.jpg)
The Mishlei Podcast
The Mishlei Podcast
Mishlei 17:23 - Bribes from Bad Bosoms
Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.
Have any questions, insights, or feedback? Send me a text!
Mishlei 17:23 - Bribes from Bad Bosoms
שֹׁחַד מֵחֵק רָשָׁע יִקָּח לְהַטּוֹת אׇרְחוֹת מִשְׁפָּט:
Length: 1 hour 28 minutes
Synopsis: This evening (4/27/26), in our Monday Night Mishlei shiur, we took up a pasuk that appeared to be obvious that it didn't even sound like it was saying anything at all. But our Monday Night Mishlei crew is fearless when it comes to pesukim like these! Sure enough, we came up with several of our own approaches, then analyzed several approaches from the meforshim. We emerged with a nice selection of clear and practical new insights!
-----
מקורות:
משלי יז:כג
תרגום רס"ג עם הערות הרב קאפח ונוה שלום
מלבי"ם - ביאור המילות
רמב"ם - מורה הנבוכים ג:נג
מצודת דוד
רבינו יונה
ר' ששת בן יצחק גרונדי
רש"י - משלי יז:א
-----
The Torah content for the month of Iyyar is sponsored by Naomi Schwartz Rothschild in memory of her mother, Breindel Bracha bas Mordechai z”l, whose yahrzeit falls on the 8th of Iyyar. She learned and lived Torah, and was a tremendous baalas chesed.
-----
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.
If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor, you can reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.
-----
Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/
YU Torah: yutorah.org/teachers/Rabbi-Matt-Schneeweiss
Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss
YouTube Channel: youtube.com/rabbischneeweiss
Instagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/
"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com
"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com
"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com
"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com
"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.com
Old Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/
WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0H
Amazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel
Okay, tonight we are up to Michle 1723. This one is one that is uh one of these like very uh straightforward psukim, and I'm hoping that we can get something uh subtle and nuanced and deep here. Uh, but it's gonna look pretty uh straightforward. Okay. Shochad mechik rasha yikach lahatos or wants to give that one a shot.
SPEAKER_07Yeah, go ahead, Isaac.
SPEAKER_06Yeah.
SPEAKER_07Um a bride and uh um like breath, lap.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, what was the how do you translate them the mem?
SPEAKER_07Um me from the uh which one was it? So you said lap.
SPEAKER_05That's also how I translated, but I guess the more uh proper one is a very I feel like an archaic term is bosom, but uh yeah.
SPEAKER_06Let's actually see why. Yeah.
SPEAKER_07Yeah. From the bosom of a Russia will be accepted. Uh yeah will be taken. Will be taken. Uh Lahat R of Michael the Ways of Justice.
SPEAKER_05Okay, good. Yeah. Okay. Anyone have a different translation for uh any of this? I think that is a good translation, but I think there's a there's an ambiguity here. Yeah, you'd see.
SPEAKER_09Um I think it's he will take, not will be taken.
SPEAKER_05Yes, he will take. Uh he will take, correct.
SPEAKER_09It's unclear who the he is, but it's yeah, yeah, okay, right.
SPEAKER_05Right. Okay, so um, yeah. Anyone else that wanna weigh in on a translation here? Okay. All right, so let's let's look at the details here. Okay, so um we there's no matistium, but the mobim says Mechik implies Bahatsnea, means um uh so from the from the bosom implies um like secretly or privately, uh, you know, uh secretly. Uh Kamo Bachit Utal Esagoral, uh, which is another puzzle commission. I don't know if we did that one. Uh fine. Okay, now Saidigon, uh so it's interesting here. So uh again, just to say background here. So Sidigon translated the Torah into Judeo-Arabic. Uh that's called the Tapsir. And then Ruf Kafik and Rev Amram Korah each wrote notes on it. So they like translated the terms back into Hebrew to show what he was trying to do. So the Kafak translation says, Ha Rusha Yikabil Hashoha Minha Chik. So the the evil, this is the Kafik version, the Russia um will accept the bribe from the bosom, kede lahatos orchos amishbad, in order to uh tilt the ways of justice. Okay, but then uh Rev Amram Korach says um this word is basroa. So he says from the bosom means from the sleeve, okay. Um uh sorry, from the sleeve, and then he adds in parentheses here, Kade La Hastyr Masehu, in order to conceal his his deed. Okay. So um for a while people have been asking me, like when I use uh, you know, I I try to not rely on AI to translate, except to just produce the original translation. Usually when I'm doing an article, I'll translate it all myself. But obviously, Judeo-Arabic, I don't know. So I uh I just for kicks just now, I tried um I opened up Claude in incognito mode. So it was not like knowing that I was asking about a Michelai Paso, and I asked it to translate from Judeo-Arabic. So it says the oppressor takes the bribe from the sleeve to remove the path in the oak of justice, and it decodes all the things. But then it says, and I found this interesting, a note on interpretation, taking a bribe from the sleeve is an Arabic idiom. Sleeves were traditionally used as pockets to conceal money, so this evokes a hidden slash under the table bribe. Um, so I was like, wow, that's pretty good. I didn't know that it would uh that, you know, first of all, I didn't know that Claude would use Judeo-Arabic because that's not really like a dialect that is, you know, widely spoken or anything like that. Um, and uh I do trust it, you know, uh when it says that it's an Arabic idiom because that exactly is what Sadigo and Amran Korok are doing. So uh who knew? So I'll just add that here. Claude says, um, what did it say? Said from taking a bride from the sleeve. I'm just gonna copy and paste this for future reference here. Um uh yeah, let's just do this here. Okay, yeah, taking abride from the sleeve is an Arabic idiom. Sleeves are just fine. Okay, okay, and then the Targum, I think, just says uh straight up translation, Shuhda Min Uba Yisav, which is just a straight trace straight translation. Uh Yisav Rashia, Limitsley Orcha Dina. The only thing he does is he makes this singular to pervert the way of justice. Um, or yeah, to to tilt the way of justice, okay, as opposed to plurals. Plural. Okay, fine. Okay, but we got, I'm just gonna move this upstairs here. Then we got art scroll that says, an evildoer will take a bribe from the lap and then in brackets of the giver to pervert the paths of justice. The Korean, we don't have a rehearsal on this. The Koran Tanakh says, A wicked man takes a bribe out of the bosom to pervert the ways of justice. And then altar, as he usually does, uh, says, bribe from his bosom the wicked man takes to tilt the paths of justice. So he preserves the order of the puzzle, okay? Uh uh that it starts off with a bribe from the bosom of Russia. Hold on, I think I accidentally deleted a footnote uh in the altar translation, which is important. 17. Uh, I could be missing it, mixing it up with something. Yep, I'm mixing it up with the puzzle. I'm doing for my morning message here. Never mind. And then our YouTube friend Peskin says, A bribe from the bosom, the wicked takes to till the paths of justice. Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and just copy all these into the chat uh because they all may prove to be handy. Um, and I'm gonna put these up here. Uh okay, what are our questions? Yeah, start with my dad.
