ื‘ืกืดื“

Kavanot: Where the Penitent Stand

Thoughts on Tanach and the Davening

ืืดืจ ืื‘ื”ื• ืžืงื•ื ืฉื‘ืขืœื™ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื ื’ืžื•ืจื™ื ืื™ื ื ืขื•ืžื“ื™ืŸ. ืฉื ืืžืจ (ื™ืฉืขื™ื”ื• ื ื–:ื™ื˜): ืฉึธืืœื•ึนื ืฉึธืืœื•ึนื ืœึธืจึธื—ื•ึนืง ื•ึฐืœึทืงึธึผืจื•ึนื‘; ืœืจื—ื•ืง ื‘ืจื™ืฉื ื•ื”ื“ืจ ืœืงืจื•ื‘.

ื‘ืจื›ื•ืช ืœื“,ื‘

Last time, we saw David retreating from Jerusalem. The ื›ื”ื ื™ื brought the ืืจื•ืŸ out to him, and he has to make a decision. I want to look at Davidโ€™s reaction:

ื›ื” ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืžืœืš ืœืฆื“ื•ืง ื”ืฉื‘ ืืช ืืจื•ืŸ ื”ืืœืงื™ื ื”ืขื™ืจ; ืื ืืžืฆื ื—ืŸ ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ ื”ืณ ื•ื”ืฉื‘ื ื™ ื•ื”ืจืื ื™ ืืชื• ื•ืืช ื ื•ื”ื•ืƒ ื›ื• ื•ืื ื›ื” ื™ืืžืจ ืœื ื—ืคืฆืชื™ ื‘ืš; ื”ื ื ื™ ื™ืขืฉื” ืœื™ ื›ืืฉืจ ื˜ื•ื‘ ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ื•ืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ืคืจืง ื˜ื•

This is important, and astonishing. The one thing David wants, more imporant that being king of Israel, is to build a ื‘ื™ืช ืœื”ืณ. He brought the ืืจื•ืŸ to Jerusalem 25 years before with the intention of building the ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ there, but the Torah doesnโ€™t name ื”ืžืงื•ื ืืฉืจ ื™ื‘ื—ืจ ื”ืณ. He might have taken the ืืจื•ืŸ to avail himself of building his ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ somewhere else. In fact, he has been faced with this opportunity before, when the ืžืฉื›ืŸ in ื ื‘ was destroyed by Saul and the remaining ื›ื”ืŸ escapes with the ืืคื•ื“ and ืื•ืจื™ื ื•ื˜ื•ืžื™ื:

ื›ื‘:ื™ื˜ ื•ืืช ื ื‘ ืขื™ืจ ื”ื›ื”ื ื™ื ื”ื›ื” ืœืคื™ ื—ืจื‘ ืžืื™ืฉ ื•ืขื“ ืืฉื” ืžืขื•ืœืœ ื•ืขื“ ื™ื•ื ืง; ื•ืฉื•ืจ ื•ื—ืžื•ืจ ื•ืฉื” ืœืคื™ ื—ืจื‘ืƒ ื›ื‘:ื› ื•ื™ืžืœื˜ ื‘ืŸ ืื—ื“ ืœืื—ื™ืžืœืš ื‘ืŸ ืื—ื˜ื•ื‘ ื•ืฉืžื• ืื‘ื™ืชืจ; ื•ื™ื‘ืจื— ืื—ืจื™ ื“ื•ื“ืƒ

โ€ฆื›ื’:ื• ื•ื™ื”ื™ ื‘ื‘ืจื— ืื‘ื™ืชืจ ื‘ืŸ ืื—ื™ืžืœืš ืืœ ื“ื•ื“ ืงืขื™ืœื”; ืืคื•ื“ ื™ืจื“ ื‘ื™ื“ื•ืƒ โ€ฆื›ื’:ื™ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื”ืณ ืืœืงื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืฉืžืข ืฉืžืข ืขื‘ื“ืš ื›ื™ ืžื‘ืงืฉ ืฉืื•ืœ ืœื‘ื•ื ืืœ ืงืขื™ืœื” ืœืฉื—ืช ืœืขื™ืจ ื‘ืขื‘ื•ืจื™ืƒ
ื›ื’:ื™ื ื”ื™ืกื’ืจื ื™ ื‘ืขืœื™ ืงืขื™ืœื” ื‘ื™ื“ื• ื”ื™ืจื“ ืฉืื•ืœ ื›ืืฉืจ ืฉืžืข ืขื‘ื“ืš ื”ืณ ืืœื”ื™ ื™ืฉืจืืœ ื”ื’ื“ ื ื ืœืขื‘ื“ืš;
ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืณ ื™ืจื“ืƒ
ื›ื’:ื™ื‘ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื”ื™ืกื’ืจื• ื‘ืขืœื™ ืงืขื™ืœื” ืืชื™ ื•ืืช ืื ืฉื™ ื‘ื™ื“ ืฉืื•ืœ; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืณ ื™ืกื’ื™ืจื•ืƒ

ืกืคืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื

Rav Medan emphasizes what this must have meant to David:

ื”ื–ื™ืงื” ื‘ื™ืŸ ื“ื•ื“ ืœื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื ื ื–ื›ืจืช ื‘ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ื ื‘ื™ืื™ื ืคืขืžื™ื ืจื‘ื•ืช: (ืžืœื›ื™ื ื ื™ื:ื™ื’) ืœึฐืžึทืขึทืŸ ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“ ืขึทื‘ึฐื“ึดึผื™ ื•ึผืœึฐืžึทืขึทืŸ ื™ึฐืจื•ึผืฉึธืืœึทโ€ึดื ืึฒืฉึถืืจ ื‘ึธึผื—ึธืจึฐืชึดึผื™. ื‘ืขืช ื™ืฆื™ืืชื• ืฉืœ ื“ื•ื“ ืžื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื ื‘ืขืช ื”ืžืจื“ ืขื•ืœื” ื”ืฉืืœื” ื”ื™ื›ืŸ ื™ื”ื ืืจื•ืŸ ื”ืืœื•ืงื™ื, ื”ืื ื™ื ื“ื•ื“ ืขื ื“ื•ื“ ืื• ื™ื™ืฉืืจ ื‘ื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื. ื‘ื‘ื—ื™ืจื” ื‘ื™ืŸ ื“ื•ื“ ืœื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื ืžื›ืจื™ืข ื“ื•ื“โ€”ื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื ืขื“ื™ืคื”. ื›ืืŸ ื ืฉืชื ืชื” ื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื ืžื›ืœ ืขืจื™ ื”ืฉื•ืคื˜ื™ื, ืฉื”ืจื™ ืื– ื ืฉืชื ืชื” ืขื™ืจ ื”ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืขืœ-ืคื™ ืžืงื•ื ืžื’ื•ืจื™ื• ืฉืœ ื”ืžื ื”ื™ื’. ื›ืืŸ ื ืงื‘ืข ืžืขืžื“ื” ืฉืœ ื™ืจื•ืฉืœื™ื ื›ืขื™ืจ ื”ื ืฆื—. ืื ื ื™ืชืŸ ืœื”ืฉื•ื•ืช ืœืžืฉื”ื• ืืช ื’ื‘ื•ืจืช ื ืคืฉื• ืฉืœ ื“ื•ื“ ื‘ืงื‘ืœืช ื“ื™ื ื• ืฉืœ ืฉื•ืคื˜ ื›ืœ ื”ืืจืฅ, ื”ืงื‘ืดื”, ื•ืœื ื”ืจื”ืจ ืื—ืจ ืžื™ื“ื•ืชื™ื• ื™ืชื‘ืจืš.

