ื‘ืกืดื“

Kavanot: First Person Singular

Thoughts on Tanach and the Davening

The eighth perek is an extended speech by ื—ื›ืžื” herself.

ื ื”ืœื ื—ื›ืžื” ืชืงืจื; ื•ืชื‘ื•ื ื” ืชืชืŸ ืงื•ืœื”ืƒ ื‘ ื‘ืจืืฉ ืžืจืžื™ื ืขืœื™ ื“ืจืš; ื‘ื™ืช ื ืชื™ื‘ื•ืช ื ืฆื‘ื”ืƒ ื’ ืœื™ื“ ืฉืขืจื™ื ืœืคื™ ืงืจืช; ืžื‘ื•ื ืคืชื—ื™ื ืชืจื ื”ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื—

We saw this same image in the first perek:

ื› ื—ื›ืžื•ืช ื‘ื—ื•ืฅ ืชืจื ื”; ื‘ืจื—ื‘ื•ืช ืชืชืŸ ืงื•ืœื”ืƒ ื›ื ื‘ืจืืฉ ื”ืžื™ื•ืช ืชืงืจื; ื‘ืคืชื—ื™ ืฉืขืจื™ื ื‘ืขื™ืจ ืืžืจื™ื” ืชืืžืจืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื

This is a much longer speech, about how important learning ื—ื›ืžื”โ€”which is the wisdom of proper behavior, phronesisโ€”from the Torah, from ื”ืงื‘ืดื”. The last perek warned about the dangers of learning from other cultures with much the same image:

ื” ืœืฉืžืจืš ืžืืฉื” ื–ืจื”; ืžื ื›ืจื™ื” ืืžืจื™ื” ื”ื—ืœื™ืงื”ืƒโ€ฆื™ื‘ ืคืขื ื‘ื—ื•ืฅ ืคืขื ื‘ืจื—ื‘ื•ืช; ื•ืืฆืœ ื›ืœ ืคื ื” ืชืืจื‘ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื–

There is a ืฉื•ืง, a marketplace of ideas. Everyone is calling out, hawking their intellectual wares, inviting the listener to their โ€œhomeโ€. This perek talks of how it is possible to learn all these things from a Torah-focused perspective.

ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื‘ึฐึผืจึนืืฉื ืžึฐืจึนืžึดื™ื, ื•ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืขึฒืœึตื™ ื“ึธืจึถืšึฐ. ื‘ืชื—ืœื” ื‘ึฐึผืจึนืืฉื ืžึฐืจึนืžึดื™ื, ื•ืœื‘ืกื•ืฃ ืขึฒืœึตื™ ื“ึธืจึถืšึฐ.

ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ื™ื˜,ื

ื ืจืื” ืœืคืจืฉ ื”ื›ื ืœืขื ื™ืŸ ืงื•ืฉื™ ื”ืœืžื•ื“ ื•ื”ืขื™ื•ืŸ ื“ื‘ืชื—ืœืช ื”ืœืžื•ื“ ื”ื•ื ืงืฉื”โ€ฆื‘ึฐึผืจึนืืฉื ืžึฐืจึนืžึดื™ื ืœื”ื’ื™ืข ืฉื, ื•ืœื‘ืกื•ืฃ ืขึฒืœึตื™ ื“ึธืจึถืšึฐ ืงืจื•ื‘ ืœื”ื’ื™ืข ืœืžืงื•ืžื• ืฉื”ื™ื ืขืœื™ ื“ืจืš ืฉื™ืœืš ื”ืื“ื ื‘ื”.

ืžื”ืจืฉืดื, ื—ื™ื“ื•ืฉื™ ืื’ื“ื•ืช, ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ื™ื˜,ื

It seems hard, because it is hard, but it gets easier as you work at it.

Her audience here is more selective.

ื“ ืืœื™ื›ื ืื™ืฉื™ื ืืงืจื; ื•ืงื•ืœื™ ืืœ ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ืืƒ ื” ื”ื‘ื™ื ื• ืคืชืื™ื ืขืจืžื”; ื•ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื ื”ื‘ื™ื ื• ืœื‘ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื—

The apostrophe is to โ€œืื™ืฉื™ืโ€, those with the title โ€œืื™ืฉโ€ (not just โ€œmenโ€, ืื ืฉื™ื).

