Day Of Fasting Day Of Holiness

R' Akiva Eger (teshuva #24) raises the issue can someone not fasting receive an aliyah on Yom Kippur at mincha - is the reading a kedushat hayom Yom Kippur reading or a fast day reading? The Marcheshes siman 14 says that issue is the root of the machlokes between the Mechabar and Remah (622:2) if the bracha of the haftorah ends מגן דוד or continues with על התורה ועל העבודה like a holiday. the Rema that ends מגן דוד  holds that the reading is that of a fast day so we don't mention the day but the Mechaber holds we do since it is the reading of a holiday. This understanding of the Rema is explicit in the Gr"a who says that the reading and haftorah are due to the day being a fast day. However, the Levush, MG"A and Alter Rebbe explain the Rema differently. They explain that the avodah of the day is already complete before mincha therefore we don't say על התורה ועל העבודה. 

A parallel inquiry applies to the ne'ilah prayer, which conceptually exists for any public fast day Is the נעילה on Yom Kippur a YK prayer or that of a taanis? R' Zvi Ryzman raises the question regarding a kohan that is not fasting can he do נשיאת כפים by ne'ilah? If ne'ilah is fundamentally a fast-day prayer, a non-fasting kohan would be disqualified; however, if it is defined by the kedushat hayom of Yom Kippur, he may be permitted to recite the blessing.

In Kol Brisk he explains why in the ne'ilah prayer we only say the short viduy of אשמנו  and not the longer על חטא recitation. He says that the על חטא prayers acknowledge wrongdoings but don't describe the person himself as a bad person, just that he has strayed in various aspects. אשמנו is a description of the person as affected by sin. On a fast day we reflect on our sad state as sinners. We do not say words of request for forgiveness. On YK however the viduy is the long one. we insert requests for forgiveness for our focus is לפני ה תטהרו how we remain connected to Hashem and just have to mend our ways. When it comes to נעילה we are davening a prayer of a taanis and hence we omit the long viduy.

On the other hand, the Chiunuch (#433) views the ne'ilah prayer as a YM prayer- וְעוֹד תִּקְּנוּ תְּפִלָּה חֲמִישִׁית בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים לְבַד, לְרֹב קְדֻשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וּבַעֲבוּר הֱיוֹתוֹ יוֹם סְלִיחָה וְכַפָּרָה לַכֹּל, וְהִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת תְּפִלַּת נְעִילָה. For more discussion about this topic see תפילת נעילה ביום הכיפורים. 

Ultimately, Yom Kippur shares the element of a standard fast day and is viewd as an עת צרה. Yet through its unique sanctity, we are granted the capacity for purification before Hashem, לפני ה תטהרו,  transforming צרה, into צהר, a window of illumination, as an opportunity to begin anew with a new light unto our lives.

Reading Of The Kohan Gadol

The Mishna Yoma (68b) says that the Kohan Gadol would be informed when the שעיר עזעזל reached the midbar and then he would read the Torah. Why the need to know the שעיר already reached the midbar? Rashi says based upon pessukim that the Kohan Gadol can't start another avodah until the previous one is completed. The Sfas Emes challenges Rashi and assumes it is just a Rabbinic law to ensure one mitzvah is done before completing another. The way the Mahar"i Korkus understands the Rambam, this is not a general law that the Kohan must wait before starting another avodah but this is a unique law for the reading of the Torah that the Kohan must wait until the preceding avodah is done. However, this is very hard to understand why would the reading of the Torah be different than other avodah? The Briskors (Rav first letter in back of sefer, Grac"h on Shas, Harraray Kedem #77) say that the Rambam holds there is a general law for the kohan to remain in the place of the avodah until it is completed. Therefore, the Kohan must remain in his place before moving to the Ezras Nashim to read the Torah. It is hard to hard why there would be such a law and why if the שיער it sent out anyway can't the Kohan Gadol leave?

The possuk Rashi cites is שנאמר ושלח את השעיר במדבר ואחר כך ואת חלב החטאת יקטיר המזבחה. How does Rashi derive from here that reading the Torah which is Rabbinic and not an avodah must be delayed as well? The simple answer is that Rashi will reject the assumption of the question. 

Rashi may indeed hold that the reading of the Kohan Gadol is the a Torah law that is considered bound by the laws of the avodah. In the very next Mishna, in the opening of the next perek, Rashi says that the reading of the Kohan Gadol is derived from the מילואים. The Sfas Emes disagrees and assumes it is a Rabbinic law. However, Rashi is clear it is a Torah obligation. 

The Mishna says that the Kohan Gadol may read the Torah either in a white cloak of his own or the בגדי כהונה. The Gemarah refers to the reading not as an avodah itself but as a צורך עבודה. The Rambam in Perush HaMishna says it is not an avodah and the proof is that it does not require בגדי כהונה. The Netziv says that Rashi holds since the reading is considered צורך עבודה it also needs the previous step to be finished. The Mishna says there are 8 berachot recited by the Kohan Gadol. Rashi says all the berachot are recited after the reading but the Rambam holds that the regular berachot before reading the Torah are recited. The Gevorot Ari wonders why Rashi doesn't hold that there is a beracha beforehand like any other Torah reading? However, if this is a reading not done as a chovas hayom like other reading but is viewed as part of the avodah service and hence it does not have the rules of regular reading.

Standing Viduy

The halacha is that one must stand while saying viduy (S.A. 607:3.) Why must viduy we recited while standing? The Mishne Berurah explains that standing demonstrates  greater sense of subservience and will establish a better confession. The Kaf Hachaim quotes the Yafe L'lev that is based upon the possuk in Nechemya (9:2) ויעמדו ויתודו על חטאתיהם וכו. The Mishne Berurah cites the Pri Migadim is unsure is this law of standing is מעכב. 

The Magen Avraham says one must be carful not to lean on something that if it is moved, the person will fall for that is considered sitting not standing. Rav Wahrman develops based upon various sources an idea that this rule only applies when standing is required innately but if one stands only for honorific purposes or for other external factors, then even when standing by being propped up, sine it still appears as if one is standing, it suffices. With this difference, he suggests according to the reason of the Mishne Berurah ,it should suffice with leaning for the standing f viduy (this would be not like the Mishne Berurah who quotes the Magen Avraham here that holds it does not work.) With this he answers the question of the Emrei Emes of how can one do viduy on a korban while doing סמיכה if one is leaning on the animal and the person will fall if it is removed? According to this, this suffices for the standing of viduy. 

Another answer Rav Wahram suggests is to differentiate between the types of viduy. Viduy as part of teshuva requires standing but the viduy on a korban is not part of the teshuva process, it is a viduy that it is a halacha in the korban. Part of bringing the korban is to say why one is bringing the korban and that entails a viduy but that viduy does not require standing. 

A third approach to the requirement of standing during viduy is suggested by Rav Yerucham Olshin. He suggests that the Rambam stresses many times in the Laws of Teshuva starting with the lists of mitzvot on the top that teshuva is done לפני ה. He says that this law of לפני ה requires standing in the same way as one stands during the amidah for being present לפני ה. (With this it is also understood why the viduy on Yom Kippur is incorporated into the Shemoneh Esrei for they are the same yesod.) With this he suggests that the Rambam does not mention the requirement of standing while doing viduy (which the Pri Migadim points out) because it is already included in the Rambam's words that teshuva is לפני ה.

