Kerem B'Yavneh Parsha Podcast

๐ŸŽฌ Watch this shiur on YouTube

โ”€โ”€ Shiur Outline โ”€โ”€
(0:07) Yahrtzeit Dedication and Opening Remarks
(2:00) Ramban vs Rambam on the Teshuva Verse
(3:46) Rambamโ€™s Definition of the First Step of Teshuva
(5:13) Tanyaโ€™s Teaching on Total Commitment in Teshuva
(6:48) Understanding Lishmor Through Gemara Yevamot
(10:37) Kablas Ol Malchus: The King Analogy and True Teshuva
(15:06) Closing Blessings and Wishes for the New Year

AI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information):

The central question of the shiur addresses why most Rishonim do not count the act of teshuva as a specific positive commandment, despite its fundamental role in Jewish life. Drawing from the Rambam and the Tanya, the shiur concludes that teshuva is not merely a list of actions but a total metamorphosis involving the complete removal of sin from one's agenda. True return is defined as kabalas ol malchus shamayim, the re-acceptance of Divine sovereignty, which serves as the essential prerequisite for fulfilling all other decrees. Thus, the work of Rosh Hashanah is to return to a state of constant God-awareness, where one views themselves fundamentally as a servant standing in the presence of the King.

1. Repentance as a promise โ€” While some authorities like the Ramban view teshuva as a formal commandment, others, including the Rambam, primarily view the Torah's words as a divine promise (havtacha) that Israel will eventually return to God.
2. Beyond simple regret โ€” The essence of teshuva is azeivas hacheit (abandoning the sin), which means reaching a state where the transgression is no longer an option or an agenda item.
3. Commitment to sovereignty โ€” True teshuva requires a person to resolve in their heart never to return to such "stupidity," viewing sin as a rebellion against the malchut (sovereignty) of HaKadosh Baruch Hu.
4. The definition of Shmira โ€” The concept of lishmor (to guard/heed) implies living with a constant sense of responsibility and kabalat ol (acceptance of the yoke), standing far back from even the possibility of transgression.
5. Awe of the Commander โ€” Based on the Gemara in Yevamos (6a), our observance must stem from awe of the One who commanded (mi shetzivah), rather than just the technical mechanics of the mitzvah.
6. Acceptance before legislation โ€” As the Mechilta teaches, a king cannot effectively decree laws until the people first accept his sovereignty; similarly, consistent religious life depends on first accepting ol malchus shamayim.
7. The goal of Rosh Hashanah โ€” The primary work of the new year is kabalas hamalchus (accepting the Kingship), which serves as the foundational cure for selective observance and spiritual inconsistency.
8. Constant Divine Presence โ€” The ultimate teshuva is returning to the principle of Shiviti Hashem lenegdi tamid (placing God before me always), living with an active awareness of standing in the Divine presence.

What is Kerem B'Yavneh Parsha Podcast?

Parsha and Chagim ideas from the rabbis of Kerem B'Yavneh
Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN

Donations: https://www.kby.org/english/support-us/?id=46

Hi this is being recorded on Monday ื—ื™ ืืœื•ืœ ืขืจื‘ ืฉื‘ืช ืงื•ื“ืฉ ื ืฆื‘ื™ื.

This is the ื™ืืจืฆื™ื™ื˜ today of a dear friend I would say a ืชืœืžื™ื“

ื™ืฉืจืืœ Person a ืื•ื”ื‘ ืชื•ืจื” ืœื•ืžื“ ืชื•ืจื” he was constantly would come to ืืจืฅ

ื™ืฉืจืืœ would always sit in the ืฉื™ืขื•ืจ father of a ืชืœืžื™ื“ a great grandfather

of a ืชืœืžื™ื“ of ืชืœืžื™ื“ื™ื ื™ื—ื–ืงืืœ ืฆื‘ื™ ื‘ืŸ ืžืฉื” ื”ืœื•ื™ this is his ื™ืืจืฆื™ื™ื˜

I'd like to teach these ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืชื•ืจื” ืœืขื™ืœื•ื™ ื ืฉืžืชื•.

