Rabbi Kook's Extension of the Concept of Teshuva
Rabbi Kook's Extension of the Concept of Teshuva

One of the things Rav Avraham Yitzhak HaCohen Kook was known for was his profound and revolutionary perspectives on Teshuva, Repentance.  I wanted to develop one aspect of his creative angles regarding Teshuva.

Several Achronim (Sages) wonder how the Rabbinic Court, Beis Din, can ever give someone Malkos (lashes), because Teshuva should transform each and every sin, aveira, into a Lav SheNitak L’Asay, that is, a prohibition which leads to a positive commandment and therefore is not punishable by Malkos. 

Let me clarify the question.  Beis Din not giving someone Malkos on a Lav SheNitak L’Asay is a rule that states when a Mitzvah is made available only after the aveira was committed, Malkos are not allocated.  A classic example of this principle would be Gezayla (theft).  There are no Malkos on theft because the Torah attaches a positive Mitzvah to theft, saying “V’HeShiv es HaGezayla asher Gazal,” to eturn stolen objects.  Since the Mitzvah of returning stolen goods is only accomplishable once theft has taken place, theft can have no Malkos. 

From the very fact that the Mitzvah of Teshuva can only be done after aveirot were committed, Teshuva should prevent anyone from getting Malkos.  Any aveira done should be categorized as a Lav SheNitak L’Asay, because it opens an opportunity to do Teshuva.  It follows that no one should ever get Malkos.  We know this is incorrect, but why?

The standard answer suggested by many Achronim is that this exemption from Malkos on a Lav SheNitak L’Asay, only works when the Mitzvah is directly connected to the aveira committed.  For example, the Mitzvah of “V’HeShiv es HaGezayla” is connected specifically to the Isur of Gezayla.  That Mitzvah of returning stolen object is only made available after the aveira of theft was committed. 

Teshuva is not connected to any particular Mitzvah.  It is not a Lav SheNitak L’Asay and subsequently one could be given Malkos.

Rav Kook offered an additional, original and insightful answer.  Rav Kook brilliantly attacks the assumption of the question that Teshuva is only available after one has indeed sinned.  Instead he posits that Teshuva is a Mitzvah with a component completely disconnected from one’s sins.  Teshuva is a Mitzvah for people to do whether or not they have violated any law.

Rav Kook’s answer to our question conceptually broadens the notion of Teshuva.  Teshuva is not just a technical way of attaining forgiveness for the particular aveirot one has violated.  Teshuva is more than a way of erasing aveirot.  Instead, there is an inherent worth to Teshuva, regardless is someone has sinned.  Teshuva has deep intrinsic value.

Rav Kook understood Teshuva to be a process of returning to Hashem.  Its goal is to cause self-improvement and draw one closer to Hashem.  Teshuva is religious and moral development which should be made even without prior sin. 

This second and revolutionary dimension of Teshuva may explain what Rabbi Akiva meant when he compares Hashem to a ritual bath, a Mikvah (Mishneh Yoma 8:9).  The Mikvah doesn’t purify a person from different levels of Tumah, impurity, one at a time.  Rather, immersion in it allows for a full spiritual cleansing.  In just one dip, one can become Tahor, pure, for everything. 

Yom Kippur facilitates a parallel process.  One should “jump into Hashem,” as one would a Mikvah, looking for purity, and seeking Tahara.  This spiritual cleansing assists a person to return to Hashem by drawing close to him.  This is designed to take place on Yom Kippur.

Hopefully this coming Yom Kippur we can accomplish both levels of Teshuva.  On the one hand erasing all of our sins, and on the other returning to our pure selves, spiritually growing, and immersing into Hashem.