Back
Igeret Hateshuva
Chapter 1תַּנְיָא בְּסוֹף יוֹמָא (פו, א):
It was taught in a baraita at the end of tractate Yoma (86a): The author of the Tanya begins Iggeret HaTeshuva by quoting a baraita, with slight textual variations, that outlines the general levels of sin, repentance, and atonement, interweaving his commentary and clarifications throughout.
שְׁלֹשָׁה חִלּוּקֵי כַפָּרָה הֵם וּתְשׁוּבָה עִם כָּל אֶחָד.
"There are three distinctions in the process of atonement, and repentance is necessary with each one. The baraita delineates three distinct levels of atonement for various categories of sin: One, if a person violates a positive commandment and he repents, he is forgiven immediately. Two, if a person transgresses a prohibition and repents, his repentance suspends his punishment until Yom Kippur, which atones for his sin. Finally, if one commits a transgression that warrants karet – excision from the World to Come or premature death – or he commits a sin that is punishable by a court-imposed death penalty, and then he repents, repentance and Yom Kippur suspend his punishment, and suffering absolves and completes the atonement. While this baraita deals with the general principles of atonement – how God forgives the sins of man – it adds an overarching comment regarding a person's duty in this interplay: He must repent. This addition is significant in that it cautions that atonement, irrespective of degree, does not replace repentance but rather accompanies and follows repentance. Each are distinct phases of the process. While repentance comprises the central subject of this book, the author of the Tanya prefaces his discussion of repentance by presenting the different distinctions of atonement according to the baraita.
עָבַר עַל מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה, וְשָׁב, אֵינוֹ זָז מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁמּוֹחֲלִין לוֹ.
If one neglected to perform a positive commandment and then repents, he is forgiven even before he has moved from his place, i.e., immediately. When a person fails, for whatever reason, to fulfill a positive commandment incumbent upon him, such as reciting the morning Shema, donning tefillin, or sitting in a sukka on Sukkot, repentance alone grants him complete atonement. Since a person regrets his failure to perform the commandment and resolves to perform it from now on, he is immediately forgiven, freeing him of any further obligation in this regard. This is the first category of atonement.
עָבַר עַל מִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה, וְשָׁב, תְּשׁוּבָה תּוֹלָה, וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מְכַפֵּר
If one violated a prohibition and then repents, repentance suspends his punishment and Yom Kippur atones for his sin." Someone who does an action that is expressly forbidden by the Torah, such as eating non-kosher food, and then he repents, the repentance grants him a suspension of the punishment, but he still has not attained complete atonement. The day of Yom Kippur supplements any aspect of his repentance that may have been lacking and atones for his having done something forbidden. This is the second category of atonement.
(פֵּירוּשׁ, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דִּלְעִנְיַן קִיּוּם, מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה גְּדוֹלָה שֶׁדּוֹחָה אֶת ׳לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה׳.
(The apparent severity of transgressing a prohibition as opposed to a positive commandment requires explanation. This means that although, with regard to performance, a positive commandment is superior since it supersedes the avoidance of violating a prohibition, In the midst of quoting the baraita, the author of the Tanya engages in a slightly peripheral yet relevant discussion, clarifying certain points that will be pertinent later. The underlying question here is, what is more important – performing a positive commandment or refraining from a prohibition? While there is no clear-cut answer, from a certain perspective a positive commandment bears more importance. If a person is faced with the choice to perform a positive commandment at the expense of transgressing a prohibition, the general principle is that the positive commandment takes precedence. Situations of conflict between the performance of one commandment over another appear in many places in Jewish law. One classic example is the mitzva of tzitzit. This mitzva entails tying woolen strings to a linen garment, even though the prohibition of forbidden mixtures precludes the attachment of such strings to a linen garment. The halakha that mandates offering sacrifices in the Temple even on the Sabbath, when slaughtering animals is generally prohibited, presents another example. Although this principle has conditions and exceptions, the general rule is that a positive commandment trumps the avoidance of transgressing a prohibition. Yet in the context of the process of atonement, a prohibition seems to hold more gravity than a positive commandment. One's repentance alone gains him atonement for neglecting to perform a positive commandment, while one who transgresses a prohibition must wait for Yom Kippur in order to earn atonement in addition to repentance. It is this dilemma that the author of the Tanya addresses and goes on to reconcile.
הַיְינוּ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁעַל יְדֵי קִיּוּם מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה מַמְשִׁיךְ אוֹר וְשֶׁפַע בְּעוֹלָמוֹת עֶלְיוֹנִים, מֵהֶאָרַת אוֹר אֵין סוֹף בָּרוּךְ הוּא
this is because by performing a positive commandment one draws down light and life-giving sustenance into the upper worlds from the illumination of the light of Ein Sof [the Infinite One], blessed be He All the worlds exist as direct manifestations of the will of God in order that man will be able to serve Him. Therefore, when a person performs a mitzva – the ultimate purpose for which He created the world – he draws down an influx of divine favor, unleashing spiritual light and abundance with it. Every commandment that a person performs therefore creates a new reality, revealing a new illumination of God's infinite light. Though this illumination, sparked by the performance of a commandment, shines into our world, we do not perceive its light due to the opaqueness of this lower realm. The author of the Tanya therefore specifies that this light is manifest in the upper worlds, which are more sensitive to spiritual illumination.
[כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּזֹּהַר דְּרמ״ח פִּקּוּדִין אִינּוּן רמ״ח אֵבָרִין דְּמַלְכָּא (תיקוני זהר עד, א)]
[as the Zohar states (Tikkunei Zohar 74a), the 248 positive commandments comprise the 248 "limbs" of the King], The 248 positive commandments correspond to the 248 limbs in the human body.
וְגַם עַל נַפְשׁוֹ הָאֱלֹקִית,
and also onto one's divine soul, Furthermore, not only does this light shine throughout all the worlds as a result of the mitzva performance, it also shines specifically on the divine soul of the one who performed the commandment. Although a commandment does not always illuminate one's vital, primal soul, the accessible and tangible self with which he experiences his day-to-day life, an illumination does shine "onto one's divine soul," which, as the author of the Tanya explains elsewhere, is the soul that becomes "clothed in the performance of the mitzvot."
כְּמוֹ שֶׁאוֹמְרִים, ״אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְּמִצְוֹתָיו״.
as we recite in the blessing before performing a mitzva, "Blessed are You... who sanctified us with His commandments." Just as the performance of the commandment draws down sanctity into reality and affects the makeup of the spiritual worlds, it also infuses the one who performed the given commandment with sanctity. Hence the wording of a standard blessing: "Who sanctified us with His commandments." The degree to which the person senses this infusion of sanctity is dependent on his spiritual level. The more open and sensitive the person is to the spiritual realm, the more he will sense the light and sanctity that the commandment infused in him. Yet even if he does not sense anything, his divine soul certainly perceives the infusion. This is why a positive commandment generally takes precedence over refraining from violating a prohibition: It is because it creates a new, supernal light that shines throughout all the worlds. When one is faced with the option of whether to perform a positive commandment at the expense of transgressing a prohibition, the positive commandment often takes priority and sometimes even overrides the prohibition.
אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן תְּשׁוּבָה, אַף שֶׁמּוֹחֲלִין לוֹ הָעוֹנֶשׁ עַל שֶׁמָּרַד בְּמַלְכוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ וְלֹא עָשָׂה מַאֲמַר הַמֶּלֶךְ, מִכָּל מָקוֹם הָאוֹר נֶעְדָּר וכו׳.
However, with regard to repentance for neglecting to perform a positive commandment, even though they forgo his punishment for rebelling against God's kingship by not complying with the King's directive, nevertheless, the light is missing.... Every transgression has two basic elements. The first, rebellion, applies to every transgression. A person who violates one of God's commandments rebels against the throne, and this applies to all commandments, whether it is a failure to perform a positive commandment or the transgression of a prohibition, minor or major. God commanded, and His subject failed to fulfill His command. With regard to this aspect of transgression, when a person repents and regrets violating the word of the King, the King forgives him. But there is another layer. As mentioned above, every commandment creates an entirely new light that never existed before and now proliferates throughout the worlds. The author of the Tanya also informs us that the Zohar refers to the mitzvot as the "limbs" of the King. Just as a person's limbs draw down vitality into the body and perforce to the world – the eye drawing the faculty of sight; the head, the faculty of intellect; the hand, the power of giving and so on – so too the mitzvot draw down divine light and vitality that never existed in the world before to man and the universe. If a person fails to perform a commandment, this light is absent. Although God forgives him for sinning against Him, he cannot compensate for the light that reality now lacks as a result. Paradoxically, it is easier to earn forgiveness for failing to perform a positive commandment than for other transgressions. Particularly because the damage is greater, because it is impossible to repay the deficit, one is not expected to do so. The process of atonement is not a vengeful punishment but rather a rectification. When a breach defies rectification, there is no point in waiting for Yom Kippur to arrive nor the day of death to compensate for the void that he caused. He is thus pardoned immediately.
וּכְמַאֲמַר רַבּוֹתֵינוּ ז״ל עַל פָּסוּק ״מְעוּוָּת לֹא יוּכַל לִתְקֹן״ [קהלת א, טו]: זֶה שֶׁבִּיטֵּל קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע שֶׁל עַרְבִית אוֹ וכו׳ [ברכות כו, א]. דְּאַף שֶׁנִּזְהָר מֵעַתָּה לִקְרוֹת קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע שֶׁל עַרְבִית וְשַׁחֲרִית לְעוֹלָם, אֵין תְּשׁוּבָתוֹ מוֹעֶלֶת לְתַקֵּן מַה שֶּׁבִּיטֵּל פַּעַם אֶחָת.