It's also the ื™ืืจืฆื™ื™ื˜ of my brother-in-law ื“ื ื™ืืœ ื“ื ื™ืืœ ื–ืœืžืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื™ืฆื—ืง a ืžืจื‘ื™ืฅ

ืชื•ืจื” was a ืžืฉืคื™ืข to multitudes of people ืžื—ื–ื™ืจ ื‘ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” I loved him ื“ื ื™ืืœ

ืฆื‘ื™ ื“ื ื™ืืœ ื–ืœืžืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื™ืฆื—ืง ื ืฉืžื” they should all have a ืขืœื™ื” ื”ื ืฉืžื” this

should be ืœืขื™ืœื•ื™ ื ืฉืžืชื•.

Okay well we're beginning we're moving straight forward into ืจืืฉ ื”ืฉื ื” and this week's

ืคืจืฉื” is the ultimate ืคืจืฉื” which deals with this this is the ืคืจืฉื” of

ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

This is the ืคืจืฉื” as we read the ืคืกื•ืง in ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ืœืžื“ ืคืกื•ืง ื'

ื•ื”ื™ื” ื›ื™ ื™ื‘ืื• ืืœื™ืš ื›ืœ ื”ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื”ืืœื” ื”ื‘ืจื›ื” ื•ื”ืงืœืœื” ืืฉืจ ื ืชืชื™ ืœืคื ื™ืš ื•ื”ืฉื‘ื•ืช ืืœ

ืœื‘ื‘ืš ื‘ื›ืœ ื”ื’ื•ื™ื ืืฉืจ ื”ื“ื™ื—ืš ื”ืฉื ืืœืงื™ืš ืฉืžื” ื•ืฉื‘ืช ืขื“ ื”ืฉื ืืœืงื™ืš ื•ืฉืžืขืช ื‘ืงืœื•

ื›ื›ืœ ืืฉืจ ืื ื›ื™ ืžืฆื•ืš ื”ื™ื•ื ืืชื” ื•ื‘ื ื™ืš ื‘ื›ืœ ืœื‘ื‘ืš ื•ื‘ื›ืœ ื ืคืฉืš.

See with this ืคืกื•ืง the ืจืžื‘"ืŸ on the ืคืจืฉื” understands as being the source

of a ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” of doing ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” ื•ืฉื‘ืช ืขื“ ื”ืฉื ืืœืงื™ืš.

It seems to be that almost all the ืจืืฉื•ื ื™ื disagree with the ืจืžื‘"ืŸ the

ืจืžื‘"ืŸ himself is bothered by the fact that it's not written ื‘ืœืฉื•ืŸ ืฆื™ื•ื•ื™ it

seems to be a ืœืฉื•ืŸ ื”ื‘ื˜ื—ื” so he says it means it's also a

ืฆื™ื•ื•ื™ and also an ื”ื‘ื˜ื—ื”.

Yet the ืจืžื‘"ื we know brings it ืœื”ื“ื™ื in the ืคืจืง ื–ื™ื™ืŸ he brings

it totally as an ื”ื‘ื˜ื—ื” that God promises that we'll do ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” at the

end ื•ืฉื‘ืช ืืฉืจ ื™ืฉื•ื‘ ื•ืžืœ ื”ืฉื ืืœืงื™ืš ืืช ืœื‘ื‘ืš etc.

This is a future there's no ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” at all.

Many ask why doesn't the ืจืžื‘"ื count the ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” as a ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื”?

The ืจืžื‘"ื only writes when you do ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” there's a ืžืฆื•ื” of ื•ื™ื“ื•ื™ of

confessing orally.

Yet somehow what about the ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”?

He takes it for granted shouldn't isn't it a ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื”?

The ื ื‘ื™ืื™ื are full of it ืฉื•ื‘ื” ื™ืฉืจืืœ ืขื“ ื”ืฉื ืืœืงื™ืš etc.

endlessly about ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” as the ืจืžื‘"ื elaborates over there in ืคืจืง ื–ื™ื™ืŸ at the

end of ืคืจืง of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” the end of ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

And the answer obviously is the ืจืžื‘"ื like all other ืจืืฉื•ื ื™ื see this ืคืกื•ืง

not as a ืžืฆื•ื” but as an ื”ื‘ื˜ื—ื”.