The Mishne Berurah (620:2) says that one must day viduy ten times within the prayers of Yom Kippur corresponding to the ten times the Kohan Gadol mentions Hashem's name on Yom Kippur. In the Shaar Hatzion he adds that the viduy after maariv doesn't count since it is not part of the Shemone Esrai. It is clear from the M.B. that the viduy of Yom Kippur must be said within the context of prayer. Why? Presumably because of this law of teshuva being said לפני ה. But then this law should always apply not just on Yom Kippur? Rav Yehoshua Eichenstein explains based upon R' Yona that Yom Kippur has a unique mitzvah of teshuva based upon the possuk לפני ה תטהרו and it is that mode of teshuva that requires it be said in prayer.  (In other words, regular teshuva according to R' Yona is not לפני ה, it is a maaseh mitzvah like any other but the Rambam vies all viduy as an act of repairing the broken relationship with G-d and hence one must come before G-d to ask for forgiveness.) However, the Rambam holds all teshuva is לפני ה yet doesn't have to be done in tefillah so why is Yom Kippur different?  As mentioned in 'Obtaining Tahara' from Rav Solevetchik, the viduy of Yom Kippur accomplishes more than a regular viduy, it accomplishes a level of taharah. Says Rav Eichenstein, Rabbenu Yonah says ועוד יתפלל בעל התשובה אל השם. למחות כעב פשעיו וכענן חטאתיו. ושיחפוץ בו וירצהו ויעתר לו כאשר אם לא חטא, to obtain taharah one has to pray. Therefore, since the viduy of Yom Kippur is to obtain taharah it goes together with the prayer which effects taharah.

Neros Shabbos Part 2

The Mishna Pesachim (53b) says that there were conflicting customs if one should light neros for Yom Kippur.  The Gemarah explains the machlokes according to Rashi's explanation that בין שאמרו להדליק - אותן שנהגו להדליק והנוהגין שלא להדליק לא נתכוונו אלא לדבר אחד להפריש עצמו ממשכבי אשה האומרים להדליק משום דאין אדם משמש מטתו לאור הנר והאומרים שלא להדליק סוברים כשהנר דולק רואה את אשתו ומתאווה לה.  The machlokes is about what is practically better to do to uphold the prohibitions of Yom Kippur.  The Gemarah continues that when Yom Kippur falls out on Shabbos, it is a machlokes if everyone agrees that one then lights candles, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, אַף בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאָמְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא לְהַדְלִיק — מַדְלִיקִין מִפְּנֵי כְּבוֹד הַשַּׁבָּת. וְעָנֵי רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בָּתְרֵיהּ: וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִים.  Presumably the Chachamam hold not to light for the same practical concerns as every Yom Kippur.  So why does רשב"א differentiate?  He would seem to hold that since Shabbos has an obligation of neros Shabbos, that applies even when Shabbos coincides with Yom Kippur.  In other words, he holds the practical concerns can't cancel out the obligation of neros Shabbos.  (The Chachamim disagree and hold even on Yom Kpput that falls out on Shabbos one should not light candles.  They may hold the practical concerns override the obligation of neros Shabbos or they hold when Shabbos coincided with Yom Kipput it is a hybrid kedusha and the Shabbos has the dinim of Yom Kippur and loses its own obligation of candles, ויש לעיין בזה.)  But why does he hold that a regular Yom Kippur doesn't have the same obligation?  It would seem to depend on the nature of the obligation of neros Shabbos.  In the post last week, 'Neros Shabbos,' it was brought up the issue is the mitzvah of neros Shabbos is for the candles to be lit on Shabbos or is the mitzvah to do an act of lighting the candles.  This debate may reflect what the reason of the mitzvah is.  If the mitzvah is to give kavod to Shabbos, then it is an act to be done before Shabbos for the sake of Shabbos, so it would be a mitzvah to light the candles but if the mitzvah is for oneg Shabbos because having a lit house enhances one's enjoyment of Shabbos, then it would suffice for the candles to be lit on Shabbos, one does not need to actively light for Shabbos.  Yom Kippur does have an obligation of kavod (Shabbos 119a) but does not carry the obligation of oneg.  It would seem רשב"א holds the obligation of lighting candles is in order to give oneg to the day and therefore, he holds a regular Yom Kippur does not have the obligation of lighting neros but Shabbos Yom Kippur does.  

The Rosh (Yoma Chapter 8 siman 27) however, says we always light a candle on Yom Kippur and say a beracha because of the mitzvah of shalom bayis.  He seems to be giving a third reason for the neros which is shalom bayis and that obligation applies even on Yom Kippur.  Rav Yosef Engel (ציונים לתורה כלל לח עמ' מז) is bothered that how can shalom bayis itself be a reason to light candles, if that is the case there should be an obligation to light a candle and one should say a beracha every single day of the year?  He says the Rosh must mean that due to the fact that there is kavod on Yom Kippur as well, one can say a beracha when lighting.  How does this fit in the words of the Rosh?  I assume he means that kavod is to do something is preparation for Shabbos that will enhance one's Shabbos experience.  In what way is one's Shabbos experience enhanced?  Because one's shalom bayis is enhanced that allows for a more enjoyable Shabbos. 

See more about this discussion in כוכבי יצחק siman 1.

Obtaining Tahara

Rabbenu Yona holds that there is an additional mitzvah of teshuva on Yom Kippur besides the mitzvah all year round.  What is the nature of this mitzvah?  

The Rambam in the beginning of the Laws of Teshuva says one must say viduy for sins done wantonly or by accident, he does not include אונס.  Furthermore, the Aruch Hashulchan (602:7) points out that the Rambam in Perush HaMishna end of Yoma indicates that there is no viduy for ones.   Why is there no viduy for ones?  Because an action done in ones is not considered to be the fault of the participant at all (as opposed to an accident which comes about due to some form of negligence.)  However, we say on Yom Kippur על חטא שחטאנו לפניך באונס.  This would indicate that one has to say viduy even for actions committed באונס?

The Rambam in Teshuva (2:8) says that averot that one said viduy for on a previous Yom Kippur, one says viduy for them on the following Yom Kippur's as well.  The Rambam does not say this regarding the viduy said throughout the year for a sin in Chapter 1, this is a specific din for Yom Kippur.  What is the nature of this din?

What we see is that even though teshuva and viduy exist all year long, the viduy of Yom Kippur is distinct from that of the rest of the year.  As Rav Soloveitchik points out (Harraray Kedem,) the first chapter of the Laws of Teshuva in the Rambam deals with teshuva and viduy throughout the year.  The second chapter deals with laws specific to the teshuva and viduy process of Yom Kippur.  The process done on Yom Kippur is to accomplish more than teshuva for sins but to attain tahara, לפני ה תטהרו.  This tahara process involves one to be cleansed and removed from any sort of sin brought into the world due to one's actions.  Hence we say viduy on sins done even באונס.  That is why it is put right next to wanton sins, על חטא שחטאנו לפניך באונס וברצון, meaning one is being cleaned from all specks of sin from the worst of sins all the way down to a sin having brought about even באונס.  

