyone possibly contemplate that there could be a method to confess of vidwe, and yet they're not vimits of chuvah? it's absurd. after all, what point of vidwe, there's no point of vidwe, if you didn't do chuvah, ma erko shul vidwe kazet. if you just say these words, I confess, and I feel bad, and I'll never do it again, but you didn't previously make those actual commitments to the act, and do the work of teshuvah, vidwe would be hollow. so the whole position is just absurd logically, there are sokim that are against it, and there admittedly are conflicting impressions in the rambam, and while the first impression might be a fair read, there's so many other texts and lines and phrases in the rambam, which seem to contradict that read. so there's numerous arguments, he says, against this, and therefore he says, as we get to the thesis that was published you can now want to develop, and this is a very very famous point, a position where towards the top second paragraph of page 40. (speaking in foreign language) we can use this as a springboard to understand a specific and unique approach of the rambam when he counts mitzos, or specifically when he is magdir mitzos, he is defining mitzos. (speaking in foreign language) The rambam understands, in the big picture, in the macro, that they're in fact two different distinct categories as mitzos. certain mitzos, the kiyom and the pula, as he puts it, (speaking in foreign language) as are synonymous terms, and the kiyom, the fulfillment, the aha, where's I like to put in the chiching, that which is the ultimate purpose of the mitzvah, the ultimate goal, we fulfill the mitzvah, that aha moment, the chiching when it actually counts, certain mitzos, the first category, all of that is the same, the act, and the kiyom are simultaneous and synonymous. (speaking in foreign language) take the little of, that's the action, but that's also the kiyom that you took a little of. (speaking in foreign language) All of these are examples where there's a maisa mitzvah, or a pula, and there's a kiyom, and they are, in fact, one and the same. However, he says, (speaking in foreign language) the armitzvahs, which are of a completely different variety, where the action and the fulfillment are, in fact, not identical. For example, the arkmashal, when we speak about certainitzvahs, where you have to say something, or do something, but the kiyom could be perhaps in the heart. There could be a physical action, but sometimes the fulfillment, the kiyom is not the action, or the declaration, the words, but the emotional feeling that those words are those actions in gender. So, for example, he says on the bottom of page 40, compelling example is (speaking in foreign language) on the one hand, the Mishnah tells us (speaking in foreign language) right? Obviously, when you talk about the terrible pain and loss and mourning that a person would feel when they lose God for (speaking in foreign language) close relative, that is a horrible emotional feeling of pain. And yet, there are specific actions (speaking in foreign language) massim of a valus. Can't wear leather shoes, can bathe, can annoy yourself, said there's a lot of hatred. Yes, there are physical things that the Torah prohibits or acquires, but those aren't really the gold. That's not the kiyom. The fulfillment of the mitzvah of a valus isn't. You know, God forbid someone loses a parent and you can say, "Oh, but I didn't wear shoes for a week." That's the real goal. That's the real fulfillment of a valus. Of course, not said or solid logic. There's a physical pull-up, but the kiyom, the fulfillment, is in your heart. Or another example, on the opposite end of the emotional spectrum. (speaking in foreign language) on the one hand in the time of the (speaking in foreign language) we had a certain carbon we brought to fulfill the mitzvah. Nowadays, we eat meat, we drink wine, we dress nicely on your teeth, said or solid logic whether it was in the time of the mythic dish, or nowadays. In either case, that was never the fulfillment, the ultimate goal of the mitzvah. The goal of the mitzvah is a feeling of genuine happiness and feeling close to and in the proximity of Hashem.