SPEAKER_00So this is a question about how we do what we do here. Tilt to passive justice. Why the flowery language to say unj unjust.
SPEAKER_05Right, okay. So that's a that's a good question. And I I I I'm glad that you're asking it as a methodology question because I think it is an open question. Okay, namely, um what I guess is the implication of um to tilt uh the paths of justice, okay. Uh you know, is this just saying, you know, in order to commit an injustice uh and it's saying it in flowery language, sorry, flowery uh language, okay, because it's it's poetic, initially it's a poetic book, okay. Or um does this have a specific meaning that you know that that requires this phrasing, okay? Or there's a third possibility, which we talked about many times, which is that um that on one level of reading the Pasuk, um it could have said uh to pervert justice, um, but it used this you know, this uh unusual phrasing, this I guess elaborate phrase, ornate, uh what's the word I'm looking for? No, I was gonna say uh unusual phrasing, um, in order to encode an additional idea. Okay, and and bear with me, I I know some of you have heard me say this a lot, but I always want to go to the most um uh the first time I really appreciated this was the first peric, uh first pascanar peric. So uh actually I I can probably probably just pull up the document here. So Mishlay 171.
SPEAKER_06Uh oh, did I not save the special file? Hold on.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, Mishlay 17.1 says, Tov Paschareva Veshalva Bah mi bias mali zivche riv. So the plain translation is better a piece of dry or stale bread with tranquility in it than a house filled with uh literally, you know, offerings of strife. Okay. So almost all of the Pshat interpret uh, you know, Mefarshim say that this is talking about literal bread, you know, a dry piece of bread, and then a house filled with meat. Okay, so they kind of like ignore this weird phrase of uh, you know, or not weird phrase, but pashareva, which it means you know, dried bread. And then uh they also just say that uh zvachim uh offerings just means meat, because back then it was, you know, uh young people ate you know uh certain parts of the offerings. But Rashi says uh on this pasuk, uh we'll just look at our Rashi here. Rashi says on this pasuk, Tov Haya La Karish Barku La Ha Kharev es Irov Vahya Bishava me avaru me avero sehem Israel. Better for God to destroy. So he turns to the word chareva, which in the case of bread means like stale, and he uses it lahachriv to destroy. So better for God to destroy his city, and it will be at peace from the transgressions of Israel, me bayis malizifhriv, than a house meaning a temple filled with offerings of strife. They were offering uh offerings of Avodazar in his house. Now, clearly, according to our approach, this is not the Peshad, okay? But, you know, it is reasonable to assume that that Shlomo used this weird language in order to convey, to evoke based on Mikdash imagery. So that's what I mean when I say that this is uh when I say this third possibility here, that sometimes Shlomo uses a weird phrase because it's poetic, sometimes he uses a weird phrase because that's the only way to say the precise idea he wants. And sometimes on the basic level, he could have said it in a simpler way, but he uses weird language to encode different ideas uh on either an esoteric level or more. So that's the methodology for that question.
SPEAKER_06Okay, next question. Yeah, yeti.
SPEAKER_09Um, who is the person who's the yikov, but yeah, the person who's taking it?
SPEAKER_05Okay, that's gonna be a central question that we're gonna have to take a stance on whenever we interpret the possible. Okay, who is taking the bribe from whom and who is the Russia? Okay, in other words, a uh I let's see if there are only two possibilities here. A bribe from the bosom of the Russia he will take. Okay, so is this um let's just put this into uh a different meetings here, okay? Sorry, is this talking, is this uh talking is this sorry, is this saying um a a judge will take a bribe from an evil litigant? Okay, that's one. Or a judge uh wait, what's what what are the other ones here? Okay, bribe from the bosom of a Russia. Or uh an evil judge will take a bribe from a litigant. Okay, in other words, um the Russia is the judge. Okay. Are there other possibilities or are they only two?
SPEAKER_03Does it have to be a judge?
SPEAKER_05It does not have to be a judge, but uh the reason why I'm using judge here is a um uh I guess I'm using judge because I think shot is that it's uh it's uh justice, but it could be anyone who's in a position to be bribed, I guess, theoretically, or anyone who's uh has over overseeing any element of justice. Yeah. Okay, so we'll we'll keep yeah, yet see.
SPEAKER_09This is for another question.
SPEAKER_05Okay, sure. Yeah, we'll we'll if we if we have other readings of this, then we'll uh we'll add it to the list here. Yeah, other question.
SPEAKER_09Yeah, so number one, I was wondering, I don't know if this is just a Hebrew phrase of having Urchos Mishpat or Khos being plural instead of Orach Mishpat, or if there's something more to it.
SPEAKER_05Okay, that's a good question. Also, so you see that that that's why I was uh I kept the Targum here because he does make both of them singular here. Okay, so let's uh say here, let's actually ask this before my dad's question, which is what is the meaning of let's just say what is the meaning of Mishpat uh justice? This context. And I guess like is this uh talking about absolute justice or just any you know system of of rules? Um I guess let's sorry, let's is it talking about absolute justice or alaka or any system of of rules? I guess those are the three main uh possibilities here. And then um what is the meaning of paths of of Mishpat? Okay, and uh and is there any significance to the um the paths plural with Mishpat singular? Yeah. Uh okay, good. Uh also I want to add Rucheli's question that she asked when we were talking about the other question, which is um actually let's just ask this uh in the in the uh our our uh scenario question here. What is the decision-making scenario uh and the and what are its uh parameters? Okay, is this talking specifically about a uh you know court situation uh with a judge and litigants, or is it you know more figuratively anyone in a position to judge anything, or is it anyone presiding over any aspect of justice? So, for example, like a you know police officer is not um acting as a judge, but he is trying to enforce the law, you know, uh, or let's say like uh you know uh a postic. Yeah. Okay, yeah, Shifra.
SPEAKER_11Um what is the is there like a significance in like the hiddenness of the of the crime or the bribe?
SPEAKER_05Right, okay. So let's go with broad for the broadest form of the question, which is what does from the bosom imply, right? So if it's if it means, you know, if I guess if it's uh emphasizing the hiddenness, um is that just the typical way, sorry, is that just the typical way bribes are given? Or is that quality being highlighted for a specific, you know, reason? Okay, uh, and if so, what is that? I don't know how to say that. Yeah. Um and yeah, I guess that's the only possibility we did. We say another possibility about what the from the bosom implies, Malvum secretly, you know, Sidagon also seems to be doing that. All right, fine. All right, so we will it could be that there's another possibility with Inship's question. Yeah, Yeti.
SPEAKER_09Um, I think there's the Ariel question here. Uh, this is obvious, just like telling you something that happens, it's not even giving you a piece of advice, it's just describing what a bride is.