This accords with our Rabbis' statement regarding the verse "That which is warped cannot be mended" [Eccles. 1:15], that this refers to "one who omitted the recitation of the evening Shema or the recitation of the morning Shema " [Berakhot 26a]. Even if he is meticulous from now on to recite the evening and morning Shema forevermore, his repentance is not effective in repairing the single instance that he omitted it. Since a person failed to perform a commandment during the time window that was most auspicious for its performance, reality now lacks its light with no way to compensate for it. The moment that required the illumination of that particular commandment now remains dark. The missing deed has left a void. A person can feel remorse or shame for neglecting to perform the mitzva, but he cannot change what he failed to do. Since there is nothing left to do, he is absolved as soon as he repents for his shortcoming.
וְהָעוֹבֵר עַל מִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה, עַל יְדֵי שֶׁנִּדְבַּק הָרַע בְּנַפְשׁוֹ,
The status of someone who violates a prohibition is different. Through the iniquity that now clings to his soul, When a person does a prohibited act, he connects to the force of impurity. This differs from a person who fails to perform a positive commandment. While missing out on the opportunity to connect to holiness, the one who neglected a positive commandment is not affected by the force of negativity. The forces of evil, on the other hand, become part of the being of the one who transgressed a prohibition.
עוֹשֶׂה פְּגָם לְמַעְלָה בְּשָׁרְשָׁהּ וּמְקוֹר חוּצְּבָה
he effects a flaw above, in his soul's root and source from which it was hewn If a person transgresses a prohibition – for example, he eats a prohibited food – a flaw is made not only in the body that ate the food and the soul that enlivens that body, but even in the most supernal roots from which the soul receives its vitality.
[בִּלְבוּשִׁים דְּי׳ סְפִירוֹת דַּעֲשִׂיָּה כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּתִיקּוּנֵי זֹהַר (הקדמה יז, א): ״לְבוּשִׁין תְּקִינַת לוֹן דְּמִנַּיְיהוּ פָּרְחִין נִשְׁמָתִין לִבְנֵי נָשָׁא״ וכו׳].
[in the garments of the ten sefirot of the world of Asiya , as stated in Tikkunei Zohar (17a), "You affixed garments to the sefirot, from which souls fly forth for mankind... "]. All souls are rooted in the supernal sefirot that fashion the entire reality of every world. Since a person's soul is rooted and bound within these ten sefirot, he blemishes the entire comprehensive network of worlds, one higher than the next, when he creates a flaw in his own soul. This is far beyond the standard concept of mutual responsibility between the members of the Jewish people, where the sin of one person not only affects the transgressor, but also becomes a liability for the entire nation. This mutual responsibility is just one component of the all-encompassing effect of a single transgression. As mentioned, when a person performs a commandment, the resulting light does not affect only his own soul but rather shines throughout all of the worlds. Likewise, a person's transgression is not just his own mistake, but rather, in a deeper way, effects a flaw in reality and reaches higher and higher to the source of all the worlds. Transgression of a prohibition becomes a problem for all the worlds and demands rectification on a broader scope, beyond the personal regret the person feels for his actions.
לְכָךְ אֵין כַּפָּרָה לְנַפְשׁוֹ, וְלֹא לְמַעְלָה, עַד יוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים. כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: ״וְכִפֶּר עַל הַקֹּדֶשׁ מִטּוּמְאוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמִפִּשְׁעֵיהֶם וגו׳ [ויקרא טז, טז]. לִפְנֵי ה׳ תִּטְהָרוּ״ [שם שם, ל], ״לִפְנֵי ה׳״ דַּיְיקָא.
Therefore, there can be no atonement for the blemish in his soul, nor for the flaw effected above, until Yom Kippur, about which it is written, "He shall atone for the Sanctum from the impurity of the children of Israel, and from their transgressions.... From all your sins before the Lord you shall be purified" [Lev. 16:16, 30], specifying "before the Lord." The author of the Tanya points out that the purification and atonement of Yom Kippur is "before the Lord." While the simple meaning of these words is "in God's presence," its deeper meaning revolves around the particular name of God used in the verse, the name of Havaya. This divine name, which literally means "being," is the source from which all of reality gleans its existence and serves as the bedrock of the universe. The author of the Tanya teaches that Yom Kippur's quality of purification stems from being "before the Lord," that is, "before the name of Havaya." This indicates that it is rooted in a realm that transcends the name of Havaya. Yom Kippur, then, allows for ascension to this supernal realm that does not even bear a name, a level that is above and beyond all the worlds. It presents the possibility of returning to the very inception of existence in order to create reality anew, as it were, free of the pitfalls that caused the transgressions.
