I
"Please forgive the sin of your brothers...now please forgive the sin of the servants of your father's G-d" (Bereishis 50:17). Yosef responds graciously, "Do not worry...Hashem intended it for good...I will sustain you... he consoled them, and spoke to their heart (50:19-21).
Rabbeinu Bachya (17) notes that the Torah does not say that Yosef forgave them; they died without his forgiveness, and their sin was not atoned. The punishment was exacted many years later, when the Romans killed the ten martyrs, as recounted during Musaf on Yom Kippur As the piyut Eila Ezkera cites the Romans despot, "You must bear the sins of your ancestors". The second phrase in the passuk, "the sin of the servants of your father's G-d" is not a redundancy, but an allusion to the ten martyrs killed, in part as a punishment for the sale of Yosef by his ten brothers. Earlier (44:17), Rabbeinu Bachya names all ten, and cites the capital punishment of those who kidnap and sell the person they kidnapped (Shemos 21:16). He adds that the brothers themselves were also punished when the their troubles in Egypt began immediately after Yosef's death.
The Gemara (Yoma 87a) states, "One who asks forgiveness should not ask more than three times", as the word "na", found three times in 50:17, is an expression of a request (Rashi). Rav Elyashiv (Toras Ha'adam L'Adam vol. 3 p. 27) proves from here that Yosef did not forgive them. If he had forgiven them, then the gemara would have no proof regarding how one should behave when not forgiven after three times. The brothers (and later the ten martyrs) were punished even though they asked for forgiveness three times, presumably because they, as tzadikim, were held to a higher standard (See Yevamos 121b, and Tzon Kodashim Menachos 29b).
Rabbeinu Bachya (38:1) asks: only nine brothers sold Yosef, as Reuven wished to return him to Yakov (37:22), so why were ten (as opposed to only nine) martyrs killed as a result of the sale? He answers that Yosef also sinned by causing the brothers' sin when he angered them and glorified himself over them with his dreams. As such, the tenth martyr bore the sin of Yosef. Perhaps, alternatively, Yosef's sin that was borne by the tenth martyr was not forgiving the brothers for their sin against him.
II
Forgiving others is beneficial to the sinners who are forgiven, since it spares them from punishment. The formulation of forgiveness, recited by many nightly before Krias Shma Al Hamita, and annually in Tefila Zaka before Kol Nidrei, contains the phrase, "May no person be punished on my account." It seems from these two tefillos that forgiveness is effective even if the sinner does not confess and ask to be forgiven, and yet Rav attempted to have a sinner who sinned against him ask for forgiveness (Yoma 87a). Why did Rav not simply forgiven him without encountering him? The answer may be that every interpersonal sin is also a sin against Hashem. One who was wronged can only forgive the interpersonal aspect, so that no person be punished on his account. However, in order to be completely forgiven for his sin against Hashem, the sinner must repent.
Repentance requires not only regret over the sin and resolution not to repeat it, but also confession (Rambam, Hilchos Teshuva 2:2). The confession must specify the sin and articulate regret and shame over it (1:1). Rav attempted to give the sinner the opportunity for complete teshuva so that he could be forgiven completely.
The Pele Yo'etz (Teshuva) proves form the story of Rav that even though sincere forgiveness granted by one who was pained by another achieves a lot, it is not enough. The sinner must do that which is incumbent upon him, i.e. appease the victim of his sin, even if he feels shame. Shame is part of confession, achieves forgiveness (Berachos 12b), and avoids much, much greater shame in the World to Come.
III
The Mishna Berura (606:3) cites three rulings of the Mateh Efraim (2) regarding asking forgiveness: 1) one who asks forgiveness must specify the sin 2) if he knows that the victim will be shamed, he should not specify it 3) asking forgiveness from an entire group, as opposed to individually from the person he sinned against, is insufficient.
Why must the sin be specified? At first glance, the victim must know what he is forgiving. But if so, how is he forgiven when he does not specify it in order to avoid shaming the victim? And why is specifying before an entire group insufficient? The need to specify must have a different reason. It is not indispensable as a function of the ability of the victim to forgive. Rather, in the words of the Pele Yoetz, it is incumbent on the sinner as part of his obligation to appease the victim. By specifying the sin, his confession is shameful. Shame is a function of forgiveness by Hashem, and applies to all sins, as the Rambam writes.
When specifying the sin shames the victim, it is prohibited, and therefore not incumbent on the sinner. Hence, he is forgiven by Hashem, as well as by the victim who sincerely forgives whatever the sin may be. By contrast, asking forgiveness from a group, even if the sin is specified, is not as embarrassing for the sinner as a one-on-one conversation with each person he sinned against, and is therefore insufficient.
