I just wanted to take a few minutes just to share one idea with regard to Rosh Hashanah. In many machzorim there's a note alongside the Avinu Malkeinu's that according to the Arizal when you say Avinu Malkeinu on Rosh Hashanah obviously this year we don't have it first day Rosh Hashanah because of Shabbos, but when you say Avinu Malkeinu on Rosh Hashanah you're supposed to omit the first Avinu Malkeinu of chatanu lefanecha and begin from אבינו מלכנו אין לנו מלך אלא אתה. And the reason the Arizal gave for skipping that first Avinu Malkeinu is that on Rosh Hashanah one is not supposed to mention cheit. One's not supposed to mention cheit. And therefore it should begin אין לנו מלך אלא אתה not with אבינו מלכנו חטאנו לפניך. Now at first glance this is absolutely mystifying. How can it be that Rosh Hashanah a Yom HaDin when one's response to din certainly has to be teshuvah so how can it be that you can't talk about cheit? And yet the rest of the machzor certainly seems to the Rosh Hashanah machzor certainly seems to corroborate what the Arizal says that we really don't. We really don't focus on cheit. So how can that be? How can it be a Yom HaDin which even if it didn't double as the first of Aseres Yemei Teshuvah which it does how can it be that on Yom HaDin on the first of Aseres Yemei Teshuvah both of which both of those characteristics both the fact that it's Yom HaDin as well as the fact that it's a first of Aseres Yemei Teshuvah how can it be that we can't talk about cheit? Le'achar ha'iyun so it seems partially understandable. What the Arizal tells us seems to be partially understandable. The Rav zichrono livracha used to mention very often in his drashos and on other occasions how in Chabad Rosh Hashanah was referred to as a Yom Tov of coronation. That we kaveyachol coronate Hakadosh Baruch Hu. With that in mind משל למה הדבר דומה imagine that a king declares a Yom Tov on the anniversary of his ascension to the throne to celebrate his kingship. He's consolidated his rule. He's an absolute monarch and to celebrate that so he pronounces he declares a Yom Tov. Obviously on this occasion so all his servants and his subjects not only praise him but they acknowledge his sovereignty. One of the subjects comes in and begins to say viduy begins to confess. And he says Adoni HaMelech, I'm truly, truly sorry that on so many occasions over the past year or years I rebelled against you and I was contemptuous of you, and I sincerely regret it, and I beg your forgiveness. Now even if his motives are entirely sincere, so what's the king's reaction going to be? For that matter, what is everyone's reaction going to be that at this moment when everyone unites and acknowledges the absolute sovereignty of the king, even for the sake of saying vidui, even for the sake of begging forgiveness, you can't even allow the thought or the possibility of challenging the king to be mentioned, to be in the air. That itself is a pegam in this celebration of the king's malchus. Even though the person is motivated sincerely, it's a sincere vidui. But the mere mention of the fact that the king's rule is something which has, can, be violated, can be broken, that itself is a pegam. That itself interferes with, detracts from, the coronation. So clearly, clearly the day of hachtara is not a time for vidui hachet. And lechora, that's what the Arizal, and I don't know what it really means, but al pi nigla, that's what the Arizal meant in telling us that you can't say אבינו מלכנו חטאנו לפניך on Rosh Hashana, you can't mention chet even to be misvade on a yom tov of hachtara. But that doesn't really answer everything for us, it just sort of rephrases the question. So how then? If that's true and we understand it, that a yom tov of hachtara doesn't allow for the mention of chet even in the context of vidui, so how can that coexist with Yom HaDin? How can that coexist with the first of Aseres Yimei Teshuva, with the day is supposed to be devoted to teshuva? How else does one conduct oneself on a Yom HaDin? How else is one supposed to respond to the opportunity of Dirshu Hashem Behimatzo of Aseres Yimei Teshuva? So how can these coexist? How can that same day be the day of hachtara and simultaneously be the Yom HaDin, the first of Aseres Yimei Teshuva? Now it's true, it's true that the Minchas Chinuch says, we mentioned it the other day, that vidui is only me'akev in kapara, it's not me'akev in teshuva. And again, veha'raya the Gemara Kiddushin that הרי את מקודשת לי על מנת שאני צדיק גמור אפילו רשע גמור אפילו רשע גמור ככל ימיו