ื”ืจื‘ ื™ืขืงื‘ ืžื“ืŸ, ืžื’ื™ืœืช ื‘ืช-ืฉื‘ืข, ืขืžืณ 155-156

In my reading of ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘, this is the climax of the story of ื‘ืช ืฉื‘ืข. This, fundamentally, was an important part of Davidโ€™s ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”. There are classically three parts of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”:โ€Ž ื•ื“ื•ื™,โ€Ž ื—ืจื˜ื” ืขืœ ื”ืขื‘ืจ and ืงื‘ืœื” ืขืœ ื”ืขืชื™ื“.

ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืจืฉื•ืช ื›ืœ ืื“ื ื ืชื•ื ื” ืœื• ื›ืžื• ืฉื‘ื™ืืจื ื•, ื™ืฉืชื“ืœ ื”ืื“ื ืœืขืฉื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื•ืœื ืขื•ืจ ื›ืคื™ื• ืžื—ื˜ืื™ื•, ื›ื“ื™ ืฉื™ืžื•ืช ื•ื”ื•ื ื‘ืขืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”, ื›ื“ื™ ืฉื™ื–ื›ื” ืœื—ื™ื™ ื”ืขื•ืœื ื”ื‘ื.

ืžืฉื ื” ืชื•ืจื”, ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื–:ื

ื›ืœ ื”ืžืฆื•ื•ืช ืฉื‘ืชื•ืจื”, ื‘ื™ืŸ ืขืฉื” ื‘ื™ืŸ ืœื ืชืขืฉื”โ€”ืื ืขื‘ืจ ืื“ื ืขืœ ืื—ืช ืžื”ืŸ, ื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ื–ื“ื•ืŸ ื‘ื™ืŸ ื‘ืฉื’ื’ื”โ€”ื›ืฉื™ืขืฉื” ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื•ื™ืฉื•ื‘ ืžื—ื˜ืื•, ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ืœื”ืชื•ื•ื“ื•ืช ืœืคื ื™ ื”ืืœ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื.

ืžืฉื ื” ืชื•ืจื”, ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื:ื

ื•ืžื” ื”ื™ื ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”โ€”ื”ื•ื ืฉื™ืขื–ื•ื‘ ื”ื—ื•ื˜ื ื—ื˜ืื•, ื•ื™ืกื™ืจื ื• ืžืžื—ืฉื‘ืชื• ื•ื™ื’ืžื•ืจ ื‘ืœื™ื‘ื• ืฉืœื ื™ืขืฉื”ื• ืขื•ื“โ€ฆื•ื›ืŸ ื™ืชื ื—ื ืขืœ ืฉืขื‘ืจ.

ืžืฉื ื” ืชื•ืจื”, ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื‘:ื‘

Iโ€™ve previously looked at the story of Davidโ€™s ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” in those terms:

  1. ื•ื“ื•ื™

    ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ืืœ ื ืชืŸ ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ืœื”ืณ;
    ื•ื™ืืžืจ ื ืชืŸ ืืœ ื“ื•ื“ ื’ื ื”ืณ ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจ ื—ื˜ืืชืš ืœื ืชืžื•ืชืƒ
    ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ืคืจืง ื™ื‘:ื™ื’

    ื ืœืžื ืฆื— ืžื–ืžื•ืจ ืœื“ื•ื“ืƒ
    ื‘ ื‘ื‘ื•ื ืืœื™ื• ื ืชืŸ ื”ื ื‘ื™ื ื›ืืฉืจ ื‘ื ืืœ ื‘ืช ืฉื‘ืขืƒ

    ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ื ื
  2. ื—ืจื˜ื” ืขืœ ื”ืขื‘ืจ

    ื—ืจื˜ื” is not just regretting the past, but making amends to the extent possible.

    ื›ื“ ื•ื™ื ื—ื ื“ื•ื“ ืืช ื‘ืช ืฉื‘ืข ืืฉืชื• ื•ื™ื‘ื ืืœื™ื” ื•ื™ืฉื›ื‘ ืขืžื”; ื•ืชืœื“ ื‘ืŸ ื•ื™ืงืจื (ื•ืชืงืจื) ืืช ืฉืžื• ืฉืœืžื” ื•ื”ืณ ืื”ื‘ื•ืƒ ื›ื” ื•ื™ืฉืœื— ื‘ื™ื“ ื ืชืŸ ื”ื ื‘ื™ื ื•ื™ืงืจื ืืช ืฉืžื• ื™ื“ื™ื“ื™ื” ื‘ืขื‘ื•ืจ ื”ืณืƒ

    ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ืคืจืง ื™ื‘

    We have talked about the fact that this is the first time that ื‘ืช ืฉื‘ืข is ืืฉืชื• of David, not ืืฉืช ืื•ืจื™ื”. We also talked about the fact that this child is described as ื•ืชืœื“ ื‘ืŸ, not (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื™ื:ื›ื–)โ€Ž ื•ืชืœื“ ืœื• ื‘ืŸ. Shlomo was a sort of child of ื™ื‘ื•ื, to be ืื•ืจื™ื”'s son, not David.

  3. ืงื‘ืœื” ืขืœ ื”ืขืชื™ื“

    ืื™ื–ื• ื”ื™ื ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื’ืžื•ืจื”โ€”ื–ื” ืฉื‘ื ืœื™ื“ื• ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืขื‘ืจ ื‘ื•, ื•ืืคืฉืจ ื‘ื™ื“ื• ืœืขืฉื•ืช, ื•ืคื™ืจืฉ ื•ืœื ืขืฉื” ืžืคื ื™ ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”, ืœื ืžื™ืจืื” ื•ืœื ืžื›ืฉืœื•ืŸ ื›ื•ื—. ื›ื™ืฆื“: ื”ืจื™ ืฉื‘ื ืขืœ ืื™ืฉื” ื‘ืขื‘ื™ืจื”, ื•ืœืื—ืจ ื–ืžืŸ ื ืชื™ื™ื—ื“ ืขื™ืžื” ื•ื”ื•ื ืขื•ืžื“ ื‘ืื”ื‘ืชื• ื‘ื” ื•ื‘ื›ื•ื— ื’ื•ืคื•, ื•ื‘ืžื“ื™ื ื” ืฉืขื‘ืจ ื‘ื”, ื•ืคื™ืจืฉ ื•ืœื ืขื‘ืจโ€”ื–ื” ื”ื•ื ื‘ืขืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื’ืžื•ืจื”.

    ืžืฉื ื” ืชื•ืจื”, ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืคืจืง ื‘:ื

    ื”ืขื ื™ืŸ ื“ืืžืจ ืกื•ืฃ ื™ื•ื”ื›ืดืค (ื™ื•ืžื ืคื•,ื‘) ื”ืดื“ ื‘ืขืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžื—ื•ื™? ืจื‘ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื”: ื‘ืื•ืชื• ืžืงื•ื ื‘ืื•ืชื• ืคืจืง ื‘ืื•ืชื• ืืฉื” ื•ืงืจืื•ื”ื• ืชืฉื•ื‘ืช ื”ืžืฉืงืœ [โ€ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืฉืงื•ืœื” ื›ื ื’ื“ ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื•ืช ื”ืชื•ืจื”โ€œ]โ€ฆ

    ื•ื”ื ืดืœ ืžืฉื•ื ื“ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ื“ื”ื™ืชื” ืžื•ืชืจืช ืœื• ืžืฆื“ ื”ื“ื™ืŸ, ืืดื› ืื ื™ืงื—ื ื” ืื—ืจ ื”ื•ื™ ื ื•ืฉื ืืฉืชื• ืฉืœ ืžืœืš ื•ืืกื•ืจ ืœื”ืฉืชืžืฉ ืืฃ ื‘ืฉืจื‘ื™ื˜ื• ืฉืœ ืžืœืš, ืœื›ืŸ ืชื”ื ืขื’ื•ื ื” ื›ืœ ื™ืžื™ื”โ€ฆืœื›ืŸ ืœื ื”ื™ื” ื‘ืืคืฉืจื™ ืœืขืฉื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ืช ื”ืžืฉืงืœ ืœื’ืจืฉื”.