If the sinner's victim died, the sinner must bring ten men to his grave and confess "I have sinned to Hashem and to this man" (606:2). The Mishna Berura (ibid 15, again citing Mateh Efraim (5)) requires that the sin be specified. Since a dead man cannot forgive, the sinner must be seeking forgiveness from Hashem. Still, it is incumbent upon him to specify the sin, so that the confession causes him to feel shame. Here, too, if specifying the sin will bring disgrace to the dead man's memory, it must be omitted (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 131:5). In such a situation, since it is not incumbent on the sinner to specify it, Hashem forgives him completely without it being specified.
If specifying will cause the victim pain, not shame, the sinner is likewise prohibited from doing so (Mo'adim U'zmanim 1:54, citing Rav Yisrael Salanter). The Chafetz Chaim's (4:12) requirement to reveal the lashon hara he said when asking forgiveness must refer to a case that will not cause the victim pain (Dirshu fn. 10, citing Chut Shani (Yom Kippur) and Az Nidberu (7:66)). Otherwise, the Chafetz Chaim agrees that he may not specify the sin and cause the victim pain. Once again, since in such cases it is not incumbent upon him to specify the sin, he is forgiven completely. (See Minchas Asher (Vayikra pg. 269) who reaches this conclusion, seemingly against both Rav Yisrael Salatner and the Chafetz Chaim. In our analysis, they both agree with this conclusion).
IV
May one ask forgiveness more than the required three times? The Pri Chadash (606:1) cites a dispute on this matter, in which the Tur and Shulchan Aruch rule that one may, but the Rambam (Hilchos Teshuva 2:9) implies that one may not, rather he must leave the victim who refuses to forgive, and the one who does not forgive is now the sinner. The Pri Chadash agrees with the Rambam and adds that the sinner is forgiven if he attempts to appeases the victim (Yoma 85b), even if the victim does not forgive him. (The Tur and Rabbeinu Bachya may disagree).
While this may make asking a fourth time unnecessary, why it is forbidden? Because having refused to forgive the sinner three times, there is a presumption (chazaka) that the victim will refuse again, and one may not cause him to sin. The Rambam's source (Bamidbar Raba 19:23) calls refusal to forgive sinful and cruel, a term cited by the Rama (606:1).
The Mishna Berura (8) adds that one who forgives another is forgiven by Hashem (Rosh Hashana 17a), and vice versa. Sha'ar Hatziyun (8) explains this as follows: in Shamayim they judge mida k'neged mida. As such, if one forgives a willful sin against him, Hashem forgives his willful sins as well. Thus, forgiving is beneficial not only to the sinner, but also to the victim who forgives, as he is thereby forgiven for his own sins.
Remarkably, recent studies have shown that letting go of grudges can protect against stress and the toll it takes on mental health (Time Magazine, Oct. 2, 2017, p. 31). Happiness results when one forgives others, and oneself, and makes a person physically healthier as well (p. 30). Thus forgiving benefits the one who forgave, both in this world and in the world to come.
The sale of Yosef is the paradigmatic sin bein adam l'chaveiro (See Meshech Chochma to Vayikra 16:30). Interpersonal sins caused the churban Bayis Sheini (Yoma 9b) and the murder of millions by the Romans, including the ten martyrs. The proper balance of truth and peace, and the avoidance of sin'as chinam, are critical conditions needed to reverse the tide of history and rebuild the Bais Hamikdash (See Radak to Zecharia 8:19).
Each member of Klal Yisroel can hasten the geula by avoiding interpersonal sins, by asking forgiveness from those he wronged, and by forgiving those who have wronged him. We must all learn the lessons taught by Rabbeinu Bachya, the Gemara, the Rambam and the Mishna Berura. We must seek forgiveness, despite the shame of specifying our misdeed, unless specifying will cause the victim shame or pain. We must grant forgiveness, realizing that we may have caused the sinner to wrong us. Moreover, if we do not forgive, we are termed cruel and sinful. Finally, forgiving benefits both the sinner and the victim, in this world and the world to come. May we thereby witness the ultimate geula quickly.
Today, Asara b'Teves, may be the anniversary of mechiras Yosef (D'rashos Bais Yishaya, p. 242). The Chasam Sofer, quoting earlier sources, writes that each year, on Asara b'Teves, the Heavenly Court decides whether the Bais Hamikdash will be rebuilt during the coming year. By improving our interpersonal behavior, seeking forgiveness, and granting it, we can do our share to make this year the year of redemption. When we balance truth and peace properly, Asara b'Teves, and other fasts, will be days of joy and celebration (Zecharia 8:19).
