The Burning Bush, The Simple Jew & The Tzaddik

This is an excerpt from Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi by Nissan Mindel, pages 69-73.

~
The main strictures which the Mithnagdim leveled against the Beshtian doctrines centered on two points:

Firstly, the teachings of the Ba'al Shem Tov accorded especial esteem to the prayers and Tehillim-recital of the unlearned and untutored Jew, even though he did not know what he was saying. This attitude, the Mithnagdim contended, tended to give the am ha'aretz and ignoramus a sense of undeserved self-importance, and lowered the prestige of the talmidei-chachamim. It seemed to ignore the Talmudic saying that "all calamities that occur in the world are due to the amei-ha'aretz."

Secondly, according to the doctrine of the Ba'al Shem Tov, even a Gaon and Tzaddik have to serve G-d in the way of Teshuvah. The Mithnagdim took strong exception to this doctrine, arguing that it placed the sainta nd scholar in the category of ordinary sinners and repenters. Such a notion surely undermined the honor of the Torah and the dignity of the talmidei-chachamim. The Mithnagdim further concluded that this notion was in contradiction to the view of the Torah, Written and Oral, which described the Tzaddik as the "foundation of the world" and the talmidei-chachamim as those who "increase peace in the world" and as the true "builders" of the Jewish nation. The Beshtian notion of requiring them, too, to do penance was humiliating, and most objectionable.

Rabbi Schneur Zalman replied to the said two main contentions of the Mithnagdim as follows:

"The basis of the doctrine of the Ba'al Shem Tov and of the teachings of his successor, my teacher and master the Maggid of Miezricz, which illuminate the way of Divine service, followed by all the disciples of our master the Maggid, is to be found in the first Divine revelation to Moshe Rabbeinu.

"My teacher, the Maggid of Miezricz, taught me the following doctrine, which he had received from the Ba'al Shem Tov:

It is written, "And the angel of God appeared (vayyera) unto him in a flame of fire from the midst of the bush. And he saw that the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. Then said Moshe, 'I will turn aside and see this great sight" (Exod. 3:2-3).

The Targum renders the word vayyera ("appeared") by v'itgali ("revealed himself"). The meaning of "revelation" is that it comes within the perception of everyone, to each one according to one's capacity, down to the lowest levels. Thus, the Targum also renders the word vayyered in Exod. 19:20 ("And G-d came down on Mount Sinai") by v'itgali ("revealed himself"), though elsewhere, e.g. Gen. 38:1 ("And Judah came down"), the word vayyered is rendered by v'nahat ("descended"). Similarly in Gen. 11:5 the Targum gives a corresponding rendition in the sense of "revelation," as in the case of the revelation at Mt. Sinai.

Now, just as the revelation at Sinai was intended for all the people, from Moshe down to the Jew of the most humble station, so must "revelation" be understood in the other instances, including the first revelation to Moshe out of the Burning Bush. Here, too, we must assume a revelation which can be perceived on all levels, down to the lowest, as already mentioned.

The words b'labat esh are rendered by Rashi by b'shalhevet shel esh, libo shel esh ("in a flame of fire; the heart of fire"). Thus, the message of G-d (i.e. "G-dliness") is to be found in the "heart of fire," i.e. in the earnest and sincere inwardness of the heart, where the fiery embers of G-dliness abide.

The words "from the midst of the bush" elicit Rashi's further commentary: "But not from another [more stately] tree, alluding to the verse, 'I am with him in distress (tzarah)'" (Ps. 91:15). Tzarah (literally "narrow place") alludes to this material world, which is so called because it is limited in space; and also because the Light of the En Sof is concealed therein in Nature, and is thus "confined" and "constricted," as it were. By contrast, the supernal worlds, where the Light of the En Sof shines forth manifestly, are called "wide, open spaces."

However, the design and purpose of the creation of this physical world is to illuminate it and convert it from צרה to צהר- "light"- by means of the light of the Torah and the Mitzvoth, to be studied and observed in the daily life.

It is written, "Man is like a tree of the field" (Deut. 20:19). There are fruit-bearing trees, to which, according to Rabbi Yochanan, the talmidei-chachamim are likened (Taanit 7a); and there is the sneh, a humble bush that bears no fruit. Yet the "fiery flame" was manifest in the sneh. To be sure, the talmidei-chachamim, the students of the Torah, are filled with fire, since the Torah is called "fire" (Deut. 33:2), but it is not the inextinguishable kind of fire which burned in the sneh. The talmidei-chachamim can, and do, quench their inner fire by the intellectual gratification which they derive from their Torah studies, from the new insights which they discover, and from original innovations in the interpretation and exposition of the wisdom of the Talmud.