SPEAKER_05Right, okay, good, right. So not only uh is this already covered by the Torah, okay, right? Like this is already usar in the Torah, okay. But but our Pasuk isn't even like you know, saying anything about this, it's just pointing out the the the fact that this happens, okay. Uh so so what is this getting at? Yeah, this is even more obvious than the usual. I knew something was bothering me about this, but uh that's a good way to say it.
SPEAKER_04I I don't I don't know if it's that obvious.
SPEAKER_05Oh, okay, good, good. I'm glad you're here then. Yeah, Isaiah? Yeah, I um was like an show card maybe while you're thinking, I'm just gonna add here also uh into this decision making scenario, likewise, um is the bribe here a literal, you know, like bribey bribe, or or you know, uh are the parameters of bribe um you know more figurative? Uh right. So like for example, you know, if you give someone like uh you know giving someone an uh an ulterior motive uh or uh or incentive, you know. Yeah, Isaiah?
SPEAKER_07Yeah, okay. Uh what are the negative consequences that occur? Right. Are there negative consequences? I mean, right. I'm gonna put that we know what they are, but yeah.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, no, I'm gonna put that in the first question because I think that's that's part of what of yet what Yitzi's pointing out is missing here is like, what are the consequences here? Um yeah, uh Rokeli.
SPEAKER_03Um, also just adding to the first question, like maybe what's motivating the person who takes the bribe, because that's also missing.
SPEAKER_05Okay, yeah. So um I'm this is not a criticism of your question, but this is a time for me to launch into my uh Rabbi Moskowitz um methodology point here. So I went through uh, I think it was cyclical phases that the what would happen is I would only learn, you know, Rabbi Moskowitz would give Michlei Shear during the summer, and I would learn with him then. Uh, and then I would go and spend my year in Yeshiva and then be learning Michlei on my own. And for for a number of years, he had to, he would always like I would I would come back to him at the beginning of the summer, and I would always ask these questions about the motives and uh of the of the you know the players involved in the in the puzzle. And he would always say, Don't think about the motives, just think about the consequences, you know. Um, and I would say, like, what do you mean? Like Mishley is about psychology, you know, Bay Nona talks about the motives all the time, you know, and like a lot of the ideas we learn come from that. And um, I and and Ryan Moskowitz himself gives psychological explanations. But what I uh what I eventually got that he was uh telling me about was A, in decision making, like the motives often don't matter. Like the the decision itself has consequences. Not that the motive never matters, but the decisions uh the like the actions themselves have consequences. Um, and so he wanted me to focus on that. And then secondarily, from a methodology standpoint, it is very easy to speculate about the motives and just like say, well, this is the motive, and then you come up with an idea based on the whole you know internal thought process that you've constructed. And it's not that those ideas are wrong, but like, you know, it's gonna be a more bottom-up approach if you start with just the the actions themselves and the decisions. Okay, so I'm asking this question, I think it is a good question, but I felt responsible to uh pass on that methodology point that Ryan Moswitz always uh corrected me with. Um, so the question is hold on, I'll put this over here. Is um what motives are involved in both parties here? Okay, and do they matter uh for our PUSOK? Uh for the idea, I guess. For the idea. Uh yeah, Ariel.
SPEAKER_04Um, yeah, what why what's unique about the Russia in this in this case? I mean, like you could take a bride from almost anyone.
SPEAKER_05That's a great question. Okay, good. That might be a candidate for um, I don't know if that if this is what you had in mind, but that might be a candidate for how this is not obvious.
SPEAKER_04Um yeah, that's yeah, that's good, good.
SPEAKER_05That's a good that's a good foothold. Okay. Um, so why? And again, that that's the okay, the uh just again, I don't know, a lot of methodology tonight is when you see a puzzle that looks obvious. The two strategies I find work the most are either lean into the obviousness, like try to define well, what is the obvious idea, and then push through it to try to find some new insight, or look for a foothold, look for something that is weird about the puzzle. I have my own weird thing that I have about this puzzle, uh, but that that's one I didn't see. So why specify Russia? Okay. Um, first of all, the um the the Torah's prohibitions uh uh about bribery apply regardless of who uh you know, I guess of what the uh the righteousness or wickedness of the parties involved are okay. Second, um you know, so many mishlayic consequences um occur regardless of of who they are. And then third, do we really want to limit an anti-bribery pussock? Sorry, bribery puzzlock, uh, more than necessary uh by tying it to a Russia? So that's the the kind of thing that's like ripe for an idea that Ariel, I'm sure, is bursting to say. Okay, yeah, uh.
SPEAKER_02Um, I don't know if this was asked already, or it's similar to um um what was being said before, but um is the Russia either taking or giving this bribe in order to tilt the ways of justice, or is his goal really to take a bribe or give a bribe? But then like because of that, um here's that.
SPEAKER_05Okay, good. I don't think that was asked. Um so the question is um more specifically, um how do we understand the to tilt the paths of justice? Okay, in other words, like is This um is this his intention, which by the way is different than Racheli's question about the motive, meaning, like, is he actually trying to tilt justice, whatever that means? You know, and he can have motives for doing that, but is he trying to do that? Or is this, you know, is this, I guess, uh result so inevitable that it can be described as, you know, as if uh as as if it's uh you know what he's trying to do. Right. So again, like the example is um, you know, when when someone does something that is self-destructive and you say, you know, why are you shooting yourself in the foot? Like they'd say, what do you mean? I'm not, I don't want to shoot myself in the foot. Yeah, but you're doing something that is shooting yourself in the foot. So you can describe the motive if it's that uh uh you know, if it's that um, you know, uh what do you call it, automatic of a cause and effect. Okay, let's see. I uh uh no one's asked my question yet. Shochad, mechek, rasha, yikah, lahajas, oracos meshpad. I'll give you a hint. Uh there's something else that's weird about the puzzle in terms of the uh the way it's formulated, and it's not in the the uh the word choice. I feel like people pick up on it, but uh and you can see by the way, again, this is the uh uh I'll point out the phenomenon here, but you know, Alter and Peskin take note of this, and Artskroll and Corinne uh avoid it. Yeah, uh we tell.
SPEAKER_02I don't know if this either was asked before about, but why is the aspect of the bosom? And I know we said like um kind of under the table, maybe it's to bring that out, but yeah, just a bribe from the Russia he will take to tilt the ways of justice, like why specifically that line?
SPEAKER_05Yeah. Um, I so is that is that the same as Schifra's question, which we expanded slightly. We asked what is from the bosom imply, and then Shiffra said if it's um you know, if it's talking about it's hidden, then that's just the way it goes, or are you asking something different?
SPEAKER_03Um, no, I think it's similar to that.
SPEAKER_05Okay, Ruckelly.