This is the reason why one says viduy even for sins already confessed previously.  That is not necessary as part of the strict teshuva process but for taharah one must absolve himself of all previous connection to sin.   

This is what Rabbenu Yona is telling us is the additional mitzvah on Yom Kippur.  This is a mitzvah beyond the bounds of teshuva, it is a mitzvah of taharah. 

What does this level of taharah mean?  Yom Kippur is the culmination of a 40 day process started at the beginning of Elul of returning to Hashem.  The Maharal in Gur Aryeh (Shoftim) says that a person gets 39 lashes for violating a lav for it takes 40 days for an embryo to form.  The first day is the pure essence of the person and then there are 39 days to create the makeup of the individual. It is the additional 39 levels of a person that can become contaminated by sin but not the pure essence of the 40th.  On Yom Kippur we are unraveled all the way back to the innermost essence of a person which desires to be attached to Hashem.  The viduy of Yom Kippur is the outward expression of the complete eradication of any connection to sin which becomes attached to the externality of the person and we proclaim our innermost desire to become attached to Hashem.   

(Based upon the sefer L'teshuvas Hashana, Yarech L'moadim siman 43, and article of Rabbi Rosensweig.)

Reconnecting To Hashem

The Rambam (Teshuva 1:1) says חַיָּב לְהִתְוַדּוֹת לִפְנֵי הָאֵל בָּרוּךְ הוּא, viduy must be done before Hashem.  Regarding Yom Kippur as well the Torah says לפני ה תטהרו.  What does it mean that viduy must be done before Hashem and why is it necessary?  Why is it that one who does teshuva is called a בַּעַל תְּשׁוּבָה, we don't call someone who wears tefillin a בעל תפילין?  

When one does teshuva one is not merely removing a negative, reversing his wrongs of the past but rather bringing a whole new light into his relationship with Hashem.  As the Rambam says (7:6) אֶמֶשׁ הָיָה זֶה שָׂנאוּי לִפְנֵי הַמָּקוֹם מְשֻׁקָּץ וּמְרֻחָק וְתוֹעֵבָה. וְהַיּוֹם הוּא אָהוּב וְנֶחְמָד קָרוֹב וְיָדִיד.  One who does teshuva enjoys a new close relationship with Hashem.  Why is this so?  

Rav Soloveitchik says every Jew has their own covenant with Hashem as being a member of Klal Yisrael.  Since there was a bris made with Klal Yisrael, a member becomes automatically part of this bris.  When one sins they are breaking this bris.  When one does teshuva they need to create a new bris with Hashem.  That is what it means viduy must be done לפני ה, one must reconnect with Hashem and personally recreate his own bris.  To create this new connection one must come personally to Hashem and ask to be given a new connection.  That is why such a person is described as a בעל תשובה, he is not merely one that has fulfilled a mitzvah of teshuva, he is someone who has established an entire new connection to Hashem. 

Rav Yeruchom Levovitz (Daas CHachma U'Mussar volume 2 #90, see also volume 1 #91) says that teshuva is not a means of refersing sin and therefore if one did many sins they need to do many acts of teshuva.  Rather, teshuva is a life changing experience.  One's entire service to Hashem now stems from teshuva.  He adds that is why Rabbenu Yona in Shaarey Teshuva gives a vast description of the mitzvot and halachot for a baal teshuva needs a new kabbalah of the mitzvot.  His new connection, new bris with Hashem, obligates a new acceptance of the Torah.  That is why the giving of the luchos happens on Yom Kippur for teshuva goes hand in hand with reaccepting the Torah.  That is why the Midrash says it is only Hashem that allows a sinner to do teshuva for it is only Hashem that has the capability of creating a new bris with the sinner.  

Views on Vidduy

One of the parts of teshuva and in fact according to  the Minchas Chiunch's understanding of the Rambam, the entirety of the mitzvah of teshuva, is vidduy.  Why is it s important for one to mention their sins explicitly?  

I would like to share three interpretations.   

In it's most basic level, vidduy allows one to come to fully acknowledge their sins.  When one does a mental process of teshuva, their is still wiggle room in the back of one's mind to think that they are really not guilty but by having to pronounce it, one must truly acknowledge their sins (Rav Soloveitchik.)  

Rav Hutner (Pachad Yitzchak mammer 18) cites the Gemarah (Yoma 86b) says one who repeats vidduy for a sin that was not committed through the year on Y.K .is עליו הכתוב אומר (משלי כו, יא) ככלב שב על קיאו כסיל שונה באולתו.  We see from this Gemarah that vidduy is referred to as קיאו, as vomit.  Why is vidduy called an act of vomit?  Rav Hutner explains that the original sin of mankind which the עץ הדעת brought רע from outside a person into the person.  Before the sin, temptation came to mankind from the outside.  It is only after the sin that now man's temptations come from within the individual.  When one does vidduy they are taking the רע that has built up within a person and bringing it out.  One is spitting the temptations, the trauma, that has built up inside and pushing it out.  That is why vidduy is called vomiting.  One has to throw up all the poison digested throughout the year.  In other words, when one does vidduy and acknowledges one's sins, one separates themselves from their sins and is able to view them as an outsider.  

A similar idea can be found in the Meshech Chochma on the possuk (Bamidbar 6:13) וְזֹ֥את תּוֹרַ֖ת הַנָּזִ֑יר בְּי֗וֹם מְלֹאת֙ יְמֵ֣י נִזְר֔וֹ יָבִ֣יא אֹת֔וֹ אֶל־פֶּ֖תַח אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵֽד.  What does it mean יביא אותו?  That the nazir has reached a point where he views his guf, his bodily pleasures as אותו, as someone else, an outsider (see also Sforno there.)