וְלָכֵן, אֵין לִלְמוֹד מִכָּאן שׁוּם קוּלָּא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם בְּמִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה,
Hence, one should not infer from this delineation of the categories of atonement any leniency, God forbid, with regard to performing positive commandments, This parenthetical statement of the Tanya portrays the relationship between a positive commandment and a prohibition in a broader context. The baraita's approach toward positive commandments seems more lenient, not because it is a more moderate transgression, but rather the opposite: It is more serious. Repentance is fast and easy for a person who fails to perform a positive commandment because the damage is essentially impossible to rectify. On the other hand, transgression of a prohibition can be rectified, but only on Yom Kippur. Since Yom Kippur does not compensate for the loss caused by the failure to perform a positive commandment, one need not wait at all to achieve atonement for it. As soon as he repents, he is forgiven. In that case, the baraita's approach to atonement should be taken as an indication of the severity of neglecting to perform a positive commandment. A person certainly should not say, "I am going to refrain from performing a particular commandment, since I can simply repent afterward and everything will be restored to its proper condition."
וּבִפְרָט בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה. וְאַדְרַבָּה, אָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ ז״ל: וִיתֵּר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עַל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וכו׳ אַף שֶׁהֵן כְּרִיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין, וְלֹא וִיתֵּר עַל בִּיטּוּל תַּלְמוּד תּוֹרָה.)
especially with regard to the mitzva of Torah study. On the contrary, our Rabbis stated, "The Holy One, blessed be He, overlooked the idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, and murder committed by the Jewish people" – even though these sins are punishable by karet , excision, or one of the court-imposed death penalties – "but He did not overlook their neglect of Torah study" [Jerusalem Talmud, Ḥagiga 1:7].) A source from Tanakh reflects a similar theme. The prophet asks, "Due to what was the land lost...?" and God responds, "Due to their abandonment of My Torah that I placed before them... " (Jer. 9:11–12). To a certain degree, the neglect of the positive commandment of Torah study is even more serious than the transgression of the most severe prohibitions. It is clear that the relationship between positive commandments and prohibitions is highly complex. Through his parenthetical comment, the author of the Tanya highlights that what may seem like an obvious case of leniency versus stringency does not apply in every situation.
עָבַר עַל כְּרִיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין – תְּשׁוּבָה וְיוֹם הַכִּיפּוּרִים תּוֹלִין, וְיִסּוּרִין מְמָרְקִין
The baraita continues with the third category of atonement: "If one committed a transgression punishable by karet or one of the court-imposed death penalties, repentance and Yom Kippur suspend his punishment, and suffering absolves him of his sin." If a person transgresses a prohibition warranting the punishment of karet – excision from the World to Come or premature death – such as consuming blood or engaging in intimacy with a woman while she is in an impure state, or a transgression that warrants a court-imposed death penalty, such as desecrating the Sabbath, and he repents, the judgment is suspended. This means that while the transgressor is not punished, he also does not merit atonement until "suffering absolves" him.
(פֵּירוּשׁ, גּוֹמְרִין הַכַּפָּרָה. וְהוּא מִלְּשׁוֹן מְרִיקָה וּשְׁטִיפָה,
(The term memarkin, absolves, means completing the atonement and also connotes scouring and rinsing, Memarkin has two implications. The first, common in the words of the Sages, is to finish, as in "completing the atonement." For example, the Talmud states that the High Priest began the ritual slaughter of the daily offering on Yom Kippur, and another priest "completed [marek ] the slaughter on his behalf" (Yoma 31b). The other meaning of memarkin is to scrub and burnish something in order to clean it.
לְצַחְצֵחַ הַנֶּפֶשׁ. כִּי כַּפָּרָה הִיא לְשׁוֹן קִינּוּחַ, שֶׁמְּקַנֵּחַ לִכְלוּךְ הַחֵטְא.)
which in this context means to polish the soul, for the word kappara , atonement, connotes an earlier stage of wiping, in which the filth of the sin is cleared away.) The culmination of the process of atonement is the burnishing and polishing of the soul, which became sullied with sin. As Rashi comments on the phrase "I will appease [achapra ] him" (Gen. 32:21), the essential meaning of kappara is wiping and cleaning. There are therefore three stages of repairing the damage done by a sin. First is repentance, which positions a person in a new situation. Second is Yom Kippur, which lends another degree of purification. Finally, suffering engenders a burnishing of the soul, cleansing it from that flaw. This constitutes the completion of the process of atonement.
שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּפָקַדְתִּי בְשֵׁבֶט פִּשְׁעָם וּבִנְגָעִים עֲוֹנָם״ (תהלים פט, לג).
"As the verse states,'I shall punish their transgressions with the rod and their iniquity with plague' (Ps. 89:33)." Here the baraita provides a textual source showing that transgression and sin are cleansed and atoned through "the rod" and "plague," meaning through various types of suffering that a person experiences.
עַד כָּאן לְשׁוֹן הַבָּרַיְיתָא.