ื‘ ืฉืžืขื• ื–ืืช ื›ืœ ื”ืขืžื™ื; ื”ืื–ื™ื ื• ื›ืœ ื™ืฉื‘ื™ ื—ืœื“ืƒ ื’ ื’ื ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื ื’ื ื‘ื ื™ ืื™ืฉ ื™ื—ื“ ืขืฉื™ืจ ื•ืื‘ื™ื•ืŸืƒ ื“ ืคื™ ื™ื“ื‘ืจ ื—ื›ืžื•ืช; ื•ื”ื’ื•ืช ืœื‘ื™ ืชื‘ื•ื ื•ืชืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืคืจืง ืžื˜

ื‘ืŸ ืื“ื: ืงืจืื• ื‘ืŸ ืื“ื ื›ื“ื™ ืฉืœื ื™ืชื’ืื” ื•ื™ื—ืฉื•ื‘ ืขืฆืžื• ื›ืื—ื“ ืžืŸ ื”ืžืœืื›ื™ื ืœืคื™ ืฉืจืื” ื”ืžืจืื” ื”ื’ื“ื•ืœื” ื”ื–ืืช.

ืžืฆื•ื“ืช ื“ื•ื“, ื™ื—ื–ืงืืœ ื‘:ื

ื›ืœื ืื ืฉื™ื: ื›ืœ ืื ืฉื™ื ืฉื‘ืžืงืจื ืœืฉื•ืŸ ื—ืฉื™ื‘ื•ืช.

ืจืฉืดื™, ื‘ืžื“ื‘ืจ ื™ื’:ื’

ื’ื: ื›ื›ื” ืืงืจื ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื ืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื”ื ืžืขืœื”, ืื• ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื”ื ืฉื”ื ื ื•ื“ืขื™ื ื•ื–ื” ื˜ืขื โ€ื•ื‘ื ื™ ืื™ืฉโ€œ.

ืื‘ืŸ ืขื–ืจื, ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืžื˜:ื’

She is addressing specifically the โ€œืื™ืฉโ€ in this perek, the important people; everyone else can listen in. But they are also ืคืชืื™ื, which we defined in Middle of the Road as โ€œnaรฏveโ€. Shlomo, in ืคืจืง ื, described one of his goals as:

ืœืชืช ืœืคืชืื™ื ืขืจืžื”โ€ฆ

ืžืฉืœื™ ื:ื“

ืคืชื™ ื™ืืžื™ืŸ ืœื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจ; ื•ืขืจื•ื ื™ื‘ื™ืŸ ืœืืฉืจื•ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ื™ื“:ื˜ื•

The ืคืชื™ is naive, easily swayed (from the root ืœืคืชื•ืช, to entice or seduce). ืขืจื•ื means clever, and in ืชื ืดืš it is generally a bad thing.

ื•ื”ื ื—ืฉ ื”ื™ื” ืขืจื•ื ืžื›ืœ ื—ื™ืช ื”ืฉื“ื” ืืฉืจ ืขืฉื” ื”ืณ ืืœืงื™ื; ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืืœ ื”ืืฉื” ืืฃ ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืืœืงื™ื ืœื ืชืื›ืœื• ืžื›ืœ ืขืฅ ื”ื’ืŸืƒ

ื‘ืจืืฉื™ืช ื’:ื

Being a ืคืชื™ is not itself a bad thing; there is a place for what we call ืืžื•ื ื” ืคืฉื•ื˜ื”. But the danger is, in our metaphor, out there in the ืฉื•ืง, there are a lot of voices crying out. Shlomo is not going to turn the ืคืชื™ into an ืขืจื•ื; he is just going to give them a little ืขืจืžื”.

As Aliza Baronofsky puts it,

wisdom + orma = foresight

lack of wisdom + orma = cunning

Rabba Aliza Libman Baronofsky, Prudence? Foresight? Cunning?

And those ืื™ืฉื™ื are also ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื, which we defined in Voice of Reason as โ€œbeing self-assuredโ€, not listening to criticism. ื›ืกื™ืœ in ืžืฉืœื™ it seems to be connected to the word ื›ืกืœ, feeling secure.

ื•ื™ืฉื™ืžื• ื‘ืืœืงื™ื ื›ืกืœื; ื•ืœื ื™ืฉื›ื—ื• ืžืขืœืœื™ ืึพืœ; ื•ืžืฆื•ืชื™ื• ื™ื ืฆืจื•ืƒ

ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ืขื—:ื–

ื›ื™ ื”ืณ ื™ื”ื™ื” ื‘ื›ืกืœืš; ื•ืฉืžืจ ืจื’ืœืš ืžืœื›ื“ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ื’:ื›ื•

The ื›ืกื™ืœ is self-confident, which sounds like a good thing but itโ€™s destructive in this case. โ€œI know what I want to do, so it must be the right thing to do, and any implication to the contrary is simply wrongโ€.

