Believe In Yourself

נח מקטני אמנה היה מאמין ואינו מאמין.  Many interpretations have been written how can Noach be a tzaddik tammim yet be lacking in his emunah?  And what does it mean a מאמין and a אינו מאמין at the same time?  The Kedushat Levi says that Noach was a maamin in Hashem but he wasn't a maamin in himself.  He explains that tzaddikim has the power to nullify the decrees of Hashem and Noach should have tried to pray to remove the threat of the Mabul.  However, he lacked faith in his own abilities and capabilities and thought that was out of his hands.  He adds it was for this same reason that Noach did not attempt to rebuke the other people for in his mind he was not better than them to be more worthy of saving and it was not his place to give rebuke.  

Rav Tzaddok (Tzidkas Hatzaddik #154) says כְּשֵׁם שֶׁצָּרִיךְ אָדָם לְהַאֲמִין בְּהַשֵׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ - כָּךְ צָרִיךְ אַחַר כָּךְ לְהַאֲמִין בְּעַצְמוֹ.  One must believe in their own capability for greatness.  

After the mabul the Torah says ויחל נח איש אדמה which Chazal view in a negative light.  Why is it denigrating to start replanting the world?  Rav Aharon Lichtenstein explains what Chazal see in the possuk is that Noach became an איש אדמה.  He was no longer Noach איש צדיק that happens to be planting and rebuilding the world, he is Noach the farmer.  His essence became a farmer and his role of tzaddik faded away.  That is the critique.  Where did this change come from?  Because Noach did not recognize his own potential it led him to become a person that was unbefitting of his level.

Lack Of Thanks

From Pneney Halacha Intro to hilchot berachot במידה מסוימת, חטא אדם הראשון התחיל בכפיות טובה. את כל עצי הגן נתן ה' לאדם הראשון, ורק מעץ הדעת ציווהו שלא לאכול. אילו היו אדם וחוה אסירי תודה על כל הטוב שנתן להם ה', היו זוכים ליהנות מן העולם, מהעצים הנפלאים ומהפירות הטעימים, ולא היו מתאווים לאכול מעץ הדעת. אבל כיוון שלא הכירו בטובה, כל המתנות הטובות שקיבלו נעשו מובנות מאליהן, ולא מצאו בהן נחת, ורק נשארה להם טינה כבושה על האיסור לאכול מעץ הדעת. וכשבא הנחש להסיתם, נפלו וחטאו. גם לאחר החטא המשיך אדם הראשון לכפור בטובה, ואמר (בראשית ג, יב): "הָאִשָּׁה אֲשֶׁר נָתַתָּה עִמָּדִי הִוא נָתְנָה לִּי מִן הָעֵץ וָאֹכֵל". מי יודע, אולי אם היה מתוודה ואומר: "אתה ה' אלוהי נתת לי אשה לשמוח עימה, ואני במקום להודות לך, שקעתי במחשבות אנוכיות ומתוך כך נתקלקלנו וחטאנו", אולי היה נסלח לו ולא היה מגורש מגן עדן. נמצא אם כן שבאמירת הברכות בכוונה אנחנו מתקנים את חטא אדם הראשון.

Why is the sin of Adam linked with a lack of hakarat hatov?  