The possuk in Shmuel (2:12:13) says  וַיֹּ֤אמֶר דָּוִד֙ אֶל⁠־נָתָ֔ן חָטָ֖אתִי לַי״י֑  וַיֹּ֨אמֶר נָתָ֜ן אֶל⁠־דָּוִ֗ד גַּם⁠־י״י֛ הֶעֱבִ֥יר חַטָּאתְךָ֖ לֹ֥א תָמֽוּת.  Why is there a break in the middle of the possuk?  The Gra explains the Dovid was about to say the entire nussach of the vidduy חטאתי עויתי פשעתי but the navi stopped him after חטאתי and said your sin is already forgiven.  There are different ways the Gra is purported to have explained the idea and one of the ways (in Barak Hashachar in likkutim) is that vidduy works to kill the קטיגור created via a sin but Dovid did such a level of teshuva that merely by saying חטאתי he killed the קטיגור monster.  The Or Hachaim (Acharei 16:7) also says this idea that a monster is created via a sin and he say that is what the navi was telling Dovid לא תמות, meaning you have slayed the monster and it won't attack you.  ולזה כמשמחל ה׳ לדוד הודיעו שאבד הכח הרע שנולד מהמעשה הבלתי הגון כאומרו (שמואל ב יב) גם ה׳ העביר חטאתך לא תמות, הכוונה בזה כיון שהחטא שעושה האדם נברא ממנו הנפרע מעושהו ממילא באבוד המשחית אין משחית, וזה שאמר לו ה׳ שאחר שהעביר חטאתו לא ימות כי אין ממית.  With this idea, the Or Hachaim says that is the point of סמיכה on a korban.  When one does סמיכה it attaches the korban to the evil monster created via the sin and then the adovah of the korban kills the monster.  The Tzemach Tzedek (Derech Mitzvosecha) also says that teshuva itself cleanses the sin but there is still left the קטיגור created via one's sins and that is killed by saying vidduy.  Rav Yeruchem Olshin (Yarech L'moadim siman 55) asks why does one need to kill the monster, isn't it enough with teshuva, at least teshuva out of love which totally erases the averah?  Why would there be a monster left if the averah is erased?  He wants to say that even though teshuva erases the sin that is only in terms of going forward, however the action of the sin in the past still happened (נעקר למפרע מכאן ולהבא, עיי"ש.)  

I think all these interpretations go hand in hand.  It is by fully coming to terms with one's sin and acknowledging them  that one is able to separate themselves from the sin.  Only after a true self- evaluation can one judge the sin as an outsider and say they don't want to be a part of that anymore. That regurgitation of sin, that cleaning of self by throwing the effects of sin out, remove the קטיגור from within one's self and then the קטיגור outside created via the sin has no hold over a person anymore either. 

Eating Erev Yom Kippur

Shulchan Aruch (604) מצוה לאכול בעיוה"כ ולהרבות בסעודה.  The Gra says the source ולהרבות בסעודה כו'. כמ"ש בכתובות ה' א' אלא מעתה יה"כ כו' וערש"י שם ד"ה שחל כו'.  The Gemarah Ketubot says one can't get married on Motzei Shabbat גזירה שמא ישחוט בן עוף on Shabbat to be prepared for the weeding.  The Gemarah asks  אלא מעתה יום הכפורים שחל להיות בשני בשבת ידחה גזירה שמא ישחוט בן עוף and Rashi explains שחל להיות בשני בשבת - שצריכין להרבות בסעודה אחר השבת שהוא ערב יום כפורים. ידחה - לשלישי בשבת שמא ישחוט בן עוף לצורך סעודת מחר Why does the Gra not cite like the Bear Hagolah  תני חייא בר רב ברכות ט' וביומא פ"א ובכמה דוכתי (it would seem to be an error where it says ט, it is ח:) which says תנא ליה חייא בר רב מדפתי כתיב (ויקרא כג, לב) ועניתם את נפשתיכם בתשעה לחדש בערב וכי בתשעה מתענין והלא בעשרה מתענין אלא לומר לך כל האוכל ושותה בתשיעי מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו מתענה תשיעי ועשירי?  

The Gemarah in Ketubot in the second answer says נמי התם אית ליה רווחא הכא לית ליה רווחא.  Rashi explains אית ליה רווחא - לשחוט בלילה שהסעודה אינה עד למחר.  The Aruch Hashulchan comments ונראה דהמצוה אינה אלא ביום של ערב יום הכיפורים, ולא בלילה שלפניה, כיון שהטעם הוא כדי שיהיה חזק להתענות ביום הכיפורים – אין זה אלא ביום, ולא בלילה. וכן משמע להדיא ברש"י כתובות (ה א בדיבור המתחיל "ידחה", עיין שם).  It appears from Rashi, says the A.H., that the mitzvah to eat on Y.K. is only during the day.  why is that?  The Netziv (in Hamek Shaleh 169:1) explains אלא רש"י ליבי' כשמעתי' דעיקר אכילת עיוה"כ אינה מצוה בפ"ע אלא הכנה למצות הצום כמש"כ בשמו סי' קס"ז אות י"ב וא"כ סגי מצפרא ולא בליל הקודם.  This is how he explains Rashi in his commentary earlier כפרש"י ביומא בזה"ל והכי משמע קרא ועניתם בתשיעי כלומר התקן עצמך בתשעה שתוכל להתענות בעשרה. [אך לשון פרש"י ברה"ש ד"ט שכתב כל דמפיש באכילה ושתיה עדיף. משמע דלא מזה הטעם אלא אכילה עצמו הוא מצוה].  In other words, since the yesod of the mitzvah is to be able to fast, that applies only in the day, right before the fast.  

However, in the sefer Tesferes Shmuel on Ketubot he cites Rav Avrohom Gurwitz who wants to say that the Gra understands Rashi not like these Achronim.  He says that if we look carefully at the wording of the S.A. we see there are two dinim in the eating of Erev Y.K.  The S.A. starts מצוה לאכול בעיוה"כ and that is based upon the derasha of כל האוכל בתשעה וכו which Rahi explains is a preparation for the fast.  Then the S.A. adds ולהרבות בסעודה.  That is another din and on that the Gra is commenting saying the source is from the Gemarah and Rashi in Ketubot.  If there was just a mitzvah to eat to prepare for the fast, then there is no need to make a large, festive meal and there would be no need for a gezerah that one will shecht extra animals.  From that Gemarah we see, as Rashi says, there is a din on Erev Yom Kippur to be מרבה בסעודה.  According to this, Rashi may agree the mitzvah of eating on Erev Y.K. applies at night as well, it is just the להרבות בסעודה that only applies during the day.  According to this interpretation of Rav Gurwitz it would seem both of these dinim would have to be learnt from the דרש of כל האוכל בתשעה but we only know the second din from the Gemarah in Ketubot (and hence as the Netziv noted Rashi explains the derash two ways,) which is צ"ע how we see both dinim in the derash?  Also it needs to be explained if there is a separate din to eat on Erev Y.K. in its own right, why does that only apply during the day and not at night, וצ"ע?

In light of this shiur by Rav Soloveitchik I think we can explain this understanding a bit more.  The mitzvah of eating is din, as part of a kium in Yom Kippur.  However, there are two ways that din is played out.  One is as preparation for the fast and another is as the fulfillment of the halacha of kibud for Y.K.  The להרבות בסעודה is the aspect of kavod of Yom Kippur and therefore, obligates one to have a festive meal.  Since it is a fulfilment of kavod for Y.K. it should be fulfilled in the day which is closer to Y.K.   

When To Say ברוך שם

The Gemarah Yoma (37a) says that when the people hear the Kohan gadol uttering the שם המפורש the people say ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו and the Gemarah says the source תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: ״כִּי שֵׁם ה׳ אֶקְרָא הָבוּ גוֹדֶל לֵאלֹהֵינוּ״, אָמַר לָהֶם מֹשֶׁה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל: בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאֲנִי מַזְכִּיר שְׁמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, אַתֶּם הָבוּ גּוֹדֶל.  The Gemarah Taanis (16a) says וּמִנַּיִן שֶׁאֵין עוֹנִין ״אָמֵן״ בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ — שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״קוּמוּ בָּרְכוּ אֶת ה׳ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם מִן הָעוֹלָם עַד הָעוֹלָם וִיבָרְכוּ שֵׁם כְּבֹדֶךָ וּמְרוֹמַם עַל כׇּל בְּרָכָה וּתְהִלָּה.  Why do we need two pessukim to tell us that amen is not uttered in the Mikdash?  