Thatโ€™s the danger in being one of the ืื™ืฉื™ื. You think youโ€™re smart, just because you are separate from ื‘ื ื™ ืื“ื, the hoi polloi, and are always talking to other smart people. But that echo chamber makes you a ืคืชื™ and a ื›ืกื™ืœ. Scott Alexander calls such groups a โ€œpriesthoodโ€, who make declarations that everyone is expected to just follow.

What about discussing ideas in a group made of only the most intelligent and knowledgeable people? This gives you the debate and collaboration functions that you only get in group conversation. But itโ€™ll have a better signal-to-noise ratio than all of society, and it might be small enough to manage. Also, you can make people sign on to good discussion norms before they enter, and you can expel them if they screw up.

From this formulation, it becomes clear that such a priesthood is only useful insofar as it has some kind of barrier between itself and the general public.

The priesthoods donโ€™t exactly hate the public. But they hate the idea of letting the publicโ€™s ideas mix with their own. Itโ€™s not just that they discount the publicโ€™s ideas insofar as the public is less sophisticated than themselves. Their whole identity comes from their separation from the public. Ideas that seem too similar to the publicโ€™s get actively penalized, the same way it would be hard to convince Democrats to accept a plan that Donald Trump proposed first, even if it otherwise fit with Democratic ideals.

Scott Alexander, On Priesthoods

Priesthoods are good for having good ideas. But a bad idea that gets in, becomes a Good Idea simply by being espoused by the priesthood and they can never get rid of it. Who can contradict them? Alexander calls that a โ€œmemetic plagueโ€.

The priesthoods draw from a certain type of person: usually upper-class, well-educated, successful but not too successful, prone to (and good at) abstract thoughtโ€ฆThen they isolate many examples of this type of person in a community designed to have dense connections within itself and thin-to-nonexistent-connections with the rest of the world. This ends up the same way as any other monoculture. Aurochs in the wilderness probably got diseases only rarely. But cram ten thousand genetically-near-identical cows in a tiny warehouse, and your beef ends up 95% antibiotics by weight. In the same way, the priesthoods are a perfect environment for memetic plagues.

Scott Alexander, On Priesthoods

So ื—ื›ืžื” tells these people:

ืฉืžืขื• ื›ื™ ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื ืื“ื‘ืจ; ื•ืžืคืชื— ืฉืคืชื™ ืžื™ืฉืจื™ืืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ื—:ื•

ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื ืื“ื‘ืจ might mean โ€œI speak to princesโ€.

ื›ื™ ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื ืื“ื‘ืจ: ื›ืœื•ืžืจ ื›ื™ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ื™ื• ืขื ื”ืฉืจื™ื ื•ื“ืจืš ื”ืžื“ื‘ืจ ืขื ื”ืฉืจ ืื™ื ื• ืžื“ื‘ืจ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ืžื™ื•ืชืจื™ื ืืœื ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ื•ืจ ื•ื“ื‘ื•ืจ ื”ื•ื ืœืฆื•ืจืš ื’ื“ื•ืœ. ื›ืŸ ื”ื•ื ื“ื‘ืจื™.

ืคื™ืจื•ืฉ ื”ื’ืจืดื, ืžืฉืœื™ ื—:ื•

But I think a better translation is โ€œmy words are princesโ€. The true ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื are not the ืื™ืฉื™ื, but the words of Torah.

ื•ืขื•ื“ โ€ื›ื™ ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื ืื“ื‘ืจโ€œ: ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ื ืฉืจื™ื ื•ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื ื•ืœื›ืŸ ืฉืžืขื• ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจื™.

ืคื™ืจื•ืฉ ื”ื’ืจืดื, ืžืฉืœื™ ื—:ื•

The gemara adds another image:

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื—ื ื ืืœ ื‘ืจ ืคืคื: ืžืื™ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืฉืึดืžึฐืขื•ึผ ื›ึผึดื™ ื ึฐื’ึดื™ื“ึดื™ื ืึฒื“ึทื‘ึผึตืจ? ืœืžื” ื ืžืฉืœื• ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืชื•ืจื” ื›ื ื’ื™ื“? ืœื•ืžืจ ืœืš: ืžื” ื ื’ื™ื“ ื–ื” ื™ืฉ ื‘ื• ืœื”ืžื™ืช ื•ืœื”ื—ื™ื•ืช, ืืฃ ื“ื‘ืจื™ ืชื•ืจื” ื™ืฉ ื‘ื ืœื”ืžื™ืช ื•ืœื”ื—ื™ื•ืช. ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ื“ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื: ืœืžื™ื™ืžื™ื ื™ืŸ ื‘ื” ืกืžื ื“ื—ื™ื™, ืœืžืฉืžืื™ืœื™ื ื‘ื” ืกืžื ื“ืžื•ืชื.