SPEAKER_03Um, just why doesn't it say he will take a bribe? Like it's weirdly set up.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, okay. So so I uh the way I would ask this question, that that is the thing I was noticing. The way I was saying it's like this, okay, is the the normal, I guess like all right, fine. The question is like, why phrase the pussook um with such weird syntax? Okay, and to say what the what's weird about it is the normal way to talk is to say that the subject is is to is is uh for the subject to be the Russia and the uh taking of the bribe to be uh the predicate, okay, meaning a Russia takes a bribe. Okay, that's like the way to say it, okay. Um uh or you could say, if you if the Russia is not the one who takes it, you know, uh someone takes a bribe from the Russia, okay? Um, but our Pusuk makes the the the bribe itself the subject, okay? Um a bribe from the lap, and then it predicates of that, like that's the the the you know, the I mean it's not I don't know if it's fully subject and predicate, but like a bribe from the lap, a Russia will take. Like, you know, it's like it why put the bribe first, right? What why why make the bribe front and center uh and the the real you know uh mishlaik actor uh secondary? It's just a weird phrasing. Yeah, okay. And that's the same uh split here that my uh for my dad's question, which is you know, you could say that this is just poetic, okay, and it really does mean that, or you could say, no, he needed to say this way to get across the idea, or you could say that it's uh you know a multi-layered uh thing. And if it's just poetic, it does not mean that it doesn't contribute to the idea, but like I would like to understand that if possible. Okay. Um, I feel like those are the main questions. I'm gonna start copying and pasting these into the chat. Um, I'm gonna go ahead and take the um I'll copy the whole thing one more time for those who came after we had the first copy. Uh I'm just gonna put in some English words here. Okay. Uh yeah, Shifra.
SPEAKER_11I have a question, but it's more of like a question for you about Michelet in general.
SPEAKER_08Sure, I love those.
SPEAKER_11Okay. So, like you read this and you assumed it was like, and this has to do with um, I don't remember which question. Oh, number two. Um, that this like where does this apply? But in general, when Michelet says like justice, because like I'm not a police officer and I feel like I deal with being a just person every day.
SPEAKER_08Right.
SPEAKER_11So, like, is it just like a Michlei thing that like this is talking about those specific situations, like police officer or judge or whatever, or yeah, did that question?
SPEAKER_05Yeah, yeah. So it's a fair question. Um, I assumed it was talking about it simply because like you hear something in Torah that talks about bribes and justice, and I think like just because the Torah makes such a big deal about that, then like my mind automatically goes to the people who are entrusted with implementing justice, which are the judges. But like, you know, you're right. Mishlei deals with, let me go to the mission statement of Mishle here. Um Mishleum bin David Melchizedra, this is first pasuk. Uh so the Proverbs of Solomon, son of David, king of Israel, king, uh yeah, king of Israel, Ladas Khmochma um Musar, uh, to know wisdom and discipline, Ribina, to understand statements of understanding, la kachas musur has killed to take uh intelligent musir, sedek umishbat u meshari, righteousness and justice and uprightness. So this trying to inculcate justice into you, and we do find ourselves in situations where we're dealing with justice all the time. So, like, I guess for me, uh there I guess there are equal possibilities now that you pointed out, but like, I don't know, my mind just went to judges first because that's such a prominent thing in the Torah. And I guess also, like, I don't know, Shalomo judge stuff. So I I uh uh were you asking like why I focused on that first, or were you asking uh yeah, did I answer your question?
SPEAKER_11I think I think you did answer my question.
SPEAKER_05Like, I was more asking just like if the word justice or like if the word mishpat in in Mishlay mean like means a specific situation, like judge or whatever, but yeah, you know, we didn't uh we I think it actually would probably be a good idea to define Mishpat, just have a working definition, which I'll give as soon as I finish with these uh succumb here. Um so the working definition of Mishpat, uh hold on just a second here. I can't do two things at once, apparently. Um there, and then and I'm gonna give the working definition before we uh um what do you call it? Before we do our thinking minute, just so everyone's on the same page. 10 and 11.
SPEAKER_03Uh Yeah, Rakhili, you have another question before I do the just back to the translation for a second.
SPEAKER_08Yeah.
SPEAKER_05Um, is it clear that it's a shochad from the Russia he will take and not um I knew there was another way to read this that I was forgetting um when Yeti asked his question. Let me just check out. Not that any of us know how to lane Mishle, but let's just see if the uh the Tamim have anything to say here. Um good call. Uh where are we? Shochad Mechek Russia Yikah. Okay, so it looks like it's actually the other way, right? A bribe from the lap, a Russia will take. Yeah. Okay, so that would be another way to say it, right? Hold on. Let's go. Yeah. Sorry, a shokad from the the Heik, a Russia will take. Okay. Um, yeah, that could be also. Yeah. Um, okay. Yeah, I knew there was some other reading that was bothering me. So good, good call. Yeah. Um, I I don't know which one's uh right, by the way. And I think from what I saw in the Mufarshim, then they're all uh uh you know, all of them are okay. Shipra, I assume your hand is left is raised from uh from your original question. Sorry, that's okay. That's okay. Uh okay, so just a elementary definition of Mishpat here. I'm gonna go to my favorite definitions. Hold on. In the Murihanavuchim, the last chapter. I'll go to the Goodman translation. We had him as a guest speaker on Sunday. Um, and this is the wrong chapter, so I will not go here. Hold on. Um, I will go here. Yeah, so in 353, Ram defines Chesed, Mishpat, and Sadakah, and uh he has a whole paragraph on Chesed, a whole paragraph on Sadaka. And in Mishpat, he just says very simply, Mishpat means justice at law, giving those judged the reward or retribution they deserve. So, what's interesting about this is that it is um is hold on. Uh so this is working definition of Mishpat is really the um uh implementation of I guess like uh this must be a fancy uh English word for this. Anyone who knows their legal terms here, like the it's not the sentencing, but it's the carrying out of the court sentence, okay? Whether for punishment, so for example, like a penalty or for uh reward, uh like you know, giving someone uh you know, so you know, I guess um uh giving someone the money they're owed. Yeah, Roqueli.
SPEAKER_03Um, do you also have a working definition of Russia?
SPEAKER_05I do have a mishlayc definition of Russia, so I'll I'll write that. Working Mishlayic definitions of Russia. Okay, so again, you've got the generic. Do we ask that as a question? Yeah, uh no, we just asked why specify Russia. Okay, fine. We it's implied here, right? So um so it could just be the uh there's three definitions I'm aware of. Okay, so there's the generic bad mishlayc actor. Okay, um, that's one. Oh, actually, sorry, there's gonna be four definitions. Okay, two is um is a like uh you know Baal Ma'as Ma'asim Raim. Okay, that's like uh you know someone who habitually engages in bad actions. Um three is our definition, which is um which is someone who imposes uh his own system onto the natural system uh which is geared toward his own um advancement. Okay, usually greatness or power, okay. Um so like uh you could say like uh alternatively within this definition, a a parasite on the system, uh uh you know, who wants nothing but his own power, his own his own uh elevation. Yeah. Okay. And then there's a fourth definition. What's the the definition when you're dealing with court cases? Anyone know?
