Teshuva: Perspectives on the Art of Return

“אם אתה מאמין שיכולים לקלקל תאמין שיכולים לתקן”
“If you believe that you can break; believe that you can fix”
- Rebbe Nachman of Breslav

Introductory Remarks

This composition was written Liluy Nishmas little Noach Yitzchak ben Moshe Berel whose mere smile could melt 1000 hearts of stone. May his soul be elevated to the highest heights.

Few people, if any, have been able to recreate the semblance of poetic grandeur expressed by Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook Zt”l, when he penned his thoughts on the topic of Teshuva, repentance. In the forward to what many would consider his magnum opus, Orot HaTeshuva, HaRav Kook speaks breathtakingly about the cosmic passions and fears that literally seized him as he prepared to speak about this most exalted topic. It is with great humility that I profess, on my own small level, to share these sentiments:

“For sometime now, I have been fighting an inner battle. A powerful force is compelling me to speak on the subject of teshuva. My attention is concentrated on only this…And while my inner essence compels me to speak about teshuva, I am yet taken aback by my own thoughts. Am I worthy enough to speak about teshuva? The loftiest souls of the past wrote about teshuva; the prophets, the holy Sages, and the greatest masters of piety. How can I venture to join their ranks? However, no shortcoming in the world can discourage me from fulfilling my inner demand.”[1]

Teshuva: the Foundation of the World

Even before Hashem created light or darkness, heaven or earth, water, dry land, fruits, vegetables, birds, fish, animals or even Man himself, He created the potential for teshuva. The gemara in Mesechet Pesachim relates:

“Seven things were created before the conception of the world. They are: Torah, Teshuva, Gan Eden, Gehenim, the Kissei HaKavod, the Beit Hamikdash, and the name of Moshiach”[2]

A perfunctory understanding and thus blind acceptance of this enigmatic gemara simply will not suffice; fortunately, the key understanding this complex ma’amar chazal was long ago fashioned by the great 13th century sage Rabbenu Bachya ben Asher Zt”l. In his philosophical work, Kad HaKemach, Rav Bachya writes:

“One of the great kindnesses that Hashem has bestowed upon us is that He created the concept of teshuva. Even before He created the world, it was revealed and known before Him that man would eventually sin, and He therefore placed the cure (teshuva) before the disease(creation).”[3], [4]

In fact, the Torah testifies that “There is no righteous person on earth who does not sin.”[5], [6] After considering the fact that (at one time or another) everybody falls short of spiritual excellence, we must neither under employ nor under appreciate the gift that Hashem has bestowed upon us by creating a means for us to return to Him. That said, it is essential that we articulate our ambitions not in terms of attaining perfection—which would be unfeasible in this world[7]—but rather in terms of striving toward that objective.[8] Indeed, as Shlomo HaMelech teaches in Sefer Mishle, “Seven times does a righteous man fall, yet he rises again, but the wicked stumble in evil”[9]; falling down, shaking off the dust, and returning to your feet are integral steps in the road to becoming a tzaddik. All the while, it is our Father in Heaven, fully cognizant of our limitations, Who waits for our return with open arms.

Ostensibly, it is this markedly significant point that the Rambam appears to have buried beneath the myriads of Halachot that scatter the pages of his Hilchot Beit HaBechira. In a somewhat uncharacteristic historical interlude, the Rambam writes:

“It is an accepted tradition that the place where Dovid and Shlomo built the altar [on the threshing floor of Aravna Ha’Yevuti] is the same place where Avraham built an altar and bound Yitzchak to it. It is also the place where Noach built [an altar] when he left the ark, and it is the location of the altar upon which Kayin and Hevel sacrificed [korbanot].[10] On it Adam offered a sacrifice when he was created, and from there he was created, as our Sages said, "Adam was created from the place of his atonement.”[11]

Consider well, that the Rambam here is making a most keen point; namely, that the reality offset by the fact that Hashem created Adam as a human being and not as an angel, is one where sin would be conceivably extant. Anticipating that Man might be incited to sin, Hakadosh Baruch Hu deliberately fashioned and animated Adam out of earth collected from the site of the holy alter, the very location where Adam could return to his former state of excellence, and experience rebirth.[12]

Armed with this understanding, we may perhaps begin to elucidate a cryptic comment made by the Maharsha, Rav Shmuel Eliezer HaLevi Eidels Zt”l, in his running commentary to Mesechet Rosh Hashana (17b). The gemara submits:

“Hashem passed over [Moshe’s] face and He called out.” Rav Yochanan said, if the pasuk didn’t say so itself, it would be impossible to say; but from here we learn that Hashem wrapped himself like a Shliach Tzibur and showed Moshe the order of the prayer [known as the 13 attributes of mercy]. He said to him, any time that Bnei Yisrael sin, recite this prayer in front of me and I will pardon them.”

The Maharsha comments:

“And in an old book of wisdom from the mystics I found, ‘Hashem garbed himself in the very same white Tallis that he wrapped himself in at the creation of the world.’”

What might otherwise ring esoteric now smacks of conventionality; it would appear most conceivable that if Hashem wanted to present the formula for teshuva to the world, he would do so wearing, k’viyachol, the same cloths that he wore while He was creating that same world. This merely serves to bolster everything we have said until now; it was the act of creation itself that served as the impetus for teshuva.