ื“ื‘ืจ ืื—ืจ: ื ึฐื’ึดื™ื“ึดื™ืโ€”ื›ืœ ื“ื™ื‘ื•ืจ ื•ื“ื™ื‘ื•ืจ ืฉื™ืฆื ืžืคื™ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืงื•ืฉืจื™ื ืœื• ืฉื ื™ ื›ืชืจื™ื.

ืฉื‘ืช ืคื—,ื‘

When we think about the โ€œtwo crownsโ€ associated with Torah, we think of the gemara that describes ืžืขืžื“ ื”ืจ ืกื™ื ื™:

ื“ืจืฉ ืจื‘ื™ ืกื™ืžืื™: ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉื”ืงื“ื™ืžื• ื™ืฉืจืืœ โ€ื ืขืฉื”โ€œ ืœโ€ื ืฉืžืขโ€œ ื‘ืื• ืฉืฉื™ื ืจื™ื‘ื•ื ืฉืœ ืžืœืื›ื™ ื”ืฉืจืช, ืœื›ืœ ืื—ื“ ื•ืื—ื“ ืžื™ืฉืจืืœ ืงืฉืจื• ืœื• ืฉื ื™ ื›ืชืจื™ื, ืื—ื“ ื›ื ื’ื“ โ€ื ืขืฉื”โ€œ ื•ืื—ื“ ื›ื ื’ื“ โ€ื ืฉืžืขโ€œ.

ืฉื‘ืช ืคื—,ื

But here it is the words of Torah themselves that are crowned.

Torah font with crowns on the letters

Illustration of โ€œcrownedโ€ letters (from ืžื’ื™ืœืช ืืกืชืจ)

And that evokes the aggadah about Moshe and Rabbi Akiva:

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘: ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืขืœื” ืžืฉื” ืœืžืจื•ื, ืžืฆืื• ืœื”ืงื‘ืดื” ืฉื™ื•ืฉื‘ ื•ืงื•ืฉืจ ื›ืชืจื™ื ืœืื•ืชื™ื•ืช. ืืžืจ ืœืคื ื™ื•: ืจื‘ืฉืดืข, ืžื™ ืžืขื›ื‘ ืขืœ ื™ื“ืš? ืืžืจ ืœื•: ืื“ื ืื—ื“ ื™ืฉ ืฉืขืชื™ื“ ืœื”ื™ื•ืช ื‘ืกื•ืฃ ื›ืžื” ื“ื•ืจื•ืช, ื•ืขืงื™ื‘ื ื‘ืŸ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืฉืžื•, ืฉืขืชื™ื“ ืœื“ืจื•ืฉ ืขืœ ื›ืœ ืงื•ืฅ ื•ืงื•ืฅ ืชื™ืœื™ืŸ ืชื™ืœื™ืŸ ืฉืœ ื”ืœื›ื•ืช.

ืžื ื—ื•ืช ื›ื˜,ื‘

Omnisignificanceโ€ฆdescribes an ideal which was never fully realized. Not every feature of Scripture has been interpreted either halakhically or aggadicallyโ€ฆThe well-known talmudic passage (Menahot 29b) which describes the scene in Heavenโ€ฆpoignantly describes the dilemma. On inquiring as to the purpose of the crowns, [Moses] is informed that many generations hence, R. Akiva would derive โ€œpiles and pilesโ€ of halakhot from each crown. We may ask, in the spirit of that story, where are those piles and piles of halakhot expounded from the crowns of the letters? The very locus classicus of omnisignificance points up either to its loss, or its lack.

Yaakov Elman, โ€It Is No Empty Thingโ€œ: Nahmanides and the Search for Omnisignificance

Rav Moshe Feinstein explains that we are misinterpreting the ื›ืชืจื™ื. They are not the source of halachot; the drashot are from the letters themselves, as we see often in the gemara. The crowns that ื”ืณ attaches to those letters symbolize their importance and authority.