SPEAKER_00Guilty word.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, can simply mean the guilty party. Okay, so meaning not any judgment about what their character is or or whatever. Yeah, that might also be another hint uh about Ariel's questions. I'm gonna post this in the chat. Okay, now we will take our real thinking minute measured starting now. Okay, Ariel, you are up. What is the non-obvious idea here?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, I I think I think this possible is you know teaching you how m um how fragile uh humans can be in in uh in rationalizing judgment.
SPEAKER_08Okay.
SPEAKER_04Um you know, and and I think that I think that the public is highly in that if if you if you're an individual who takes a bribe, well, like a let's take a normal bribe, you know, like a normal bribe, not necessarily a Russia, like you're already already you're already gonna be biased, you know, to the individual specifically, right? Yeah. Um not necessarily with what he stands for, but let's let's say he's just your friend or whatever, you know, like you just you take the bribe and like okay, you you you owe you owe something, you owe him something, you know. Yeah. That's just you know, psychology, you know. Right. But you know, now the question is let's say a Russia, you know, like you you take a bribe uh from Russia. And you you don't have to be a Russia to take a bribe from Russia. You can be like a totally neutral innocent guy, and and when you take a bribe from Russia, like something that you a value, uh, an individual who re represents a value system that you definitely do not stand for, yeah, you're gonna start questioning and and rationalizing why you did it. Right. You may not necessarily say, oh, because he's a good you can't you cannot say oh because he's a good guy or whatever, because you know he's a pretty bad guy. So why are you doing it? You must, you know, you must say that, you know, maybe it's not really a bad thing, it's not what he stands for isn't so um problematic. You know, you try to blur the lines, you gray, you gray it out a little bit, and you keep on pushing the line further and further and further. And um, and that and that's and that's where he's tilting Mashbot. Right. Okay, good. And and and I and you know, basically the idea is Walter White. I'm just gonna I'm just gonna stop there.
SPEAKER_05Yeah. Okay, so let me just state what is just to make this clear here. So what what would be the obvious idea, and then what is the could we just like like identify the kiddish here?
SPEAKER_04Yeah, taking a uh I to me I thought the obvious idea obvious idea was all right, you you taking a bribe is a bad thing. Okay. You'll feel indebted. But the but the kidd, but but this Pussik is talking about you're not just taking a bribe from someone, you're taking a bribe from what someone represents and how it can affect your internal internal value system.
SPEAKER_05Okay.
SPEAKER_04That's a very subtle, nuanced point.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, okay, good, good. So the obvious idea is that taking a bribe is a bad thing, and there are many, you know, uh consequences that are um you know that that don't discriminate uh between you know the who you take the bribe from.
SPEAKER_04And and I want to point out, um, I think to and I think to your question about how the Pussic is framed, like the subject plus the subject of the Pussic is is what was it? It was like uh uh what was it, the the bribe?
SPEAKER_05Yeah, the bribe from the bribe is being made as the subject, yeah.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, and I think that's that's the point. But but also um it's an and you even see this in secret, too. Like in secret, you could you could even tell yourself, well, yeah, but it's in secret, nobody will nobody will know. Okay, that's it. So maybe I won't even feel indebted to this guy. But the fact that you're taking it, you're still gonna question yourself, I think.
SPEAKER_05Okay, right. So so perhaps the in secret is is um is underscoring the fact that even if nobody ends up knowing about it, um, it still affects uh your mind because you know about it. Yeah, that's interesting. Um, could we just give I want to, I mean, I I'm not disagreeing with your Walter White example, but could we give an example, maybe more of an everyday example? Um, not necessarily everyday, like that one of us would encounter, but like a real-world example that really highlights the unique corruption of what happens when you take a bribe from Russia?
SPEAKER_04Politics.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, anyone could just jump in with a specific example.
SPEAKER_01Um, I have a thought.
SPEAKER_05Okay, go ahead.
SPEAKER_01So, you know how, like, for example, when you find uh something that someone lost, like an Avidal, right? And you want to return it. Uh so you know, usually you don't give too many uh details, right? You just say I found a silver necklace. If you lost a silver necklace, let me know. Blah, blah, blah.
SPEAKER_05Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Uh, somebody could just come to you and say, you know what, here's 200 bucks, let me just have the necklace. I I don't know if it's mine or you know, that's a kind of a you know, an everyday kind of thing that could happen. Someone could tell you, listen, I don't really know. I'm not sure if it's mine or here's the money. Let me just say it could be a thousand dollar necklace, right? But they're bribing you to get it, and you'll be like, Oh, okay, you know, maybe, maybe I would think about it.
SPEAKER_05Right. You know, if someone's really I think that's a good example because now the question is that's a normal case, and then what if what difference does it make if the person is a Russia, right? Because that's that's what Ariel's trying to highlight here, right? So both cases are bad, and both cases are gonna basically make you feel like the personal benefit that you get out of this thing is more important than the principles of justice that you're upholding, right? But with the case of a Russia, that's why I want to know what happens. What what what happens specifically with the Russia, you know? Um, yeah. And that's why I also I'm not sure, by the way, just to go back here, um, I would agree with you that uh keeping a lost object is wrong. I think it depends though on how much we want to lean into this idea, this definition of the Mishbah. That is this only talking about when you're carrying out a sentence, you know.
SPEAKER_01That was okay. So that was actually my thought, that it's actually not. I don't think that a bribe is only for judges, um, policemen, you know, things like that. I think anybody can be bribed, a lawyer who is uh, you know, site when you're signing a contract, things like that. A lot of different instances. And I think that the shop aspect comes into it where you might not be, you might be a good person, and there's this slippery slope of you do it once, and then suddenly the next time it becomes much easier and much easier, and and that's a pathway to lead to you becoming a shop, even if you're not.
SPEAKER_05Okay, that could be as well. Um, I have an example that um I haven't brought up in Michelin in a while, although uh this is like uh this is my go-to examples for for a good month, is after I watched that Jeffrey Epstein um documentary, then um like he really stands up in my mind as someone who was not just uh a you know uh uh guy with bad meetos, but like an actual Russia in terms of corrupting the system. So I think the difference is like this. Okay, let's say you have a guy who commits a crime and he deserves a certain you know uh jail sentence, okay? And let's say he's a normal guy, and let's say you are in a position to carry out that sentence, you're a judge or whatever, and you take a bribe and you let him go free. So that's bad because you are it's bad for the guy because he's not gonna learn from his lesson. It's bad for you because of the reasons that Ariel was saying that you're you're you know, you're uh elevating your own like personal gain over the, you know, your your responsibility as judge. It's bad for the society because now this guy's going out in the society. But there's something specifically bad when the guy is a Jeffrey Epstein, because then what you're doing, I think there is a part of you that feels like evil pays off. Like, like, like he won. Like this, you know, like like Jeffrey Epstein was going around just feeling like he could just do whatever he wanted without any consequences. And when you like um accept a bribe from him, and then you have you you you wrestle with that cognitive dissonance, part of you is gonna say, like, okay, that's just the way the world works. Like that Rashadim are just like they could they could get away with stuff, you know? And that is gonna really corrode your internal sense of justice. It's all those consequences from before, but even worse. Um, so yeah, I think that that's the kind of example I wanted. So accepting a bribe from a Jeffrey Epstein. Okay. Okay, let's go. I think that's a good idea, Ariel. All right. Uh Shiffer, did you have uh yeah, Shiffer, go ahead.