Teshuva: the Great Constant

The art of return is a funny thing; it takes only a moment to begin, but a lifetime to perfect.[13] Indeed, it is quite likely that this exact point served as the inspiration for Rav Yisrael Lipkin of Salant Zt”l when he coined the following witticism:

“Most people begin to do teshuva during the week of selichot preceding Rosh HaShanah; the more righteous begin at the beginning of the month of Elul preceding Rosh HaShanah; but I say that one should begin to do teshuva immediately after Yom Kippur has ended.” [14]

Indeed, Teshuva is a constant endeavor, which must be practicedמראשית השנה ועד אחרית שנה—from the commencement of the year until its end. [15]

A fascinating appeal included in the Tzavah (Last Will and Testament) of the great, Rebbe Yehudah HaChassid Zt”l may help us to add a bit more nuance to this slightly inaccessible abstraction:

“Item #39: It is essential that a man not shine his shoes on the day that he sets out on a journey.”

To expand our understanding of this strange request, let us turn to the commentary of R’ Avraham Yaakov Finkle Shlit”a, which he appended to his translation of the Tzavah. Rav Finkle expounds:

“Perhaps he [Rebbe Yehudah HaChassid] intended to alert each and every person to prepare himself and repent [exemplified by the cleaning of one’s shoes] well before he sets out on his ultimate ‘journey,’ and not wait for the last moment. [This follows what] the Mishna says: ‘Rebbe Eliezer said, “Repent one day before your death.”[16] His disciples asked, “Does a person know on what day he will die?” Rebbe Eliezer said to them, “All the more so should he repent today, lest he die tomorrow. All of one's days should be spent in Teshuvah.”’”[17]

Perhaps our classification of teshuva as an omnipresent obligation can inspire a more profound understanding of a most perplexing gemara in Mesechet Berachot regarding the status of Ba’alei Teshuva. The gemara insists:

“Rebbe Avahu said, ‘[In the World to Come], even the completely righteous cannot stand where the Ba’alei Teshuva stand,’ as the pasuk says, ‘Peace, peace, unto the far and the near.’ First the pasuk says to the far (those who were spiritually far) and only then does the pasuk include the near (the righteous).”[18]

Indeed, how are we to understand this gemara? Is it really feasible that a person who has reached many exalted levels of righteousness should be surpassed by a meager Ba’al Teshuva? We may suggest, however, that since teshuva at its very core is a constant attempt at improving ones relationship with the Master of the Universe, the spiritual composition of its adherents is even more refined than that of a person who has not experienced this devoted striving. [19], [20]

The Will to Believe

I do confess, however, that while it is one thing to philosophize about what precisely constitutes teshuva, or how exactly one achieves this exalted state—we’ll leave that to the professionals—it is an entirely different matter to believe in its efficacy. Indeed, even the now dissipated generations of our nation’s past, found it justifiably[21] challenging to harness their faith in the potency of teshuva. For instance, near the end of Sefer Yechezkel, Hakadosh Baruch Hu relates the following catechetical message to his beloved prophet:

“Tell Bnei Yisrael that ‘Although you [Bnei Yisrael] have said: “Our rebellious acts and our sins have caught up with us, and we are wasting away because of them. How can we live?”’ Say to them, ‘Hashem declares, “As surely as I live, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but prefer that the wicked change their behavior and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil deeds!”’” [22]

In his peirush to Sefer Yechezkel, Rashi acts as if a pair of reading spectacles aiding our presbyopic mind’s eye to glean the proper intention of these truly illuminating pesukim. Rashi comments:

Hashem instructed Yechezkel, “Tell them that I know that they do not want to return because they think that Teshuva will not help them; [but, they are wrong.]”[23]

Unfortunately, this type of expressed hopelessness is not unique to the times of the nevi’im. During the days of our sages as well, there were those who despaired of the potential to do teshuva. One such example of this despondency was displayed by the foremost masmid turned maskil, Rabbi Elisha Ben Avuya, (later to be dubbed “Acher” which means “the other one”) who left the fold around the 2nd century. The gemara (Chagigah 15a) credits Acher's persistence in maintaining his new found, yet self destructive modus vivendi to his misgivings about the כח of teshuva. The gemara records the following heartrending account:

“Acher rhetorically asked [his student] Rebbe Meir, ‘What is the meaning of the
pasuk (Iyov 28:17), “Neither gold nor crystal can be compared with it, nor can a vessel of pure gold match its worth”?’ He explained, ‘This pasuk refers to words of Torah which are as difficult to acquire as gold, and as easy to lose as glass.’ Rebbe Meir responded, ‘Our teacher Rebbe Akiva did not interpret this pasuk like that; rather, “just as broken vessels of gold and broken glass may be mended, likewise a talmid chacham who has sinned may be mended.”’ [24] Rebbe Meir concluded, ‘Please, mend yourself as well.’ Acher answered him, but I have already heard them call out from behind the Heavenly partition, “Return, O wayward children…except for Acher.”’”