And here the question lies how could it be that such a great important

pillar of our religion the fact that we can rectify our sins and we

are commanded to we should rectify our sins how would that not be a

ืžืฆื•ื”?

The answer lies obviously in the understanding the nature of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” means to return to return to what to what to what situation are

we talking about?

So let's start from ืืœืฃ ื‘ื™ืช.

We know that the ืจืžื‘"ื writes in ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” he writes what is the

first thing of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”?

ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” you're supposed to be ืขื•ื–ื‘ ืืช ื”ื—ื˜ื ื™ืฉื™ื‘ ื”ื—ื™ what's he supposed to

be doing?

So he's basically ืขื•ื–ื‘ ืืช ื”ื—ื˜ื.

What does it mean ืขื–ื™ื‘ืช ื”ื—ื˜ื?

It means he's supposed to say to God you know I'm never going to

do this again.

More than that ื™ืกื™ืจ ืžืžื—ืฉื‘ืชื• it's off his plate he's not even on his

agenda.

And then he has to say these things in verbalize primarily the ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is

basically it should be off your plate not enough to refrain it's not even

an option.

And only that after you've come to a conclusion that it's not even an

option ื™ืกื™ืจ ืžืžื—ืฉื‘ืชื• only then is ื™ืขื™ื“ ืขืœื™ื• ื™ื•ื“ืข ืชืขืœื•ืžื•ืช then you must let

God be my witness that this stage of my commitment I really mean this

I mean to commit not to do this and I commit that this I'm

going to do everything I can to get this off my plate.

It's for me ืœืฉื•ืŸ ื”ืจืข is like bestiality.

Not even a ืชืื•ื”.

This is the agenda of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”,

not just say I'm sorry,

not just say I won't do it,

but it should not even be an option.

How does one get there?

And this is the primary issue of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

The Rebbe writes in ืชื ื™ื in ืื’ืจืช ื”ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”,

he writes explicitly that there he writes ืžืคื•ืจืฉ,

what is the idea of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”?

ืฉื™ื’ืžื•ืจ ื‘ืœื™ื‘ื• ื‘ืœื‘ ืฉืœื,

a total commitment,

ื“ื‘ืœ ื™ืฉื•ื‘ ืขื•ื“ ืœื›ืกืœื”,

he will never return back to this stupidity.

One has to see it as a ื“ื‘ืจ ื›ืกืœ,

something stupid,

something which makes no sense.

Not something I want to do but this is something which I perceive as

idiotic.

ืœืžืจื•ื“ ื‘ืžืœื›ื•ืชื• ื™ืชื‘ืจืš.

How could I possibly rebel in the ืžืœื›ื•ืช of ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื?

ื•ืœื ื™ืขื‘ื•ืจ ืขื•ื“ ืžืฆื•ื•ืช ื”ืžืœืš ื—ืก ื•ืฉืœื•ื.

How is it possible?

I will never,

but never,

transgress the will of the King.

ื”ืŸ ื‘ืžืฆื•ื•ืช ืขืฉื” ื”ืŸ ื‘ืžืฆื•ื•ืช ืœื ืชืขืฉื”.

He says ื–ื” ืขื™ืงืจ ืคื™ืจื•ืฉ ืœืฉื•ืŸ ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”,

the primary interpretation of ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is ืœืฉื•ื‘ ืืœ ื”ืณ,

to return to God,

equals to return to His sovereignty.

ื‘ื›ืœ ืœื‘ื• ื•ื‘ื›ืœ ื ืคืฉื•,

with all his emotion and with all his sense of self.

If ืœื‘ means the emotion,

ื ืคืฉ means identity,

that you are totally identify yourself as a person which the idea of being

ืžื•ืจื“ ื‘ืžืœื›ื•ืชื• ืฉืœ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื is beyond your radar screen.

ืœืขื•ื‘ื“ื•,

ืœืฉื•ื‘ ืืœ ื”ืณ

ื‘ื›ืœ ืœื‘ื• ื•ื‘ื›ืœ ื ืคืฉื• ืœืขื•ื‘ื“ื•,

to become His servant or actually slave,

ื•ืœืฉืžื•ืจ ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื•ืชื™ื•.