Not so the ordinary and unlearned Jew, the sneh- in whom burns an inextinguishable fire, and unquenchable longing for attachment to G-d. The only spiritual expression that the simple and untutored Jew can find, is in prayer and the recital of Tehillim. And though he may not know the exact meaning of the sacred words he intones, they contain the full force of his sincerity and wholeheartedness.

The only motivation of these humble Jews is their simple faith in G-d, which creates in them the burning and insatiable desire for Torah and Mitzvoth, a desire which, of necessity, remains unsatisfied and unquenched.

That is why the eternal "fiery flame" (labat esh) is to be found precisely in the hearts of these simple, sincere folk.

It is written, "And Moshe said, 'I will turn and see this great sight'" (Exod. 3:3) which, according to Rashi, means "I will turn from here, to come closer to there." This indicates that Moshe Rabbeinu understood the Divine message of the Burning Bush which emphasized the unique quality of the ordinary Jew- the Labat esh being found precisely in the sneh, rather than in the cedars of Lebanon. The realization of this evoked a sense of Teshuvah in him, and a change of outlook and direction ("I will turn [ashuva] from here to come closer there").

Now, Moshe Rabbeinu was a perfect Tzaddik. The course of Teshuvah of the perfect Tzaddik is quite different from that of the ordinary repenter. It is effected in the manner of "I will turn from here to come closer there." In other words, no one, not even the greatest Tzaddik, should be static in his Divine service, however perfect it may seem at any time. There must be a constant striviting toward ever greater heights, turning from one high level to a still higher one, with a constant desire to get closer to G-d. In this progression, which is essentially an infinite process, each higher level attained leaves the previous level, however satisfactory it seemed previously, deficient by comparison. Hence there is room for Teshuvah even for the perfect Tzaddik."

Rabbi Schneur Zalman emphasized that the said fundamental tenets of the Ba'al Shem Tov were based on the first Divine revelation to Moshe Rabbeinu, whom G-d had chosen to be the first deliverer and leader of the Jewish nation and he went on to explain the precedental nature of that revelation:

The Divine revelation to Moshe Rabbeinu was quite different from the Divine revelation to Noah, or even to Abraham. For the Divine revelation to Noah was a personal one, due to special Divine grace. Whether Noah was singled out for this Divine love because "Noah found favor in the eyes of G-d" (Gen. 6:8), or because he actually merited it, as it is written, "For I have found thee righteous before Me in this generatoin" (ibid. 7:1), it was, nevertheless, a personal revelation, confined to him only.

The Divine revelation to Abraham was quite different. It contained certain instructions as to Divine service, and was attended by extraordinary tests and trial. It was, obviously, on an altogether higher level, though it, too, came as a result of special Divine love, as it is written, "For I know him (Rashi: love him) that he will command his children and his household after him, that they observe the way of G-d, to do righteousness and justice," (Gen. 18:19). In the Midrash Abraham was also called the "Supreme King's favorite" (B.R. ch. 42). Be it as it may, G-d's revelation to Abraham was also, essentially, a personal one.

However, the Divine revelation to Moshe Rabbeinu- Rabbi Schneur Zalman explained- was not merely a personal one, but rather a general one, serving as a guideline for all future leaders of our people. This revelation showed that a Jewish leader should look for the labat esh in the sneh- among the ordinary people. The leader must try to discover this spark in the heart of the simple folk and fan it into an all-consuming flame.

Og & Menashe: To Bore A Hole

My Rabbi mentioned the famous gemara regarding King Menashe in shul today:

והיו מלאכי השרת מסתמין את החלונות שלא תעלה תפילתו של מנשה לפני הקב"ה והיו מלאכי השרת אומרים לפני הקב"ה רבונו של עולם אדם שעבד ע"ז והעמיד צלם בהיכל אתה מקבלו בתשובה אמר להן אם איני מקבלו בתשובה הרי אני נועל את הדלת בפני כל בעלי תשובה. מה עשה לו הקב"ה חתר לו חתירה מתחת כסא הכבוד שלו ושמע תחינתו הדא היא דכתיב ויתפלל אליו ויעתר לו וישמע תחינתו וישיבהו

This is from Talmud Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 10:2.