In his seminal work, Agra D’pirka, Reb Tzvi Elimelech Shapira of Dinov Zt”l, more commonly known as the Bnei Yisaschar, notes that Acher did in fact hear a Heavenly voice seemingly barring him from doing teshuva. Nonetheless, however, he was expected to rise above doubt, ignore this “divine decree,” and execute an unabridged, full on return to Hashem.[25]

While this answer does evoke some degree of appreciation for those who have risen to the occasion in realizing the strength of teshuva, it does little to pacify the strange, yet incessant feelings of sympathy that one cannot help but feel for the rebellious Acher. After all, how could he possibly have known to ignore this divine calling? A curious gemara in Mesechet Pesachim affords an exceptional answer to this question and a complementary lesson in etiquette to boot:

“Rav Huna the son of Rav Nasan said, ’Everything your host [בעל הבית] tells you to do, you must do, except leave [חוץ מצא].’” [26]

A humorous gemara no doubt; but what does this have to do with Acher and his divine decree? Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk Zt”l, the author of the sefer Meshech Chochma, had this to say:

The gemara means to instruct us to listen to everything that Hashem [the בעל הבית] tells us to do. There is only one exception to this rule: if we feel like we are being pushed away from doing teshuva [צא], as did Acher, we must not listen; rather, we must learn to defy this inner voice, and return to Hashem nonetheless.[27]

The Talmud Yerushalmi (Ma’akot 2:6) offers this unique perspective as well:

“[Chazal] asked Wisdom [i.e. one of the books of כתובים], ‘What is the punishment for one who sinned?’ Wisdom answered, ‘Let evil trample the sinner’ (Mishlei 13:21). They asked Prophecy [i.e. one of the books of נביאים], ‘What is the punishment for one who sinned?’ Prophecy answered, ‘The soul that sins shall perish’ (Yechezkel 18:4)…They asked Hashem, Blessed be He, ‘What is the punishment for one who sinned?’ He said, ‘Let him do teshuva and he will be forgiven.’” [28]

Consider well this most exalted lesson; even though the highest forms of human understanding (Prophecy and Wisdom) whisper in our impressionable ears, “Teshuva cannot help you”, we must have faith in Hashem’s word.

Those who are little of Faith

And now, to help us expand our tapestry a bit further, let’s examine an intriguing gemara in the seventh perek of Mesechet Sotah. The gemara relates:

Rav Yochanan said in the name of Rebbe Shimon Bar Yochai: To what end did the Anshei Kneset HaGedolah [Men of the Great Assembly] establish silent prayer? So that those who have sinned may admit their transgressions without being ashamed[29] [in front of others].[30]

Rav Yissachar Ber Elenberg, the author of the sefer Be’er Sheva (and a possible relative of mine) was troubled by the following question:

“It is very difficult for me to understand…how the gemara can attribute the establishment of silent prayer to chazal’s sensitivity toward the shame of those who have sinned, when the gemara in Brachot (24b) details: ‘Anyone who raises his voice in prayer is considered little of faith,’ implying that, irrespective of our sensitivity towards sinners, there is some prohibition to raise one’s voice in prayer…V’tzaruch Iyun (And this needs further consideration)?[31]

I would like to suggest a possible reconciliation for the Be’er Sheva’s question; however, this will need a word or two of introduction.

As it turns out, there are several other places in ש"ס where the term “מקטני אמונה” is used to describe those who are, so to speak, “little of faith.” One classic example of this formulation is found in the last perek of Mesechet Pesachim (118b):

“Rav Huna said, ‘The generation of Jews who left Egypt were מקטני אמונה.’ This is in accordance with Rabbah bar Mari’s explanation of the pasuk [Tehillim 106:7], ‘“And they rebelled on the banks of the Red Sea;” This teaches us that they rebelled and said, “Just as we entered the sea and came out, so shall the Egyptians enter the sea and come out.”’”

But something remains aloof here; after all, does this gemara not speak of the דור דעה– the generation that was redeemed from Mitzrayim and went on to receive the Torah at Har Sinai–about whom the midrash declares, “Even the most simple maidservant was able to see that which the prophets did not see”?[32] Indeed, does the gemara really mean to suggest that the members of such a distinguished generation, who witnessed the revealed hand of Hakadosh Baruch Hu through ten mystifying plagues, doubted the existence of their Creator, chas v’shalom?

And so, it is this very question that R’ Yitzchak Blazer, the renowned disciple of R’ Yisrael Lipkin of Salant, addresses in his preeminent work, Koch’vei Ohr:

“It is clear that R’ Huna, in the above cited midrash, did not come to speak disparagingly about this exalted generation; rather, מקטני אמונה here means, that they were complete in their אמונה, lacking only one minor detail. [In other words, if the word אמונה implies one-hundred percent participation, מקטני אמונה implies a slightly imperfect level of faith].”

HaRav Blazer goes on to explain that the אמונה which Bnei Yisrael lacked was true faith in the efficacy of teshuva, a force which is beyond the realm of our human comprehension. “How could it be,” they wondered, “that just days ago we were worshiping idols, and now we are a separate and holy people?”[33]

Using this new definition from the term “מקטני אמונה,” we are now prepared to answer the Be’er Sheva’s question, and to resolve the seemingly contradictory opinions recorded in Mesechtot Brachot and Sotah, regarding the impetus for the establishment of silent prayer. Essentially, we would like to suggest that the true reason for the establishment of silent prayer is one recorded in Mesechet Sotah: “So that those who have sinned may admit their transgressions without being ashamed [in front of others],” and that the gemara’s assertion in Mesechet Brachot that one who prays out loud is deemed “מקטני אמונה,” is merely a consequence of rationale given in Mesechet Sotah.