Rav Soloveitchik explains these two Gemarot are two different discussions.  The Gemarah in Yoma is talking about the response of the nation to hearing the שם המפורש.  The Gemarah tells us for that that, כִּי שֵׁם ה׳, when the name of Hashem is pronounced, it obligates a response of ברוך שם.  The Gemarah in Taanis is another discussion about the response of kohanim to a beracha in the Mikdash.  That is not a din in hearing the name of Hashem annunciated, but a din in the קיום of the shem Hashem being uttered.  The נ"מ is even after Shimon Hatzaddik passed away and the שם מפורש was no longer used, still the kohanim would respond with ברוך שם because there is a קיום of the announcement of שם מפורש and that timeframe obligates a ברוך שם.  With this idea Rav Soloveitchik explains that is the מחייב for saying ברוך שם in Shema.  The Gra (on Orach Chayim siman 5) says that in Shema when one says the name of Hashem one has to have kavana not only for אדנות like every beracha for also for the explanation of הוי"ה.  In other words, in Shema there is a kium of mentioning the name of Hashem and hence we say ברוך שם.  

On Y.K. the blood is sprinkled אחת למעלה ושבעה למטה.  The אחת is drawn down into the 7 middot of a person.  To bring the holiness of Y.K. into a person.  The Alter Rebbe explains in great depth in the שער היחוד והאמונה how שמע ישראל is יחודא עילאה and ברוך שם  is  יחודא תתאה.  On Y.K. we given a lot of attention to ברוך שם because we want to take the kedusha of the day and be able to put it into a כלי to use throughout the year.

Getting Close

The last Mishna in Yoma says אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אַשְׁרֵיכֶם יִשְׂרָאֵל, לִפְנֵי מִי אַתֶּם מִטַּהֲרִין, וּמִי מְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם. The line seems to be a contradiction in of its self, on the one hand it says  מִי אַתֶּם מִטַּהֲרִין, you have have to purify yourself but on the other hand it says וּמִי מְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם, that Hashem will do the tahara for a person?  The Rambam rules that the day of Yom Kippur is מכפר, how does the day itself cause atonement?  Why does the Torah call Yom Kippur a day of עינוי?   

We say ברוך שם loud on Y.K. because we are like angles.  How are we like angles?  What the Mikdash is in space, Yom Kippur is in time.  The Mikdash is the place where one can come the closest to Hashem and Yom Kippur is the day when one can come closest to Hashem.  In the Mikdash, ברוך שם was already uttered at the end of a beracha or when hearing the שם מפורש because when one feels they are  in the presence of Hashem, then one acknowledges that by saying ברוך שם.  Normally, we don't feel that Presence and can't utter it aloud.  However, on Y.K. we are able to experience the same closeness to Hashem as one sanding in the Mikdash, it is a feeling of being 'לפני ה and therefore we say ברוך שם aloud.  That is what it means we are like angles.  Just as angles recognize the Presence of Hashem ,we are able to come to that recognition on Y.K .as well. 

The two stages alluded two by the Mishna in Yoma are two stages a person must go through to obtain teshuva.  The first is לִפְנֵי מִי אַתֶּם מִטַּהֲרִין, where a person works upon his self to become a better person.  After that, וּמִי מְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם, Hashem provides tahara for the person.   

The Maharal says that the tahara of Hashem is compared to a mikvah for just as a mikvah is only metahar one when one is totally submerged, so too on Yom Kippur one is totally connected to Hashem.  The explains since on Y.K. we become elevated beyond our general physical limitations and are able to come close to Hashem.  That is the two step process of tahara the Mishna is alluding too.  The first step is the inuy of Y..K. which lets a person elevate above their normal physical boundaries and the next step is the tahara which is produces by dint of merely being close to Hashem.  Just as the Mikdash itself, the closeness a person felt brought about tehuva as in the story with יוסף משיתא, so too the closeness to Hashem on Y.K. itself makes one a better person.  That is how the tahara of Y.K. works; how the day itself can bring כפרה, for it is the day itself that brings this sense of closeness with Hashem. 

Two Types Of Yom Kippur

The Alter Rebbe notes a few distinctions in the pessukim of Emor discussing Yom Kippur vs. those of Acharei Mot.  In Emor (23:32) it says שַׁבַּ֨ת שַׁבָּת֥וֹן הוּא֙ לָכֶ֔ם וְעִנִּיתֶ֖ם אֶת־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶ֑ם בְּתִשְׁעָ֤ה לַחֹ֨דֶשׁ֙ בָּעֶ֔רֶב מֵעֶ֣רֶב עַד־עֶ֔רֶב.  Compare to Acharei (16:31) שַׁבַּ֨ת שַׁבָּת֥וֹן הִיא֙ לָכֶ֔ם וְעִנִּיתֶ֖ם אֶת־נַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶ֑ם חֻקַּ֖ת עוֹלָֽם.  Why the switch from היא to הוא?  Why does it say בתשעה לחדש it one and not the other?  And why does it say חקת עולם is Acharei but not in Emor?  Why does it say בתשעה לחדש, it should have said בתשיעי לחדש?  This alludes to the idea that it means one has complety vanquished the 9 traits of the נפש הבהמית.  Just as a fast weakens the body, one has used the 9 days of repentance before Yom Kippur to weaken the animal traits of the soul.  The focus of the parsha in Emor is the avodah one has done to prepare him/her self for Yom Kippur.  That is why it is says הוא, masculine, because one is an active participant in the avodah.  The parsha in Acherei is the Yom Kippur taharah that Hashem provides.  Even though there was no avodah on the traits of the soul, it is חקת עולם, even when we are not deserving, that Hashem provides taharah.  That is why it uses the feminine terminoligy, היא, for we are accepting the taharah from Hashem. 

The last Mishna in Yoma says אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אַשְׁרֵיכֶם יִשְׂרָאֵל, לִפְנֵי מִי אַתֶּם מִטַּהֲרִין, וּמִי מְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם, אֲבִיכֶם שֶׁבַּשָּׁמַיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יחזקאל לו), וְזָרַקְתִּי עֲלֵיכֶם מַיִם טְהוֹרִים וּטְהַרְתֶּם. וְאוֹמֵר (ירמיה יז), מִקְוֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל יְיָ, מַה מִּקְוֶה מְטַהֵר אֶת הַטְּמֵאִים, אַף הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְטַהֵר אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל.  Many seforim point out that there are two different questions addressed in the Mishna.  One is לפני מי and the other is ומי מטהר.  The question of לפני מי presupposes a person in trying to purify themselves and the question is before whom.  The question of מי מטהר אתכם is who purifies you even when you don't purify yourself.  The Mishna answers with the possuk of וזרקי עליכם, which is a sprinkling of water on a person.  That is an act of Hashem to purify the person.  Even if a person doesn't properly prepare themselves for purification, Hashem purifies the person.  The other question is answered with the possuk of מקוה ישראל ה, just as one needs to enter a mikvah, one who enters into the purification process is purified before Hashem.  (The only thing that bothers me is why the Mishna answers out of order, the second question before the first.)  Even beyond what we can do ourselves, Hashem purifies us, וזרקתי עליכם.