SPEAKER_11Okay, I thought my idea was very different from Ariel's, but your I think your example was like the like bridge the gap between Okay, yeah.
SPEAKER_05It could be we could use multiple the same example for multiple ideas.
SPEAKER_11Um not yeah, no. Um so my my my thought process was less of the fragility of humans and more of the fragility of like the system of justice itself. Like and that's kind of why like I guess I was thinking like even taking a bribe from some from someone who's known as a Russia, and you take the bribe in private, like even that act, because I feel like that's like the let the the kind of like the least impactful, because I I don't know how to explain this better, but like even taking a bribe from a Russia in private, um, like can entirely disrupt the system of Mishpat.
SPEAKER_05Yeah. Um okay, so I I I like the the duality here of is Lahatos Oracle Mishpat uh includ tilting the the ways of Mishpat in the mind or in the external reality here. Um so let's just think about this for a second here. Okay, so I get why we would emphasize the in private, because that's when you're gonna tell yourself that if it's open bribery, so then you're you're definitely corrupting the system because now no one has any trust in the system anymore. But if it's in private, so then maybe that's uh that's fine. That's how you're gonna rationalize. What I'm not getting is isn't it worse to take a bribe from a Russia? Sound like you were saying that it's it that like it's the least impactful to take a bribe in private from Russia. So the in private I get, but the Russia I'm not getting.
SPEAKER_11I think my like my intuition is before my actual understanding, but I think my understanding is starting to come that like maybe it's like the r like like taking a bribe from a Russia at least is some indication that like there is still a sense of justice, like there is still a Russia and not taking a bribe from someone who's just like a regular person.
SPEAKER_08Uh-huh.
SPEAKER_11Um, and so like you're kind of making the first step as like not a Russia, taking a bribe. Does that make sense?
SPEAKER_05Um, so I uh something glimmered when you said it, which is that like like the the the the bribe taker here is um is telling himself like I still know that this guy uh is a Russia, uh right? Uh as opposed to you know the the kind of bribe taker, uh like the kind of bribe taker that indiscriminately, you know, uh takes bribes and doesn't care about anything. Is that what you're trying to go for with the like the Russia, like you're still identifying the guys with the Russia?
SPEAKER_11Yeah, I think so. And I think it's also like that um it's not like the entire populace is like is committing bribery. Right.
SPEAKER_05And um yeah. Okay, so now the question is so what effect does this have on the system and and is that still via the mind, or is this gonna like, yeah, what what effect does this have on the system then?
SPEAKER_06It's not just a question for you, but anyone who's uh working on this right now on the system uh that is described as tilting the ways of Mishpat.
SPEAKER_05See, I'll tell you just I'm gonna throw this out here just because in case it helps anyone, um, even though it's not really helping your case, Shifra, is you know, the the famous halakha about the limits of bribery is that if I'm a judge and let's say like Shifra and Aryel come before me as litigants, and let's say I was going to rule in favor of Shifra anyway, and she doesn't know that though, and then she offers me a bribe. So I'm not even taking a bribe to change my judgment. I'm taking a bribe, but I'm just gonna make the same judgment as I was gonna do anyway. Even that is Usir. You know, to me, that's like the that's like the the fact that Khazal talked about that case, like that is the the um that shows you how the Torah is really not concerned, uh like the Torah is not just concerned with messing with rulings, the Torah is concerned with messing with the apparatus, you know, and even if the ruling wouldn't change, then it still is Usser. So that's why I think to me, the question of why specifically a Russia is still a pressing question. If we're trying to argue about like what is the like I I have a hard time saying that this is like the least case. I see what you're trying to do though, so I think there's hope there. But yeah, that's where I'm at. Yeah, Rakheli. Um, okay, a different approach, which Okay, so let's put Shiva's idea on the sideburner here, because I do think that that uh especially the fragility of the system idea about the Russia taking it in secret is really appealing to me. So let's put it on the side burner and and uh try to come back to it if something lights up. Yeah, Rakeli, go ahead.
SPEAKER_03Okay, I'm still kind of working it out.
SPEAKER_05Yeah.
SPEAKER_03Uh I'm thinking, okay, translating it that the Russia is the person taking the bribe.
SPEAKER_08Okay.
SPEAKER_03Um, so he's the kind of person who basically, like you said, like a parasite on the system who wants the system to be corrupted, but not entirely because he wants to benefit from it. Therefore, tilting the ways of justice implies sort of like a concealed version of corruption, maybe because it's not like complete perversion, but it's just a little bit in order for his benefit. Um, and therefore, he's careful to be private about it because it's just for him.
SPEAKER_05So okay, good. That is a good uh um a way to interpret the facts of the puzzlook and the uh the the area of decision making this is this is uh targeting. Okay, so let's just uh think this through here. That's why he's careful to do this in private. Okay, right. So, in other words, that's a good point, is that even the most corrupt official wants to keep his position. So he's not an anarchist. In fact, to the contrary, the people who are really mooching off the system are gonna want there to be law and order, but law and order that's tilted in their favor, right? Um, because of it, because otherwise they they lose their uh their their position, right? So so you know, this kind of person uh wants law and order, um uh as opposed to anarchy, um, but wants it tilted in his favor. Yeah. So that maybe then could we go one step further and say that a so okay, hold on a second here. I don't know if this will work out with my my uh my syntax question, but like like if you take a bribe with that mentality, then you are a Russia. In other words, it's defining it's not saying this is something that a Russia does, it's saying that if you do this, you are by definition a Russia.
SPEAKER_03Right.
SPEAKER_05That's okay, right. Yeah, okay. So this is a possibility for for this. Here is it's not saying this is something, I mean, it is something a Russia does, but uh this is something a Russia does, uh, because that's obvious. Rather, it's saying that if you do this, then by definition, you are a Russia because you're upholding the system, but bending it in your favor to keep or like grow uh your power, you know, uh and uh and and gain, right? Yeah, that's good. So that's interesting. So now the question is can we come up? Well, I'm I'm yeah, uh Yeti.
SPEAKER_02I just had kind of like a comment on that one. I was thinking something very similar, yeah. Um, that um, and it kind of goes in line with exactly what you're saying with the like classic idea of like a judge taking a bribe and not really changing the system. Um just that in like everyday life when people do like little things like hey, like it's not such a big deal, and in their minds they like really brush it off in like the privacy of their own mind that it's like okay, it's microluting, yeah. Right, like you like to say that reminds me just like a little like a little tilt, and it's like, no, like if you tilt your head even like see, it's still it's still straight, you know? Like that kind of imagery of like, okay, I'm taking and I'm twisting a little bit, it's fine, like it's just for me. And if I tilt my head also, or like if you close one eye type, then it's still all clean and good, you know. Yeah, like with that, like recognizing that it's it's much bigger than that, like you're tilting the system of Mishba, which is like a Russia. Um I don't think it makes you okay, immediately you're Russia, but that attribute like is that of a Russia, and like each time you do that, it turns you a little more into like who you are being.