is mekudeshes, mekudeshes misafek, that doesn't make a difference, שמא הרהר בלבו תשובה. So there was, but there was no vidui, so vidui's not me'akev in kapara. But אף על פי כן, that doesn't begin to answer the question, doesn't begin to answer the question of how you can have a Yom HaDin, how you can have a Yom Teshuva on which you can't, can't be misvade, on which you can't talk about. Lulei demistafina, I would think that the Arizal here is telling us a tremendous chiddush in Hilchos Teshuvah. For our present purposes, so we can describe two types of teshuvah. A person is nichshal in a certain aveirah, rachmana litzlan, whatever that may be. He's makir be'cheto. I know that I was nichshal in this aveirah. He's mischarait. He profoundly regrets, he feels anguish at the aveirah. So what's the response? What's the response? So one response, and it's a response of teshuvah, it's a response of teshuvah. One response is, I have to be more nizhar. I have to be more nizhar. Go back to the beginning of Mesillas Yesharim: zehiruss, zerizuss. Clearly I'm not sufficiently nizhar, I'm not sufficiently zariz in whatever areas I have identified chet. And that's a response of teshuvah. There's another response of teshuvah to recognize that whatever the chet may be, whatever chet rachmana litzlan from alef through tav in the Al Chet, if I was nichshal in any chet kehu zeh, so clearly it means that my קבלת עול מלכות שמים is lacking. Clearly that means that despite, despite שמע ישראל בשכבך ובקומך, that my קבלת עול מלכות שמים is lacking because קבלת עול מלכות שמים by definition is absolute, comprehensive, all-encompassing. And if in fact I wasn't sufficiently nizhar, and if in fact I wasn't sufficiently zariz, it goes much deeper than that. Obviously the קבלת עול מלכות שמים was not as deep or as profound or as genuine as it should have been to generate that zehiruss and zerizuss. Against that background, it would appear, and again Lulei demistafina, it would appear that the chiddush of Rosh Hashanah, of יום טוב של ראש השנה is that teshuvah on Rosh Hashanah is through Malchiyos. It's not that the Yom Tov of Hachtarah as such, which is why we say אמרו לפני מלכויות כדי שתמליכוני עליכם, it's not that that simply coexists or coincides with a day of teshuvah. But the teshuvah of Rosh Hashanah is a teshuvah through Malchiyos. What does that mean? It means on Rosh Hashanah we don't talk about chet. Because to talk about chet is to talk about the aveirah. To talk about chet is to talk about being nizhar and being zariz. But there's a teshuvah that's l'ma'alah from all of that. There's a teshuvah that's much more fundamental than all of that. And that is the teshuvah of Hachtarah. If I'm mamtlich the Ribbono shel Olam properly, if my קבלת עול מלכות שמים is what it should be, then the zehiruss and the zerizuss will follow. So on Rosh Hashanah we go to the shoresh. We go to the ikkar. We don't talk about the perat. We don't talk about the anaphim. We don't talk about the consequences. We don't talk about the aveiros. We talk about the קבלת עול מלכות שמים. And the teshuvah of Rosh Hashanah is that Hachtarah. And if that Hachtarah is genuine, then all the aveiros from alef to tav in the Al Chet are handled. Because we have corrected the shoresh from which all of those aveiros stemmed. And that's why we don't say Viduy on Rosh Hashanah. And that's why we don't talk about chet on Rosh Hashanah. Because the teshuvah of Rosh Hashanah is not a teshuvah of Viduy. It's not a teshuvah of being mifaret the chet. It's a teshuvah of Malchiyos. It's a teshuvah of Hachtarah. If that's the case, then teshuvah on Rosh Hashanah is not only possible, but it's the most profound teshuvah of all. It's the teshuvah of shoresh. It's the teshuvah of ikkar. Mah she'ein kein, Erev Yom Kippur. On Erev Yom Kippur we start with Viduy. Because Yom Kippur is a teshuvah of kaparah. It's a teshuvah of Viduy. It's a teshuvah of being mifaret the chet. And therefore Viduy is me'akev. Viduy is an essential component of the teshuvah of Yom Kippur. But the teshuvah of Rosh Hashanah is the teshuvah of Malchiyos. And on Rosh Hashanah, Viduy would be out of place. Viduy would be a stirah to the avodah of the day. Because the avodah of the day is to be mamlach the Ribbono shel Olam. And if