Newsgroup: it.cultura.ebraica
Titolo: 18 -11: Forgiveness

                        ]
                   YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
      ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************
 
          YHE-18: THE MEANING OF SHEMONA ESREI
 
                    by Rav Ezra Bick
 
 
                     11: Forgiveness
     The sixth berakha asks for forgiveness:
     Forgive us, our Father, for we have sinned;
     Forgive us, our King, for we have transgressed,
     For you pardon and forgive.
     Blessed be You, gracious, who greatly forgives.
 
      The  previous berakha asked for help in repentance.
The  Sages  chose to separate these two  requests  -  for
repentance  and  for  forgiveness  -  into  two  distinct
berakhot.  Based  on  what  I tried  to  explain  in  the
previous  shiur, the request for repentance is a  request
for healing and repair, an expression of our desire to be
able  to support the spirit of God that should be  within
us.  We are asking to come close to God. This berakha  is
asking  for  something else, for forgiveness and  pardon.
Sin  contaminates the spiritual personality and makes  it
impossible for the sinner to be close to God. Sin also is
a  crime, and the doctrine of reward and punishment -  in
other words, of Divine justice - mandates a response from
God, for "the Judge of the whole world does justice."  To
avoid  the  punishment, we ask God  to  forgive.  Because
these  are two very different requests, one based on  our
internal  spiritual welfare, and the other  referring  to
our  physical well-being, the Sages wanted it to be clear
that  we  should  not confuse the two. More  importantly,
perhaps,  each request in the Shemona Esrei represents  a
distinct  NEED of Man. The Sages wished us to  understand
that  the need to be close to God is independent  of  the
need  not  to be punished by God - and in fact should  be
prior to it. The need for repentance is not dependent  on
the  need  to avoid punishment, although the  second  may
very well be dependent on the fulfillment of the first.
      The berakha itself is very straightforward. I would
like to comment on two points.
A. Selicha, Mechila, and Kappara
      There are three terms used to describe the intended
result that we request when repenting, three actions that
we  ask  God  to  do.  They  are "selicha,  mechila,  and
kappara."  The  three terms are nearly  inseparable,  for
instance in the Yom Kippur prayers (where forgiveness  is
the  central theme). In our berakha, however, kappara  is
absent. In order to understand why, we have to understand
the significance of each term.
1.  Selicha  -  selicha means not holding a  grudge,  not
feeling affronted or aggrieved. If someone is angry  with
you,  you  would ask him to forgive you, to be "soleach."
To ask God for selicha is to ask Him not to be angry with
us,  to change His attitude towards us, even though  that
attitude  is justified. To understand why God  should  be
angry  when we sin, we must realize that every sin is  an
affront  to God, who is Creator and King. This  does  not
mean  that  God has a fragile ego, or is easily insulted.
The  "anger"  and  "affront" here is objective  -  within
every  sin  is an act of rebellion, of throwing  off  the
"yoke  of  heaven;" and the proper reaction of  objective
justice  to  such  an act is what we, in  our  subjective
psychological lives, feel as a sense of hurt. The sin has
a  personal  aspect - God has commanded you, has  treated
you  as  worthy of His Torah, has entered into a covenant
with  you,  and  you  have  defiled  and  abrogated  that
covenant.  Aside  from the objective wrongdoing,  an  act
against  what is right, there is a personal  sin  AGAINST
GOD. In our language, we would say that God takes the sin
personally,  unlike  a  judge  in  a  human  court,   who
dispenses  justice  without any  personal  stake  in  the
matter.  The  remedy to this reaction of God is  selicha,
forgiveness.  God is asked to not let our actions  affect
his feelings towards us.
2.  Mechila  -  mechila is a word borrowed from  a  legal
context. If you owe someone money, but he waives the need
to  repay,  this  is called mechila - not  forgiving  but
foregoing. It does not interest us how the creditor feels
about  the  debt,  but only whether he  waives  the  debt
itself,  thereby  freeing you from the need  to  pay.  In
fact,  the  word itself is neutral as regards insult  and
injury - one can waive (be "mochel") debts that arise  in
a purely civil context; e.g., if one borrowed money. When
one who has the right to demand redress or payment waives
that  right, thereby freeing the debtor from the expected
consequences, this is called mechila.
      In  the context of sin, mechila refers directly  to
the  punishment.  This  is based on  the  idea  that  the
punishment  for a sin is inherent in the sin  itself,  as
repayment is inherent in borrowing. One who sins incurs a
debt,  redress  is necessary to set things  right  again.
This  is the principle of pure justice. We feel this when
we  read of someone who committed a crime and managed  to
avoid  ever  paying  for it - our  hearts  tell  us  that
something is wrong here, unjust, not right in the general
order  of  things.  This  is different  from  selicha  in
regards the nature of sin itself - we are not looking  at
sin as a personal affront to God, but as an objective act
of wrong, which must be paid for so that justice be done.
God,  in  this picture, is not the lawgiver who has  been
"insulted" by my ignoring Him, but the judge, who  is  in
charge  of seeing that objective justice be done. As  the
first Jew discovered, God is "the judge of all the world"
(Genesis 18,25). If we ask for mechila, we are requesting
that God "waive" the payment of sin, not demand it of us.
As   opposed  to  selicha,  which  occurs  within   God's
attitude,  mechila occurs in God's relationship  with  us
and  frees us from an obligation in regard to Him. If one
obtains mechila, he does not "owe" God anything anymore.
3.  Kappara - Kappara is fundamentally different then the
previous two terms. Kappara means "atonement." The object
of  atonement, that which is changed as a result, is  not
God (His attitude, as in selicha) or God's demands of  us
(His demands, as in mechila), but Man and the sin itself.
Objects  which have been defiled by sin need  kappara  to
return to a state of purity. In fact we find the concepts
of  atonement  and purity often joined. The famous  verse
which concludes the Yom Kippur (Day of ATONEMENT) service
in  the Torah reads: "For on this day He shall atone  for
you  from  all  your  sins,  before  God  shall  you   be
purified." Atonement is purification from sin.  R.  Akiva
had the following saying:
     Fortunate  are  you,  Israel, before  whom  are  you
     purified  and  who  purifies you -  your  Father  in
     Heaven,  as is written, "I shall pour over you  pure
     waters and you shall be purified" (Ez. 36,25 ).  And
     it is written, "The hope ('mikve') of Israel is God"
     (Jer.  17,13). Just as a mikve purifies the defiled,
     so  does the Holy One, blessed be He, purify Israel.
     (Yoma 85b)
 