When Menashe wished to repent, the Malachei HaShares (Ministering Angels) wished to hide his prayer from God so they closed all the windows to Heaven. God therefore decided to bore a hole beneath His Throne of glory in order to allow Menashe's prayer to enter, so much does He desire teshuva, true repentance.

The imagery struck me as familiar. It reminds me of the story of Og & Noah as brought down in Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer, Chapter 23.

How was Og saved from the Mabul (Flood?) He told Noah that he would be a servant to him and his children forever if only Noah would save him. Thus, he lay on top of the ark and Noah drilled a hole into its ceiling. Noah would pass Og's food to him through this little hole in the Ark and during the times that he was not receiving food, Og stopped up the hole with his little finger. (For a beautiful retelling of the story check out Howard Schwartz's The Diamond Tree.)

I think it is deliberate that the imagery echoes. When Noah saved Og, he drilled a little hole in the Ark through which to pass up his food to him. In return, Og saved Noah and everyone in the Ark by ensuring the rainwater could not get into the Ark through the hole and stopping it up with his little finger. When God wished to receive Menashe's prayer, thereby saving him from the conditions he was in (he was being boiled in a pot at the time), he chose to bore a hole underneath His Throne of Glory in order to receive his prayer.

Sometimes God is pleased by man's innovations. It occurred to me that perhaps God saw Noah's compassion for Og, for whom he chose to bore a little hole in the Ark so that he could pass him his food, and thought to Himself: If mortal man can take compassion upon a giant and bore a hole within the Ark for him, how much the more so can I take compassion upon my creatures and bore a hole beneath my throne for them! And thus does one man's kindness eventually benefit us all.

Teshuva vs. Kappara: Repentance and Atonement In Jewish Intellectual History/ Why Do We Read Jonah On Yom Kippur?

This person permitted me to disseminate their Torah so long as I do not cite them by name. Therefore, from now on I will refer to them as The Adept. The Adept is an incredibly learned Torah scholar and the Torah they teach compares in quality to that of Rebbetzin Sarah Greer's, which is my highest compliment. Should I say anything untoward, assume it is my misunderstanding of The Adept.

The Adept decided to offer a lecture on Teshuva & Kappara (Repentance & Atonement) in Jewish Thought in honor of the upcoming Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement. Attached are the pages we shall make reference to throughout this lecture, with the understanding that it would also be helpful for you to have a Tanakh with you. Do not be daunted by the presence of this attachment or the supposed length of this post; The Adept's lectures are well worth any effort you may exercise. From now on, whenever I say 'I' in this post, assume it is The Adept who is speaking.

If for no other reason, you should read this in order to understand why we read the Book of Jonah on Yom Kippur.



Teshuva and Kappara in Jewish Thought

The general tendency in rabbinic scholarship is to focus on the end product of Jewish scholarship. It's crucial, however, to examine the issue's historical development through the course of Jewish intellectual history. There is much to gain if you study Jewish thought vertically, not horizontally. It is crucial to know the process that leads to these answers.

I am going to ask four questions.

1. Is there a biblical obligation to do Teshuva (repent)?

2. Why do we read Sefer Yonah (the book of Jonah) on Yom Kippur?

3. In the Shulchan Aruch (see passage 1 in the document above) there is a practice of doing Kapparot for every male in the house. However, the Rama says this applies to women as well and even to the unborn fetus within a pregnant woman! Why on earth does a fetus need a kappara (atonement)?

4. There is a compendium by Rambam called Hilchos Teshuva [Laws of Repentance]. (To digress, there is a famous Ramban where he praises the Rambam and says look, he wrote Hilchos Tehuva, an amazing piece of work!) In Germany, the Rokeach publishes Sefer Rokeach and has a section called Hilchos Teshuva as well. But there are huge differences between the two Hilchos Teshuva. How is it possible in the 12th century when we have 2 greats recording Hilchos Teshuva we have two totally different accounts? (Immediate thought: Foreign influence! But obviously we will not accept that.)

Let's address question 1. We want to look at the peshuto shel mikra of the Bible. In the peshat, is there a biblical obligation to do Teshuva? Now, to defend myself lest I am deemed a heretic for looking at the peshat, let's offer precedent for those who look at peshat.