In other words, since silent prayer was established so that those who have sinned may admit their transgressions without being ashamed, it follows that one who does not take advantage of this opportunity must be “little of faith,” in that he does not believe that teshuva is effective. For if he truly believed in the strength of teshuva, he would surely be davening silently, admitting his transgressions before his merciful Father.

To be continued………………

*************************************

[1] Rav Kook’s words here are reminiscent of an anecdote recounted by R’ Teitelbaum to R’ Shalom Schwadron, who in turn related it to R’ Shlomo Price, who taught it to this author. One year at the Great Assembly of the Agudat Yisroel, the Chafetz Chaim spoke at length about the importance of spreading the light of Torah to the far reaches of the earth. After completing his speech, the Chafetz Chaim noticed the reluctance of his esteemed audience, who, in their great humility, had disqualified themselves from this most vital undertaking on account of the Rabbinic dictum (Bava Batra 60b) “First adorn (perfect) yourself, then adorn others.” “Who are we,” they said with complete sincerity, “to carry the message of the pure and holy Torah?” Realizing the problem, the Chafetz Chaim quickly returned to the podium to address the disheartened audience. “A nobleman once came to visit his manor,” he began again by way of a parable. “His subjects prepared an impressive reception for him at which they served some of finest tea in all of the land. However, because the water supply in the manor was not clean, the tea was quite muddy. After just one sip of the brew, the nobleman spit out the tea and promptly proclaimed that ‘No water from the manor is to be used without first sterilizing it through boiling!’ A short while later the nobleman heard that his manor had burnt to the ground. When he inquired as to why the subjects had been negligent in putting out the fire, they told him that although they had tried, the new law required that they cook the water before using it. ‘By the time we finally prepared the water,’ said the subjects, ‘the fire had already consumed the entire manor.’ The furious nobleman screamed at his subjects, ‘You fools! When you want to serve tea, then you need to sterilize the water first, but when there is a fire burning, you must not be particular as to what kind of water to use; you must use any kind of water you can find!’” So too, explained the Chafetz Chaim, when a fire is burning in the world, we cannot afford to be picky about who takes on the responsibility to spreads the light of Torah, no matter how unfit he may be for the task. It is with this in mind that we humbly present this essay.

[2] Mesechet Pesachim (54a); Similarly, see Bereishit Rabbah (1:4), Midrash Tehillim [Shochar Tov] (90:12), and the Zohar (I:134b): “Great is teshuva for it preceded the creation of the world…”, as well as Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook Zt”l in Orot HaTeshuva (5:6): “Teshuva preceded the world and is therefore the foundation of the world. The fulfillment of life occurs specifically through the unfolding revelation of its essential nature.” Additionally, see R’ Meir Ben Yitzchak Zt”l’s liturgical poem, Selichah #61, recited on day 3rd day of the Aseret Y’mei Teshuva. The Zohar Chadash (65a) goes so far as to say that the world itself was metaphysically formed out of teshuva. Lastly, see R’ Shalom Rokeach, the Sar Shalom of Belz Zt”l’s Torah U’Moadim (Parshat Bereishit D”H Od #1) [collected by R’ Yisroel Yaakov Klapholtz], for a fascinating observation about the connection between the beginning of the Torah and its end.

[3] Kad HaKemach, Os Tuf/Teshuva. Similarly, see R’ Yaakov Moelin (Maharil) Zt”l’s Sefer Minhagim: Hilchot Aseret Y’mei Teshuva (9), and the Shelah HaKadosh Mesechet Shevuaot: Perek Torah Ohr (21). Perhaps Rabbenu Bachya here is basing his comments on the Zohar (I: 22a-23b) as paraphrased by Rav Yaakov Culi Zt”l, in his Me’am Loez: Parshat Netzavim: “When Hashem desired to create the world, He asked the Torah for counsel. The Torah replied: ‘Master of the world, if You create man there are times when he will sin...thus, neither the world nor man will be able to endure.’ Therefore, before Hashem created the world, He created teshuva.” Baring similar sentiments, see Mesechet Avodah Zarah (3b), Pirkei D’Rebbe Eliezer (Chapter 11), and Rashi to Bereishit (1:1) D”H Barah Elokim

[4] See Mesechet Megillah (13b) for a discussion of this notion: “Reish Lakish said, ‘Hashem does not strike Bnei Yisrael unless He creates the cure first…’” Additionally, see Yalkut Shemoni, Esther (Remez 1053), and the R’ Shlomo ben Shmuel Zt”l’s Selichah (#66), recited on the 4th day of the Aseret Y’mei Teshuva. It is fascinating to note the gemara’s archetype for הקדים רפואה למכה, supplying the cure before the disease: “Hashem knew that Haman would expend 10,000 kikar [a unit of weight] in silver shekel in exchange for permission to destroy B’nei Yisrael; therefore, Hashem made sure that our shekel [those donated to aid the construction of the mishkan] preceded Haman's shekels, so that they might serve as a protection for us. “Interestingly, the gemara’s example of הקדים רפואה למכה lends further credence to the already well supported association between Purim and Yom HaKippurim, [seeTikkunei Zohar (86)]. What becomes readily apparent is that both Purim and Yom HaKippurim are celebrations of the fact that Hashem always establishes a רפואה before He strikes us—on Purim, we revel in the fact that Hashem prevented our physical destruction by preemptively soliciting our shekalim before Haman attempted to carry out his evil plan against us; on Yom Kippur we celebrate that Hashem created teshuva, as a means to draw ourselves closer to Hashem even before He created the means for us to distance ourselves from Him. Additionally, see the Midrash Pli’ah (Astonishing Midrash) cited in Yalkut Reuveni (Shemot, Ki-Tisa #10) that in the merit of donating Shekalim to the Mishkan, the Jewish People were given the a day of forgiveness, Yom Kippur, as well as the Maharal in his Tiferet Yisroel, (Chapter 53) regarding the midrash that Purim and Yom Kippur will be the only festivals that we continue to celebrate even L’atid La’vo.