we're mamlach the Ribbono shel Olam, we're doing the most profound teshuvah of all. And that's why the Arizal says that teshuvah is the ikkar avodah of Rosh Hashanah. But it's a teshuvah that's expressed through Malchiyos, through Hachtarah, and not through Viduy. sides with the Yom Tov of Din with the first of Aseres Yemei Teshuva, but rather the path to Teshuva on Rosh Hashanah is through Malchios. And a real Malchios, if a person really says Malchios on Rosh Hashanah, u'malchuso bakol mashala, if a person really renounces any illusion of independence, of autonomy, if a person is really מכתיר הקדוש ברוך הוא, if a person really resolves that no matter what was true in the past, this קבלת עול מלכות שמים is a genuine, comprehensive one, then that Malchios gufa is his Teshuva. And that these strands are not different strands, but that they're two sides of the same coin. The Hachtara is the Teshuva for Rosh Hashanah. And in saying that we don't mention cheit because that detracts from Hachtara, that's not any kind of impediment to Teshuva. It doesn't in any way restrict us from Teshuva, but on the contrary, it says that the Teshuva is through Malchios. That recognize that any cheit reflects a failure to fully tamlichuni aleichem, to fully respond to that charge and thus the אמרו לפני מלכויות כדי שתמליכוני עליכם is the avodas hateshuva for Rosh Hashanah. I have to think about this for a while, I looked a little bit, didn't find this, but found at least some kind of partial parallel. Saw that the Slonimer Rebbe says in his sefer Nesivos Shalom, he quotes the Gemara in Shabbos קיח ע"ב that אמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן כל המשמר שבת כהלכתו אפילו עובד עבודה זרה כדור אנוש מוחלין לו שנאמר אשרי אנוש יעשה זאת.
And the Slonimer Rebbe comments that the mashma'us in the Gemara is that the experience and again this is a separate, a separate shmooze, one we're not going to, it requires its own arichus, but the experience of shomer Shabbos kehilchaso again is an alternate mode of Teshuva, is an alternate mode of Teshuva even though a person is not following the normal procedure for Teshuva. Al kol panim, lichora that's what the Arizal is saying is that the Yom Tov of Hachtara should be seen as merging with the Yom HaDin, with the Yom HaTeshuva, and that the avoda of Rosh Hashanah is to do Teshuva through the imru lefanai malchiyos. Hope the Ribbono Shel Olam will open our hearts that we should be able to say malchiyos, lehamlicho aleinu, and in that zchus we should all have a ksiva v'chasima tova. The she-sikamnu that we would discuss a sugya in Yoma and bli neder pick up tomorrow with the erev machaiv korban. The sugya with which you're all familiar on פ"ז ע"ב in Yoma. ברייתא תנו רבנן מצות וידוי ערב יום הכפורים עם חשכה. אבל אמרו חכמים יתודה קודם שיאכל וישתה שמא תטרף דעתו בסעודה. ואף על פי שהתודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה שמא אירע דבר קלקלה בסעודה. ואף על פי שהתודה ערבית יתודה שחרית שחרית יתודה במוסף במוסף יתודה במנחה במנחה יתודה בנעילה.
So here there is a major machlokes Rishonim what exactly it means מצות וידוי ערב יום הכפורים עם חשכה. So the Ran says that most of the meforshim say that this refers to mitzvas viduy really commences with tefillas Arvis, which is why when you look later in the braisa, the braisa doesn't mention being misvadeh in Arvis, right? It says ואף על פי שהתודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה
because this refers to the viduy of Arvis, and then the braisa simply says that even though you were already misvadeh once on Yom Kippur, a person is supposed to be misvadeh numerous times on Yom Kippur, ערבית שחרית מוסף מנחה נעילה. But the מצות וידוי ערב יום הכפורים עם חשכה means beginning with tefillas Arvis. The only thing is שמא תטרף דעתו בסעודה according to the Rambam it means shema yachanaik that we say one viduy already before the seuda mafsekes in tefillas Mincha erev Yom Kippur. And that also seems to be how the Rambam understood pshat here in perek bais of Hilchos Teshuva. ומצות וידוי יום הכפורים שיתחיל מערב היום קודם שיאכל שמא יחנק בסעודה קודם שיתודה ואף על פי שהתודה קודם שאכל חוזר ומתודה בלילי יום הכפורים ערבית וחוזר ומתודה בשחרית מוסף מנחה ונעילה.
So the Ran, the Rambam paraphrases what the braisa says of ואף על פי שהתודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה
so the Rambam paraphrases that as ואף על פי שהתודה קודם שאכל חוזר ומתודה בלילי יום הכפורים ערבית.