    ืžืฉืš ื—ื›ืžื”, ื ืฆื‘ื™ื, ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื›ื˜:ื›ื“

    The tragedy of Davidโ€™s life, therefore was beyond repair. Although he dedicated himself to repentance, he could never fully eradicate his sin.

    Artscroll Tehillim, 70:3, footnote 1

    But I have been arguing that the affair of Bat Sheva was not a crime of passion, but an abuse of authority. David could take another manโ€™s wife because he was the king. And he justified taking her because needed an heir who would build the ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ. Bat Sheva appeared to him, like Tamar before Yehuda, and was cleary sent by G-d to allow him to fulfill his destiny. Here we have David faced with the same question: he has been deposed as king, but the ืืจื•ืŸ appears before him. He can take it and create his own ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ. Or he can admit that itโ€™s not about him, itโ€™s about ื›ื ืกืช ื™ืฉืจืืœ. And here he makes the right choice. This is ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉืขื‘ืจ ื‘ื• and now he has ืคื™ืจืฉ ื•ืœื ืขืฉื” ืžืคื ื™ ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

Davidโ€™s ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is complete. He will still have to fight the battle with Avshalom, but he will return to Jerusalem and his designated heir, Shlomo, will build the ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ.


This reading of our ืกืคืจ helps explain some difficult statements from ื—ื–ืดืœ.

ื•ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื“ืืดืจ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื ืจืดืฉ ื‘ืŸ ื™ื•ื—ืื™: ืœื ื“ื•ื“ ืจืื•ื™ ืœืื•ืชื• ืžืขืฉื” [ืจืฉืดื™: ื“ื‘ืช ืฉื‘ืข] ื•ืœื ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืจืื•ื™ืŸ ืœืื•ืชื• ืžืขืฉื”โ€ฆืืœื ืœืžื” ืขืฉื•? ืœื•ืžืจ ืœืš, ืฉืื ื—ื˜ื ื™ื—ื™ื“ ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืœื• ื›ืœืš ืืฆืœ ื™ื—ื™ื“ [ืจืฉืดื™: ื’ื–ื™ืจืช ืžืœืš ื”ื™ืชื” ืœื™ืชืŸ ืคืชื—ื•ืŸ ืคื” ืœืฉื‘ื™ื], ื•ืื ื—ื˜ืื• ืฆื‘ื•ืจ ืื•ืžืจื™ืโ€ฆ ืืฆืœ ืฆื‘ื•ืจ.

ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ื“,ื‘-ื”,ื

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืจ ื ื—ืžื ื™ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื ืชืŸ: ื›ืœ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื—ื˜ื ืื™ื ื• ืืœื ื˜ื•ืขื”.

ืฉื‘ืช ื ื•,ื

How can we say David didnโ€™t sin, or that he only did it as a lesson for ื‘ืขืœื™ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”? I think we are mis-reading the gemara. In the context of ืชื ืดืš, the David of the Bat Sheva incident is inconsistent with the David of the rest of ืกืคืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ and the rest of ืชื ืดืš. That doesnโ€™t mean it didnโ€™t happen in the life of the historical David. But why write it as as such a major part of the literary work that we have before us? Itโ€™s for the lesson about ืœื™ืชืŸ ืคืชื—ื•ืŸ ืคื” ืœืฉื‘ื™ื.โ€Ž ื”ืื•ืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื—ื˜ื ืื™ื ื• ืืœื ื˜ื•ืขื” means that if you read this and all you can say is ื“ื•ื“ ื—ื˜ื then you are ืื™ื ื• ืืœื ื˜ื•ืขื”. You are missing the point. You are making Meir Sternbergโ€™s mistake, reading a single chapter as an independent short story. There is a novel here, with an arc of character development that cannot conclude with ื“ื•ื“ ื—ื˜ื.

Me, Peccavi

And this teaches us an important lesson about the nature of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

ื•ื”ื ืชื ื™ื ืฉื‘ืขื” ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื ื‘ืจืื• ืงื•ื“ื ืฉื ื‘ืจื ื”ืขื•ืœื ื•ืืœื• ื”ืŸ ืชื•ืจื” ื•ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”โ€ฆืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืฆ) ื‘ื˜ืจื ื”ืจื™ื ื™ืœื“ื• ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืฆ) ืชืฉื‘ ืื ื•ืฉ ืขื“ ื“ื›ื ื•ืชืืžืจ ืฉื•ื‘ื• ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื.

ืคืกื—ื™ื ื ื“,ื

When we speak of the creation of the world, we believe that it was formed ื™ืฉ ืžืื™ืŸ, a tangible reality out of nothingโ€ฆ

Now let us consider a grave sin like the murder of Hevel by Kayin. According to our sages, Kayin did teshuva for his crime. But what does that mean? Can this teshuva bring back Hevel? Clearly not; he is dead. It is not like a case of robbery, where the money can be returned. Here the act cannot be undone.

Yet this is the wonder of teshuva. If someone fully and sincerely repents, then Hashem considers it as if the crime had never been done. Instead of ื™ืฉ ืžืื™ืŸ we have ืื™ืŸ ืžื™ืฉโ€ฆSo in this sense, teshuva was created before the formation of the world. Because teshuva returns conditions to where they were before the Creation to the status of ืื™ืŸโ€ฆ

This explains the statement of Chazal that โ€œื›ืœ ื”ืื•ืžืจ ื“ื•ื“ ื—ื˜ื ืื™ื ื• ืืœื ื˜ื•ืขื”โ€”Whoever says that King David sinned is mistakenโ€. On the surface, it seems strange for the Chachamim to have come to this conclusion. After all, the Tanach is very direct in its description of Davidโ€™s actions; it does not whitewash anyone. Certainly, it is clear from the Tanach that David committed some ื—ื˜ื in regard to Batsheva. Why, then, is it wrong to think that David did something improper?

The answer is that David sinned, but he also did teshuvaโ€ฆ[O]nce someone has repented wholeheartedly and has committed himself to not repeating his mistake, it is as if he has not sinned at allโ€ฆ

Rav Shimon Schwab, Selected Speeches,pp. 43-44

And the undoing of the past happens in stages.

In Vidui, we ask for three things: selichah, mechilah and kaparahโ€ฆ

According to the Avudraham, selichah is being pardoned from any due punishment.

Mechilah is forgiveness. There are no ill feelings remaining from the act. As Rashi writes (teshuvah #245), โ€œโ€œIf he hugged him and kissed him, there is no mechilah greater than this.โ€โ€ฆWe do not obtain forgiveness from Hashem for sins done against another without first trying to obtain mechilah from the person offended.