[5] Kohelet (7:20); Additionally, see Hakadosh Baruch Hu’s magnificent work, Sefer Vayikra, where He repeatedly uses the phrase, “When (and not “If”) a person from among the nation sins…”, and R’ Yitzchak Abarbanel Zt”l’s comments to Devarim (30:1), as well as Rav Kalonymus Kalman Epstein Zt”l’s Me’or V’shemesh: Parshat Bereishit D”H V’yivra (#1) where he quotes from R’ Yaakov Yitzvak Ish Horowitz Zt”l, the Chozeh of Lublin that “in our times there is not a single person who is not considered a Ba’al Teshuva.” Likewise, see R’ Yaakov Emden’s Siddur Ya'avetz (Beit Yaakov [Lomberg Addition] pg. 68b) that the reason chazal established the bracha Ha’shiveinu directly after Chonen HaDa’at is to remind us that since Hashem gave us Da’at—free will—it is certain that we will need the gift of teshuva.
Lastly, there is a saying which has been passed down from R’ Nachaman of Breslav: “Der velt hot a taos. Az a tzaddik mact a taos—oder iz er nisht kein tzaddik, oder iz es nisht kein taos. Nisht azoy! Tzaddik bleibt tzaddik, un taos bleibt taos. [The world is subject to a common misconception. If a Tzaddik makes a mistake—either he is not a Tzaddik, or it is not a mistake. It is not so! The Tzaddik remains a Tzaddik, and the mistake, a mistake.]

[6] However, Shabbat 55b: Binyamin, Amram, Yishai, Kalev ben David, see Tanya about tzaddikim never sinned have no yetzer hara- even a beinoni never sinned

[7] See the Sefer Megalei Amukot, by R’ Nosson Neta Shapira of Krakow Zt”l to Devarim 34, regarding Moshe Rabbenu’s death on the mountain “Navo” (Heb. בו). Rav Shapira explains"נ"-בו , he reached the שער "נ", the 50th level of purity, and in his newfound state of perfection, he was no longer fit for this world; for perfection, by its basic definition, has no place in this world. Likewise, see the Maharal’s comments in his Chidushei Aggadot to Sandhedrin (106a), “Sitting, is always synonymous with pain…” and Mesechet Brachot (17a), “In Olam Haba…the Tzaddikim sit with their crowns on their heads.” For further reading on this subject, see R’ Yehuda Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefat Emet: Lech Lecha (5634); R’ Meshulam Gross Zt”l’s Nachalas Tzvi: Vayeira, D”H Vayeira #2; R’ Moshe Feinstein Zt”l’s Drash Moshe: Shoftim (16:22) D”H V’lo Takim Lecha Matzeiva #2; R’ Yaakov Katina Zt”l’s Korban Ha’ani: Netzavim, D”H Atem #2; Ma’aseh Ish, a digest of minhagim and stories about the Chazon Ish, (Vol. 5, pg. 119), and Lamed vav: a collection of the favorite stories of Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach Zt”l (pg. 23-24): The holy Rebbe of Sochachov (the son-in law of the Kotzker) became very sick soon after he got married at the young age of 13. His father came to the Kotzker to ask him to pray on behalf of the still young child. “Rebbe,” he said, “pray for my son. He is only 13 years old and yet he knows the entire Torah!” The Kotzker laughed, “You call that learning? He has done nothing.” Soon after, the Sochachover recovered, but his father was still disturbed by his visit to the Kotzker. The Sochachover, who immediately understood his father-in-law’s depth, said, “By intimating that I have not even begun to learn yet, he was appealing to Heaven as if to say, ‘He has not completed his role in the world; do not take him away yet!’” See the Yerushalmi Kiddushin (1:7 [20a]) for a similar story about a sick R’ Tarfon’s (non)perfection of the mitzvah Kibbud Av V’eim. Interestingly, it was R’ Tarfon himself who taught: “You are never free to desist from working [to perfect the world]” (Pirkei Avot 2:16).
[8] See Orot HaTeshuva 5:6, “If a person is constantly given to stumbling…this is not a defect in his perfection, for the principal of perfection is realized only in the struggle to attain it.”

[9] Mishle (24:16). See R’ Yitzchok Hutner’s understanding of this pasuk in his Pachad Yitzchak (Igros U’kesuvim #128). For a similar theme, see the Rebbe Nachman of Breslav in Likutey Moharan (I:25).

[10] For a discussion of the apparent discrepancy between Noach and Avraham, who “built alters” and Adam Kayain, and Hevel who are merely described as “sacrificing” on those alters, see R’ Yehoshua Olbaum Shlit”a’s Divrei Yehoshua: Parshat Noach (pg. 25).