      This  is based on the idea that sin is not  just  a
historical fact which engenders punishment from the  just
King, but an internal defilement of man's purity, of  the
tzelem elokim (the image of God). A person who sins has a
corrupted  personality,  a  tainted  character,   and   a
polluted  soul. He has not only done sin, he is  SUNK  in
sin.  Kappara is restoration of the sinner himself.  This
is  reflected in another difference between  selicha  and
mechila,  on the one hand, and kappara on the  other.  If
you sin against me, I can offer you a pardon and forgive.
I  can grant selicha and mechila. But only God can effect
kappara,  for it is a miracle of healing for  the  ailing
soul. It requires more than a decision to have kappara  -
God  must  act  and  change a fact of the  world;  not  a
natural,  physical fact to be sure, but a spiritual  one.
When  one asks for kappara, one is asking for REDEMPTION,
to  be saved from an oppressive and tyrannical evil  that
has conquered one's being.
      Hence, I believe, kappara is not mentioned in  this
berakha, not because it is not important, but because  it
will  appear in the next berakha, the berakha of  "geula"
(redemption).  As  we  shall see then,  the  request  for
redemption  expressed in that berakha is not specifically
referring to political oppression, but includes spiritual
trouble  as  well.  The oppression of  sin  will  be  the
subject  of that request as least as much as any physical
trial to which one might be subjected.
      This,  of  course raises thequestion why the  Sages
separated  the two berakhot. The answer to that  question
mainly lies in understanding the next berakha, for  which
you  are  going to have to wait until after  Pesach.  But
even now, we should emphasize one point. The contents  of
each  berakha are not based on a commonality of  effects,
so  that  selicha, mechila and kappara would be naturally
grouped  together,  but on a commonality  of  need.  Each
berakha expresses a single, distinct, basic need of  Man.
Although sin underlies all three of the processes we have
been  discussing, and although in terms  of  the  effect,
they  are  closely related, from the perspective  of  the
need  from  which the prayer arises, kappara  is  a  very
different thing than selicha and mechila. The latter  two
arise  from  man's need to ensure his welfare,  from  his
need to be secure and even prosperous. Sin threatens  his
well-being,  for  God  is angry with  him  and  threatens
punishment.  Kappara,  though, arises  from  man's  inner
spiritual need to be whole, to be healthy in spirit.  The
"problem"  it  comes to solve is internal. The  need  for
redemption  is  completely different than  the  need  for
security.  Therefore these two requests, which  refer  to
two  completely different aspects of man, are  placed  in
two separate berakhot.
B. "Who greatly forgives"
       The   chatima  of  the  berakha  is  "Who  greatly
forgives."   This   sounds   like   a   really   terrible
translation.  I  plead guilty - I don't  even  know  what
"greatly  forgives" means. But then, I  think  that  "ha-
marbeh l'sloach" does not, on first glance, make a lot of
sense  either. Literally translated, it would read,  "who
forgives a lot," or "who forgives often." What does  that
mean? Why is this the only berakha where the attribute of
God in the chatima is described as happening often, or as
expressing an excess of God's power?
      In  my opinion, the "ha-marbeh" here means that the
ability  of  God  to forgive is endless,  infinite.  "Ha-
marbeh  l'sloach"  means  that  God  forgives  endlessly,
without limit, as much as is needed, if He so desires. We
wish to place no limits on God's merciful forgiveness; we
do  not wish to imply or even hint that there could be  a
limit on it.
     Now, the more metaphysically inclined among you will
surely protest that none of God's attributes are limited.
God's  power  is infinite, in all respects.  What  is  so
special or noteworthy about forgiveness?
     The answer, I believe, is that every other attribute
of  God  to which we refer in the Shemona Esrei,  in  our
requests  for  assistance, does not NEED to be  infinite.
Since  the  world which we are asking to  be  changed  is
finite, God does not need an infinitude of power in order
to change it and correct it. The problems may be immense,
but nonetheless, by virtue of the fact that the world and
everything  in it is created, it is finite in  scope  and
hence can never pose more than a finite problem for  God.
The  religious  doctrine of the infinity of  God  derives
first  and  foremost from creation itself, which  was  ex
nihilo, out of nothing. There, and only there, there  was
no proportion between the problem (non-existence) and the
solution (the world). As we all know, anything divided by
nothing  is  equivalent to infinity. But since  creation,
God  is dealing only with finite problems. Hence when  we
turn  to Him to solve our problems and fulfill our needs,
we  do  not  have  to  specify that  He  is  of  infinite
resource.
      There  is  one exception within the world  to  this
sweeping generalization. There is one problem within  the