[K]aparah is the containment of the inclination that led to the sin. This also explains the verse "Ki bayom hazeh yechapeir aleichem litaher eschem mikol chatoseichim, lifnei Hashem titeharu.โ€ โ€œ[F]or on this day, it will provide kaparah upon you to make you tahor, before Hashem you will become tahorโ€ links kapparah to taharah. Taharah, purity,โ€ฆis freedom from adulterations, negative habits inculcated into the soulโ€ฆ.Kaparah, then is a prior step, their containment. Beyond pardon from punishment and restoration of the relationship, but starting the healing of the very self.

โ€ฆKaparah, by containing the cause of the sin, isolating off the personal flaw, is a step toward closing that gap between my finite self and the romemus, the greatness of the Almighty. From that kaparah, one can become a person with a healthier relationship with Hashem and with othersโ€ฆ

Rabbi Micha Berger, Selichah, Mechilah, Kapparah, Yirโ€™ah and Simchah

David achieves these three stages: ืกืœื™ื—ื”:โ€Ž (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื™ื‘:ื™ื’)โ€Ž ื•ึทื™ึผึนืืžึถืจ ื ึธืชึธืŸ ืึถืœ ื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ ื’ึผึทื ื”ืณ ื”ึถืขึฑื‘ึดื™ืจ ื—ึทื˜ึผึธืืชึฐืšึธ ืœึนื ืชึธืžื•ึผืช. Then ืžื—ื™ืœื”:โ€Ž (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื™ื‘:ื›ื”)โ€Ž ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทื— ื‘ึผึฐื™ึทื“ ื ึธืชึธืŸ ื”ึทื ึผึธื‘ึดื™ื ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึฐืจึธื ืึถืช ืฉืึฐืžื•ึน ื™ึฐื“ึดื™ื“ึฐื™ึธื”ึผ ื‘ึผึทืขึฒื‘ื•ึผืจ ื”ืณืƒ. We have not seen Davidโ€™s ื›ืคืจื” yet, but it will come: (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื™ื˜:ืžื-ืžื‘)โ€Ž โ€ฆื•ึฐื›ึธืœ ืขึทื ื™ึฐื”ื•ึผื“ึธื” ื”ึถืขึฑื‘ึดืจื•ึผ ืึถืช ื”ึทืžึผึถืœึถืšึฐโ€ฆื•ึฐื”ึดื ึผึตื” ื›ึผึธืœ ืึดื™ืฉื ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตืœ ื‘ึผึธืึดื™ื ืึถืœ ื”ึทืžึผึถืœึถืšึฐ.


But there is more to this story. David teaches us specifically about ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื”.

ืืžืจ ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ: ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืฉื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืขืฉื•ืช ืœื• ื›ืฉื’ื’ื•ืช, ืฉื ืืžืจ (ื”ื•ืฉืข ื™ื“:ื‘) ืฉืื•ึผื‘ึธื” ื™ึดืฉึฐื‚ืจึธืึตืœ ืขึทื“ ื”ืณ ืึฑืœึนืงึถื™ืšึธ ื›ึดึผื™ ื›ึธืฉึทืืœึฐืชึธึผ ื‘ึทึผืขึฒื•โ€ึนื ึถืšึธ; ื”ื ืขื•ืŸ ืžื–ื™ื“ ื”ื•ื ื•ืงื ืงืจื™ ืœื™ื” ืžื›ืฉื•ืœ. ืื™ื ื™? ื•ื”ืืžืจ ืจื™ืฉ ืœืงื™ืฉ: ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืฉื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืขืฉื•ืช ืœื• ื›ื–ื›ื™ื•ืช, ืฉื ืืžืจ (ื™ื—ื–ืงืืœ ืœื’:ื™ื˜) ื•ึผื‘ึฐืฉืื•ึผื‘ ืจึธืฉึธืืข ืžึตืจึดืฉึฐืืขึธืชื•ึน ื•ึฐืขึธืฉึธื‚ื” ืžึดืฉึฐืืคึธึผื˜ ื•ึผืฆึฐื“ึธืงึธื” ืขึฒืœึตื™ื”ึถื ื”ื•ึผื ื™ึดื—ึฐื™ึถื”. ืœื ืงืฉื™ื; ื›ืืŸ ืžืื”ื‘ื”, ื›ืืŸ ืžื™ืจืื”.

ื™ื•ืžื ืคื•,ื‘

ื—ื–ืดืœ ื‘ื“ื‘ืจื™ื”ื ืขืœ ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื”ื‘ื—ื™ื ื• ื‘ืขื™ืงืจ ื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉืชื™ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื•ืช: ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžื™ืจืื” ื•ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” [ืžืื”ื‘ื”]. ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžื™ืจืืช ื”ืขื•ื ืฉ ืงืœื” ืœื”ืกื‘ืจ, ื•ื“ื•ื’ืžืชื” ื”ืžื•ื‘ื”ืงืช ื”ื™ื ืชืฉื•ื‘ืช ืื ืฉื™ ื ื™ื ื•ื”, ืฉืฉื‘ื• ืžืคื—ื“ื” ืฉืœ ื ื‘ื•ืืช ื™ื•ื ื” ืขืœ ื”ืคื™ื›ืช ืขื™ืจื ื‘ืขื•ื“ ืืจื‘ืขื™ื ื™ื•ื.

ืžื ื™ืขื™ื” ืฉืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื” ืงืฉื™ื ื™ื•ืชืจ ืœื”ื’ื“ืจื”. ืฉื”ืจื™ ืื”ื‘ืช ื”ืณ ื˜ื”ื•ืจื” ื‘ืœื ืขื™ืจื•ื‘ ืฉื™ืงื•ืœื™ ื”ึพโ€ืื ื™โ€œ ืฉืœ ื”ืื“ื ื›ืžื ื™ืข ืœืฉื™ื ื•ื™ ื“ืจืš, ืœื—ืจื˜ื” ื•ืœืชืฉื•ื‘ื”, ื”ื™ื ื“ืจืš ืงืฉื”, ื”ื ืจืื™ืช ืœื›ืื•ืจื” ื›ื“ืจื›ื ืฉืœ ื™ื—ื™ื“ื™ ืกื’ื•ืœื” ื‘ืœื‘ื“. ื ืจืื” ืœื ื•, ืฉืขื™ืงืจื” ืฉืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื” ื ืขื•ืฆื” ื‘ืžื” ืฉืงืจื•ื™ ืืฆืœ ื”ืื—ืจื•ื ื™ื โ€˜ื˜ื”ืจื”ืณ ืื• โ€™ืฉื‘ื™ืจืช ื”ืžื—ื™ืฆื•ืชืณ ืฉื™ึธืฆึทืจ ื”ื—ื˜ื.

ื”ืจื‘ ื™ืขืงื‘ ืžื“ืŸ, ืžื’ื™ืœืช ื‘ืช-ืฉื‘ืข, ืขืžืณ 160

But I want to look at the idea of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื” from a different perspective.

Joey Rosenfeld lent me a little book and suggested that I read the last chapter. I know whenever I accept reading material from Joey Iโ€™m about to fall down the rabbit hole, but itโ€™s always fascinating and worthwhile. This book is ืฉื•ื‘ื™ ื ืคืฉื™: ื—ืกื“ ืื• ื—ื™ืจื•ืช by ื”ืจื‘ ืฉื’ืดืจ. Rabbi Shimon Gershon Rosenberg, known by his acronym ืฉื’ืดืจ, was rosh yeshiva at Yeshivat Siach Yitzchak, and brought Chassidut and post-modern philosophy into religious Zionist thinking.