Close It In

The Midrash on Shir Hashirim (7:2) says בנעלים. שתי נעלים, נעילה בפסח ונעילה בסכות, אמר הקב"ה לישראל, אתם – נועלים לפני בסכות ואני נועל לפניכם בפסח  

The Sfas Emes Pesach (5637) says  כתיב מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים דרשו חז"ל על הרגלים נעילת החג ונעילת הפסח כו'. כי נעל הוא שמירת הרגל. כמו כן הקב"ה פורס סוכת שלום ברגלים הללו על בנ"י להצילם מהתערובות שנמצא בעולם השפל הזה. כמו ששומרין הרגל מטיט ושאר דברים ע"י שהוא תחתון שבאדם. [ואיתא ברמב"ם (פי"ג מה' אישות) שצריך כל איש ישראל לעשות לב"ב מנעלים חדשים בכל רגל והיא רמז לסוד הזה].  That is what we are doing in נעילה on Yom Kippur.  During Yom Kippur we are on the level of angels.  That has to be able to be locked into ourselves.  Therefore, we have an added prayer of נעילה to lock in the prayers into ourselves.  The prayer serves as a נעל to illuminate even the lowest part of our body, the feet and imbue it with kedusha that will let us rise above the tumah of the world.  After thar we are able to bring that kedusha into the world which is celebrated during Sukkot where we go out into the sukkah.  

A halachik thought on נעילה I saw in the name of Rav Soloveitchik.  He said that just as in Shemone Esrai there is a beracha of שמע קולנו that our prayers should be accepted, so to נעילה is a prayer that our prayers that our prayers should be accepted and therefore he ruled that if one had not prayed the earlier prayers in the day, one cannot pray נעילה.  This goes in line with the above thought.  נעילה functions as a prayer to fuse the loftiness of the day into the person, without that experience, נעילה would not have any energy to lock in. 

Yom Kippur Bris

In Pirkay D'rebbe Eliezer (Ch. 29) it says that the milah of Avraham took place on Yom Kippur, אתיא "עצם" מ"עצם" מיום הכפורים, מה להלן (ויקרא כג, כח): "כָּל מְלָאכָה לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה כִּי יוֹם כִּפּוּרִים הוּא", שביום הכפורים נמול אברהם, ובכל שנה ושנה הקב"ה רואה דם הברית של מילה של אברהם אבינו, ומכפר על כל עונותינו, שנאמר (ויקרא טז, ל): "כִּי בַיּוֹם הַזֶּה יְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם לְטַהֵר אֶתְכֶם".   Why did the bris of Avraham take place on Yom Kippur? And how does that atone for us?  

The possuk in Tehillim (139:16) says יָמִ֥ים יֻצָּ֑רוּ ולא (וְל֖וֹ) אֶחָ֣ד בָּהֶֽם.  Chazal say the one day designated to Hashem, the לו אחד is Yom Kippur.  The קרי of the possuk is לא, to say Hashem is not just is one of the days.  This means that on Yom Kippur it is revealed that it is a day designated for Hashem.  However, that is not merely to be on Yom Kippur but is meant to affect the rest of the days of the year as well.  ועניתם את נפשתיכם בתשעה לחדש בערב מערב עד ערב תשבתו שבתכם.  Chazal ask but we don't fast on the ninth day, we fast on the tenth?  The derash is one who eats on the ninth and fasts on the tenth is as if he fasted both days.  The same can be extended for the next words, עד ערב, the fast is in the day, not in the evening?  If one eats at night, if one takes the joy of Yom Kippur and extends it into the year, its as if one fasted then as well.  The radiance and kedusha of Yom Kippur extends throughout the year if one appreciates its atonement. 

The ערלה represents that which is tumah, klipah, external to one's spiritual growth.  The commandment of milah is reveal one's essence of kedusha.  That is why the limud to tell us that Avroham's bris took place on Yom Kippur is in the words בעצם היום, because it is the עצמיות, the essence of a person, when all the outside factors are removed, that becomes revealed.  That is why the דם ברית of Avraham is what gives us the merit of atonement.  Avraham's bris was not just for himself but his middot became part of his very makeup and were passed down through the genes as described in Tanya Ch. 18-19.  Hashem looks at the essence of a Jew, when the foreskin is removed an sees the pure soul.  Just as the radiance of Yom Kippur can be extended into the year, so too one's kedusha of the bris milah can elevate all the limbs of a person (based on Sfas Emes Yom Kippur 5652.)

Fasting For a Minor

The Mishna in Yoma (82a) as elucidated by the Gemorah says that there is a law to teach kids to fast by a few years before they become obligated in mitzvot training them to fast for a few hours.  The Ritvah in Sukkah (3a) proves from the Gemorah there that the mitzvah of chinuch is to have the minor fulfill the mitzvah with all of its details, it does not suffice to merely do chinuch on the general idea of the mitzvah.  The Steipler (Sukkah siman 28) asks if so, what is the point of doing chinuch for a few hours of fasting?

The Rambam in Shvesus Asor (2:10) brings this law, קָטָן בֶּן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וּבֶן עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים מְחַנְּכִין אוֹתוֹ לְשָׁעוֹת. כֵּיצַד. הָיָה רָגִיל לֶאֱכל בִּשְׁתֵּי שָׁעוֹת בַּיּוֹם מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁלֹשׁ. הָיָה רָגִיל בְּשָׁלֹשׁ מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ בְּאַרְבַּע. לְפִי כֹּחַ הַבֵּן מוֹסִיפִין לְעַנּוֹת אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁעוֹת. בֶּן אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה בֵּין זָכָר בֵּין נְקֵבָה מִתְעַנֶּה וּמַשְׁלִים מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים כְּדֵי לְחַנְּכוֹ בְּמִצְוֹת  Rabbenu Manoach notes that the Rambam adds לְחַנְּכוֹ בְּמִצְוֹת and מדברי סופרים only regarding the full fast, not the partial fast.  He explains there is rabbinic mitzvah of chinuch to train a child to do a mitzvah and then there is another law of chinuch which is not a rabbinic commandment but it is something one should do to train their children to go in the right path.  The full fast is the mitzvah of chinuch, to instruct a minor to do the mitzvah.  The partial fast is just a a good training idea but not the rabbinic mitzvah of chinuch.  In the back of Rav Chayim on Shas the Briskor Rav says a similar idea to explain Rabbenu Yonah at the beginning of Berachot.  Rashi says that one does have to do chinuch for krias shema even for kids that have reached the age of chinuch.  Tosfos asks that the Gemorah Sukkah (42a) says that once a kid knows how to speak his father must teach him shema?  Rabbenu Yona answers that the Gemorah doesn't mean it is an obligation but rather that it is to teach the kids to do mitzvot.  What is this distinction?  The Rav explains with this yesod that there are two dinim of chinuch.  There is no rabbinic commandment of chinuch for krias shema but one should still teach there kid to be accustomed to doing mitzvot.  The Ritvah that says that the mitzvah must be done in all its details is referring to the mitzvah of chinuch, but the second din, to accustom a minor to know how to do mitzvot still applies even if not performed exactly correct.  