The baraita concludes here. In truth, the baraita lists a fourth category, yet the author of the Tanya concludes his reference here, after addressing only three out of the four categories of atonement. The baraita goes on to say that for someone who has caused a desecration of God's name, repentance has no power to suspend punishment, nor does Yom Kippur have the power to atone for his sin, nor does suffering alone have the power to absolve him. Rather, all these suspend punishment, and only death absolves him of his sin. In light of this, although there seem to be four distinctions, there are only three regarding atonement. The fourth category of sin, desecrating God's name, is absolved only through death, and therefore it is not counted. This is because the author of the Tanya dedicates this work, Iggeret HaTeshuva, exclusively to repentance and atonement of the living and not to the inner workings of atonement after death.
וְהִנֵּה מִצְוַת הַתְּשׁוּבָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה
Now the mitzva of repentance as stipulated by the Torah After an introduction that consisted primarily of the citation and brief elucidation of the baraita in tractate Yoma, the author delves into the mitzva of repentance from a formal, halakhic perspective.
הִיא עֲזִיבַת הַחֵטְא בִּלְבַד
consists of no more than abandoning the sin This refers to repentance at its most distilled, fundamental level, as laid out by Torah law.
(כִּדְאִיתָא בַּגְּמָרָא פֶּרֶק ג דְּסַנְהֶדְרִין (כה, א), וּבְחוֹשֶׁן מִשְׁפָּט סוֹף סִימָן ל״ד, לְעִנְיַן עֵדוּת).
(as stated in the Talmud, in the third chapter of Sanhedrin [25a] and in the Shulḥan Arukh, end of Ḥoshen Mishpat 34, with regard to testimony). For a clear and precise delineation of the mitzva of repentance, one must clarify not only its deeper spiritual meaning but also its halakhic implications. For example, a person who is characterized as a rasha, one who willfully commits transgressions, is disqualified from bearing testimony. The halakhic question is, when can it be affirmed that a person has done sufficient repentance and is therefore no longer characterized as a rasha, at which point he is permitted to bear testimony?
דְּהַיְינוּ שֶׁיִּגְמוֹר בְּלִבּוֹ בְּלֵב שָׁלֵם לְבַל יָשׁוּב עוֹד לְכִסְלָה לִמְרוֹד בְּמַלְכוּתוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ, וְלֹא יַעֲבוֹר עוֹד עַל מִצְוַת הַמֶּלֶךְ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם,
That is, one must wholeheartedly decide to never again revert to the folly of rebelling against God's kingship and never again disobey the King's command, God forbid, The halakhic definition of repentance is the moment a person decides wholeheartedly that he will not continue to transgress God's commandment. At that point, he is considered a penitent and is no longer categorized as a rasha. For the individual, actual repentance happens in the heart. Although each transgression has its own parameters delineating when there is sufficient evidence that a person will no longer violate that transgression, those parameters are merely external indicators for outside observers who are not privy to the inner workings of the penitent's heart. Their only purpose is to serve as proof for the internal shift of deciding to abandon the sin. The emphasis that the author of the Tanya puts on abandoning the sin, so that he will "never again disobey the King's command," illustrates the distinction between remorse and repentance. The Sages observe how "the wicked are filled with regrets."
הֵן בְּמִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה הֵן בְּמִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה.
whether it is a positive commandment or a prohibition. The decision to repent, to change one's behavior going forward, consists of two aspects. For neglecting to perform a positive commandment, a person must undertake to perform the action that God prescribed for him. For transgressing a prohibition, he must resolve not to rebel against God anymore. He must decide to refrain from doing those actions that God prohibited.
וְזֶהוּ עִיקַּר פֵּירוּשׁ לְשׁוֹן תְּשׁוּבָה – לָשׁוּב אֶל ה׳ בְּכָל לִבּוֹ וּבְכָל נַפְשׁוֹ. לְעָבְדוֹ וְלִשְׁמוֹר כָּל מִצְוֹתָיו.
This is the primary meaning of the term for repentance, teshuva : to return [ lashuv ] to God with all one's heart and all one's soul, to serve Him, and to observe all His commandments, After severing oneself from God, as it were, and veering away from His path, the fundamental nucleus of repentance is to return to Him with a deep, soulful connection, with love and a desire to do His will. At that moment of decision, the person has disconnected himself from everything associated with the sin. This is the central thrust of repentance from the standpoint of halakha: this internal resolution and turnaround, turning one's back on what was and facing a new direction from this time forward. That is the main aspect of repentance.
כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: ״יַעֲזוֹב רָשָׁע דַּרְכּוֹ וְאִישׁ אָוֶן מַחְשְׁבוֹתָיו, וְיָשׁוֹב אֶל ה׳״ וגו׳ (ישעיה נה, ז).
as it is written, "Let the wicked forsake his way and the man of iniquity his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, and He will have mercy on him" (Isa. 55:7), The prophet articulates the essence of repentance: a decision and resolution in the heart. The stage of repentance wherein one abandons the sin is exemplified by the phrase "Let the wicked forsake his way." "[Let] the man of iniquity [forsake] his thoughts" refers to resolving wholeheartedly in one's mind to refrain from sinning again in the future. Then he has "returned to the Lord," achieving repentance. Immediately afterward, "He will have mercy on him."
וּבְּפָרָשַׁת נִצָּבִים כְּתִיב: ״וְשַׁבְתָּ עַד ה׳ אֱלֹקֶיךָ וְשָׁמַעְתָּ בְּקוֹלוֹ וגו׳ בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ״ וגו׳ (דברים ל, ב). ״שׁוּבָה יִשְׂרָאֵל עַד ה׳ אֱלֹקֶיךָ״ וגו׳ (הושע יד, ב). ״הֲשִׁיבֵנוּ ה׳ אֵלֶיךָ״ וגו׳ (איכה ה, כא).
and in Parashat Nitzavim it is written, "You shall return to the Lord, your God, and heed His voice... with all your heart and with all your soul" (Deut. 30:2), and in the Prophets it is written, "Return, Israel, to the Lord, your God... " (Hos. 14:2), and in Writings, "Return us to You, Lord, and we will return" (Lam. 5:21). These biblical verses parallel the words of the Sages in expressing how the most crucial aspect of repentance is that internal shift, leaving the way of negativity and accepting the way of eternal good. Everything else is supplementary.
וְלֹא כְּדַעַת הֶהָמוֹן שֶׁהַתְּשׁוּבָה הִיא הַתַּעֲנִית.
This differs from the popular opinion that repentance consists of fasting. In the times of the author of the Tanya, and to some extent other times in history, the vast majority of people were of the opinion that repentance is an action that man does to atone for his sins, such as undertaking a fast. The author of the Tanya emphasizes this point for many reasons, the most important of which is that if a person equates the two, repentance and fasting, he may hesitate to repent if he finds fasting difficult. Conversely, one should not think that merely fasting is sufficient to achieve complete repentance. The latter stance is not entirely unfounded because, as will be discussed below, fasting can affect one's process of repentance in various ways. There was once a time when it was not uncommon for an individual, aroused to repent, to go to one of the wise men of the generation and request what they termed "repentance": a series of fasts and self-mortification practices. This became so universally accepted that people mistakenly equated repentance with those fasts. The author of the Tanya aims to uproot this mistake. These practices are not synonymous with repentance but rather complement it. The essence of repentance, as discussed above, is the internal shift of abandoning sin and the resolution to act differently going forward: regret for the past and the resolution to abandon the sin in the future.
וַאֲפִילּוּ מִי שֶׁעָבַר עַל כְּרִיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין, שֶׁגְּמַר כַּפָּרָתוֹ הִיא עַל יְדֵי יִסּוּרִים, הַיְינוּ שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מֵבִיא עָלָיו יִסּוּרִים (וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: ״וּפָקַדְתִּי בְּשֵׁבֶט״ וגו׳ [תהלים פט, לג] – ״וּפָקַדְתִּי״ דַּיְיקָא).
Although the baraita does state that one who committed sins punishable by karet or one of the court-imposed death penalties completes his atonement only through suffering, that means that the Holy One, blessed be He, brings suffering upon him (as it is written, "I shall punish their transgressions with the rod... " (Ps. 89:33), specifying "I shall punish," referring to God). The penitent is not responsible for determining for himself the nature of the suffering that will serve as his atonement. Rather, when he suffers heaven-sent hardship, his atonement is complete. The author of the Tanya thus points to the emphasis in the verse on the words "I shall punish." It is God Himself who sends the suffering, not the penitent who undertakes it.
וְהַיְינוּ כְּשֶׁתְּשׁוּבָתוֹ רְצוּיָה לְפָנָיו יִתְבָּרַךְ,
That suffering is brought upon him only after his repentance has been accepted before God. The suffering comes only once God accepts a person's repentance, which is not the case with insincere repentance. Sometimes one's remorse or resolve for the future is not wholehearted. Then the corresponding supernal response, which precipitates an influx of atonement and forgiveness, does not flow in its full capacity.
בְּשׁוּבוֹ אֶל ה׳ בְּכָל לִבּוֹ וְנַפְשׁוֹ מֵאַהֲבָה, אֲזַי, בְּאִתְעָרוּתָא דִּלְתַתָּא וְ״כַּמַּיִם הַפָּנִים״ וכו׳ (משלי כז, יט). אִתְעָרוּתָא דִּלְעֵילָּא לְעוֹרֵר הָאַהֲבָה וְחֶסֶד ה׳ לְמָרֵק עֲוֹנוֹ בְּיִסּוּרִים בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה.