[11] Bereishit Rabbah (14:8). See as well, Midrash Tanchuma: Tzav (14), that the Mizbe’ach was composed of dirt in order that it be fit to atone for man who is made from dirt, and Kli Yakar to Bereishit (3:23) that after Adam sinned he was sent from the garden to work the ground of Har HaMoriah so that he might build a Mizbei’ach from there; thus, facilitating teshuva through the same dirt that caused the chet, [i.e. his body].

[12] Regarding the notion of Teshuva as a rebirth, the Tikunei Zohar (Tikun 1) writes that the word "בראשית" is actually a conjunction of the letter "ב" and the word "ראשית", meaning “two beginnings.” In his Imrei Baruch: Bereishit (Maamar 2), R’ Baruch Simon Shlit”a elucidates that every man’s life consists of two beginnings. The first beginning is the point of his birth, when he enters the world. The second beginning occurs as a rebirth; after having sinned, he may do teshuva and begin again. Hashem provides with this all important message in the first word of the Torah to ensure that we do not despair of spiritual redemption. [Perhaps this is similar to the Midrash Shmuel’s insight regarding the Hakdama to Pirkei Avot, “Kol Yisrael Yesh LaHem Chelek L’Olam Haba…” Ayain Sham.] Indeed, the well known relationship between mikva’ot and teshuva stems from this quality of rebirth. See the Sheim Mi’Shmuel: Shabbat Teshuva (5672) and R’ Aryeh Kaplan’s Waters of Eden (Pgs. 13-14) who both write that mans inability to live underwater serves as a symbolic act of death; it follows, therefore, that his accent from the water serves as a form of rebirth. It is therefore interesting to note that the word “ך-ש-פ- נ” using ש” ב ת”א transforms into the word “ל-ב-ו-ט.” See as well, Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 173) and R’ Nosson Sternhertz of Nemirov’s Likutei Halachot:Yoreh De’ah, Hechsher Keilim (1:2 and 4:20).

[13] Perhaps this is what R’ Kook meant when he wrote in the Hakdama to Orot HaTeshuva, “It [teshuva] is the commandment which on one hand, is most simple to perform—for a mere thought of teshuva is already considered teshuva; but on the other hand, is the most difficult to perform—for its essence is not fully revealed in the world.”

[14] Quoted in Torat Rebbe Yisrael M’Salant (Chapter #4: HaYomim HaNora’im, pg. 101), written by Rav Yisrael’s grandson R’ Chaim Yitzchak Lipkin Zt”l.

[15] In his Sefer Ta’amei HaMinhagim, Likutim Inyanim Shonim (Simin 151 [pg. 543]) R’ Avraham Yitzchak Sperling Zt”l quotes from the Great Tzaddik of Rahatin that the bracha “Sh’hechiyanu,” which is customarily recited in conjunction with the performance of any mitzvah which is connected to a specific time of year, is not said on the mitzvah of teshuva precisely because it is a constant process that remains active throughout the year. We might suggest this as a possible reason for the absence of any bracha over the mitzvah of teshuva whatsoever. Indeed, see the ruling of the Or Zaruah (Vienna) Hilchot Birkat HaMotzei (Simin 140) that “all constant mitzvot (e.g. believing in Hashem, fearing Him, loving Him, etc…) do not receive brachot.” Teshuva, which fits into the category of “constant mitzvot” as well, should not—and indeed does not—receive a birkat mitzvah. For a similar theme, see the last comment of the Maharsha to Mesechet Megillah (32a) D”H V’yidaber Moshe as to why there is no specific injunction to learn the halachot of teshuva thirty days before Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur as there is to learn the laws of Sukkot, Pesach, and Shevu’ot before each of these other holidays respectively.

[16] Mesechet Pirkei Avot (2:15)

[17] Mesechet Shabbos (153a). This notion adds an extra dimension of depth to the story which is told about R’ Yisrael Salanter: Late one night, while taking a walk, he passed by a shoe store and was perplexed to see an old shoemaker still up mending shoes. After expressing his surprise, the shoemaker pointed at his half burnt out candle and replied, “As long as the candle still burns, it is still possible to fix what is broken.” Rav Yisrael took this powerful mussar with him until the day he passed on from this world. [Although this story is told about quite a few gedolim, including: the Chafetz Chaim, the Besh”t, and R’ Zushia of Anapoli, to date, I have never seen it printed in any primary source.]

[18] Mesechet Brachot (34b) and Sanhedrin (99a).

[19] Perhaps this is an extension of the concept from Pirkei Avot (5:26), “According to the pain is the reward.” It is the painful struggle that a Ba’al Teshuva constantly undergoes, which pushes him to higher levels than the tzaddik. Indeed, the Rambam rules, [Hilchot Teshuvah (2:8), based on Meschet Yoma (86a)] that even after one repents for having commited an aveirah, he must continue to do Teshuva every Yom Kippur.

[20] For several alternate explanations try: Ba’al HaTanya Zt”l’s Iggeret HaKodesh (Letter 10), R’ Yehudah Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefas Emes: Acharei Mos (5664), R’ Chaim Halberstam of Tzanz Zt”l’s Chidushei Divrei Chaim on Shas (Chelek 3, pg. 389), R’ Yosef Dov Soloveitchik Zt”l’s Al HaTeshuva: (Chapter 7, see specifically pgs. 169-183), and the Maharal, Tiferet Ysirael (Chapter 57). Additionally, see R’ Yonatan Eibshitz Zt”l’s Yaaros Dvash (Drasha 1:1) where the author explains that since the spot where the ba’al teshuva stands used to be occupied by sin, it is dangerous for a tzaddik to stand there.