This law of training a minor to fast is only mentioned regarding Yom Kippur but not for other fasts.  The Briskor Rav (Kovetz Inyaninim Lbeis Brisk) questions why there is this distinction?  He explains the fast of Yom Kippur is different from that of other fast days.  The Rambam  (Lasw of Taanis 5:1) describes the purpose of the fasts is to arouse one to do teshuva.  Since teshuva is not applicable for a katan, there is no law of chinuch for a few hours.  However, the fast of Yom Kippur is for affliction and one can be be mechanach a katan in that mitzvah.

Three Steps Of Teshuva

The Minchas Chinuch (364:1) asks that from the Rambam it appears that vidduy is an integral part of teshuva, without it, teshuva is incomplete, however, from numerous Gemorot, such as the Gemorah Kiddushin (49b) which says if one does kiddushin on the condition that he is a tzaddik, it might be a kiddushin, for he may have had thoughts of teshuva, it appears that one can do teshuva even without vidduy?  The Gemorah Kiddushin (40b) says if one regrets doing mitzvot they lose the merit of the mitzvot that they did.  So, they why should vidduy be required to rid one's self of averot?  The Achronim ask, the midrash Tanchuma in Nasso says that teshuva is only granted to Jews but in numerous stories in Tanach such as in Sefer Yonah and the generation of Noach it appears that teshuva is granted to gentiles as well?  

Achronim explain that there are two types of teshuva.  There is the teshuva of the gavra and the teshuva of the cheftzah.  For the gavra to fix himself, for the person's teshuva to be complete, one doesn't need vidduy, the charatah and azivat hachat suffices.  Just as one divorces themselves from the mitzvot they have fulfilled because they regret fulfilling them, so too one can rid themselves of sin.  When a person does teshuva, as the Rambam describes, the person is no longer the individual that committed the sin, one is transformed into a new person and is separated from the crimes one has committed.  Even a gentile can have this type of teshuva.  They can be transformed into a different person and are divorced from their sin.  This teshuva rids one of their connection to the sin, but the sin itself still exists.  Sins create an evil force in the world, as the Tomer Devorah explains, and the world has been contaminated by sin.  The Alter of Slodbadka points out if the Torah says that the scapegoat "carries the sins," then it must be the sin is a reality that exists in the world.  Although, through teshuva one has already been absolved from bearing responsibility for the act of the sin, the sin itself is not rectified.  For that, vidduy is required.  By doing an physical action of speaking words of acknowledging the sin, one can slay the monsters created by their sins (see Derech P'kudecha of Tzemech Tzedek.)  The vidduy and the level of teshuva only granted to Klal Yisroel is the ability to rid the world of the affects of sin. 

Rabbenu Yonah holds that there is a separate mitzvah of doing teshuva on Yom Kippur itself.  Why is there a separate mitzvah of doing teshuva on this day?  The Mishna at the end of Yoma says אמר רבי עקיבא: אשריכם ישראל, לפני מי אתם מטהרין, ומי מטהר אתכם? אביכם שבשמים,.  What is the need for the double language of לפני מי אתם מטהרין, ומי מטהר אתכם?  The possuk in Acharei Mos (16:30) says כִּֽי־בַיּ֥וֹם הַזֶּ֛ה יְכַפֵּ֥ר עֲלֵיכֶ֖ם לְטַהֵ֣ר אֶתְכֶ֑ם מִכֹּל֙ חַטֹּ֣אתֵיכֶ֔ם לִפְנֵ֥י י״י֖ תִּטְהָֽרוּ.  Again, why the double language of טהרה?  Furthermore, Yom Kippur is a day of atoning sin, what is the טהרה?  

What Yom Kippur adds is a third level of teshuva; tahara.  Even after slaying the monster of sin, the dead carcass has still left its horrific stench in the room.  To rid the smell, air freshener of tahara must be applied. What Rebbe Akiva was teaching was that there are two steps to tahara.  There is the לפני מי אתם מטהרין, which is the person's job to come close to Hashem, אתם מטהרין, and then there is a second level, מי מטהר אתכם, that is the tahara that comes from Hashem that is out of a person's reach (Sifsay Chayim.)  The mitzvah of teshuva on Yom Kippur is to make a person susceptible of accepting the tahara that comes down from the heavens.  To receive the tahara one must be ready; that means one must do teshuva.  That is the double language of the possuk as well.  First there is the avodah of the person, to do what s/he can do to cleanse themselves from the stench of the sin, and then Hashem completes the job that is out of the hands of a person.

Help Is On The Way

From Chochma U'Mussar (Kelm) volume 2 maamer 141

Why Have The Segan Kohan Gadol?

There is a memra of the Rabbe Chanina Segan Hakohanim that appears in a few places in Shas, one of them being Yoma (39a.)  רבי חנינא סגן הכהנים אומר למה סגן מימינו שאם אירע בו פסול בכהן גדול נכנס סגן ומשמש תחתיו.  According to this גירסא the Gemorah is saying Why did the Deputy remain at the High Priest’s right side throughout the day’s service? Because if some disqualification befalls the High Priest, the Deputy can step in and serve in his stead.  However, Rashi brings another גירסא that the Gemorah is asking what is the point of the appointment of a Segan: ואני שמעתי מרבינו יצחק בר יהודה למה סגן ממונה שאם יארע פסול אבל כל זמן שלא יארע בו פסול אין הסגן עובד שום עבודה בעולם.  According to this approach the Gemorah seems to be saying the whole purpose of the Segan is to be a backup. [It is a little difficult that Rashi says אין הסגן עובד שום עבודה בעולם for the Segan has jobs as Tosfos (15b) cites from the Yerushalmi.]

The Rambam Kli Mikdash (4:16) says מְמַנִּין כֹּהֵן אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל כְּמוֹ הַמִּשְׁנֶה לַמֶּלֶךְ וְהוּא הַנִּקְרָא סְגָן. וְהוּא הַנִּקְרָא מְמֻנֶּה וְיִהְיֶה עוֹמֵד לִימִין כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל תָּמִיד וְזֶה כָּבוֹד הוּא לוֹ. וְכָל הַכֹּהֲנִים מִתַּחַת יַד הַסְּגָן.  It is clear that the Rambam understands the point of the Segan isn't to be a mere backup, its to be the Kohan Gadol's valet.  So, he must have learnt like the first גירסא.  The Rambam goes לשיטתו in the Laws of Avodat Yom Kippurim (1:3) that says וּמַתְקִינִין לוֹ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל אַחֵר שֶׁאִם יֶאֱרַע בְּזֶה פִּסּוּל יַעֲבֹד הָאַחֵר תַּחְתָּיו.  No mention of the Segan, any Kohan can be appointed to be the backup.  [This raises difficulties in the Gemorah Nazir 47b as the Briskor Rav there points out, ואכ"מ.]