Indeed, when he returns to God with all his heart and soul, out of love, then this awakening from below, "as water reflects a face... " (Prov. 27:19), engenders an awakening from above that awakens God's love and kindness to scour his sin with suffering in this world, Repentance inspired by love, as opposed to fear, stems from a person's desire to draw close to God, which is termed an "awakening from below." This awakening from below engenders a commensurate awakening above, as expressed in the verse that the author of the Tanya quotes from the book of Proverbs: "As water reflects a face to the face, so does the heart of a person to a person." Just as water reflects one's own facial expression back to him, so too a person experiences the same attitude and countenance that he shows to his friend. That same interpersonal principle functions between an individual and God. The response that a person receives from above reflects that which he did below. The more a person turns toward God, the more he evokes God's turning toward him. Repentance out of love means that he does not repent because of social pressure or from fear of punishment, but only as an expression of his love for God. The more a person expresses his love for God, the more God reveals love and kindness to him. This love and kindness is manifest in suffering that God sends him in order to wash and cleanse any grime that has become encrusted on his soul. If God would reserve the soul cleansing for the World to Come, the punishment would be characterized by the attribute of harsh judgment and would be manifest in a much more severe and painful way.
וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב: ״כִּי אֶת אֲשֶׁר יֶאֱהַב ה׳ יוֹכִיחַ״ וגו׳ (משלי ג, יב).
as it is written, "For he whom the Lord loves He rebukes... " (Prov. 3:12). The suffering, or divine "rebuke," as it is termed in the verse, that a person experiences in this world is actually an expression of God's love – a gift not every person is privileged to receive. Here too we need to make a distinction between repentance and atonement. Repentance comes from man, while atonement primarily stems from God. Repentance entails an interruption of the causal sequence of a person's life and reframes his identification with his past. This occurs through the person's choice to sever his connection with his past self. Only afterward does the process of atonement begin with the scouring and cleansing that is sent from above. The suffering that comes to "scour" the person's soul is a divine action, a show of God's loving-kindness, and is not the obligation or the affair of man. If a person commits a sin, he must perform wholehearted repentance out of love. If God accepts his repentance because He sees that it is sincere, God will respond by properly cleansing and scouring his soul of its flaws. Sometimes, though, God sends suffering as a precursor to awaken an individual to repent, and this too is a sign of God's kindness. Conversely, if God does not desire a person, He protects him from suffering so that he will not have thoughts of repentance. The Talmud teaches that King David never dreamed a good dream in his whole life, while Aḥitofel never had a bad dream.
וְלָכֵן לֹא הִזְכִּירוּ הרמב״ם וְהסמ״ג שׁוּם תַּעֲנִית כְּלָל בְּמִצְוַת הַתְּשׁוּבָה, אַף בִּכְרִיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין,
For this reason, Rambam and the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol did not mention any fasts whatsoever with regard to the mitzva of teshuva , even for sins punishable by karet or one of the court-imposed death penalties. The baraita concludes that the culmination of atonement for these severest of sins is through suffering. Therefore, even fundamental works of halakha that debate and determine the parameters of the mitzva of repentance do not make any mention of fasting. We find that neither the Rambam, whether in his Hilkhot Teshuva or in his Sefer HaMitzvot, nor the author of the Sefer Mitzvot Gadol mention any fasts whatsoever in their treatment of the mitzva of repentance.
רַק הַוִּידּוּי וּבַקָּשַׁת מְחִילָה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה: ״וְהִתְוַדּוּ אֶת חַטָּאתָם״ וגו׳ (במדבר ה, ז).
The only actions they do mention are confession and asking pardon, as it is written in the Torah, "They shall confess their sin... " (Num. 5:7). The main component of confession is "But we have sinned" – one's awareness and admittance of the transgression that he committed. Merely avoiding transgression does not indicate that the person has repented. He may desist from transgression because the opportunity to commit the sin has not presented itself or because he lacks the energy at that point in time. If the recognition that he did not behave correctly is absent, then he lacks the driving impetus that fuels him to abandon the past and launch a new future.
וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּיוֹאֵל: ״שׁוּבוּ עָדַי בְּכָל לְבַבְכֶם בְּצוֹם וּבִבְכִי״ גו׳ (יואל ב, יב), הַיְינוּ לְבַטֵּל הַגְּזֵרָה שֶׁנִּגְזְרָה לְמָרֵק עֲוֹן הַדּוֹר עַל יְדֵי יִסּוּרִים בְּאַרְבֶּה.
With regard to that which is written in the book of Joel, "Return to Me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with lamentation" (Joel 2:12), this was to annul the heavenly decree that had been issued to scour the sin of that generation with suffering through a plague of locusts. The prophet did not intend for the fasting and weeping to constitute repentance. Rather, the fasting served as a means to annul the heavenly decree that was issued at the time. The fasting and weeping mentioned in the book of Joel were not focused on past transgressions, which is part of the process of repentance. Rather, they were intended to serve as vehicles for supplication and prayer for the future, in order that God would annul the decree that would bring the massive plague of locusts described there.