"Please forgive the sin of your brothers...now please forgive the sin of the servants of your father's G-d" (Bereishis 50:17). Yosef responds graciously, "Do not worry...Hashem intended it for good...I will sustain you... he consoled them, and spoke to their heart (50:19-21).
Rabbeinu Bachya (17) notes that the Torah does not say that Yosef forgave them; they died without his forgiveness, and their sin was not atoned. The punishment was exacted many years later, when the Romans killed the ten martyrs, as recounted during Musaf on Yom Kippur As the piyut Eila Ezkera cites the Romans despot, "You must bear the sins of your ancestors". The second phrase in the passuk, "the sin of the servants of your father's G-d" is not a redundancy, but an allusion to the ten martyrs killed, in part as a punishment for the sale of Yosef by his ten brothers. Earlier (44:17), Rabbeinu Bachya names all ten, and cites the capital punishment of those who kidnap and sell the person they kidnapped (Shemos 21:16). He adds that the brothers themselves were also punished when the their troubles in Egypt began immediately after Yosef's death.
The Gemara (Yoma 87a) states, "One who asks forgiveness should not ask more than three times", as the word "na", found three times in 50:17, is an expression of a request (Rashi). Rav Elyashiv (Toras Ha'adam L'Adam vol. 3 p. 27) proves from here that Yosef did not forgive them. If he had forgiven them, then the gemara would have no proof regarding how one should behave when not forgiven after three times. The brothers (and later the ten martyrs) were punished even though they asked for forgiveness three times, presumably because they, as tzadikim, were held to a higher standard (See Yevamos 121b, and Tzon Kodashim Menachos 29b).
Rabbeinu Bachya (38:1) asks: only nine brothers sold Yosef, as Reuven wished to return him to Yakov (37:22), so why were ten (as opposed to only nine) martyrs killed as a result of the sale? He answers that Yosef also sinned by causing the brothers' sin when he angered them and glorified himself over them with his dreams. As such, the tenth martyr bore the sin of Yosef. Perhaps, alternatively, Yosef's sin that was borne by the tenth martyr was not forgiving the brothers for their sin against him.
II
Forgiving others is beneficial to the sinners who are forgiven, since it spares them from punishment. The formulation of forgiveness, recited by many nightly before Krias Shma Al Hamita, and annually in Tefila Zaka before Kol Nidrei, contains the phrase, "May no person be punished on my account." It seems from these two tefillos that forgiveness is effective even if the sinner does not confess and ask to be forgiven, and yet Rav attempted to have a sinner who sinned against him ask for forgiveness (Yoma 87a). Why did Rav not simply forgiven him without encountering him? The answer may be that every interpersonal sin is also a sin against Hashem. One who was wronged can only forgive the interpersonal aspect, so that no person be punished on his account. However, in order to be completely forgiven for his sin against Hashem, the sinner must repent.
Repentance requires not only regret over the sin and resolution not to repeat it, but also confession (Rambam, Hilchos Teshuva 2:2). The confession must specify the sin and articulate regret and shame over it (1:1). Rav attempted to give the sinner the opportunity for complete teshuva so that he could be forgiven completely.
The Pele Yo'etz (Teshuva) proves form the story of Rav that even though sincere forgiveness granted by one who was pained by another achieves a lot, it is not enough. The sinner must do that which is incumbent upon him, i.e. appease the victim of his sin, even if he feels shame. Shame is part of confession, achieves forgiveness (Berachos 12b), and avoids much, much greater shame in the World to Come.
III
The Mishna Berura (606:3) cites three rulings of the Mateh Efraim (2) regarding asking forgiveness: 1) one who asks forgiveness must specify the sin 2) if he knows that the victim will be shamed, he should not specify it 3) asking forgiveness from an entire group, as opposed to individually from the person he sinned against, is insufficient.
Why must the sin be specified? At first glance, the victim must know what he is forgiving. But if so, how is he forgiven when he does not specify it in order to avoid shaming the victim? And why is specifying before an entire group insufficient? The need to specify must have a different reason. It is not indispensable as a function of the ability of the victim to forgive. Rather, in the words of the Pele Yoetz, it is incumbent on the sinner as part of his obligation to appease the victim. By specifying the sin, his confession is shameful. Shame is a function of forgiveness by Hashem, and applies to all sins, as the Rambam writes.
When specifying the sin shames the victim, it is prohibited, and therefore not incumbent on the sinner. Hence, he is forgiven by Hashem, as well as by the victim who sincerely forgives whatever the sin may be. By contrast, asking forgiveness from a group, even if the sin is specified, is not as embarrassing for the sinner as a one-on-one conversation with each person he sinned against, and is therefore insufficient.