What does ืœืฉืžื•ืจ mean?

ืœืฉืžื•ืจ does not just mean to do the ืžืฆื•ื•ืช.

That's ืœืขืฉื•ืช.

And we always say ืœืฉืžื•ืจ ืœืขืฉื•ืช ื•ืœืงื™ื™ื.

The understanding of ืœืฉืžื•ืจ,

that's a ื’ืžืจื in ื™ื‘ืžื•ืช.

The ื’ืžืจื says,

it says 'ืืช ืฉื‘ืชื•ืชื™ ืชืฉืžื•ืจื• ื•ืžืฆื•ื•ืชื™ ืชื™ืจืื• ื•ืžืงื“ืฉื™ ืชื™ืจืื•'.

You must heed my Sabbath and you must be in awe of my ืžืงื“ืฉ.

And the ื’ืžืจื says ืžื” ืฉื‘ืช,

just as ืฉื‘ืช,

ืœื ืžื”ืฉื‘ืช ืืชื” ื™ืจื,

you're not in awe or afraid of ืฉื‘ืช,

but rather ืžื™ ืฉืฆื™ื•ื•ื” ืขืœื™ื”,

but rather of God who commanded on the ืฉื‘ืช.

ืืฃ ืžืงื“ืฉ,

also ืžืงื“ืฉ,

ืœื ืžืŸ ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ ืืชื” ื™ืจื,

you're not in awe or afraid of the ืžืงื“ืฉ,

but rather ืžื™ ืฉืฉื•ื›ืŸ ื‘ืชื•ื›ื•,

He who resides in it is ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื.

You look at this ื’ืžืจื,

it's basically a ืชื•ืจืช ื›ื”ื ื™ื ืกืคืจื™,

and you ask yourself where does it say anywhere there's a ืžืฆื•ื” of ื™ืจื

on ืฉื‘ืช?

It says ืฉืžื™ืจื” on ืฉื‘ืช.

It's true the ื™ืจืื™ื learns that there's a ื”ื™ืงืฉ of ืฉื‘ืช to ื™ืจืืช ื”ืžืงื“ืฉ,

and if there's a ืžืฆื•ื” of ืžื•ืจื ืžืงื“ืฉ,

there's also a ืžืฆื•ื” of ืžื•ืจื ืฉื‘ืช.

This is the ืชื ื™ื ื™ืจื•ืฉืœืžื™ in ื“ืžืื™ which says explicitly that ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ ืžื•ืจื

ืฉื‘ืช ืขืœื™ื•.

Even an ืขื ื”ืืจืฅ,

a person which is not learned and therefore not meticulously observant because he simply

doesn't know,

but he,

the ืžื•ืจื,

the ื™ืจืืช ืฉืžื™ื,

the awe of God,

of ืฉื‘ืช is upon him and we can trust him in certain ื“ื™ื ื™ื of

ื“ืžืื™.

But that's a ื“ืขืช ื™ื—ื™ื“,

that's only a ื™ืจืื™ื.

ืœืžืขืฉื” ืœื”ืœื›ื”,

where do we find a ื“ื™ืŸ of ื™ืจื on ืฉื‘ืช?

What's the ืคืฉื˜ in the ื’ืžืจื?

The ืชื™ืจื•ืฅ is ืคืฉื•ื˜.

It says ืฉืžื™ืจื”.

What does ืฉืžื™ืจื” mean?

To have a sense of responsibility and being making doing everything possible to fulfill

that responsibility,

which will include not to transgress.

To have that sense of responsibility,

ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ,

that's ื™ืจืื”.

ื™ืจืื” of ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื or ื™ืจืื” that you shouldn't ื—ืก ื•ื—ืœื™ืœื” transgress the

ืžืฆื•ื”,

therefore you do everything possible to go far,

far,

far from it.

You know I remember I was a kid I smoked until the age of

thirty.

You know and every so often I would say to myself well,

just one,

you know?

No,

I know that one means thirty.

So you don't go near the one.