ื•ื‘ื–ื” ื‘ื™ืืจืชื™ ืžื” ืฉืื™ืชื ื‘ืžื ื—ื•ืช ื“ืฃ ื›ืดื˜ ืืดืจ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื‘ืฉืขื” ืฉืขืœื” ืžืฉื” ืœืžืจื•ื ืžืฆืื• ืœื”ืงื‘ืดื” ืฉื™ื•ืฉื‘ ื•ืงื•ืฉืจ ื›ืชืจื™ื ืœืื•ืชื™ื•ืช ืืžืจ ืœืคื ื™ื• ืจื‘ืฉืดืข ืžื™ ืžืขื›ื‘ ืขืœ ื™ื“ืš ืืžืจ ืœื• ืื“ื ืื—ื“ ื™ืฉ ื•ืขืงื™ื‘ื ื‘ืŸ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ืฉืžื• ืฉืขืชื™ื“ ืœื“ืจื•ืฉ ืขืœ ื›ืœ ืงื•ืฅ ื•ืงื•ืฅ ืชื™ืœื™ืŸ ืชื™ืœื™ืŸ ืฉืœ ื”ืœื›ื•ืช, ืฉืœื›ืื•ืจื” ืœื ืžื•ื‘ืŸ ืœืฉื•ืŸ ื›ืชืจื™ื ืฉืืžืจ. ื•ืขื•ื“ ืงืฉื” ืฉืืœืช ืžืฉื” ืžื™ ืžืขื›ื‘, ืžื” ื›ื•ื•ื ืชื• ื‘ื–ื”?โ€ฆืื‘ืœ ืœืคืดืž ืฉื‘ืืจืชื™ ืžื“ื•ื™ืง ืœืฉื•ืŸ ื›ืชืจื™ื ืฉื ืžืฆื ืฉื”ืฉื™ืดืช ืขืฉื” ืืช ืื•ืชื™ื•ืช ื”ืชื•ืจื” ืœืžืœื›ื™ื ื”ื™ื™ื ื• ืฉื™ืขืฉื” ื”ื—ื›ื ื•ื™ื“ืžื” ืžืœืชื ืœืžืœืชื ื•ื™ืคืกื•ืง ื”ื“ื™ืŸ ื›ืคื™ ื”ื‘ื ืชื• ื˜ืขื ื”ืื•ืชื™ื•ืช ืฉื‘ืชื•ืจื”โ€ฆืืฃ ืฉืืคืฉืจ ืฉืœื ื ืชื›ื•ื•ื ื• ืœื”ืืžืช ื•ืœื ื”ื™ื” ื“ืขืช ื”ื‘ืดื” ื›ืŸ, ื“ื”ืงื‘ืดื” ื ืชืŸ ืืช ื”ืชื•ืจื” ืœื™ืฉืจืืœ ืฉื™ืขืฉื• ื›ืคื™ ืฉื™ื‘ื™ื ื• ืืช ื”ื›ืชื•ื‘ ื•ืืช ื”ืžืกื•ืจ ื‘ืขืดืค ื‘ืกื™ื ื™ ืœืคื™ ื”ื‘ื ืชื ื•ื™ื•ืชืจ ืœื ื™ืคืจืฉ ื•ืœื ื™ื›ืจื™ืข ื”ืฉื™ืดืช ื‘ื“ื™ื ื™ ื”ืชื•ืจื” ืฉืœื ื‘ืฉืžื™ื ื”ื™ื, ืืœื ื”ืกื›ื™ื ืžืชื—ืœื” ืœื”ื‘ื ืช ื•ืคื™ืจื•ืฉ ื—ื›ืžื™ ื”ืชื•ืจื” ื•ื ืžืฆื ืฉืื•ืชื™ื•ืช ื”ืชื•ืจื” ื”ื ืžืœื›ื™ื ืฉืขื•ืฉื™ืŸ ื›ืคื™ ืžื” ืฉืžืฉืžืข ืžื”ืชื•ืจื” ืœื—ื›ืžื™ ื”ืชื•ืจื” ืืฃ ืฉืื•ืœื™ ืœื ื”ื™ื” ื–ื” ื›ื”ื‘ื ืช ื”ืฉื™ืดืชโ€ฆื•ื–ื”ื• ืคื™ืจื•ืฉ โ€ืžื™ ืžืขื›ื‘โ€œ, ืฉืžืฉื” ืฉืืœโ€ฆืœืžื” ื ืชืช ื›ื— ืžืœื•ื›ื” ืœื”ืื•ืชื™ื•ืช ืฉื™ืžืฆื ืฉืœืคืขืžื™ื ื™ืขืฉื• ืฉืœื ื›ื›ื•ื•ื ืชืš. ื•ื”ืฉื™ื‘ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื, ืžืฉื•ื ืฉืขืดื™ ื–ื” ื™ื“ืจืฉื• ืจืดืข ื•ื›ืœ ื”ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืชื™ืœื™ืŸ ืฉืœ ื”ืœื›ื•ืช ืฉื”ื•ื ื”ื’ื“ืœืช ืชื•ืจื” ืžืžืขื˜ ื”ื ื›ืชื‘ ื•ื”ื ืžืกืจ, ื•ืœื›ืชื•ื‘ ื”ืจื‘ื” ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจ ื‘ืคืจื˜ ืื™ืŸ ืงืฅ ืฉื”ืชื•ืจื” ื”ื™ื ื‘ืœื ืงืฅ ื•ื’ื‘ื•ืœ.