The last Midrash in V'zos Haberacha says הצדיקים, שאפלו במיתתן קרויין חיים, שנאמר: ובניהו בן יהוידע בן איש חי רב פעלים מקבצאל וגו' (ש״‎ב כג, כ). וכי כלי עלמא בני מתים הוו, אבל הרשעים, אפלו בחייהם קרויים מתים, שנאמר: ואתה חלל רשע וגו' (יחזקאל כא, ל). וכן הוא אומר, על פי שנים עדים או שלשה עדים יומת המת (דברים יז, ו). וכי יש מת שהוא חיב מיתה אחרת. אלא רשע בחייו חשוב כמת, מפני שרואה חמה זורחת ואינו מברך יוצר אור, שוקעת ואינו מברך מעריב ערבים, אוכל ושותה ואינו מברך עליה. אבל הצדיקים, מברכין על כל דבר ודבר שאוכלין ושותין ושרואין וששומעין. ולא בחייהם בלבד, אלא אפלו במיתתן מברכין ומודין לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא, שנאמר: יעלזו חסידים בכבוד, ירננו על משכבותם, רוממות אל בגרונם וחרב פיפיות בידם (תהלים קמט, ה-ו).  A rasha is called a מת because he doesn't recognize that everything is in the hand of Hashem as opposed to the tzaddik who is called living because he acknowledges where things come from.  In other words, being alive is defined as being able to see things clearly while dead is defined as a lack of clarity.  Any time there is a sin it is a lack of clarity and that goes together with a lack of hakarot hatov.  That may be the death that was decreed on Adam.  Not only a physical death, but a spiritual death, which did occur immediately.

Peer Pressure

The Maharal in Derush L'Shabbas Hagadol asks why did the korban that Hevel offered protect him from being killed by Kayin for שומר מצוה לא ידע דבר רע?  He answers that Hevel was not offered protection from hi korban because Hevel did not initiate the offering on his own but rather just followed in Kayin's footsteps.  והבל הביא גם הוא, he also offered a korban, he followed the lead of his brother.  The Maharal identifies this as a the definition of הבל (what was just read about in Koheles,) not having one's own existence, but looking for external inspiration and guidance. 

We just concluded the holiday of sukkot which is as the Tur notes, parallel to Yaakov Avenu.  The middah of Yaakov is emes, which means that he served Hashem equally at all times.  This is the message of Sukkot, even when one is a temporary hut devoid of one's comforts, one's service of Hashem should not be altered.  In other words, one's service of Hashem must come from within, one's own motivation and not as a result of external pressure.  That is the message of the Maharal, even for mitzvah purposes, one's motivation must come from the inside and not from external factors.

No Barriers

אך שמח לרבות לילי יו"ט אחרון של חג לשמחה.  Why is there an increase in simcha on Atzeret?  If Atzeret is a regel unto itself, why is it called Shemini?

Usually the word אך functions as a miut so how does it include the night for simcha?  The Gra explains it comes to exclude that there are no mitzvot and the command of והיית שמח is all that is left.  What we learn from here is that other holidays require some sort of mitzvah which enables us to obtain simcha but on Atzeret there is no need for external mitzvot, the day itself demands simcha.  What is the nature of this simcha?  

The number 8 always represents that which is above nature.  During the seven days of Sukkot korbanot are offered for the gentiles as well; they have a part in the natural cycle of the world.  Atzeret is just a korban for Klal Yisrael, it alludes to the times of Mashiach where the gentiles will have no power.  In the back of the Eretz Tzvi (Frumer) there are pieces from a grandchild of the Rodamskor (Emrei Chanoch) and he says in his grandfathers name that why is the mitzvah of simcha for Atzeret written just in the form of a hint?  The Rodamskor explains since Atzeret hint to the days of Mashiach it needs to be snuck in so that the evil forces don't try to attack the day.  How is Atzeret an allusion to the times of Mashiach?  

The simcha of Atzeret is the fact that a Jew is connected to Hashem irrespective of mitzvot.  Simcha comes about when things can come together.  The fact that Klal Yisrael is connected to Hashem, the fact that there is that bond, that closeness, which is experienced on Atzeret, obligates simcha.  That is what will be revealed in the times of Mashiach.  The apparent barriers that exist, that seem to impede on this connection will be broken down.  

However, this doesn't come about on its own.   It is only after אך, after the first 21 days of preparation during Tishray, and specifically during the 7 days of Sukkot that can culminate in a Shemini Atzeret.  It is only after we have one our part, have fulfilled the mitzvot, that Hashem allows us to jump to the Shemini, to the supernatural realm which is above our own grasp.   