To read Rav Shagar is to encounter a thinker unlike any that American, Modern Orthodox Jews are familiar with. His writings seek to address the most pressing intellectual, spiritual, and cultural issues of the day by mining the depths of Hasidut and Kabbalah, along with modern and postmodern philosophy.

Zach Truboff, The Earth-Shattering Faith of Rav Shagar

Rav Shagar asks, what is teshuva, really? And focuses on the ืชืงื ืช ื”ืฉื‘ื™ืŸ of Rืณ Zadok Hacohen of Lublin:

ื”ื‘ืขื•ืช ืฉื”ื•ื [ืจืณ ืฆื“ื•ืง] ื“ืŸ ื‘ื”ืŸ, ื”ืŸ ื”ืฉืืœื•ืช ืฉืงืœืกื™ื•ืช ืฉืœ ืชื•ืฉื‘ื”: ื›ื™ืฆื“ ื ื™ืชืŸ ืœืžื—ื•ืง ืืช ื”ืขื‘ืจ, ืžื” ืคื™ืฉืจื” ืฉืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื” ืฉืžื”ืคื›ืช ื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ืœื–ื›ื•ื™ื•ืช, ืžื™ ื™ืชืงืข ืœื™ื“ ื”ืฉื‘ ืฉืœื ื™ืฉื•ื‘ ืœื—ื˜ืื•, ื•ืขื•ื“.

ื”ืจื‘ ืฉื’ืดืจ, ืฉื•ื‘ื™ ื ืคืฉื™, ืขืžืณ 133

Rืณ Zadok was a student of the Ishbitzer, the author of the ืžื™ ื”ืฉื™ืœื•ื—, a Chasidic rebbe famous for his philosophy of determinism, that ื”ื›ืœ ื‘ื™ื“ื™ ืฉืžื™ื ืืคื™ืœื• ื™ืจืืช ืฉืžื™ื. He preached acceptance of oneself and allowing ื”ืณ to determine our actions. Rืณ Zadok looks at teshuva in that vein.

ื”ื›ืœ ืฆืคื•ื™, ื•ื”ืจืฉื•ืช ื ืชื•ื ื”.

ืžืฉื ื” ืื‘ื•ืช ื’:ื˜ื•

ืž ืขื™ืงืจ ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื”ื•ื ืขื“ ืฉื™ืื™ืจ ื”ืณ ืขื™ื ื™ื•, ืฉื™ื”ื™ื• ื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื›ื–ื›ื•ื™ื•ืช. ืจื•ืฆื” ืœื•ืžืจ ืฉื™ื›ื™ืจ ื•ื™ื‘ื™ืŸ ืฉื›ืœ ืžื” ืฉื—ื˜ื ื”ื™ื” ื’ื ื›ืŸ ื‘ืจืฆื•ืŸ ื”ืฉืดื™โ€ฆื•ื›ื˜ืขื ื™ื“ื™ืขื” ื•ื‘ื—ื™ืจื” ืฉื‘ื™ืืจ ื”ืืจื™ื–ืดืœ ื‘ืกื•ืฃ ืกืคืจ โ€ืืจื‘ืข ืžืื•ืช ืฉืงืœ ื›ืกืฃโ€œ ืฉืฉื ื™ื”ื ืืžืช ื›ืœ ืื—ื“ ื‘ืžืงื•ื ื‘ืคื ื™ ืขืฆืžื•, ื‘ืžืงื•ื ื”ื‘ื—ื™ืจื” ืฉื ืื™ืŸ ืžืงื•ื ืœื™ื“ื™ืขื” ื•ื‘ืžืงื•ื ื”ื™ื“ื™ืขื” ืฉื ื‘ืืžืช ืื™ืŸ ืžืงื•ื ืœื‘ื—ื™ืจื”. ื•ื›ืฉืžื’ื™ืข ืœืื•ืจ ื–ื” ื”ืขืฆื•ื ืื– ืฉื‘ื• ื›ืœ ื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืชื™ื• ื‘ืœืชื™ ื™ื•ืฆืื™ื ืžืขื•ืžืง ื™ื“ื™ืขืช ื”ืฉืดื™ ื•ื”ื•ื ื•ื“ืขืชื• ื•ืจืฆื•ื ื• ื”ื›ืœ ืื—ื“, ื•ืžืื—ืจ ืฉื”ืฉืดื™ ืจืฆื” ื›ืŸ ื”ืจื™ ื”ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ื™ื•ืช, ื•ื–ื•ื›ื” ืœื›ืคืจื” ื’ืžื•ืจื” ืฉื‘ื™ื•ื ื”ื›ื™ืคื•ืจื™ื.

โ€ฆ

ืง ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ืฉืžืฉื™ื‘ ืื•ืชื• ื“ื‘ืจ ืืœ ื”ืฉืดื™, ืจืดืœ ืฉืžื›ื™ืจ ืฉื”ื›ืœ ืคื•ืขืœ ื”ืฉืดื™ ื•ื›ื—ื•, ืืคื™ืœื• ื”ืžื—ืฉื‘ื” ื˜ืจื โ€ื ื•ืฆืจื” ื‘ืœื‘ื• ืฉืœ ืื“ืโ€ฆื ืžืฆื ื”ืฉืดื™ ื ืชืŸ ืœื• ื›ื— ืื– ื’ื ื‘ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจื”, ื•ืขื™ืดื– ืื—ืจ โ€ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื”ื’ืžื•ืจื” ื”ื•ื ื–ื•ื›ื” ืฉื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืขืฉื™ืŸ ื–ื›ื™ื•ืช ื›ื™ ื’ื ื–ื” ื”ื™ื” ืจืฆื•ืŸ ื”ืฉืดื™ ื›ืš.

ืจืณ ืฆื“ื•ืง, ืฆื“ืงืช ื”ืฆื“ื™ืง

This is very similar to the twelve step program of Alcoholics Anonymous, that overcoming addiction involves admitting that we canโ€™t do it ourselves:

As summarized by the American Psychological Association, the process involves the following:

  • admitting that one cannot control oneโ€™s alcoholism, addiction or compulsion;
  • recognizing a higher power that can give strength;
  • examining past errors with the help of a sponsor (experienced member);
  • making amends for these errors;
  • learning to live a new life with a new code of behavior;
  • helping others who suffer from the same alcoholism, addictions or compulsions.
Wikipedia, Twelve-step program

Rabbi Abraham Twerski famously uses these ideas in a Jewish, mussar-based manner.


Rav Shagar points out that there are two diametrically opposed approaches to teshuva: active, individual-centered, and passive, G-d-centered. Like most such dialectics, both are right and both are necessary, and both can end up in the same place, of being a new person whose past is changed:

ื‘โ€ฆื•ื™ืขื™ื“ ืขืœื™ื• ื™ื•ื“ืข ืชืขืœื•ืžื•ืช ืฉืœื ื™ืฉื•ื‘ ืœื–ื” ื”ื—ื˜ื ืœืขื•ืœืโ€ฆ

ื“โ€ฆื›ืœื•ืžืจ ืฉืื ื™ ืื—ืจ ื•ืื™ื ื™ ืื•ืชื• ื”ืื™ืฉ ืฉืขืฉื” ืื•ืชืŸ ื”ืžืขืฉื™ื; ื•ืžืฉื ื” ืžืขืฉื™ื• ื›ื•ืœืŸ ืœื˜ื•ื‘ื”, ื•ืœื“ืจืš ื™ืฉืจื”.