ืฉื•ืดืช ืื’ืจื•ืช ืžืฉื” ืื•ืจื— ื—ื™ื™ื ื—ืœืง ื ื”ืงื“ืžื”

ื”ืณ, as it were, put His own crown onto the letters of the Torah. ื ื’ื™ื“ื™ื ืื“ื‘ืจ.

Just like the โ€œsmart peopleโ€ are ื›ืกื™ืœื™ื and ืคืชืื™ื, so are the wealthy. They are blind to what is important.

ื– ื›ื™ ืืžืช ื™ื”ื’ื” ื—ื›ื™; ื•ืชื•ืขื‘ืช ืฉืคืชื™ ืจืฉืขืƒ ื— ื‘ืฆื“ืง ื›ืœ ืืžืจื™ ืคื™; ืื™ืŸ ื‘ื”ื ื ืคืชืœ ื•ืขืงืฉืƒ ื˜ ื›ืœื ื ื›ื—ื™ื ืœืžื‘ื™ืŸ; ื•ื™ืฉืจื™ื ืœืžืฆืื™ ื“ืขืชืƒ ื™ ืงื—ื• ืžื•ืกืจื™ ื•ืืœ ื›ืกืฃ; ื•ื“ืขืช ืžื—ืจื•ืฅ ื ื‘ื—ืจืƒ ื™ื ื›ื™ ื˜ื•ื‘ื” ื—ื›ืžื” ืžืคื ื™ื ื™ื; ื•ื›ืœ ื—ืคืฆื™ื ืœื ื™ืฉื•ื• ื‘ื”ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื—

Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Absolute power demoralizes.

Lord John Dalberg-Acton

But Mishleiโ€™s mussar message number nine is: Power makes gullible; absolute power makes absolutely gullible. The only way to avoid Alexanderโ€™s memetic plagues is to learn ื—ื›ืžื”, phronesis, ืชื•ืจื”.

ื™ื‘ ืื ื™ ื—ื›ืžื” ืฉื›ื ืชื™ ืขืจืžื”; ื•ื“ืขืช ืžื–ืžื•ืช ืืžืฆืืƒ ื™ื’ ื™ืจืืช ื”ืณ ืฉื ืืช ืจืข; ื’ืื” ื•ื’ืื•ืŸ ื•ื“ืจืš ืจืข ื•ืคื™ ืชื”ืคื›ื•ืช ืฉื ืืชื™ืƒ ื™ื“ ืœื™ ืขืฆื” ื•ืชื•ืฉื™ื”; ืื ื™ ื‘ื™ื ื” ืœื™ ื’ื‘ื•ืจื”ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื—

The advice I give, that makes me different from all the other ethical systems in the ืฉื•ืง, is ื™ืจืืช ื”ืณ.

ื™ืจืืช ื”ืณ ืจืืฉื™ืช ื“ืขืช; ื—ื›ืžื” ื•ืžื•ืกืจ ืื•ื™ืœื™ื ื‘ื–ื•ืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ื:ื–

And that ื™ืจืื” means avoiding not only the evil: ื•ื“ืจืš ืจืข ื•ืคื™ ืชื”ืคื›ื•ืช but also the haughtiness that keeps you from improving: ื’ืื” ื•ื’ืื•ืŸ.

ื’ืื•ืŸ, ื•ื’ืื•ื”: ื”ื’ืื•ื” ื”ื•ื ืจืง ื‘ืขืฆื ื”ืžืชื’ืื”, ืฉืžืชื ืฉื ื‘ืจื•ื—ื•โ€ฆื•ื”ื’ืื•ืŸ ื”ื•ื ื—ื•ืฅ ืœืขืฆื ื”ืžืชื’ืื”, ื”ืžืขืœื•ืช ืฉื‘ืขื‘ื•ืจื ื™ืชื’ืื•, ื›ืžื• ืขื•ืฉืจ ื’ื‘ื•ืจื” ื—ื›ืžื” ืžื•ืคืœื’ืช.

ืžืœื‘ื™ืดื ื‘ืื•ืจ ื”ืžื™ืœื•ืช, ื™ืฉืขื™ื”ื• ื™ื’:ื™ื

ื”ื’ื ืฉื’ืื•ื ื ืฉื”ื•ื ืชืงืคื ื•ืขืฉืจื ืื™ื ื• ืฉื ื•ื ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ ื”ืณ ืื—ืจ ืฉืœื ื”ื–ื™ื“ื• ื•ืœื ื—ื˜ืื•, ืžืดืž ืื—ืจ ืฉื’ืื•ืชื ืฉื”ืชื’ืื• ื‘ืจื•ื—ื ื”ื•ื ืฉื ื•ื ื‘ืขื™ื ื™ ื”ืณ.