The Briskor Rav tries to read even into the second גירסא that it also agrees the main job of the Segan is to serve the Kohan Gadol, the Gemorah is only asking why do they designate the Segan in place of the Kohan Gadol on Yom Kippur.  However, it doesn't seem that way from the Rishonim.  Tosfos Yeshanim asks why would they need a Segan in Bais Rishon, they had the משוח מלחמה?  He answers that there will be איבה for the משוח מלחמה already has some of the dinim of the Kohan Gadol.  But we see from the question that he assumes the whole point of the Segan is merely to be a backup, not to serve the Kohan Gadol.   

High Holiday Highlights

In this post I have collected some of the things I witnessed during the High Holy days that I thought were funny, examples of missing the boat or just strange.

1. People that drove to and fro from tashlich on Rosh Hashana.

2. An individual who belongs to a group of Klal Yisroel that doesn't eat before the blowing of the shofar on Rosh Hashana so I heard him telling someone else that he woke up, blew shofar and then happily had a hearty breakfast of cheesecake and coffee.  I think he went l'shitaso after Yom Kippur when he couldn't even wait for havdalah to break his fast.

3. The person telling his son on Yom Kippur that unesane tokef is the most important part of the prayer service, so he should make sure to say it.

4. Those that wished to pray netz so they prayed at a synagogue that has a different liturgy than they are accustomed to, so they had to leave in a jiffy after the silent Shemonei Esrai, not even waiting around for kedusha.

5. Someone who was learning during the al chate recitation of chazaras hashatz.

6. A rabbi who always (almost every holiday, especially by the second half of Sukkot and Pesach,) who has to explain why the new fruit is only placed out on the second day of Rosh Hashana.

7. The fastest maariv of the year; motzei Yom Kippur. 

8. Myself, who was just paying attention to all the above things.

Hopefully, there will be more after Sukkot.

זבח רשעים תועבה And שעיר משתלח

This blog mentioned previously the question of the Gemorah in Shavuot (12b) that why would one need to be atoned for a ביטול עשה with the שעיר משתלח.  If he did teshuva, there is no need for the שעיר for there is immediate forgiveness, and if he didn't do teshuva, then its a זבח רשעים תועבה?  This blog discussed in the past if the שעיר לעזעזל has the status of a korban or not.  This Gemorah seems explicit that it does have the status of a korban? Indeed, the Pnei Yehoshua points out that the language of Rashi on the Gemorah, הא כתיב זבח רשעים תועבה - והיכי מכפר עליה קרבן יוה"כ: is clear that the שעיר has the status of a korban.  However, the Pnei Yehousha himself disagrees with this assertion and understands that the Gemorah is asking from a קל וחומר.  If for a inadvertent sin can't be atoned by a korban, for sure a sin committed wantonly can't be atoned for without teshuva.

We see in this Gemorah (according to Pnei Yehoshua anג those that hold the שעיר isn't a korban,) that the din of זבח רשעים תועבה isn't said as a פסול in a korban.  It's not a law that  of a rasha is disqualified.  It's a law in kapparah, one who is still in the status as one who has violated the averah isn't eligible to  the kapparah of any means. That is what we explained in the past, that זבח רשעים תועבה doesn't disqualify the korban, it disqualifies the kapparah of the korban (see Birchas Avrohom.)      

Vidduy Part Two

The Gemorah in in Yoma (36b – 37a) learns from Moshe’s prayer that the vidduy recitation must be preceded with the word anah.  ומנין שבאנא נאמר כאן כפרה ונאמר להלן בחורב כפרה מה להלן באנא אף כאן באנא ומנין שבשם נאמר כאן כפרה ונאמרה בעגלה ערופה כפרה מה להלן בשם אף כאן בשם.

Rashi says: ומנין שבאנא - יהא וידוי זה:נאמר כפרה בחורב - במעשה עגל (שמות ל״ב:ל׳) אולי אכפרה בעד חטאתכם: מה להלן באנא - אנא חטא העם הזה וגו':  Rashi's comment of  וידוי זה would seem to limit this law specifically to the vidduy recited by the Kohan Gadol but it doesn't apply to any other vidduy.  (Possibly the idea is that it's only a vidduy requesting forgiveness for the sins of many people that requires additional ריצוי ופיוס and hence one must ask forgiveness with annah.) 

However, when we look in Rambam, we see he disagrees.  In Teshuva (1:1) he includes the word אנא in the vidduy recitation of every individual.  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.  It would seem that he disagrees with Rashi and holds its a requirement by every vidduy.  However, when we look at the end of Ch. 3 of מעשה קרבנות, regarding vidduy on a korban, all of a sudden the word annah disappears.  The Rambam says: כֵּיצַד מִתְוַדֶּה. אוֹמֵר חָטָאתִי עָוִיתִי פָּשַׁעְתִּי וְעָשִׂיתִי כָּךְ וְכָךְ וְחָזַרְתִּי בִּתְשׁוּבָה לְפָנֶיךָ וְזוֹ כַּפָּרָתִי.  Why is the word annah omitted in this form of vidduy?  The source for this exception wold be the Toras Kohanim פרשתא דחובה ג:ד that assumes annah is said only on the korban of Yom Kippur, not by the Kohan Gadol who brings his korban if he sinned: "וסמך..ידו על ראש הפר" – לרבות פר יום הכפורים לסמיכה. הלא דין הוא! מה אם זה – שאינו טעון שני וידוים ואינו טעון "אנא" – טעון סמיכה, פר יום הכפורים – שטעון שני וידוים וטעון "אנא" – אינו דין שיטעון סמיכה?!.  We see from here that its not not an obligation to say annah by all korbanot. But what is the understanding of this, why would the vidduy of korbanot be different?  We can understand this based upon the principle mentioned in the previous post that the vidduy of korbanot isn't the same as the vidduy of teshuva, it is merely a declaration of the purpose of the korban.  With that distinction we can understand that its only when saying vidduy as part of teshuva that there is need for additional supplication and one must add annah.  However, as a mere declaration of purpose, there is no need to say annah. 

Based upon this, it comes out that the vidduy of the Yom Kippur offerings are not because they are korbanot, but because of teshuva.  The korbanot of Yom Kippur are all offered to enhance the process of one's teshuva and their vidduy is the vidduy of teshuva.  

It is also noteworthy that the Rambam doesn't include the word annah in one's personal request of vidduy on Yom Kippur.  His text (Laws of Teshuva 2:8) is אֲבָל אֲנַחְנוּ חָטָאנוּ (כֻּלָּנוּ) וְהוּא עִקַּר הַוִּדּוּי.  Why is the word annah omitted?  This can be understood based upon the previous post, that the vidduy of Yom Kippur is an expression of the innermost part of the soul and on that level there is no room for great requests of appeasement, for on such levels, one is in fact distant from sin.