SPEAKER_05Okay, yeah, that's actually a much more uh I that's a more moderate claim, which I would agree with here, is that um uh it's the Mida of a Russia, right? Um, so uh hold on a second, then uh you are partaking of the Mida of a Russia. Um I also just want to say that um this might answer Yitzi's question about why it's the paths of paths plural of justice singular, because if it said it perverts just paths, like path were each you know, many paths, each of which is justice. So, like, yeah, he knows he's doing that, like knows he's like he's perverting this little rule here, but like it does endanger the entirety of the uh of the system, yeah. Yitsi.
SPEAKER_09Um, this is a new idea. Okay, sure. Yeah, I like this idea though. This is a this is a good good approach, yeah. Go ahead. Yeah, um, based on your question of why Shochad is the center of the Pasuk, yeah. Wondering if this Pasuk is giving us like a litmus test to if something is a bribe or not. Speaking of a judge, uh let's let's say there's a litigant, so there's different interactions he can have with the judge. Um, so how does he know if a certain interaction or a favor he's doing for him is a bribe or not? Yeah. So the PASUC is telling us if you're someone who's if you're doing it in like a backhanded way, in a way that you don't want other people to notice, then you know you're not doing this out of the goodness of your heart, but rather in order to uh tilt the ways of justice.
SPEAKER_05Okay, that's that that's a good limits test. So the only thing that's missing from that idea is where does the uh Russia part fit in? And I think there's an easy answer, but I just wanted to pose the question.
SPEAKER_09Meaning on a simple level, maybe there's a more insightful explanation. Yeah, somebody who does this is now a Russia from the fact that you are giving somebody else a favor for the purpose of um ruining the system, getting what you want instead of the other person.
SPEAKER_05Okay, why Russia? Okay, so one idea is that um that it's it's calling uh you, the audience, uh a Russia. Okay, I think the other easy answer is that if it's from the guilty party, okay. I think that you're just going with the the uh the normal case of the uh and again, I I know I just got through saying that the Torah considers it a bribe, even if it's from uh uh even if you're being bribed to do what you're gonna do anyway, but like that is um like I think that's the Torah going above and beyond, like, you know, to protect the meeters of the of the judge. I think though for a litmus test purpose, like like if you're if you're going through all of these like like rationalizations, and at the end of the day, it's like, yeah, but this guy was guilty and you're making him not guilty, you know, like and it's amazing how people can like uh you know like rationalize it. But yeah, you're you're you do this underhanded and you're changing the verdict from a guy who's guilty to not guilty. Don't tell me this is not a bribe, you know. Uh, I think that's this is a good limit test. Yeah, I like that idea a lot. I think this is a good um, so I I mean I like all these other ideas. I think though, so far, not that it's a competition, so far though, I think this is the my the most satisfying like shot interpretation to me. Um uh like the the for uh as a candidate for an idea. And and it explains the the order of the puzzle. Yeah, okay, good. I like it. Um okay, anyone else have an idea? Now we'll dive into the mufarshim. I had an idea earlier today, but it it it it flitted out of my mind. Maybe it'll come back. Uh okay, let's look at the mufarshim here. So uh I did uh I don't remember Mutsu Stavid. I don't remember what he says. So he says, Harusha, this might just be shot. Harusha Yikakh Shokad Mechik Hanosein Bases Rav. So a Russia will oops sorry, a Russia will take a bribe from the bosom of the giver uh amid great uh you know secretiveness. Secretiveness. To um to uh make uh to I guess to vindicate vindicate him in judgment. Okay, so this he is taking firm stances here on the facts of the Pasuk. So the facts are um this is talking to a judge who is who accepts a bribe to vindicate someone who doesn't deserve it, and it's calling him a Russia. So now the question is what is the main idea slash khedesh here? Right, this is again the classic Mitsubishi David just spelling out the facts here, but is is is there something in the in the Monsudas David's uh words that points to a main idea or kidish? Ooh, I got one. I might be reading into it though.
SPEAKER_06Yeah, you see.
SPEAKER_09Uh I'm just noticing how he's making the rush of the judge. Yeah. Not the person who's giving it. So I'm wondering based off of that, if he's saying part of the evilness of the judge here is that he's getting the money, but he's also trying to preserve his reputation at the same time.
SPEAKER_05Interesting. Uh okay, so that's definitely a possibility here is that um since the focus is on the judge, perhaps, uh yeah, and he's being called a Russia, and he's being deemed a Russia, um, perhaps this is pointing out the the double uh you know, I guess the double uh wrongdoing of changing the din, changing the verdict, and attempting to cover it up so that he protects uh his reputation.
SPEAKER_04This sounds like a very obvious idea to me.
SPEAKER_05Yeah, it does. It does. Uh to me, the word that leaps out at me is laman in order to. And I think it's interesting because if you ask the judge why are you doing this, he'd say for the money, right? Or you'd say, like, I mean, he if you say, Why are you taking the money? He'd say in order to make this guy to vindicate this guy, right? But it's interesting, Laman hatos orchos mishpat l zakoso bedin. There's a double two here, you know. So I might be reading too much into this, but what I'm noticing here is that that ordinarily the way justice works is you look at the um at the person on trial, okay, and you see how uh you see what uh what the law says about this person, you know, like like how does he you know how do his actions what's the word I'm looking for here? What is the status of his actions in the eyes of the law? Okay, what this judge is doing is reversing it, okay? He's he's using his he's wielding the law, wielding the law in whatever way it takes in order to vindicate the guy, right? So in other words, like like he is, I mean, I know it says this, he is literally perverting the law, right? But in other words, I think that's the mistake, though, is like like in the judge's mind, he's just you know giving a particular verdict uh that is not what it should be. But in reality, he's he's relating to the entire law in a corrupt manner, you know, and it might be easier to like like think of it uh uh here's an uh I know uh I don't know how people feel about the FDA, but just imagine like the the perfect FDA, right? So let's say like an example is the purpose of the FDA is to certify uh that uh a food or food production you know system is is safe, right? Okay, so the normal process is you look at the thing you're judging through the eyes of the FDA laws, right? Uh and deem whether whether it is safe or not. But if a guy bribes you uh to to issue a ruling that his restaurant is uh is is safe, you're taking those those FDA laws and uh and uh warping them uh uh contrary to their purpose in order to use them to certify this guy, uh you know, to certify something not safe as safe. Okay. I don't know if that example helps anyone, but for me, it's like like I don't know, thinking about like law is very, very abstract, but but the FDA exists to make sure that things are being done safely. So if you're taking something unsafe and you're putting an FDA stamp on that, you're warping the entire system of the FDA in order to do something contrary to its purpose.
