Special Yom Kippur Vidduy

The Rambam in the first law of Teshuva sets forth the test of vidduy that one must say: וִדּוּי זֶה מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה. כֵּיצַד מִתְוַדִּין. אוֹמֵר אָנָּא הַשֵּׁם חָטָאתִי עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי לְפָנֶיךָ וְעָשִׂיתִי כָּךְ וְכָךְ וַהֲרֵי נִחַמְתִּי וּבֹשְׁתִּי בְּמַעֲשַׂי וּלְעוֹלָם אֵינִי חוֹזֵר לְדָבָר זֶה. וְזֶהוּ עִקָּרוֹ שֶׁל וִדּוּי.  The vidduy includes acknowledging the sin, separating one’s self from the sin, and a resolution not to do it in the future.  The Achronim ask that the text of the vidduy of Yom Kippur is much shorter than this as the Rambam himself in Ch. 2 Law 8 says: הַוִּדּוּי שֶׁנָּהֲגוּ בּוֹ כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲבָל אֲנַחְנוּ חָטָאנוּ (כֻּלָּנוּ) וְהוּא עִקַּר הַוִּדּוּי. עֲבֵרוֹת שֶׁהִתְוַדָּה עֲלֵיהֶם בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים זֶה חוֹזֵר וּמִתְוַדֶּה עֲלֵיהֶן בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים אַחֵר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא עוֹמֵד בִּתְשׁוּבָתוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהילים נא ה) "כִּי פְשָׁעַי אֲנִי אֵדָע וְחַטָּאתִי נֶגְדִּי תָמִיד":  What happened to mentioning the וַהֲרֵי נִחַמְתִּי וּבֹשְׁתִּי בְּמַעֲשַׂי וּלְעוֹלָם אֵינִי חוֹזֵר לְדָבָר זֶה, how are these key elements of the vidduy omitted on Yom Kippur?

In the past, this blog mentioned an idea of the Briskors that we find in Rambam two types of vidduy.  One is what we mentioned from the beginning of the Laws of Teshuva and is part of the teshuva process.  Another type of vidduy is that which the Rambam brings at the end of Ch. 3 of מעשה קרבנות, that one must say vidduy when bringing a korban.  This isn’t a vidduy as part of teshuva, it’s a din in describing why the korban is being offered. 

The Mishna in Yoma (35b) says the text of the vidduy recited by the Kohan Gadol on Yom Kippur is וכך היה אומר אנא השם עויתי פשעתי חטאתי לפניך.  The Ran (end of Yoma,) the Yereim (263) and Levush siman 407 all say that the vidduy we recite on Yom Kippur is pattered after the vidduy of the Kohan Gadol.  Putting 1 and 1 together, says Rav Eliyahu Baruch Finkel, that the vidduy we recite on Yom Kippur isn’t the vidduy of teshuva, it’s the vidduy said over a korban.  Just as one must say vidduy at the time of the kapparas hakorban, so too we say vidduy at the time of kapporas hayom. 

There are a couple of problems with his thesis.  The most glaring issue is (as he says himself,) it comes out a huge חידוש לדינא that the nussach of the vidduy printed in the machzor for Yom Kippur is insufficient for vidduy of teshuva and a person would have to add at least one time something along the lines of the text of the Rambam’s teshuva vidduy to completely fulfill the mitzvah of teshuva.  It is quite astonishing that such a din wouldn’t be pointed out by anyone until the end of the 20^th century.  Another issue is that it just doesn’t fit with the words of the Rambam.  Besides omitting the part of עזיבת החטא וקבלה על העתיד in the vidduy of Yom Kippur, the Rambam also omits the עויתי פשעתי part and says one must only say חטאתי (his souce is from Yoma 87b, see Kesef Mishne.)  According to Rav Eliyahu Baruch, that this vidduy is patterned after the words of the Kohan Gadol, these words should be necessary as well?  (The Lechem Mishne says the Rambam doesn’t mean to exclude those words and he means חטאנו וכו, but obviously that is very forced.)  Finally, if the vidduy of the שעיר משתלח is a din in the korban, not as a fulfillment of teshuva, why doesn’t the Rambam mention it in the Laws of מעשה קרבנות?

This would lead us to assume in the Rambam that the vidduy of Yom Kippur is different from that of the rest of the year.  Rav Eliyahu Baruch shoots this down from a Gemorah in Shevuot (12b) that questions why the ברייתא says that the שעיר משתלח atones for missing a positive mitzvah: האי עשה ה"ד אי דלא עבד תשובה (משלי כא, כז) זבח רשעים תועבה אי דעבד תשובה כל יומא נמי דתניא עבר על מצות עשה ועשה תשובה לא זז משם עד שמוחלין לו?  Asks Rav Eliyahu Baruch, why doesn’t the Gemorah say that you did teshuva, but only said the vidduy that works on Yom Kippur, so everyday there wouldn’t have been atonement?  I don’t find his question earth shattering.  The Gemorah is questioning why the person needs the atonement of the שעיר לעזעזל, not the atonement of the day itself, if he said the vidduy that suffices on Yom Kippur, he still doesn’t need the שעיר לעזעזל, for he is atoned by his teshuva and vidduy done before the goat is sent away.  However, we need to explain what is different about the vidduy of Yom Kippur.

The Gemorah (ibid) answers the question that it follows the opinion of Rebbe that Yom Kippur atones even without teshuva.  How is this to be understood, how can the day itself cause atonement?  In the past few weeks this blog mentioned the idea that there is an element of the person’s soul that can never be contaminated by sin. In Chassidus it explains the idea of Yom Kippur atoning is because the essence of the Jew, the part which can never be tainted, is revealed.  Every person (at least sub-consciously) enters into the Kodesh Kadoshim of his own soul and comes out pure.  Says the Binyan Av (volume 5 siman 39,) on Yom Kippur, God looks deeply into the core of every Jew and sees s/he doesn’t want to sin at all.  It is only because of the רוח שטות and outside circumstances that one sins.  When one views the soul from this perspective, the tables are turned.  Not only is the חטא a mere שוגג, but every sin is considered only a חטאת for it was the never the true intent of the Jew to sin.  That is why the only thing we must declare on Yom Kippur is חטאתי for it the day we are looked at from the perspective of the deepest parts of our souls.  That is what the passuk means כי לכל העם בשגגה, on Yom Kippur every sin is viewed from the sole perspective of the inner soul and then everything is a mere שוגג.  

With this idea we can understand why the Yom Kippur vidduy doesn’t require the usual עזיבת החטא וקבלה על העתיד because when the inner depths of the soul are revealed there no possibility and no connection to sin.  Those declarations are only necessary for a person to distance themselves from sin.  However, on this day, when the inner dimensions of the soul shine forth there is automatically no connection to sin and long vidduy become not only irrelevant, yea, they are inappropriate.