And again that's the first pshat which the Ran quotes from the meforshim. Then he says that the Ramban didn't like this pshat. The Ramban says that if the braisa were talking about viduy of Arvis, so the braisa wouldn't have said wouldn't have described the viduy of tefillas Arvis leil Yom Kippur as l'achar she-achal v'shasah. First of all it's not immediately after achal v'shasah, there's going to be some time lapse, and there's no reason the braisa wouldn't have said it directly. So this is where the Ramban again advanced his well-known pshat that what it means is that there's a מצות וידוי ערב יום הכפורים עם חשכה means that there's a separate mitzvas viduy immediately prior to the beginning of Yom Kippur. That a person is supposed to begin Yom Kippur immediately prior to Yom Kippur, a person should begin by being misvadeh, and this is in addition to the ten viduyim of the tefillos Yom Kippur. That's what it means מצות וידוי ערב יום הכפורים עם חשכה and what the braisa says ואף על פי שהתודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה.
doesn't mean misvadeh again in arvis. That's obvious, says the Ramban. It would never occur to us that the vidui you said before Yom Kippur could substitute for a vidui in Yom Kippur proper. However, this mitzvah of saying vidui before Yom Kippur, of beginning the day with tahara. This mitzvah of saying vidui before Yom Kippur. So there I would have thought that once we said it in Mincha, so then there would be no need to say it again immediately before Kol Nidrei, a few minutes right before shkiyah, so kamashma lan that אף על פי שהתוודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתוודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה.
And then the braisa doesn't say misvadeh arvis. That's obvious that you have to be misvadeh on Yom HaKippurim. The chiddush is that אף על פי שהתוודה ערבית יתוודה שחרית. Okay, that's the Ran, kiyaduah, that's the Ramban's pshat here in this braisa. And again, halacha l'maiseh means that according to the Ramban, there is a chiyuv vidui immediately prior to Yom Kippur, immediately prior to Yom Kippur. That's why lechora to fulfill this view of the Ramban, so one should either at least have in mind that Tefilla Zaka functions that way and stand for the appropriate parts of Tefilla Zaka because vidui, as the sugya says later here, is me'umad. Or the Rav used to recommend that a person actually say the vidui, actually say ashamnu, actually say vidui prior to Yom Kippur because of this shitas haRamban. Okay. But again, the other Rishonim learn differently. Okay, and then there's several things to discuss here, but in a moment we'll come back to one he'ara in pshat here. Heikan omro, where do you say vidui in tefilla on Yom Kippur? Yachid achar tefillaso, after Elokai Netzor, shliach tzibbur omer be'emtza. Mai amar? What does this vidui consist of? Amar Rav אתה יודע רזי עולם, right? אתה יודע רזי עולם ותעלומות סתרי כל חי אתה חופש כל חדרי בטן ובוחן כליות ולב אין דבר נעלם ממך ואין נסתר מנגד עיניך.
So that's what the vidui consists of according to Rav. Shmuel amar mimmama'akei haleiv, right? We don't have Shmuel's tefilla, but it was some tefilla that I guess it began with those words, mimmama'akei haleiv. Levi amar uvechochmascha kasuv, Rashi says ובחכמתך כתוב לאמר כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם לטהר אתכם מכל חטאתיכם לפני ה' תטהרו.
Rabbi Yochanan amar Ribbon Ha'olamim. That's what we have as part of לעולם יהא אדם ירא שמים in the morning. לא על צדקותינו אנחנו מפילים תחנונינו לפניך etc. So that was the vidui according to Rabbi Yochanan. Rav Yehuda omer כי עונותינו רבו מלמנות וחטאתינו עצמו מספר. Rav Hamnuna omer, right? This too we have at the end of our Shtilleh Shemoneh Esrei after the vidui. אלהי עד שלא נוצרתי איני כדאי ועכשיו שנוצרתי כאילו לא נוצרתי עפר אני בחיי קל וחומר במיתתי הרי אני לפניך ככלי מלא בושה וכלימה יהי רצון מלפניך שלא אחטא עוד ומה שחטאתי מרק ברחמיך אבל לא על ידי יסורין. והיינו וידוייא דרב בכל שתא ודרב המנונא זוטא ביומא דכיפורי.