1. Look at Sefer HaMitzvos, Mitzvah Chaf- The Rambam tells us it is a mitzvah asei d'oraita to build the Beit HaMikdash but also tells us he won't list separately everything included in the Beit HaMikdash (it's all subsumed under this mitzvah.) However, in the middle of the mitzvah the Rambam throws in a question.

The Mizbeach that we know of was made of copper; alternatively there was one made of gold. They were also made of stone. However, in Exodus 20:21 it states "Make me a Mizbeach [altar] of earth!"

כ מִזְבַּח אֲדָמָה, תַּעֲשֶׂה-לִּי, וְזָבַחְתָּ עָלָיו אֶת-עֹלֹתֶיךָ וְאֶת-שְׁלָמֶיךָ, אֶת-צֹאנְךָ וְאֶת-בְּקָרֶךָ; בְּכָל-הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַזְכִּיר אֶת-שְׁמִי, אָבוֹא אֵלֶיךָ וּבֵרַכְתִּיךָ. 20 An altar of earth thou shalt make unto Me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt-offerings, and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen; in every place where I cause My name to be mentioned I will come unto thee and bless thee.

In Exodus 20: 21 there is the option of an altar of stone:

כא וְאִם-מִזְבַּח אֲבָנִים תַּעֲשֶׂה-לִּי, לֹא-תִבְנֶה אֶתְהֶן גָּזִית: כִּי חַרְבְּךָ הֵנַפְתָּ עָלֶיהָ, וַתְּחַלְלֶהָ. 21 And if thou make Me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stones; for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast profaned it.

The altar of stone is confirmed in Deuteronomy 27:6:

ו אֲבָנִים שְׁלֵמוֹת תִּבְנֶה, אֶת-מִזְבַּח יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ; וְהַעֲלִיתָ עָלָיו עוֹלֹת, לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ. 6 Thou shalt build the altar of the LORD thy God of unhewn stones; and thou shalt offer burnt-offerings thereon unto the LORD thy God.

Rambam regarding the mizbeach adama in Mitzvah Chaf questions: Maybe this is another mizbeach! He is trying to figure out the plain sense of the verse, the peshuto shel mikra. He does explain it, answering that this is not talking about the Beis HaMikdash but rather bamos- then you could build a mizbeach made of earth.

So Rambam, despite all the Chazals, still explains the plain sense of the verse.

2. The Maharal of Prague in the Tiferes Yisrael, Chapter 57 states: Many people are troubled as to why there is no mention in the Torah of Olam Haba? (There are endless Chazals but in the plain sense of the verse it is not mentioned.)

There's the problem of theodicy to which Olam Haba is the answer- so why isn't it mentioned in the Torah? The question has to be asked in the plain sense of the words- why?

Now, to find out his answer you should read the rest of what he says. But the point is that there is precedent for looking at the peshat and we have a right to examine Torah to figure out answers.

So let's proceed:

1. Do we see a biblical obligation to do Teshuva in the Torah (Five Books of Moses?)
2. Do we have dramatis personae who preach the need to do Teshuva?
3. Do we have dramatis personae who do Teshuva in the form the Rambam outlines (regret, confession and stating they will never do the sin again?) Or Baalei Teshuva in the Torah who are identified as such?

At this point everyone in attendance at the lecture began throwing out names and ideas. "Of course we have Teshuva," we figured. "Look at Kayin, the brothers of Joseph, etc." However, what we soon realized is that none of these is a biblical dictum or commandment to repent. Also, none of these characters preach the need to do Teshuva- you do not have someone in the Bible walking around saying, "Repent, o' ye sinners!" Indeed, the ideas of repentance appear in the Midrash but not in the plain text. Noah, according to the plain text, simply builds the Ark as God commands him, does not intercede and does not request that others do teshuva. Abraham bargains with God, searching for ten righteous people in whose merit to save the city. Whenever the Jews do something wrong in the desert, Moshe falls on his face and begs God to blast and smite him, but don't take it out on the Jews. We do have some elements of Teshuva in that the brothers of Joseph certainly feel regret and the Jews contribute their gold to build the Mikdash in order to make up for the Golden Calf, but it is not referred to by this name.

Ramban in HIlchos Teshuva, Perek Zayin, Halacha Hey states: We find Teshuvah in the Neviim (Prophets!) They all speak about it. The Torah promised us that after the Jews do Teshuva they will be redeemed. He cites Deuteronomy 30: 1-3 as his source. However, he notes these verses are a prediction, not a legal obligation. He is also the only one who points to V'shavta ad Hashem Elokecha as a source; everyone else disagrees with him.