ืžืฉื ื” ืชื•ืจื”, ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืคืจืง ื‘

How can Rambam make that statement? A person always has bechira, the freedom to do good or to sin. If Hashem testifies that the person will never again commit that sin, then either he loses his bechira or Hashemโ€™s testimony was not correct. Neither of these is acceptable.

I attended a meeting of recovering alcoholics at which the speaker said, โ€œThe man I once was drank. And the man I once was will drink again. If I ever go back to being the man I once was, I will drink again.โ€ Suddenly, the Rambamโ€™s words were clear. A sin does not occur in a vacuum. A sin occurs when a person is in a spiritual state that allows that sin to occur.

โ€ฆHashem does not testify that the person will never again commit the sin, but rather that he has succeeded in attaining a level of kedusha, where, at this level, that sin is not a possibility. That is why the Rambam, uncharacteristically, chose to refer to Hashem as, โ€œwho knows the innermost secrets of oneโ€™s heartโ€, i.e, He knows that this person has achieved the level of spirituality.

This why the Rambam continues that with this kind of teshuva the person can say, โ€œI am no longer the same person that committed that sinโ€ (ibid. 2:4).

Rabbi Dr. Abraham J. Twerski, Mussar and the 12 Steps

As I understand Rav Shagarโ€™s analysis, a personโ€™s teshuva changes the future by making them a different person. The miracle of teshuva is that Hashem changes the past as well. It is this new person who had committed the sinful act. This is how Rav Shagar reconciles the two approaches to teshuva. ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžื™ืจืื” is active; the Rambamโ€™s approach is ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžื™ืจืื”. โ€The person I was did wrong. I reject that person as I become betterโ€œ. The ื™ืจืื” is the fear, disgust with my own past.

ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื” is passive, accepting. โ€œI donโ€™t reject the person I was. What happened, even though I shouldnโ€™t have done it, was G-dโ€™s will and it is part of what makes me a better person todayโ€. The ืื”ื‘ื” is the love of who I was.

That is why ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžื™ืจืื” leads to ื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืขืฉื•ืช ืœื• ื›ืฉื’ื’ื•ืช. The act happened, but โ€œwho I am todayโ€ would never have done such a thing. So the act is a ืฉื’ื’ื”, negligent, not intentional. But ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื” leads to ื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืขืฉื•ืช ืœื• ื›ื–ื›ื™ื•ืช. The act happened, but โ€œwho I am todayโ€ accepts it as an โ€œact of G-dโ€, not under my control, but it made me who I am today, which is a good thing, a ื–ื›ื•ืช.

[The problem with this approach is that it leads to antinomianism, that there are no laws and no right or wrong. Others have dealt with this in understanding the Ishbizter, and I wonโ€™t deal with that here. But this is not about our behavior now; that is certainly subject to the laws of the Torah and is under our free will. The question is how do we look at our acts in the past. ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” requires ื—ืจื˜ื” ืขืœ ื”ืขื‘ืจ before the ื›ืคืจื” of acceptance is possible. ]


ืกืคืจ ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื is Davidโ€™s expression of ืื”ื‘ืช ื”ืณ, and part of that is ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื”.

ื•ึฐืึตืœึผึถื” ื“ึผึดื‘ึฐืจึตื™ ื“ึธื•ึดื“ ื”ึธืึทื—ึฒืจึนื ึดื™ื; ื ึฐืึปื ื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ ื‘ึผึถืŸ ื™ึดืฉืึทื™ ื•ึผื ึฐืึปื ื”ึทื’ึผึถื‘ึถืจ ื”ึปืงึทื ืขึธืœ ืžึฐืฉืึดื™ื—ึท ืึฑืœึนืงึตื™ ื™ึทืขึฒืงึนื‘ ื•ึผื ึฐืขึดื™ื ื–ึฐืžึดืจื•ึนืช ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตืœืƒ

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื’:ื

ืจื‘ื™ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืจ ื ื—ืžื ื™ ืืดืจ ื™ื•ื ืชืŸ: ืžืื™ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื›ื’) ื ืื ื“ื•ื“ ื‘ืŸ ื™ืฉื™ ื•ื ืื ื”ื’ื‘ืจ ื”ื•ืงื ืขืœ? ื ืื ื“ื•ื“ ื‘ืŸ ื™ืฉื™ ืฉื”ืงื™ื ืขื•ืœื” ืฉืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ื”,ื

ื›ืืŸ ื—ื™ื“ื•ืฉื• ืฉืœ ื“ื•ื“, ื”ืžืงื™ื ืขื•ึผืœื”ึผ ืฉืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”. ื•ืฉืœึนืžื” , ื‘ื ื” ืฉืœ ื‘ืช-ืฉื‘ืข ืฉึพ(ืชื”ืœื™ื ื ื:ื–) ื”ึตืŸ ื‘ึฐึผืขึธื•ื•ึนืŸ ื—ื•ึนืœึธืœึฐืชึดึผื™ ื•ึผื‘ึฐื—ึตื˜ึฐื ื™ึถื—ึฑืžึทืชึฐื ึดื™ ืึดืžึดึผื™, ื”ื•ืคืš ืœื‘ื—ื™ืจ ื”ืณ, ื›ืฉื ืฉื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื”ื—ื˜ื ื ื”ืคื›ื•ืช ืœื• ืœื“ื•ื“ ืœื–ื›ื•ื™ื•ืช.

ื”ืจื‘ ื™ืขืงื‘ ืžื“ืŸ, ืžื’ื™ืœืช ื‘ืช-ืฉื‘ืข, ืขืžืณ 161

Davidโ€™s return to ืžืœื›ื•ืช, with Shlomo as his heir, is the result of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ืžืื”ื‘ื”, growing from the past.


There is a ืคืจืง ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื that deals with the nature of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

ืœื“ื•ื“ ืžืฉื›ื™ืœ; ืืฉืจื™ ื ืฉื•ื™ ืคืฉืข; ื›ืกื•ื™ ื—ื˜ืื”ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื

David in this ืžืฉื›ื™ืœ (a didactic poem) seems to be saying that ื›ืกื•ื™ ื—ื˜ืื”, one who covers up their sin, is happy, to be praised. Thatโ€™s not the usual approach:

ืžึฐื›ึทืกึถึผื” ืคึฐืฉึธืืขึธื™ื• ืœึนื ื™ึทืฆึฐืœึดื™ื—ึท ื•ึผืžื•ึนื“ึถื” ื•ึฐืขึนื–ึตื‘ ื™ึฐืจึปื—ึธื.

ืžืฉืœื™ ื›ื—:ื™ื’

The gemara says our pasuk is talking about publicizing a sin. Confession is always necessary; the question is whether everyone has to hear that confession:

ืืดืจ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืจื‘ ืจืžื™ ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ืชื”ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื) ืืฉืจื™ ื ืฉื•ื™ ืคืฉืข ื›ืกื•ื™ ื—ื˜ืื” ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ืžืฉืœื™ ื›ื—:ื™ื’) ืžื›ืกื” ืคืฉืขื™ื• ืœื ื™ืฆืœื™ื— ืœื ืงืฉื™ื ื”ื ื‘ื—ื˜ื ืžืคื•ืจืกื ื”ื ื‘ื—ื˜ื ืฉืื™ื ื• ืžืคื•ืจืกื. ืจื‘ ื–ื•ื˜ืจื ื‘ืจ ื˜ื•ื‘ื™ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื ื—ืžืŸ: ื›ืืŸ ื‘ืขื‘ื™ืจื•ืช ืฉื‘ื™ืŸ ืื“ื ืœื—ื‘ื™ืจื• ื‘ื›ืืŸ ื‘ืขื‘ื™ืจื•ืช ืฉื‘ื™ืŸ ืื“ื ืœืžืงื•ื.