world where the God who will solve it must be of infinite
resource  in order to ensure in advance the certainty  of
solution. That is the problem of sin.
      Since man has free will, he is capable of unlimited
evil, even as he is capable of unlimited good. As we have
stated  in the past, the upper limit of man's development
is  nothing  less  than  God,  i.e.,  infinity.  But  the
necessary balance between good and evil which results  in
freedom of the will implies that the lower limits of  his
depravity be also unlimited. Just as we regularly declare
that no matter how far man has fallen he can still repent
and  return, so too, no matter how far he has fallen,  he
can  do even more evil. If that were not so, he could not
repent  at  that point either. Hence, evil in this  world
is, in principle, potentially endless. Therefore, God who
is  our  answer to our own evil and sin,  is  He  who  is
"marbeh  l'sloach."  Accordingly, the proper  translation
for  this  name  of God would be "who can always  forgive
more,   whose  power  of  forgiveness  derives  from   an
unlimited  fount." It is necessary to emphasize  this  in
the  chatima of the berakha, because I will only turn  to
God  who can solve any problem with which I will approach
Him.  In  the case of this problem, the problem of  evil,
that  means  that  I  must know and  reiterate  that  His
forgiveness is endless.
[Back  in  the second berakha, Gevurot (shiur  no.5),  we
explained the phrase "rav lihoshia" (who redeems much) as
referring  to the fact that God's power is  not  of  this
world,  but  above and beyond anything within the  world.
That was in the introductory berakha where I explain  why
I  am approaching Him with my problems. In the individual
requests,  there  is no need to address God  as  infinite
when bringing a finite problem to His attention. Only sin
is  different, since it derives from an infinite fount of
its own, the power of free will.]
      This  is  not  merely  the knowledge  of  limitless
potential,  providing assurance that any future  sin,  no
matter   how  great,  is  also  within  God's  power   of
forgiveness.  The nature of forgiveness in  every  single
case  derives from this infinite power in actuality. This
is true for two reasons.
a.  Every  sin, even a "little" one, results  from  man's
power  of  free will, which is unlimited. The sin  itself
may  be finite, but it by definition is an expression  of
an  unlimited power. Hence, the remedy must  also  derive
from  an unlimited power. If one concentrates on the  sin
itself, this may not be true, but from the perspective of
the root and cause of sin, the battle is between infinite
resources.
b.  When  free will is used to sin, it calls in  question
the very creation of the world. The world was created  by
God,  as  an  expression of His infinite  and  omnipotent
will.  Everything that exists, exists because  God  wills
it.  In principle, nothing can exist against God's  will.
Yet  -  and this is the mystery of free will, the mystery
of  the  image  of God in which man was  created  -  evil
exists.  Logically, the existence of  sin  should  result
immediately  in its non-existence, and the  non-existence
of  the sinner as well, for by going against the will  of
God  it  negates  its  own  metaphysical  basis.  So  the
existence of evil impugns the infinity of God by its very
existence.  The  forgiveness of  sin,  its  casting  into
oblivion, is a return to the purity and totality  of  the
moment of creation, when everything is in accordance with
God's  will. "And God said..... and it was so." The power
of  forgiveness  is therefore the power  of  creation  ex
nihilo, and hence, even for one sin, it derives from  "He
who greatly forgives."
***********************************************************
For direct questions or comments regarding this shiur, 
please write to 
1...@ETZION.ORG.IL
***********************************************************
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, SEND EMAIL TO
LI...@VBM-TORAH.ORG
Unsubscribe yhe-18
**********************************************************
Yeshivat Har Etzion's Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash
is on the web at 
http://www.vbm-torah.org
***********************************************************
Shiurim   may   be  dedicated  to  various  occasions   -
yahrzeits,  semachot,  birthdays,  etc.   Please   e-mail
y...@vbm-torah.org
 for an application.
***********************************************************
Internet & e-mail list hosting for the VBM provided courtesy of:
The Yerushalayim Network (
http://www.yerushalayim.net
)
a Centennial Project of the Orthodox Union (
http://www.ou.org
)
***********************************************************
For a full VBM curriculum, write to 
li...@vbm-torah.org
 with 
the following message:  Get YHE-About courses
***********************************************************
YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH
ALON SHEVUT, GUSH ETZION 90433
E-MAIL: 
Y...@VBM-TORAH.ORG
 or 
OFF...@ETZION.ORG.IL
Copyright (c) 1999 Yeshivat Har Etzion
All Rights Reserved
------
Posted via news://
freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to 
ne...@netfront.net