[21] See R’ Moshe Chaim Luzzato Zt”l’s Mesillat Yesharim (Chapter 4): “According to strict justice, there should be no correction at all for a sin, for in truth, how can a man straighten that which he has made crooked?” Likewise, see R’ Shemuel Yehudah Katsenelenbogen Zt”l’s Drashot Mahr”i Mintz: HaDrash HaRishon (pgs. 9-10), and Mesechet Avodah Zarah (4b) w/ Rashi (ibid.) regarding the fact that Dovid Hamelech only sinned because Hashem wanted to show people that, despite the fact that logic seems to dictate otherwise, teshuva truly is effective. We can readily understand that common sense would seem to reject the notion of teshuva. See the Maharal in his Netivot Olam: Netiv HaTeshuva (Chapter 2) who writes that just as it is unnatural to expect an earthly court to accept the apology of a criminal; it is likewise unnatural to expect the Heavenly court to forgive us for our sins.

[22] Yechezkel (33:10-11). See Mesechet Ta’anit (16a) with Maharsha (ibid. D”H HaZaken Shebahem) and Sefer Ba’al Shem Tov al torah: Parshat Breishit #169 that the fasting and afflictions which are often associated with teshuva are to be viewed merely as a catalyst toward fixing ones character rather than a punishment for the wicked actions of the past. Thus, the gemara in Ta’anis (16a) relates “It is not fasting, nor sackcloth which helps; rather, teshuva and good deeds that are effective.” Fasting and sackcloth are merely a means to improve ourselves. Indeed, the idea of “punishment”—divine or otherwise—as a means to teshuvah is a major reoccurring theme in R’ Ovadiah Seforno’s commentary on the Torah. See for example, his comments to Shemot (3:7) regarding the imagery of the burning bush as a symbol for the ma’akot in general, as well as Shemot (4:23) regarding ma’akot bechorot and (7:3) regarding pharaoh’s obstinance specifically. It is only when there is no hope for teshuva [see comments to Bereishit (18:17)] that Hashem is forced to punish us for our own good. For a similar theme, see R’ Shlomo Ben Aderet Zt”l’s Shu”t Rashba (Simin #18) for the reason that we do not make a bracha on the mitzvah to carry out capital punishment. Additionally, see R' Moshe Yehudah Leib Zilberberg M'Ketina Zt”l’s Shu"t Zayit Raanan (Vol. 2, Likutei Chidushei Torah: Bereishit #1) for a beautiful explanation of the midrash [Bereishit Rabbah (2:5)], “‘And Hashem saw that the light was good,’ this shows that Hashem desires the actions of the righteous more than the actions of the wicked.”

[23] As we will see, with G-d’s help, Bnei Yisrael had a similar issue during the Exodus from Egypt, which Hakadosh Baruch Hu helped them to surmount.

[24] Rebbe Meir is certainly referring to Acher here. Interestingly, Rebbe Akiva, the author of this interpretation, was himself the son of a convert who, until the age of 40, was little more than a common shepherd. Lacking even a rudimentary understanding of the Aleph-Beis, he transformed himself, with remarkable perseverance, into one of the greatest torah luminaries of all time. He serves as the embodiment of this teaching. For his life story, see Mesechet Pesachim (49b), Mesechet Ketuvot: (62b-63a), and Avot D’rebbe Nosson (Chapter 4, Mishna 2).

[25] Sefer Agra D’pirka (Os #1). We should note, however, that the Dinover Rebbe was a 5th generation disciple of R’ Yisrael Ba’al Shem Tov, the founder of the Chassidic movement, who preceded him in this understanding of the gemara; see Shivchei Ha’Besht, (pg. 50). See as well, Yerushalmi Peah (1:1), Yerushalmi Sanhedrin (10:1), Rambam to Hilchot Teshuva (3:14), Tosefot to Bava Metzia (58b), and R’ Yechezkel Landau Zt”l’s Drashei HaTzlach (Drash #4): “Nothing can stand in the way of Teshuva…” For an interesting elaboration, see R’ Dr. Moshe Burak’s The Hatam Sofer (pg. 294-296).

[26] Pesachim (86b); the Beit Yosef also quotes this from Derech Eretz Zuta (Perek 4) and Derech Eretz Rabbah (Perek 6). Granted, R’ Menachem ben Solomon of Provonce Zt”l, the illustrious Meiri (ibid) believed that “some jokesters add this line to the gemara and it should be removed.” However, for a few possible explanations of this gemara see, R’ Shmuel Eliezer Eidels Zt”l’s Maharsha (Pesachim 86b.), R’ Yehudah Leib Alter Zt”l’s Sefes Emes (Pesachim 86b.), R’ Yoel Circus Zt”l’s commentary to the Arbah Turim, Ba’it Chadash (Orech Chaim 170:6). For a literal reading of the gemara, see the commentary of the Drisha (ibid. 170:3)

[27] Meshech Chochma, Devarim (9:23). Likewise, see the Shelah HaKadosh in his Shaar HaOsios, Kuf/Kidushat Zivugim (Simin 21) D”H V’yesh Lomar and Eliyahu De’Vidas Zt”l’s Reishit Chochma Sha’ar HaKedusha (#17), as well as the Chid”a Zt”l, in his Nachal Kedumim (Parshat Bo) quoting from R’ Ya’akov Toledano Zt”l, the Maharit. The Agra D’Pirka (ibid.) goes on to explain that this divine decree was nothing more than a test of sincerity which Acher, and many like him failed to surmount.

