This might seem like an easy question but it is actually a very challenging one. Why? Neither the noun mechila nor the verb MChL appear in Tanach. Therefore, we do not have a precise handle on what the verb MChL means, or even whether the initial mem is part of the root. In order to understand the difference between mechila and selicha, we must first attempt to understand the root MChL.
We do know that the root MChL appears in many places in the Mishnah and the Tosefta with some meaning related to “forgive.” (The fact that the root does not appear in Tanach and then appears in Tannaitic Hebrew is surprising, but it is not unusual. This is the case with many other roots as well.)
One possibility for the origin of MChL is that it derives from the noun ChLL, and its meaning of “open space” or “emptiness.” It is fairly clear that this word lies behind Biblical words such as chalil (flute), and chalon (opening, window). Probably, the Hebrew word for bread, challah, derives from ChLL as well. Ancient Middle Eastern bread probably looked like pita, i.e., had a hollow center.
Another possibility is that MChL is related to the Aramaic root ChLL, which has a meaning of “forgive” or “relinquish.” See M. Sokoloff, “A Dictionary of Jewish Babylonian Aramaic of the Talmudic and Geonic Periods,” entry “ChLL.”
A third possibility is that the root MChL is related to the root MChE, attested to many times in Tanach. It has the meaning “to erase, blot out, remove, wipe away.” Supporting the derivation of MChL from MChE is that, in the earliest stages, Hebrew roots probably had only two letters. Thus, there may have been an original two-letter root MCh, which had some meaning related to “erase, blot out, remove,” and perhaps both MChE and MChL ultimately derive from this root.
There are people in Tanach with names that use the letters MChL. For example, Machlah (daughter of Tzelafchad) and Machlat (a wife of Esau). Based on this, it can be argued that the verb MChL and a concept of mechila did exist in Biblical times. But these names were probably based on the “musical instrument,” “dancing” or “joy” meanings of the letters MChL. These meanings derive not from MChL, but from ChLL or ChOL.
Interestingly, archaeology has provided us with a name from the late Biblical period that is likely related to a “forgiveness” or “relinquish” meaning of MChL. An altar from Lachish has been discovered with the name MCHLYH. See Y. Aharoni, “Investigations at Lachish,” pp. 6-7. The altar dates from the 5th century B.C.E. and most likely this owner was a Jew. The name MCHLYH is undoubtedly meant to provide a description of God, and God is much more likely to be described as a “forgiver” or “relinquisher (of punishment)” than as a “musician” or “dancer,” or described with some meaning related to “sickness.” The meaning of the name MCHLYH is almost certainly “God has forgiven/relinquished.” We now have a reasonable basis to infer that the root MChL with a meaning relating to “forgive” or “relinquish” existed at least in late Biblical times.
Going back to our attempt to distinguish between selicha and mechila, many Rabbinic authorities have attempted to distinguish between them. For example, R. David Abudarham suggested that selicha is more efficacious, claiming that with selicha there will not remain a lingering minor ill feeling. On the other hand, R. Jacob Emden suggested that mechila is an erasure (like a mechia and mechika), and that these are complete, unlike selicha.
The Talmud, at Taanit 30b, describes Yom Kippur as a day of both selicha and mechila. But why this passage uses both terms is unclear. Also, there are many passages in the Yom Kippur and yearly liturgies in which both SLCh and MChL are included, and a possible distinction between the roots could be implied. But the original distinction between SLCh and MChL was most likely lost by the time these passages were composed.
The difference between selicha and mechila is not just relevant to the Yamim Noraim. For example, in the prevalent version of the daily Amidah today, both SLCh and MChL are found in the sixth bracha. (But there are older versions of the sixth bracha with MChE instead of MChL.)
A most interesting suggestion is made by Rabbi S.R. Hirsch (The Hirsch Siddur, pp. 136-37):
Selicha is personal forgiveness granted so that the transgression that was committed may not permanently blight the relationship of the transgressor to the one against whom he has sinned. Mechila is objective pardon, the waiver of the punishment which the transgressor would have deserved.
This suggestion is attractive because it clearly delineates two different concepts, each deserving of its own root. One is the psychological forgiveness granted so that the relationship between the transgressor and the other party can be maintained. The other is the waiver/relinquishment of the objective punishment or financial penalty. (I never really understood the difference between these two concepts until Rabbi Moshe Yasgur illustrated it to me with the following example: If I throw a pie on your suit, I owe you two things: 1) compensation for your dry cleaners’ bill, and 2) an apology for the psychological insult that I inflicted!)
The problem with the suggestion of R. Hirsch is that by the time the root MChL appears in the Mishnah and Tosefta, it appears in the contexts of both waiver of objective punishment/financial penalty and psychological forgiveness. Most probably, the name in the altar from Lachish from the 5th century BCE also alludes to the psychological forgiveness aspect of MChL. But it is at least possible that originally MChL had only the meaning of waiver of an objective punishment and/or financial penalty, and that SLCh had only the meaning of psychological forgiveness, and over time the root MChL expanded to include psychological forgiveness.
An alternative suggestion can be made, based on the fact that the root SLCh only appears in Tanach in the context of the Divine. It never appears in Tanach, or even in the Talmud, as something given by, or requested from, a human being. (It is very ironic that the expression in modern Hebrew for “excuse me” is “selicha”!) Perhaps SLCh was the root used for Divine forgiveness or waiver of an objective punishment/financial penalty, while MChL arose as the root for human beings, whether they were giving out psychological forgiveness or waiving an objective punishment/financial penalty. But then, over time, MChL also began to be used in the context of the Divine, as evidenced by the altar from Lachish from the 5th century BCE.
Both of our suggestions are only speculation. But if MChL was not originally synonymous with SLCh, this makes it more of a possibility that MChL existed as a root in the early Biblical period, even though our earliest clear evidence for it is only from the 5th century BCE altar from Lachish. The Tanach may simply have not had the occasion to use the root.
Regarding the root SLCh, in Akkadian the root has the meaning “sprinkle.” It is possible that this was the original meaning of SLCh. Words normally have concrete meanings before they develop abstract meanings.
Finally, Malbim is one authority who has pointed out that the root SLCh only appears in Tanach in the context of the Divine. See his comm. to Ps. 130:4. He suggests that selicha treats the sin as if it had never occurred, and only God is capable of doing this. He suggests that this may be the meaning of ki imcha ha-selicha at Ps. 130:4.
(This article is an abridged version of my longer article published in “Hakirah,” vol. 18, and in my book, “Esther Unmasked.”)
Mitchell First is an attorney and Jewish history scholar. Once a year, he asks forgiveness from his readers for challenging them to think a bit. He can be reached at [email protected].
By Mitchell First
For more articles by Mitchell First, and information on his books, please visit his website at rootsandrituals.org.
