In the outline of the daf, it says 36a that according to R' Yosi haGelili he confesses over an olah for leket, peya and shechacha. Rashi comments there D'H v'al olah Avon leket, shechacha v'peia that there is no vidui over these. It would seem that if there was, the vidui would be mechaper and therefore an olah would not be brought to be mechaper. That is why Rashi removes maaser Oni from the remedy of an olah because yeish vidui alah.
David Samuels, United States
Correct!
The Rambam, in Hilchot Teshuvah, writes that viduy is an essential part of repentance. He starts off there, at the beginning of chapter 1, by writing that if a person transgressed a positive or negative commandment, when he does teshuvah and returns from his bad ways, he must do viduy in front of Hash-m. We learn from the Rambam that viduy is mechaper. It is not sufficient merely to think that one regrets what happened; you have to say it also.
KOL TUV
Dovid Bloom