ืžืœื‘ื™ืดื, ื™ืฉืขื™ื”ื• ื™ื’:ื™ื

Having ื’ืื•ืŸ, things to be proud of, is not a problem. Just remember what ื—ื›ืžื” is saying: ืœื™ ื’ื‘ื•ืจื”.

ืื™ื–ื”ื• ื’ื™ื‘ื•ืจ? ื”ื›ื•ื‘ืฉ ืืช ื™ืฆืจื•.

ืžืฉื ื” ืื‘ื•ืช ื“:ื

Therefore:

ื˜ื• ื‘ื™ ืžืœื›ื™ื ื™ืžืœื›ื•; ื•ืจื–ื ื™ื ื™ื—ืงืงื• ืฆื“ืงืƒ ื˜ื– ื‘ื™ ืฉืจื™ื ื™ืฉืจื•; ื•ื ื“ื™ื‘ื™ื ื›ืœ ืฉืคื˜ื™ ืฆื“ืงืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื—

ื•ืจื•ื–ื ื™ื: ื”ื ืฉืจื™ ื”ืขืฆื”, ื•ื‘ืื• ืกืžื•ื›ื™ื ืืœ ืžืœื›ื™ื ืชืžื™ื“.

ืžืœื‘ื™ืดื ื‘ืื•ืจ ื”ืžื™ืœื•ืช, ืชื”ื™ืœื™ื ื‘:ื‘

But this doesnโ€™t just apply to literal kings; we all have authority in some situations, and we need ื—ื›ืžื” to be ืฉืคื˜ื™ ืฆื“ืง.

Shlomo concludes this section of the perek by reviewing the rewards of learning and living through ื—ื›ืžื”.

ื™ื– ืื ื™ ืื”ื‘ื™ ืื”ื‘; ื•ืžืฉื—ืจื™ ื™ืžืฆืื ื ื™ืƒ ื™ื— ืขืฉืจ ื•ื›ื‘ื•ื“ ืืชื™; ื”ื•ืŸ ืขืชืง ื•ืฆื“ืงื”ืƒ ื™ื˜ ื˜ื•ื‘ ืคืจื™ื™ ืžื—ืจื•ืฅ ื•ืžืคื–; ื•ืชื‘ื•ืืชื™ ืžื›ืกืฃ ื ื‘ื—ืจืƒ ื› ื‘ืืจื— ืฆื“ืงื” ืื”ืœืš; ื‘ืชื•ืš ื ืชื™ื‘ื•ืช ืžืฉืคื˜ืƒ ื›ื ืœื”ื ื—ื™ืœ ืื”ื‘ื™ ื™ืฉ; ื•ืืฆืจืชื™ื”ื ืืžืœืืƒ

ืžืฉืœื™ ืคืจืง ื—

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ: ืื™ืŸ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ื ื•ืชืŸ ื—ื›ืžื” ืืœื ืœืžื™ ืฉื™ืฉ ื‘ื• ื—ื›ืžื”, ืฉื ืืžืจ (ื“ื ื™ืืœ ื‘:ื›ื): ื™ึธื”ึตื‘ ื—ื‡ื›ึฐืžึฐืชึธื ืœึฐื—ึทื›ึผึดื™ืžึดื™ืŸ ื•ึผืžึทื ึฐื“ึผึฐืขึธื ืœึฐื™ึธื“ึฐืขึตื™ ื‘ึดื™ื ึธื”.

ื‘ืจื›ื•ืช ื ื”,ื

Since wisdom is granted by G-d, how does one initially attain it in order to qualify for the further blessing of even more wisdom? The Vilna Gaon explains that a person merits the heavenly blessing of wisdom by exhibiting a love for it.

Artscroll Mishlei 8:17, footnote 2

Remember Mishleiโ€™s mussar message number three (Tree of Life): Your gifts are G-d-given. Even wisdom.

We started the perek with Maharshaโ€™s observation that ื‘ืชื—ืœืช ื”ืœืžื•ื“ ื”ื•ื ืงืฉื”. It is hard to learn, but the act of trying brings ื”ืณ's help and ื•ืœื‘ืกื•ืฃโ€ฆืงืจื•ื‘ ืœื”ื’ื™ืข ืœืžืงื•ืžื•.