The Emrei Chanoch adds based upon the Shem MiShmuel that the קללות that come אשר לא עבדת בשמחה are not a punishments, but a means to fire a person up to feel that desire to come back to Hashem.  With this in mind, he says ,since milah is done with simcha (see Shabbos 130) the golus that no dominion over it and it also hints to the times of Mashiach.  Hence, he adds, the seudah for a bris milah is also derived from a hint הגמל את יצחק (5+3 מל) (see Tosfos Shabbos 130a) to avoid the evil forces trying to attack.  In light of the above idea, it is the same yesod.  Milah is a symbol of one's bris, one's internal connection to Hashem and that hints to the times of Mashiach (see also Pri Tzaddik Sukkot #9, #12.) 

Temporary

ויעקב נסע סכתה ויבן לו בית ולמקנהו עשה סכת על כן קרא שם המקום סכות.  Why did Yaakov name the place Sukkot due to the huts and not house due to the permanent structure he built?  The Chasam Sofer in his derashot to Sukkot suggests that the read is that for Yaakov everything in this world is temporary, a sukkah and that is his בית, for him the sukkah is the bayis.  However, למקנהו doesn't mean for his livestock, but for the entourage, the נפש אשר עשו בחרן, the sukkah was only temporary but this message did not stay with them.  He continues to say that the Sukkot is what sticks with the place because it is the message that gets passed to others that is most important.  

The Sfas Emes (5662) echoes this message that the machlokes if sukkah is דירת ארעי או קבע is two different modes of viewing the sukkah.  For some people, the sukkah is דירת קבע, they are able to see the entire world as temporary.  However, for most people the sukkah is just a דירת ארעי, a temporary residence that doesn't last.  He adds that is inherited from Yaakov calling the place Sukkot, he allowed for even those with whom the message of Sukkot does not permeate on a permanent basis to to able to appreciate Sukkot.

Two Types Of Water

Rashi Meilah (13a) and Rashbam Bava Bathra (79a) say that the nisach hamayim must come from מים חיים.  The Shittah asks on the Rashbam from the Mishna in Sukkah (48b) which says that the mayim was drawn from the מי השילוח but if it spilled or became uncovered, then the water would be drawn from the kiyor and the opinion of the Chachamim (Zevachim 22b) is that the waters of the kiyor were not מים חיים (see also Rashash in Sukkah)?  The Ritva sidesteps this question and he says that the kiyor was mayim chayim for it was filled form the water of the ים של שלמה which was connected to a spring as the Yerushalmi Yoma (19a) notes (see Aruch Lenar.)  This also may be the machlokes Rashi and Tosfos if the Gemrah's derash of ושאבתם מים בששון is to tell us that we blow shofar during the drawing of the water or that you need מי השילוח = מים חיים (Aruch Lenar.)     

The Gemarah Taanis (2b) מה ניסוך המים מאורתא דאמר מר (במדבר כט, יח) ומנחתם ונסכיהם אפילו בלילה.  The Gemarah Yoma (26b) אמר ר' אבא ואיתימא רמי בר חמא ואיתימא ר' יוחנן אין מנסכין מים בחג אלא בתמיד של שחר.  On the one hand the nisach hamayim is connected to the tammid of the shachar but on the other hand it can be offered even at night.  Rabbi Brown (Mishberay Yam siman 27) wants to suggest that these two derashat are telling us there are two ways of doing nisach hamayim.  One way is to offer the nisach as part of the tamid, as a korban and it will have halachot associated with it such as to be offered from מים חיים.  However, we learn from the derash that it is kasher at night that even without acting with the rules of korban there is a halacha to bring the mayim as an obligation of the day and for that there is no rule of מים חיים.  In other words, לכתחילה the mayim should be offered as a korban but even if that is not fulfilled the Torah still wants there to be a מציאות of a mayim libation but there aren't all the halachot of the "korban" of nisach hamayim attached to it.  

Chazal say it was called bais hashoava שמשם שואבין רוח הקודש.  There were tremendous heights that one could achieve at the beis hashoava.  At the same time, it represents the low waters trying to climb higher.  It is even those that are lower down that are able to connect to the beis hashoava.  The nisach hamayim had something for everyone to gain.  

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.