[28] See as well, Yalkut Shemoni Tehillim (25), Piskta D’rav Kahana (24:7); and Yerushalmi, Sanhedrin (10:2) regarding Hashem’s acceptance of the evil King Menashe’s teshuva. Likewise, see the brilliant insight of R’ Nosson Neta Shapira of Krakow Zt”l in his Sefer Megalei Amukot: Rosh Hashana, D”H Ofen HaSheni regarding the pasuk “קחו עמכם דברים ושובו אל ה'” (Hoshe’a 14:3). Based on the gemara cited above, Rav Shapira explains that a person must ignore the words of “Wisdom” and “Prophecy” [i.e. קחו עמכם דברים] and return to Hashem nonetheless [i.e. ושובו אל ה'].

[29] See the comments of R’ Yechiel ben Yekutiel Anav Zt”l in his Ma’alot Ha’middot (Chapter 17: Repentence) and of R' Yochanan Luria Zt”l in his Mashivat Nefesh to Parshat Netzavim, who write that Hashem does everything he can to try to make Teshuva less embarrassing for us: “Indeed, Hashem returns to us first, like a doctor who takes some medicine to show the patient that it is not dangerous.” Ayein Sham! Likewise, see Bava Metzia (mishna 4:10) and the gemara (ibid. 59a) as well as Rambam [Hilchot Teshuvah (7:8)], regarding the punishment for embarrassing a Ba’al teshuva..

[30] Mesechet Sotah (32b). We would do well to mention that this gemara appears to be inconsistent with the gemara in Mesechet Brachot (12b): “One who is embarrassed as a result of a transgression is forgiven for all of his sins.” [See the Maharal in his, Netivot Olam: Netiva HaTeshuva (Chapter 5), who explains that his feelings of embarrassment are indicative of the fact that he feels disconnected from his sin; for one who is attached to his sins would surely think them natural. Indeed, it is these feelings of detachment that warrant his being forgiven.] Perhaps the gemara in Mesechet Chagiga (16a) can serve to reconcile the two statements: “Who is a person who has no respect for his creator? One who sins in private [i.e. he looks around to make sure no one is looking, thus implying that Hashem cannot see him.] Since the root of his first transgression stemmed from his failure to feel embarrassed in front of Hashem, Chazal established silent prayer to serve as a forum to feel embarrassment in front of Hashem alone. [As the gemara says, “without being ashamed in front of other people,” (i.e. without being ashamed only in front of other people, to the exclusion of Hashem).] The gemara in Brachot, therefore, teaches that a person who feels embarrassed, even under the rubric of silent prayer, deserves to have all of his sins forgiven. Perhaps this can also account for the strange language of the Mishna in Avot (5:20): “Boshet Panim L’gan Eden, (eng. the shame faced go to Gan Eden).” Why does the mishna add the seemingly superfluous word “Panim (eng. face)” to the mishna? Would it not suffice to say, “Those who possess [the trait of] shame go to Gan Eden”? Perhaps we can suggest that the word “פנים” here should be pronounced “P’nim (eng. internal),” instead of “Panim (eng. face);” thus rendering the mishna, “Anyone whose embarrassment is internal goes to Gan Eden.” [Rebbe Mori R’ Elie Marcus Shlit”a pointed out to me that this approach adds new meaning to both the gemara in Berachot (7a): “Rav Yochanan said in the name of Rav Yossi, ‘One strike to the heart (internally) is better that 100 lashes to the body (externally),” and the gemara in Brachot (34b): “Rav Kahana said, ‘A person who openly admits his sins (i.e. only openly to the public, but not to Hashem) is called brazen, as the pasuk says, “Happy is the man whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is hidden (from the public).”’” Additionally, see Rashi and Radak to Tehillim (130:4).

[31] Sefer Be’er Sheva: Mesechet Sotah (32b), D”H “Mipnei Mah”. See the Maharsha (ibid.) who asks the same question and gives a technical answer that he himself is not satisfied with: “Perhaps we can suggest that if everyone was accustomed to raise his voice during tefillah, we wouldn’t think of this as a show of little faith; however, once chazal established that tefillah be said quietly, one who raises his voice is called little of faith. V’dachok Ketzat (And this is slightly forced).”

[32] See Mechilta (15:2) and Shir HaShirim Rabbah (3:9) cited by Rashi to Shemot (15:2). [The midrash, however, name the prophet Yechezkel in particular.] The Maharal, in his Gur Aryeh (15:2) insists that the midrash learns this from the use of the singular form in the pasuk, which implies that each and every member of Klall Yisrael was afforded this sublime level of prophesy.

[33] Regarding the idol worship of Bnei Yisrael in Mitzrayim, see the opening words of the Haggadah shel Pesach based on the mishna, Pesachim (10:4): “In the beginning our fathers worshiped idols in mitzrayim.” Likewise, see Mechilta, (Parsha 5); Midrash Shachar Tov (Chapter 15); Yalkut Shimoni (1:234).