Rambam pointed to Numbers 5:7 as the source.

וְהִתְוַדּוּ, אֶת-חַטָּאתָם אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ, וְהֵשִׁיב אֶת-אֲשָׁמוֹ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ, וַחֲמִישִׁתוֹ יֹסֵף עָלָיו; וְנָתַן, לַאֲשֶׁר אָשַׁם לוֹ. 7 then they shall confess their sin which they have done; and he shall make restitution for his guilt in full, and add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him in respect of whom he hath been guilty.

But even here we only have the element of confession as opposed to the three elements that the Rambam refers to! And this is cultic confession (doing so before offering the Korbanot) as opposed to individual confession.

There are various people who write lists of the 613 Mitzvot and they don't list Teshuva but rather Viduy as one of the mitzvot- and only within the cultic setting of bringing a Korban.

A 19th century Gadol B'Yisrael who has his finger on the pulse of Judaism is R' Joseph Babad, the Minchas Chinuch, commenting on the 613 commandments. And he was really surprised that Rambam brought Numbers 5:7 as a source! The Minchas Chinuch says the Rambam doesn't really believe there IS a mitzvas asei to do Teshuvah. Minchas Chinuch says Teshuva is only a means toward an end- Kappara.

Basically, his argument is that Rambam considered Teshuva like Gittin. There is no mitzvas asei to write a divorce document; all it is is an appropriate legal means to an end, namely if the parties want to remarry. The divorce document is not a mitzvah and is not even a mitzvah kiyumis. For Rambam, Teshuva is sound advice- a means toward the end of Kappara!

However, The Adept added, this cannot be right because it is very clear the Rambam says this is a mitzvas asei.

So nobody knows where Teshuva is from- it is not at all clear. Does the Torah require one to do Teshuva? Very hard to see where.

As for questions 2 and 3, it is very hard to find someone preaching Teshuva in the biblical text and we certainly do not have Baalei Teshuva in the Torah who are identified as such.

What DO I find in the Torah again and again?
The concept of Kappara [Atonement].

* The whole book of Leviticus, Deuteronomy 21: 8 (Egla Erufa), etc- many things that need to be atoned for. There is a strong idea within the biblical text that sin needs to be atoned for.

Now let's look at Neviim (the Prophets.) Let's use our three- question format again.

1. Does anyone preach Teshuva in the Neviim? Yes! Every Navi! The purpose of the Navi is to chastise people so that they will do Teshuva.

2. Do we have models in Neviim who do Teshuva?

Yes!

David (Samuel II, Chapter 12)
Achav (Kings I, Chapter 21)
Josiah (Kings 22, 22:19)
Menashe (Chronicles 2, Chapter 33)

Now, nowhere is the tension between the ideas of Teshuva and Kappara (Repentance vs. Atonement) more palpable than in Sefer Yonah. Let's discuss Sefer Yonah.

Firstly, what was the sin of the people of Ninveh? Chamas, violence.

Why did Yonah not want to go to Ninveh?

1. Rashi to Jonah 1:3 states it's because he didn't want to make the Jews look bad. He knew if he went to Ninveh and asked them to repent, they would, whereas the Jews had not been doing so. God would negatively compare the Jews to the gentiles. (Mechilta)

2. Abarbanel states: They're pagans! There were ovdei avodah zarah- so yes, they did Teshuva for chamas, but what about Avodah Zarah? (They worshipped Marduk, Ashur, etc.)

3. Rashi to Jonah 4:1- Yonah is upset because now the nations will say that I am a Navi Sheker, a false prophet. (Yonah had formerly said in 40 days Ninveh will fall.) (Pirkei D'Rabi Eliezer)

Now, let's look at the peshat. Jonah 4:2 tells you why he ran away!

ב וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל אֶל-יְהוָה וַיֹּאמַר, אָנָּה יְהוָה הֲלוֹא-זֶה דְבָרִי עַד-הֱיוֹתִי עַל-אַדְמָתִי--עַל-כֵּן קִדַּמְתִּי, לִבְרֹחַ תַּרְשִׁישָׁה: כִּי יָדַעְתִּי, כִּי אַתָּה אֵל-חַנּוּן וְרַחוּם, אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב-חֶסֶד, וְנִחָם עַל-הָרָעָה. 2 And he prayed unto the LORD, and said: 'I pray Thee, O LORD, was not this my saying, when I was yet in mine own country? Therefore I fled beforehand unto Tarshish; for I knew that Thou art a gracious God, and compassionate, long-suffering, and abundant in mercy, and repentest Thee of the evil.