Finally, amar Mar Zutra לא אמרן אלא דלא אמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו. All of these are what the Amoraim say can be used to fulfill the mitzvah vidui. However, aval amar לא אמרן אלא דלא אמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו. Aval amar aval anachnu chatanu, tu lo tzarich. But if the person just said that simple formula, those three words, aval anachnu chatanu, so that would suffice. Good. Good. And the Rambam takeh quotes this as well in perek beis, that same halacha. In perek beis מהלכות תשובה הלכה זיין. So the Rambam says יום הכיפורים הוא זמן תשובה לכל ליחיד ולרבים והוא קץ מחילה וסליחה לישראל ולפיכך חייבים הכל לעשות תשובה ולהתודות ביום הכיפורים. ומצוות וידוי יום הכיפורים שיתחיל מערב היום קודם שיאכל שמא יחנק בסעודה קודם שיתודה.
And then he says in halacha ches הוידוי שנהגו בו כל ישראל אבל אנחנו חטאנו והוא עיקר הוידוי.
Right? Zus Gemara. Right? הוידוי שנהגו בו כל ישראל אבל אנחנו חטאנו והוא. ikaro shel viduy. So here there is a famous kashya, the Avodas Hamelech and others raise the kashya that and what's so amazing about this is that it's as almost as if the Rambam was waving a red flag to make sure that we didn't miss the kashya. Almost as if the Rambam is telling us to watch out for a stira here. Because earlier in פרק א הלכות תשובה הלכה א, the Rambam again, the famous opening halacha, writes as follows: כל מצות שבתורה בין עשה בין לא תעשה אם עבר אדם על אחת מהן בין בזדון בין בשגגה כשיעשה תשובה וישוב מחטאו חייב להתוודות לפני האל ברוך הוא שנאמר איש או אשה כי יעשו והתודו את חטאתם אשר עשו זה וידוי דברים וידוי זה מצות עשה.
Keitzad misvade? Right? Now comes the Rambam to tell us how you misvade. אומר אנא השם חטאתי עויתי פשעתי לפניך ועשיתי כך וכך והריני נחמתי ובושתי במעשי ולעולם איני חוזר לדבר זה.
And if that weren't bad enough, so then the Rambam says וזהו עיקרו של וידוי. Right? It's an amazing thing. So in both halachos, both in פרק א הלכה א as well as פרק ב הלכה ח, he uses the same phrase that what I'm telling you here is ikaro shel viduy. The problem is he doesn't tell us the same thing. In פרק ב הלכה ח he says ikaro shel viduy is the three words of aval anachnu chatanu. Where does he get that from? He gets that from our Gemara here in Pezayin Amud Beis. But in פרק א הלכה א, so there the viduy contains more than aval anachnu chatanu. First of all, it has perut hachet, asisiti kach vekach. Second of all, it also has nichamti uvoshti. Nichamti uvoshti, I regret, I'm embarrassed. And it also has kabbala l'haba. Right? So it has all of those elements, none of which are present in פרק ב הלכה ח and yet the Rambam says here alef alef is ikaro shel viduy and then he tells you in פרק ב הלכה ח that this too is ikaro shel viduy. So again, you look at Avodas Hamelech amongst others already asked, it seems to be a glaring stira. Again, so glaring because the Rambam uses the same phrase ikaro shel viduy to in case we wouldn't have picked up on the stira on our own, to as it were, to alert us. That's one kashya. Another kashya going back to the Gemara is that some of these viduyim of the Amoraim are very strange when you think about them. Dehainu, let's take Levi's: ובתורתך כתוב לאמור כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם לטהר אתכם מכל חטאתיכם לפני השם תטהרו.
So what's missing in Levi's viduy? There's no explicit, there's no explicit confession of chet. All we do is we say uvisoscha kasuv leimor and then we quote a pasuk from Chumash. We quote a pasuk of Sefer Vayikra: כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם לטהר אתכם מכל חטאתיכם לפני השם תטהרו.
There's no, there's not even an explicit, explicit admission of chet. For that matter, I'm not sure exactly where Rav Zatzal's אתה יודע רזי עולם ended, but if it ended with אין דבר נעלם ממך ואין דבר נסתר מנגד עיניך, so in Rav's also you don't have any explicit admission of chet. Again, it's אתה יודע רזי עולם ותעלומות סתרי כל חי אתה חופש כל חדרי בטן ובוחן כליות ולב אין דבר נעלם ממך ואין דבר נסתר מנגד עיניך.