The old saying is if you're once burnt with hot water,

you're wary about lukewarm water.

That's called ืฉืžื™ืจื”.

Living with a sense of responsibility,

a sense of authority,

a sense of there's a ืžืœืš ืžืœื›ื™ ื”ืžืœื›ื™ื ืขื™ืŸ ืจื•ืื” ื•ืื•ื–ืŸ ืฉื•ืžืขืช ื•ื›ืœ ืžืขืฉื™ืš

ื‘ืกืคืจ ื ื›ืชื‘ื™ื and you can't be ืžื•ืจื“ ื‘ืžืœื›ื•ืช.

So this is what the Rebbe writes.

What's ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”?

To make sure that there's no way you're going to be ืžื•ืจื“ ื‘ืžืœื›ื•ืช.

ืœืฉืžื•ืจ ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื•ืชื™ื•.

ืœืขื•ื‘ื“ื•,

to be His ืขื‘ื“,

ืœืฉืžื•ืจ ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื•ืชื™ื•,

not enough to not to transgress or to fulfill.

but to live with that ื›ื•ื‘ื“ ืจืืฉ.

And this is the ืคืกื•ืง ืžื” ืฉื›ืชื•ื‘ ื™ืขื–ื•ื‘ ืจืฉืข ื“ืจื›ื• ื•ืื™ืฉ ืื•ืŸ ืžื—ืฉื‘ื•ืชื™ื•.

A person should leave the path that he's living on and a man of

iniquity should forget the thoughts that he has.

In other words,

ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is a metamorphosis,

a changing of your way of life,

of your thought process.

It's gotta be off your plate.

There's no way I can be ืžื•ืจื“ ื‘ืžืœื›ื•ืช.

For that,

one has to be ืžืงื‘ืœ ืขื•ืœ ืžืœื›ื•ืช.

The basic reason of why we transgress or don't fulfill what we're fulfilling,

the basic reason why we engage in I would say selective halachic observance,

whatever community you're in,

we all suffer this problem,

is because we don't live with ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืฉืžื™ื.

We do the ืžืฆื•ืช,

we refrain from a lot of ืขื‘ื™ืจื•ืช,

but it's got many reasons contributing to our actions.

The focal point is,

are we really living with a yoke of ืฉืžื™ืจื”,

are we living with ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืฉืžื™ื?

And this is a ืžืคื•ืจืฉืช ืกืคืจื™,

brought down in the ืจืžื‘"ืŸ in ืคืจืฉืช ื™ืชืจื•,

ืกืคืจ ื”ืžืฆื•ืช,

ืžืฆื•ื” ื',

and the ืจืžื‘"ืŸ quotes it as follows:

let me find it here for a moment.

Yeah,

it says like this,

the ืคืกื•ืง says:

ืื ื›ื™ ื”' ืืœื”ื™ืš,

and then it says:

ืœื ื™ื”ื™ื” ืœืš ืืœื”ื™ื ืื—ืจื™ื ืขืœ ืคื ื™.

And the question ืกืคืจื™ is asked,

why do we have to have again the ืื ื›ื™ ื”' ืืœื”ื™ืš,

ืœื ื™ื”ื™ื” ืœืš ืืœื”ื™ื ืื—ืจื™ื ืขืœ ืคื ื™,

it's all the same thing.

So he says,

he quotes,

excuse me,

it's not a ืกืคืจื™,

it's a ืžื›ื™ืœืชื in ืฉืžื•ืช.

ืœืคื™ ืฉื”ื•ื ืื•ืžืจ ืื ื›ื™ ื”' ืืœื”ื™ืš,

ืžืฉืœ ืœืžืœืš ืฉื ื›ื ืก ืœืžื“ื™ื ื”.

There was a king which conquered a city-state.

ืืžืจื• ืœื• ืขื‘ื“ื™ื•,

his servants told him,

ื’ื–ื•ืจ ืขืœื™ื ื• ื’ื–ืจื•ืช,

decree decrees,

set down the law,

tell them what to do and what to refrain from.

ืืžืจ ืœื”ื ืœื,

no I can't do that yet.