If the sinner's victim died, the sinner must bring ten men to his grave and confess "I have sinned to Hashem and to this man" (606:2). The Mishna Berura (ibid 15, again citing Mateh Efraim (5)) requires that the sin be specified. Since a dead man cannot forgive, the sinner must be seeking forgiveness from Hashem. Still, it is incumbent upon him to specify the sin, so that the confession causes him to feel shame. Here, too, if specifying the sin will bring disgrace to the dead man's memory, it must be omitted (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 131:5). In such a situation, since it is not incumbent on the sinner to specify it, Hashem forgives him completely without it being specified.
If specifying will cause the victim pain, not shame, the sinner is likewise prohibited from doing so (Mo'adim U'zmanim 1:54, citing Rav Yisrael Salanter). The Chafetz Chaim's (4:12) requirement to reveal the lashon hara he said when asking forgiveness must refer to a case that will not cause the victim pain (Dirshu fn. 10, citing Chut Shani (Yom Kippur) and Az Nidberu (7:66)). Otherwise, the Chafetz Chaim agrees that he may not specify the sin and cause the victim pain. Once again, since in such cases it is not incumbent upon him to specify the sin, he is forgiven completely. (See Minchas Asher (Vayikra pg. 269) who reaches this conclusion, seemingly against both Rav Yisrael Salatner and the Chafetz Chaim. In our analysis, they both agree with this conclusion).
IV
May one ask forgiveness more than the required three times? The Pri Chadash (606:1) cites a dispute on this matter, in which the Tur and Shulchan Aruch rule that one may, but the Rambam (Hilchos Teshuva 2:9) implies that one may not, rather he must leave the victim who refuses to forgive, and the one who does not forgive is now the sinner. The Pri Chadash agrees with the Rambam and adds that the sinner is forgiven if he attempts to appeases the victim (Yoma 85b), even if the victim does not forgive him. (The Tur and Rabbeinu Bachya may disagree).
While this may make asking a fourth time unnecessary, why it is forbidden? Because having refused to forgive the sinner three times, there is a presumption (chazaka) that the victim will refuse again, and one may not cause him to sin. The Rambam's source (Bamidbar Raba 19:23) calls refusal to forgive sinful and cruel, a term cited by the Rama (606:1).
The Mishna Berura (8) adds that one who forgives another is forgiven by Hashem (Rosh Hashana 17a), and vice versa. Sha'ar Hatziyun (8) explains this as follows: in Shamayim they judge mida k'neged mida. As such, if one forgives a willful sin against him, Hashem forgives his willful sins as well. Thus, forgiving is beneficial not only to the sinner, but also to the victim who forgives, as he is thereby forgiven for his own sins.
Remarkably, recent studies have shown that letting go of grudges can protect against stress and the toll it takes on mental health (Time Magazine, Oct. 2, 2017, p. 31). Happiness results when one forgives others, and oneself, and makes a person physically healthier as well (p. 30). Thus forgiving benefits the one who forgave, both in this world and in the world to come.
The sale of Yosef is the paradigmatic sin bein adam l'chaveiro (See Meshech Chochma to Vayikra 16:30). Interpersonal sins caused the churban Bayis Sheini (Yoma 9b) and the murder of millions by the Romans, including the ten martyrs. The proper balance of truth and peace, and the avoidance of sin'as chinam, are critical conditions needed to reverse the tide of history and rebuild the Bais Hamikdash (See Radak to Zecharia 8:19).
Each member of Klal Yisroel can hasten the geula by avoiding interpersonal sins, by asking forgiveness from those he wronged, and by forgiving those who have wronged him. We must all learn the lessons taught by Rabbeinu Bachya, the Gemara, the Rambam and the Mishna Berura. We must seek forgiveness, despite the shame of specifying our misdeed, unless specifying will cause the victim shame or pain. We must grant forgiveness, realizing that we may have caused the sinner to wrong us. Moreover, if we do not forgive, we are termed cruel and sinful. Finally, forgiving benefits both the sinner and the victim, in this world and the world to come. May we thereby witness the ultimate geula quickly.
Today, Asara b'Teves, may be the anniversary of mechiras Yosef (D'rashos Bais Yishaya, p. 242). The Chasam Sofer, quoting earlier sources, writes that each year, on Asara b'Teves, the Heavenly Court decides whether the Bais Hamikdash will be rebuilt during the coming year. By improving our interpersonal behavior, seeking forgiveness, and granting it, we can do our share to make this year the year of redemption. When we balance truth and peace properly, Asara b'Teves, and other fasts, will be days of joy and celebration (Zecharia 8:19).
No comments:
Post a Comment