So there too there's no, okay, there's certainly an allusion to it, but if it's viduy, so why isn't it straight and simple and direct admission of chet? And the same thing you have in some of the others also. In the אלוקי עד שלא נוצרתי איני כדאי, again, mah shechatasi is mentioned parenthetically to to asking that Hakadosh Baruch Hu be mamarayk our avonos, so incidentally we have to say mah shechatasi. But it doesn't seem to have the focus which viduy should have. That's a second kashya. Number one is the stira in the Rambams, the ikaro shel viduy. Number two again is that all these viduyim of the Amoraim or several of them at any rate don't seem to emphasize simply the hakaras hachet, the hoda'as hachet. of mitzvas viduy is a strange - is a strange phrase because be'emes there's not a mitzva of viduy, right? There's a mitzva of doing teshuva. And, again, after all the - well, I guess depending upon which pshat you say in in the Rambam in פרק א הלכה א, but certainly if you go with the Rav's mahalach that the - the mitzva is obviously teshuva, the only maiseh hamitzva is - is viduy, that's true. But the mitzva per se is not viduy, the mitzva is teshuva. So the phrase mitzvas viduy is a strange phrase because lachora there really isn't any such thing. There's no mitzvas viduy per se. There's a mitzva to do teshuva and an integral component of that - an integral component at least in terms of gaining kapara, it's not that there's no teshuva without viduy, right? That's what the Minchas Chinuch proves from the Gemara in Kiddushin of - well when a person is mekadesh an isha על מנת שאני צדיק גמור, so she's mekudeshes misafek שמא הרהר בלבו תשובה. So the Minchas Chinuch asks but we didn't hear him say viduy. We didn't hear him say viduy. אפילו רשע כל ימיו שמא הרהר בלבו תשובה, but we know that he didn't say viduy. What he was meharher belibo we can't - we can't X-ray his heart. So we don't know. But we know that he didn't say viduy, so that's what the Minchas Chinuch discusses that maybe viduy is - is meakev in getting kapara. But in terms of - again, just teshuva per se, it's not that there's no such thing as teshuva without viduy. Okay, ad de'hachi. Be that as it may, the phrase here mitzvas viduy is a very strange phrase because lachora it's a misnomer. There is no such thing as mitzvas viduy per se. So be'emes that last diyuk, perhaps if you learn the Ramban's pshat... well, maybe not. So those are the three kashas we're left with. The stira in the Rambam by the ikaro shel viduy, the fact that the viduy in the sugya, some of them don't even have any explicit admission of cheit, the others certainly don't emphasize it, it seems to be more behavlaya. And finally, what's this phrase of mitzvas viduy? So lachora what that phrase suggests and what the entire sugya suggests is as follows, that be'emes there are two types of viduy, two types of viduy. There's one type of viduy, the mokor for which in the Torah is as the Rambam tells us in פרק א הלכות תשובה הלכה א is כל מצות שבתורה בין עשה בין לא תעשה אם עבר אדם על אחת מהן בין בזדון בין בשגגה כשיעשה תשובה וישוב מחטאו חייב להתוודות לפני האל ברוך הוא שנאמר איש או אשה כי יעשו והתודו את חטאתם אשר עשו זה וידוי דברים.
So that's a posuk in Parshas Naso by gezel hager, and the Sifrei on that posuk says ומניין שהיה צריך להתוודות על כל החטאים and the Sifrei has a whole series of ribuyim that it's not only for this particular cheit that a person is misvadeh but for any cheit when a person's doing teshuva he has to be misvadeh. Or in other words, there's viduy, again, which as the Rav explained is the maiseh hamitzva of teshuva. So that viduy, if it's the maiseh hamitzva of teshuva, so what does it have to contain? It has to contain all the elements of teshuva. So it has to contain the hakaras hacheit, it has to contain the pirut hacheit, it has to contain - for - reasons which we'll discuss some other time bli neder - nichamti u'voshti and it also has to contain the kabala l'haba because all of those are indispensable elements of teshuva. Because this is the viduy of teshuva. But the chazal have another mokor for viduy as well. If you take a look in the Toras Kohanim in Parshas Acharei Mos in the avodas Yom HaKippurim on the posuk of וכיפר בעדו ובעד ביתו so chazal say that zu viduy devarim. That this refers to a mitzva of viduy, teaches us a mitzva of viduy. And then it goes on to quote the viduy of the kohen gadol, again, which the mishna has earlier in Yoma. on לה עמוד ב of בא לו אצל פרו סומך שתי ידיו עליו ומתודה וכך היה אומר אנא השם עוויתי פשעתי חטאתי לפניך אני וביתי אנא השם כפר נא לעוונות ולפשעים ולחטאים שעוויתי ושפשעתי ושחטאתי לפניך אני וביתי ככתוב בתורת משה עבדך כי ביום הזה יכפר והם עונים אחריו ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד.