The last pasuk is quoted in the very last mishna:

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ืฉืข ื‘ืŸ ืœื•ื™: ืขืชื™ื“ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืœื”ื ื—ื™ืœ ืœื›ืœ ืฆื“ื™ืง ื•ืฆื“ื™ืง ืฉืœืฉ ืžืื•ืช ื•ืขืฉืจื” ืขื•ืœืžื•ืช, ืฉื ืืžืจ: ืœึฐื”ึทื ึฐื—ึดื™ืœ ืึนื”ึฒื‘ึทื™โ€‰โ€‰ื™ึตืฉื ื•ึฐืึนืฆึฐืจึนืชึตื™ื”ึถื ืึฒืžึทืœึผึตื.

ืžืฉื ื” ืขื•ืงืฆื™ื ื’:ื™ื‘

Everyone tries to figure out the significance of the gematria of 310; Tosfot Yom Tov says it is a reference to ื™ืžื•ืช ืžืฉื™ื—:

ื•ืœืขื•ืžืช ื–ื” ื™ืืžืจ ื‘ื›ืืŸ ื’ืดื› ืžืกืคืจ โ€ื™ืฉโ€œ. ืฉื”ืจื™ ื›ืฉื ื—ืœื• ื”ืืจืฅ ื›ื‘ืฉื• ืœืดื ืžืœื›ื™ื. ื•ืื ืœืขืชื™ื“ ื™ื›ื‘ืฉื• ื‘ืžืกืคืจ ื™ืณ ืคืขืžื™ื ืœืดื, ื™ื”ื™ื• ื‘ืžืกืคืจ ื™ืฉ.

ืชื•ืกืคื•ืช ื™ื•ื ื˜ื•ื‘, ืžืฉื ื” ืขื•ืงืฆื™ื ื’:ื™ื‘

But the Netziv says not to over-read it; ืฉืดื™ is a symbolic number as the sum of ื™ืฉ; it means all the parts that go into all of creation, all that is.

The Netziv in his introduction to Haโ€™emek Shayla explains that this statement of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi refers to the 310 areas of technical expertise which are necessary for a landmark ืชืœืžื™ื“ ื—ื›ื (Torah scholar) to master in order to adjudicate the myriad areas of Halacha. How is it possible for one to spend their days and nights engrossed in learning Torah and at the same time master all the sciences that are necessary to apply the rulings of the Torah to our physical world? The Netziv explains that the Holy One, Blessed is He will give these bodies of knowledge to the tzadik as an inheritance, i.e. without the necessity to toil; he will acquire them as a gift.

Rav Hershel Schachter, Rav Belsky, ztโ€lโ€”An Appreciation

โ€ฆื“ื‘ืจื™ ื—ื›ืžื” ืื™ื ื• ืืกื•ืจ ื›ื™ ื”ื—ื›ืžื” ื”ื–ืืช ื”ื™ื ื›ืžื• ืกื•ืœื ืœืขืœื•ืช ื‘ื” ืืœ ื—ื›ืžืช ื”ืชื•ืจื”โ€ฆื•ืžื–ื” ื ืœืžื•ื“ ื›ื™ ื›ืœ ื“ื‘ืจ ืฉื”ื•ื ืœืขืžื•ื“ ืขืœ ืžื”ื•ืช ื”ืขื•ืœื ื™ืฉ ืœืื“ื ืœืœืžื•ื“, ื•ืžื—ื•ื™ื™ื‘ ื”ื•ื ื‘ื–ื”, ื›ื™ ื”ื›ืœ ืžืขืฉื” ื”ืฉื ื”ื•ื ื•ื™ืฉ ืœืขืžื•ื“ ืขืœื™ื”ื ื•ืœื”ื›ื™ืจ ืขืœ ื™ื“ื™ ื–ื” ื‘ื•ืจืื•โ€ฆ

ืžื”ืจืดืœ, ื ืชื™ื‘ื•ืช ืขื•ืœื, ื ืชื™ื‘ ื”ืชื•ืจื” ื™ื“

So, yes, you need to know ืฉืœืฉ ืžืื•ืช ื•ืขืฉืจื” ืขื•ืœืžื•ืช, all the wisdom and all the science and all the knowledge in the world. And, no, you canโ€™t be seduced by all those other sources of wisdom; you need to stay in the โ€œpalace of Torahโ€. But donโ€™t despair of the contradiction: ืื ื™ ืื”ื‘ื™ ืื”ื‘; ื•ืžืฉื—ืจื™ ื™ืžืฆืื ื ื™.

ืœื ืขืœื™ืš ื”ืžืœืื›ื” ืœื’ืžื•ืจ, ื•ืœื ืืชื” ื‘ืŸ ื—ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืœื™ื‘ื˜ืœ ืžืžื ื”.

ืžืฉื ื” ืื‘ื•ืช ื‘:ื˜ื–