ื™ื•ืžื ืคื•,ื‘

But Hirsh says that ื›ืกื•ื™ ื—ื˜ืื” means one who has not sinned at all, and this pasuk is a contrast to the next:

ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดื“ ืžึทืฉื‚ึฐื›ึผึดื™ืœ ืึทืฉืึฐืจึตื™ ื ึฐืฉื‚ื•ึผื™ ืคึผึถืฉืึทืข ื›ึผึฐืกื•ึผื™ ื—ึฒื˜ึธืึธื”: ืึทืฉืึฐืจึธื™ื• ืœึฐืึธื“ึธื ืฉืึถื”ื•ึผื ื’ึผึธื‘ื•ึนื”ึผึท ืžึดืคึผึดืฉืึฐืขื•ึน ื•ึฐืœึนื ืคึผึดืฉืึฐืขื•ึน ื’ึผึธื‘ื•ึนื”ึผึท ืžึดืžึผึถื ึผื•ึผ.

ื‘ืจืืฉื™ืช ืจื‘ื” ื›ื‘:ื•

Happy is he of whom it can be said that he is both ื ืฉื•ื™ ืคืฉืข and ื›ืกื•ื™ ื—ื˜ืื”; that he is not guilty of any transgression, intentional or unintentional.

Hirsch Psalms, XXXII:1

That is just the introduction; the remainder of the perek is for those who are not ื ืฉื•ื™ ืคืฉืข and ื›ืกื•ื™ ื—ื˜ืื”.

ื”ืžื–ืžื•ืจ ืžืขื•ืจืจ ืชืฉื•ืžืช ืœื‘ ื‘ื ื•ืฉืื•, ืฉืื™ื ื• ืจื’ื™ืœ ื›ืœ ื›ืš ื‘ืžื–ืžื•ืจื™ ืชื”ืœื™ื ื›ืžื• ื”ืชืคื™ืœื” ื”ื˜ื”ื•ืจื” ืื• ื”ืชื”ื™ืœื” ื”ื˜ื”ื•ืจื”. ื”ืžื–ืžื•ืจ ื”ื–ื” ืžืœืžื“ ืื•ืชื ื• ืžืฉื”ื•, ื”ื•ื ืžืœืžื“ ืื•ืชื ื• ื‘ืขื™ืงืจื• ืฉืœ ื“ื‘ืจ ืืช ื”ืจืขื™ื•ืŸ ื”ืžื‘ื•ื˜ื ื‘ืฆื•ืจืช ืžืฉืœ ื”ื—ื›ืžื” ืฉืื ื• ื™ื•ื“ืขื™ื ืžืชื•ืš ืกืคืจ ืžืฉืœื™: ืžื›ืกื” ืคืฉืขื™ื• ืœื ื™ืฆืœื™ื— ื•ืžื•ื“ื” ื•ืขื•ื–ื‘ ื™ืจื•ื—ื. ืืš ื”ื•ื ืžืœืžื“ ื—ื›ืžืช ื—ื™ื™ื ื–ื•โ€”ืœื ื›ื›ืœืœ ื™ื‘ืฉ ื‘ืกืคืจ ื”ื—ื›ืžื”. ื”ื•ื โ€ืฉืืจโ€œ ืืช ื”ื›ืœืœ ื‘ืฆื•ืจื” ืคื™ื•ื˜ื™ืช, ืžืชื•ืš ื ืกื™ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืคืฉ ืขืฆืžื•. ื”ื•ื ืžืขืœื” ืืช ืจื’ืฉื•ืชื™ื• ื‘ืžืฆื‘ื™ื ืฉื•ื ื™ื, ื’ื ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉื”ื™ื” โ€ืžื›ืกื” ืคืฉืขื™ื•โ€œ ื’ื ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉื”ื•ื“ื” ื•ืขื–ื‘ ื•ื’ื ืจื•ื—ื. ื”ื•ื ืžืฆื™ื™ืจ ืœื ื• ืืช ืžืื•ืจืขื•ืชื™ื• ื”ื ืคืฉื™ื™ื, ืืฉืจ ื”ื™ื• ื›ื” ื—ื–ืงื™ื, ืขื“ ืืฉืจ ื”ืชื‘ื˜ืื• ื’ื ื‘ื’ื•ืคื•. ืžืชื•ืš ื›ืš ืื ื• ืงื•ืจืื™ื ืืช ื”ืžื–ืžื•ืจ ืœื ื›ืงืจื•ื ื‘ืกืคืจึพื—ื›ืžื” ืžืคื•ื›ื— ื•ืžื™ื™ืฉื‘, ืืœื ื›ืงืจื ื‘ืฉื‚ื•ึผืจื” ืื™ื ื“ื™ื•ื™ื“ื•ืืœื™ืช ืฉื™ืฆืื” ืžืŸ ื”ืœื‘. ื”ื™ื ื™ืฆืื” ืžื ืคืฉ ื ืขื ื” ื•ืžืฉื•ื ื›ืš ื”ื™ื ื’ื ืžื•ืฆืืช ื”ื“ ื‘ื ืคืฉื•.

ืคื™ื‘ืœ ืžืœืฆืจ, ืคื ื™ ืกืคืจ ืชื”ืœื™ื, ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘

The second pasuk is another ืืฉืจื™:

ืืฉืจื™ ืื“ื ืœื ื™ื—ืฉื‘ ื”ืณ ืœื• ืขื•ืŸ; ื•ืื™ืŸ ื‘ืจื•ื—ื• ืจืžื™ื”ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื‘

But happy, too, is he to whom, even if he has sinned, the L-rd need not ascribe iniquity when He decrees his ultimate fateโ€ฆ.He is not deceived in his own mind about his true worth. He bears within his soul a conscience that acts as a stern, incorruptible judge.

Hirsch Psalms, XXXII:2

This was Davidโ€™s own experience. When he tried to cover up the sin, everything got worse.

ื’ ื›ื™ ื”ื—ืจืฉืชื™ ื‘ืœื• ืขืฆืžื™ ื‘ืฉืื’ืชื™ ื›ืœ ื”ื™ื•ืืƒ
ื“ ื›ื™ ื™ื•ืžื ื•ืœื™ืœื” ืชื›ื‘ื“ ืขืœื™ ื™ื“ืš;
ื ื”ืคืš ืœืฉื“ื™ ื‘ื—ืจื‘ื ื™ ืงื™ืฅ ืกืœื”ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ืœื‘

ื›ื™ ื”ื—ืจืฉืชื™: ื›ืืฉืจ ื”ื—ืจืฉืชื™ ืžืœื”ืชื•ื“ื•ืช ืขืœ ืคืฉืขื™ ืœืคื ื™ืš.

ื‘ืœื• ืขืฆืžื™. ืžืจื•ื‘ ืื ื—ื•ืชื™ ื•ื“ืื’ื•ืชื™ ื›ืœ ื”ื™ื•ืณ ืฉื”ื™ื™ืชื™ ื“ื•ืื’ ืžืคื ื™ ื”ืคื•ืจืขื ื•ืช.