So this vidui the Toras Kohanim has a separate makor for it. Has a separate makor for this vidui of the Kohen Gadol again of vechiper ba'ado. Rashi refers to it, doesn't quote the whole he just said that vechiper here means it's before it's being offered, so it means kaparas devarim, it means vidui. Now it's interesting that this vidui of the Kohen Gadol also, again, it's more along the lines of פרק ב הלכה ח, i.e., it doesn't have kabbala l'haba or many of the other elements which the Rambam calls ikaro shel vidui in פרק א הלכה א. So what would seem to be is that what this Toras Kohanim tells us is the makor that there's a second mitzvas vidui. That vidui appears, it functions as the ma'aseh hamitzvah of teshuva. That's פרק א הלכה א, but then there's also a din of vidui not of teshuva, but a vidui of kapara. That when a person stands on the threshold of kapara, so then a person has a new chiyuv vidui. And that's distinct from the vidui as part of teshuva, but it's rather a vidui of kapara. That in order that a person should be ra'uy lehitkaper, should be ra'uy to receive kapara, so then a person has to be misvadeh. And this is a different vidui. This isn't the vidui which is a detail of mitzvas teshuva, but this is a free-standing vidui. That's what our sugya is talking about, mitzvas vidui, meaning the independent mitzvas vidui, as it were. Not independent in the sense that it's going to be featured in Taryag Mitzvos, not independent in that sense because it's linked to the impending kapara, but mitzvas vidui in contrast, in contradistinction to mitzvas teshuva, this is a free-standing mitzvas vidui and again, it's not the vidui of teshuva, it's the vidui of kapara. This ikaro shel vidui aval anachnu chatanu suffices. For this vidui, not the vidui of teshuva, but the vidui of kapara, so there the Rambam says aval anachnu chatanu suffices. And if you look, the Rambam took pains to make sure that we'd understand that. He writes here again in perek bet, again, halacha zayin vechet where he has the second ikaro shel vidui from our sugya, aval anachnu chatanu, so the Rambam writes לפיכך חייבים הכל לעשות תשובה ולהתוודות ביום הכיפורים. And then he says ומצות וידוי יום הכיפורים. Again, right? The Rambam is very careful to preserve the leshon hasugya that ומצות וידוי יום כיפור. That what I'm talking about here, what I'm about to define for you, is not the vidui of teshuva. No, that was defined in פרק א הלכה א. But there's a second din vidui, there's a din vidui of kapara. That when a person stands on the threshold of kapara, again he's mechuyav to be misvadeh. Again he's mechuyav to be misvadeh. That's the free-standing mitzvas vidui that our sugya is talking about. The Rambam says for this vidui, aval anachnu chatanu is the ikaro shel vidui. Since it's not the vidui of teshuva, it's the vidui of kapara, it doesn't require all those other elements of פרק א הלכה א. And what's more, the emes is that this vidui of kapara again, since it's not the vidui of teshuva, basically again, if you read the sugya, what's the basic idea that a person has to express? Whether it's אתה יודע רזי עולם, or whether it's אלוהי עד שלא נוצרתי איני כדאי, that the vidui of kapara, a person is supposed to not so much focus on a specific aveira, but rather on his relationship with the Ribbono Shel Olam. That a person in order to receive kapara, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is about to grant atonement, to grant kapara, so that can only happen when a person correctly understands his relationship vis-a-vis Hakadosh Baruch Hu, his dependence upon Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Whether it's אתה יודע רזי עולם, whether it's אלוהי עד שלא נוצרתי איני כדאי. Ini kedai, and that's being expressed. And even when we say it, aval anachnu chatanu, again, it's more to capture again where we stand vis-a-vis Hakadosh Baruch Hu, our dependence upon him. And it's only once a person acknowledges that he's rauy l'chapara. So then the sugya reads beautifully. That's what the sugya is telling us. We're defining here a separate mitzvas viduy, not the viduy of teshuva.