ื›ืฉื™ืงื‘ืœื• ืžืœื›ื•ืชื™,

only after they accept my sovereignty,

they see me totally as their ืžืœืš and they are my ืขื‘ื“ื™ื,

at that stage ื’ื–ื•ืจ ืขืœื™ื”ื ื’ื–ืจื•ืช,

then I will be able to legislate laws and decree their behaviors and their

ืžื—ืฉื‘ื” and their ื“ื™ื‘ื•ืจ and their ืžืขืฉื”.

ืฉืื ืžืœื›ื•ืชื™ ืื™ื ืŸ ืžืงื‘ืœื™ื,

because if they don't really predicate their actions and their thoughts by first accepting

the authority,

the ืžืœื›ื•ืช of ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื,

that ืื ื›ื™ ื”' ืืœื”ื™ืš,

only then will they be able to fulfill my ื’ื–ืจื•ืช.

ืื ืžืœื›ื•ืชื™ ืื™ื ื ืžืงื™ื™ืžื™ื ื’ื–ืจื•ืชื™ ื”ื™ืš ืžืงื™ื™ืžื™ื?

How can you possibly expect them to fulfill my ื’ื–ืจื•ืช,

to be consistent in a religious behavior in ืžื—ืฉื‘ื”,

ื“ื™ื‘ื•ืจ,

ื•ืžืขืฉื”,

even to wish,

to will,

to want,

to aspire to do them in truth.

How do you dream of being able to do this if you don't make

sure you have ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืฉืžื™ื?

It would seem to be the ultimate ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is exactly that:

to walk away from ืžืจื™ื“ื” ื‘ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืฉืžื™ื,

or rather I would say it's not even ืžืจื™ื“ื”,

but to begin to be ืžืงื‘ืœ ืขื•ืœ ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืฉืžื™ื.

And that is the ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” of ืจืืฉ ื”ืฉื ื”,

ืงื‘ืœืช ื”ืžืœื›ื•ืช.

Do we actually sit,

look at ourselves in the mirror and say,

yes,

I am an ืขื‘ื“ ื”' and God is my sovereign,

and there's no,

I don't move my hands without him?

That's ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”.

ืœืฉื•ื‘ ืขื“ ื”' ืืœื”ื™ืš,

until you stand in presence in front of God,

and that's how you live.

ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is returning to the first ืจืž"ื in ืฉื•ืœื—ืŸ ืขืจื•ืš,

ืฉื•ื™ืชื™ ื”' ืœื ื’ื“ื™ ืชืžื™ื“.

That you stand in God's presence,

that you live with God awareness.

That's what ืชืฉื•ื‘ื” is.

So yes,

there's no specific commandment of returning to God,

because every walking away from God is a pre,

is walking away from ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ ืžืœื›ื•ืช ืฉืžื™ื.

The basic reason for you to do ืชืฉื•ื‘ื”,

because there's no way you should be living without ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ.

Should you return to ืงื‘ืœืช,

you must return to ืงื‘ืœืช ืขื•ืœ because that's the ืคืกื•ืง ืื ื›ื™ ื”' ืืœื”ื™ืš,

the basis of our total religion.

That's what this ืžื›ื™ืœืชื teaches us.

There's no specific ืžืฆื•ื” of returning,

of walking away from sin.

The ืžืฆื•ื” is walk away from the reason of sin.

Walk away from the reason of sin,

you must eradicate that and you must start from scratch if necessary.

I want to wish us all a ื›ืชื™ื‘ื” ื•ื—ืชื™ืžื” ื˜ื•ื‘ื”.

Remember ืืชื ื ืฆื‘ื™ื ื”ื™ื•ื ื›ืœื›ื,

we stand one day in front of ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื,

standing upright and straight,

we stand in front of ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื.

ืจืืฉ ื”ืฉื ื” is a day of ืฉื•ื™ืชื™ ื”' ืœืคื ื™ ืชืžื™ื“.

Have a ื›ืชื™ื‘ื” ื•ื—ืชื™ืžื” ื˜ื•ื‘ื”,

ืืชื ื•ื‘ื™ืชื›ื ื•ื›ืœ ืืฉืจ ืœื›ื.

Take care.