ืจืฉืณื™, ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื’

ื ื”ืคืš ืœืฉื“ื™: ืœื—ืœื•ื— ืฉืœื™, ื•ื›ืŸ (ื‘ืžื“ื‘ืจ ื™ื:ื—) ืœึฐืฉึทืื“ ื”ึทืฉึธึผืืžึถืŸ , ืœื—ืœื•ื— ืฉืžืŸโ€ฆ:

ื‘ื—ืจื‘ื•ื ื™ ืงื™ืฅ: ืขื“ ืฉื™ื™ื‘ืฉ ื‘ื—ื•ืจื‘ ื”ืงื™ืฅ ืžืคื ื™ ื“ืื’ืช ื›ื•ื‘ื“ ื™ื“ืš ืฉื”ื™ื™ืชื™ ื“ื•ืื’ ืขืœ ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ื•ืœืคื™ื›ืš

ืจืฉืณื™, ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื“

ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ืื•ื“ื™ืขืš ื•ืขื•ื ื™ ืœื ื›ืกื™ืชื™
ืืžืจืชื™ ืื•ื“ื” ืขืœื™ ืคืฉืขื™ ืœื”ืณ;
ื•ืืชื” ื ืฉืืช ืขื•ืŸ ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ืกืœื”ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื”

We usually translate ื ืฉื ืขื•ืŸ as โ€œtolerating sinโ€, not punishing. But I think here is is more literal: ื”ืณ โ€œcarries the sinโ€. In ืจืณ ืฆื“ื•ืง's terms we used above, ื›ืœ ืžื” ืฉื—ื˜ื ื”ื™ื” ื’ื ื›ืŸ ื‘ืจืฆื•ืŸ ื”ืฉืดื™.

ื”ื—ื•ื˜ื ื•ื ืฉื ืขื•ื ื• ืœื ื™ื›ื•ืคืจ ื”ื—ื˜ื ืœื• ืจืง ื”ืขื•ื ืฉ ืฉื™ื‘ื ืขืœื™ื• ืขืณ'ื“ (ืžืฉืœื™ ื˜:ื™ื‘) ื•ึฐืœึทืฆึฐืชึธึผ ืœึฐื‘ึทื“ึฐึผืšึธ ืชึดืฉึธึผื‚ืโ€ฆื•ื”ื›ืœืœ ื›ื™ ื”ื ื•ืฉื ืขื•ื ื• ื‘ืขืฆืžื• ื”ื•ื ืœื’ื ืื™ ืœืขื•ืœื. ื•ื ืฉื™ืืช ื—ื˜ื ืขืœ ืฉื ื™ ื“ืจื›ื™ื. ื”ื“ืจืš ื”ืื—ืช ืฉื™ืžื—ื•ืœ ืœื• ื›ืžื• ื–ื” ืฉื”ื•ื ืœืฉื‘ื— ืœื ืฉื•ื ื”ืขื•ืŸ. ื•ื”ื“ืจืš ื”ืื—ืจืช ืฉื™ื”ื™ื” ื ื•ืฉื ื”ืขื•ืŸ ืื—ื“ ืจืฉืข. ื•ื”ื ื” ืœื ื•ืฉื ืขื•ืŸ ื™ื”ื™ื” ืœื’ื ืื™ ื•ืœื ืฉื•ื ื”ืขื•ืŸ ืœืฉื‘ื—.

ืื‘ืŸ ืขื–ืจื, ืฉืžื•ืช ืœื“:ื–

The past cannot literally be changed. The sin happened. But with ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”,โ€Ž ื”ืณ offers to bear the responsibility. That is part of what ื–ื“ื•ื ื•ืช ื ืขืฉื•ืช ืœื• ื›ืฉื’ื’ื•ืช means.

ื• ืขืœ ื–ืืช ื™ืชืคืœืœ ื›ืœ ื—ืกื™ื“ ืืœื™ืš ืœืขืช ืžืฆื;
ืจืง ืœืฉื˜ืฃ ืžื™ื ืจื‘ื™ื ืืœื™ื• ืœื ื™ื’ื™ืขื•ืƒ
ื– ืืชื” ืกืชืจ ืœื™ ืžืฆืจ ืชืฆืจื ื™;
ืจื ื™ ืคืœื˜; ืชืกื•ื‘ื‘ื ื™ ืกืœื”ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ืœื‘

ื”ืชืคืœืœ means โ€œto acknowledge and imbue oneself with the knowledge of truth and thus to acquire the proper insight concerning oneโ€™s self and all of oneโ€™s relationshipsโ€, for the root ืคืœืœ means โ€œto judge, to pass judgmentโ€โ€ฆThe man who truly serves G-d regards all material suffering only as a means sent him to awaken the right spiritual life within his soul.

Hirsch Psalms, XXXII:6

When is ืขืช ืžืฆื?

ื“ืจืฉื• ื”ืณ ื‘ื”ืžืฆืื•; ืงืจืื”ื• ื‘ื”ื™ื•ืชื• ืงืจื•ื‘ืƒ

ื™ืฉืขื™ื”ื• ื ื”:ื•

ื›ืชื™ื‘ (ื™ืฉืขื™ื” ื ื”:ื•): ื“ึดึผืจึฐืฉืื•ึผ ื”ืณ ื‘ึฐึผื”ึดืžึธึผืฆึฐืื•ึนโ€ฆ ืืœื• ืขืฉืจื” ื™ืžื™ื ืฉื‘ื™ืŸ ืจืืฉ ื”ืฉื ื” ืœื™ื•ื ื”ื›ื™ืคื•ืจื™ื.

ืจืืฉ ื”ืฉื ื” ื™ื—,ื

But here David is saying ืขืช ืžืฆื is always, as long as we are honest with ourselves, seeing ื”ืณ's hand in whatever happens. Then, even in the face of the floodwaters, ืืœื™ื• ืœื ื™ื’ื™ืขื•, I am not washed away. Instead of being surrounded by danger, ืจื ื™ ืคืœื˜ ืชืกื•ื‘ื‘ื ื™, I am surrounded by a song of salvation. My ื™ื•ื“ื•ื™ becomes a ืจื ื™ ืคืœื˜.

And David concludes with the summary of his ืžืฉื›ื™ืœ.

ื— ืึทืฉื‚ึฐื›ึผึดื™ืœึฐืšึธ ื•ึฐืื•ึนืจึฐืšึธ ื‘ื“ืจืš ื–ื• ืชืœืš; ืื™ืขืฆื” ืขืœื™ืš ืขื™ื ื™ืƒ
ื˜ ืืœ ืชื”ื™ื• ื›ืกื•ืก ื›ืคืจื“ ืื™ืŸ ื”ื‘ื™ืŸ;
ื‘ืžืชื’ ื•ืจืกืŸ ืขื“ื™ื• ืœื‘ืœื•ื; ื‘ืœ ืงืจื‘ ืืœื™ืšืƒ
ื™ ืจื‘ื™ื ืžื›ืื•ื‘ื™ื ืœืจืฉืข; ื•ื”ื‘ื•ื˜ื— ื‘ื”ืณ ื—ืกื“ ื™ืกื•ื‘ื‘ื ื•ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ืœื‘

The theodicy of ืกืคืจ ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื is ื’ื ื–ื• ืœื˜ื•ื‘ื”. Everything is for the best. Even our checkered past is ืœื˜ื•ื‘ื”; it is what made it possible to be a ื‘ืขืœ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”, to grow into who we are now. And that is something to be celebrated.

ืฉืžื—ื• ื‘ื”ืณ ื•ื’ื™ืœื• ืฆื“ื™ืงื™ื; ื•ื”ืจื ื™ื ื• ื›ืœ ื™ืฉืจื™ ืœื‘ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืœื‘:ื™ื