Jonah ran away because "I knew that Thou art a gracious God, and compassionate, long-suffering, and abundant in mercy and nicham al ha-ra- have compassion upon evil."

Let's compare this to God's description in Exodus 34:6-7.

ו וַיַּעֲבֹר יְהוָה עַל-פָּנָיו, וַיִּקְרָא, יְהוָה יְהוָה, אֵל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּן--אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם, וְרַב-חֶסֶד וֶאֱמֶת. 6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed: 'The LORD, the LORD, God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth;

ז נֹצֵר חֶסֶד לָאֲלָפִים, נֹשֵׂא עָו‍ֹן וָפֶשַׁע וְחַטָּאָה; וְנַקֵּה, לֹא יְנַקֶּה--פֹּקֵד עֲו‍ֹן אָבוֹת עַל-בָּנִים וְעַל-בְּנֵי בָנִים, עַל-שִׁלֵּשִׁים וְעַל-רִבֵּעִים. 7 keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and unto the fourth generation.'

Let's focus on the words v'nakeh lo yenakeh. What does that mean? It's similar to mos yumas- verily, you shall die. You shall surely die! So v'nakeh lo yenakeh means 'but you certainly shall not be cleansed!"

Yes, Hashem is all these things and has all these qualities (Rashi says this) but the plain sense of the text is that God does not cleanse entirely. You sin? You pay! God remembers sins and punishes for sins (spread out over several generations.)

Now, Yonah knows what it says in the Torah and he is raised on the Torah (this is before the time of canonical Navi and Kesuvim.)

Indeed, look at Yonah's very name! He is Yonah ben Amitai- the son of Emes! Emes is the attribute of Din, Judgment. When Yonah talks about God's qualities in 4:2 the word 'Emes' is missing. 'V'nicham al ha'ra' is used instead, suggesting that God forgives the entire sin. There is nothing here about Emes. So what is Yonah saying to God? He is saying: Sin requires kaparah, atonement! It's the Neviim who came along and stressed this concept of Teshuva alone! The people of Ninveh need to atone, not just repent!

Look at passage 2 in the attachment above: It was asked to Wisdom, the sinner, what is his redemption? The evil a person does pursues him. The Prophets were asked and they said the nefesh ha'chotais hi tamus- the person who sinned shall die. David said that professional sinners will be wiped out. The Torah was asked and said to bring an Asham [guilt offering] and make atonement. They asked God and God answered that teshuva alone is the kappara [atonement].

Why do we read Sefer Yonah on Yom Kippur? Because Yom Kippur hangs upon the concept of Kappara! That was the whole Avodah in the Beit HaMikdash with the Kohen Gadol. But we don't have any of that! So we are despondent. In that case, that is why we read Sefer Yonah, because it shows that genuine Teshuva alone works! God is willing to accept repentance alone in place of atonement.

(See passages 3, 4 and 5) in the sheets above and you will see that yes, there was once a time where sin required kaparah, atonement, but nowadays Teshuva suffices.)

So why the differences between the two Hilchos Teshuva compendiums?

In Ashkenaz they preserve the tradition of Torah and Kappara- that's why we have penances of all sorts, etc.

In Spain the Rashba and Rambam banned Kapparos/ so the Mechaber who is Sephardi is very unhappy about Kapparos.

These two different strands of thought (atonement vs. repentance) were united by Chazal, then separated out into the two different strands once more. See passage 8 on page 2.

When and/or why does everything change? See Ezekiel 18.

There, God (in Navi) comes to say: I will change everything so the only people who are punished are those who do the sins (and not later generations.) The Gemara says that God's own teaching was overturned here (somewhere at the end of Mesechtas Makkos.)

[We have run out of time, but read through the rest of the sources on your own; they support this point.]

"The beauty of Judaism," concluded The Adept, "is that there are many different notions and ideas and during different time periods different ones rise to the top. It doesn't stay frozen. For example, the words mos yumas are all over the Torah but the Gemara says that never would have happened. How can that be? The answer is that times change. At the time of the Torah, the way to cleanse oneself of sin was through atonement. Later on it changed to repentance. In truth, there is basis for both ideas within the text; it is simply which one floats to the top depending on the generation. Judaism is not one size fits all."