,
liviatan  <livi...@SoftHome.net> wrote:
" [ This is a repost of the following article:                               ]
Toh, un articolo contro il manifesto (quello originale, intendo...)
.mau.

 .mau.
Ciao, Maurizio.
Non desidero in alcun modo essere polemica (per ora, almeno),  ma
potresti cortesemente spiegarmi per quale ragione l'articolo "postato"
da liviatan sarebbe contrario al manifesto di ICE?
Grazie.
Marina

 wrote:
" Non desidero in alcun modo essere polemica (per ora, almeno),  ma
" potresti cortesemente spiegarmi per quale ragione l'articolo "postato"
" da liviatan sarebbe contrario al manifesto di ICE?
Cito dal manifesto originale:
    Il newsgroup e' moderato, in lingua italiana ed in caratteri ASCII a 7
    bit. Sono ammesse brevi citazioni in ebraico translitterato, di cui e'
    gradita la traduzione in italiano.
Ergo, un testo in inglese, secondo quanto scritto dall'allora moderatore
del gruppo, e` fuoritema: o italiano o ebraico.
Sia ben chiaro che - anche se liviatan aka deadmanw non si divertisse a
bypassare la moderazione - quell'articolo sarebbe stato considerato
pienamente in tema per le regole che ho messo su per Golem: la buona
educazione avrebbe richiesto magari un riassuntino di tre-quattro righe in
italiano (in modo che chi con l'inglese fa fatica avrebbe potuto capire se
valeva la pena di tradurselo), ma la buona educazione non e` certo un
obbligo.
Ricordo che il vecchio manifesto del gruppo e` sempre disponibile a 
http://www.news.nic.it/manif/old/it.cultura.ebraica.txt.990305
ciao, .mau.