וְזֶהוּ הַטַּעַם בְּכָל תַּעֲנִיּוֹת, שֶׁמִּתְעַנִּין עַל כָּל צָרָה שֶׁלֹּא תָּבֹא עַל הַצִּבּוּר,
This is the rationale for all fasts undertaken for any trouble that threatens to befall the community, This rationale applies to all fasts decreed upon the community, like a person undertaking bodily and spiritual afflictions in order to have a potential calamity canceled.
וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בִּמְגִלַּת אֶסְתֵּר.
as we find regarding the fasts mentioned in the book of Esther. Before Esther dared to plead that her people be saved, she requested of Mordekhai, "Go, assemble all the Jews... and fast on my behalf; do not eat and do not drink for three days... " (Est. 4:16). Fasting in this context was part of the prayer effort imploring God to save the Jewish people. We see that fasting is not undertaken for the purpose of repentance but rather is a complement to prayer, both of the righteous and the wicked alike, in beseeching God to eradicate from reality an impending disaster that is advancing on the world.
וּמַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בְּסִפְרֵי הַמּוּסָר, וּבְרֹאשָׁם ׳סֵפֶר הָרוֹקֵחַ׳ וְ׳סֵפֶר חֲסִידִים׳, הַרְבֵּה תַּעֲנִיּוֹת וְסִיגּוּפִים לָעוֹבֵר עַל כְּרִיתוֹת וּמִיתוֹת בֵּית דִּין,
Nevertheless, works on ethics and spiritual piety, primarily Sefer HaRoke'aḥ (Hilkhot Teshuva ) and Sefer Ḥasidim (167), prescribe many fasts and self-mortification practices for one who transgresses sins punishable by karet or one of the court-imposed death penalties, These two early and widely accepted books, and other works as well, are replete with lists of fasts and self-mortification procedures, prescribing how many fasts are required for various transgressions.
וְכֵן לְמוֹצִיא זֶרַע לְבַטָּלָה, שֶׁחַיָּיב מִיתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה גַּבֵּי עֵר וְאוֹנָן (בראשית לח, ו–ז), וְדִינוֹ כְּחַיָּיבֵי כְּרִיתוֹת לְעִנְיָן זֶה,
and also for one who emits semen for naught, which incurs death at the hand of Heaven, as written in the Torah regarding Er and Onan (Gen. 38:6–7), in which case his status is equivalent to those sins that are punishable by karet in this respect. Both Er and Onan transgressed this prohibition. The text attests that Er's transgression was "evil in the eyes of the Lord, and the Lord put him to death" (Gen. 38:6). Despite the differences between karet and death at the hand of Heaven, this sin also requires atonement through suffering.
הַיְינוּ כְּדֵי לִינָּצֵל מֵעוֹנֶשׁ יִסּוּרִים שֶׁל מַעְלָה חַס וְשָׁלוֹם.
That is, these works prescribe fasting to be spared the punishment of suffering from on high, God forbid, While repentance focuses on the past, the aim of these fasts is to serve as an aid to supplication, that the person should not experience the suffering that one might be afflicted with in the future.
וְגַם כְּדֵי לְזָרֵז וּלְמַהֵר גְּמַר כַּפָּרַת נַפְשׁוֹ.
and also to expedite and hasten the completion of his soul's atonement. Here is another reason that an individual may undertake fasting: A person generally wants to complete the process faster. Due to his love for God, he does not want to be separated from Him for even another instant. In this sense, the fasting takes a form of prayer. He fasts in the hope that God will have mercy on him and mitigate the suffering He would send for his atonement, hastening the process.
וְגַם, אוּלַי אֵינוֹ שָׁב אֶל ה׳ בְּכָל לִבּוֹ וְנַפְשׁוֹ מֵאַהֲבָה, כִּי אִם מִיִּרְאָה.
Moreover, perhaps he is not returning to God with all his heart and soul out of love but out of fear. Here is yet another reason that one may prefer to undertake suffering through fasting of his own volition. God cleanses those who repent from love. A person cannot be sure, however, that his repentance is inspired by unadulterated love. There are many levels and gradations of motivation, and clarity regarding the purity of one's intentions is hard to attain. Sometimes repentance arises from internal pressure that stems from a vague feeling of fear – fear of punishment or fear of sin – and the value and power of such repentance does not compare to repentance inspired by absolute love. If a person is concerned that his repentance was not generated from pure motivations, that it was not engendered by pure, unadulterated free will, he may want to rectify and augment his repentance through fasts and self-mortification. The conclusion that emerges from this discussion is that while fasting serves various functions, it does not constitute repentance. As stated above, repentance is that inner shift sparked by an internal resolution. This chapter, the first in