SPEAKER_10Yeah, Stephanie Um, I think it's also pointing out that doing this, like let's say you're doing something in secret and you're making somebody get away with something that's wrong, that's bad, right? But you're also creating another Russia in yourself. So you're letting the guy go free, and then in place of that, you become a Russia. Okay, and now there are two Russias. Okay, good.
SPEAKER_05I was wondering if he was if he was getting that point because he starts off by saying, Ha Russia, ikak shokat mecheka no sein besaver uh beses your ravann, hatos orcos mishpa, the zakoso, but then so he slipped in the other subject here, and and I was wondering, oh, there's two rushim here, but that's a good that's a good point here. Not only are you allowing this guy to continue as a Russia um by pronouncing him uh him uh innocent, uh, but you are are introducing another Russia uh into the system, uh, namely yourself. Okay, that's good. Okay, let's do Rabini Yonah. Uh so this now is Claude's translation, so I have not vetted this yet. Shochad mechek rusha yikah. So the Torah warns the judge not to take a bribe. So now the two now uh this is coming to uh to teach you, to make known that the giver of the bribe is also a Russia, because he knows that a shokad perverts the din and inclines the uh the ways of justice. So that's one interpretation. Gam Yesh L Farish, you could also explain Kih uh Kih.
SPEAKER_06I'm gonna look at my good rebellion. Hold on. I think that's a statement.
SPEAKER_05There should not be a hai vihanosain. Uh 1723.
SPEAKER_09Uh the hatoin.
SPEAKER_05Hatoin.
SPEAKER_09Yeah.
SPEAKER_05Hahayav the Hatoin. Oh, hahayvahatoin. Okay, let me just uh yeah, that that would make more sense. Let me just look here. Oh, interesting. Okay, so my good rebanyona adds words here. Okay, so Gun Yesh Le Farish. Um Russia Badin. Those are important words. Hold on. Russia Badin. Um Ki Hahev that telling Kiahaev
SPEAKER_09uh that toeen shekir yeah let's let me just uh okay another way to interpret this is that um uh kamish the farish as uh sorry as referring to uh one who is uh wicked in judgment kihachaev batoin chekar for one who is liable and one who makes a false claim uh darko lasay shochad um uh uh uh usually gives a bribe to tilt the ways of justice al cane therefore amar he said he has a bribe uh from the bosom of the liable uh lokia oso hashofe um a the the judge will take okay so is he um I don't know if he's giving when he says Gamiush Lafarish I don't know if he's giving a new idea I think he's just giving a new interpretation of the case um or sorry of the of the of the words in the puzzle here in other words the first is just to summarize here summary um according what am I saying uh first reading is that the giver of a bribe no matter who he is is wicked because he's the cause of perverting justice and then the second reading is that um that uh a judge who takes a bribe from the the libel party perverts j uh judge uh justice yeah yeti so I actually had an idea on each one of these Rebian parts um for the second one um I think the the word that pops out for the new idea is the word darko latte like his general way is to get where it's also kind of a litmus test kind of idea but somebody who is giving a bribe they are often going to be the one who is liable in court so someone can like it's kind of giving us like the practical things if you see someone giving a bribe don't think that oh you know they're just doing it for extra insurance really there right if they're giving the bribe that means there's something bad behind okay all right so it doesn't want otherwise yeah if you if you see someone give a bribe uh you can you can um reasonably infer that that he's he's uh he's liable right uh in other words uh don't talk it up to extra insurance uh even though that is possible but that's not that's not likely okay that's gonna that's good for the second one and the first one um yeah for the first one I think what the Havamina is meaning before the Pusuk a person could think is that I'm going to the judge I have a court case and I'm gonna give a bribe the judge is the one in power it's his court so if he decides to be evil he'll take it um or he'll do his job and not take it but I'm not doing anything wrong by offering it yeah I'm just like uh I'm not the one in the position of authority yeah the judge who's commanded in the Torah not to take a bribe but this is the Rabini on is coming to tell us that no by being the one to um to offer the bribe meaning even though you're not the one doing the bad act you're putting the other person in the situation where it will end up that justice gets distorted so you also become culpable for the entire process.
SPEAKER_05Yeah that's good uh I feel like people use that rationalization all the time right like uh like that that like the you know like there are there are positions where the the the chief harm is done by the person who is in the position of authority and you're like look man like it's it's your decision you know but like no you're putting him in that position and you're complicit in the perversion of the system yeah Rokelli um my question is when you say you can reasonably infer like to what end like because that would probably not be a legitimate way to decide that something no right not not to the point where you can uh judge the case on that because that's funny because that's also making decision based on the bribe just the other way around right but like um but uh you know uh it I it is a significant factor here in other words like like if a um I mean what's a good example I mean I I will always think about this example that like um again like you know uh in what one year before midterms when I was teaching Shall Havet like a student came up to me and just started saying Ramish Nameweiss your class is my favorite class and just like laying it on thick and I like immediately knew like okay what do you what do you want you know like now could it be that that that she was making like a legitimate request and was just like trying to be nice but yeah it could be but like if you're laying it on thick like you're you're you're you're you're trying to pull something and if you're trying to pull something then like the normal channel like you're not going through the normal channels. So like I'm on I'm on uh like it's a red flag let's put it that way it's like it's a red flag if someone is bribing. And again look there are cases where someone is just trying to like you know provide extra insurance um and you have to be aware that that's a possibility as well but like I in other words if someone offers I'm in a position to judge and someone offers a bribe I'm gonna scrutinize a lot more than I ordinarily would have I think yeah Rokeli.
SPEAKER_03I'm just curious then is there anything like halachically about or I don't know just like in this topic about that you are able to like kind of do a deeper analysis based on a bribe but in the opposite direction.
SPEAKER_05It's a good question. You know I've never seen that uh um I've never seen that uh when I think about the halachas of uh of judges and the synhedrin and the bribery stuff it doesn't come to mind but I I I do want to look into it. Uh if you remind me put it in the uh after party chat um yeah um okay uh I wanted to just highlight um another yeah yet I just had a question on that also uh Kelly said um about are you allowed would you be allowed to offer a bribe to see if the person would take it to scope with the other person would that be allowed or that would also not be allowed I think that's leaf naivere yeah yeah it'd be a good trick though right I mean yeah meaning but it is a good test of whether like somebody is I know or like I could see like a cop case going and like somebody's out undercover and offers them is like gotcha you know yeah right I mean look let me put it this way is I'm when I when when Ruquay was asking the question like I was answering it from the perspective of actual judges in Halakha who are like high of you know who are who this mitzvah uh applies to certainly in in real life like you know I I think you can make an argument that like put setting someone up for a a test you know is warranted in in in certain cases you know like uh I mean you know I I don't know what people actually do but like you know um you're hiring a babysitter and like when you leave a hundred dollar bill out on the on the thing like do they take it like you know uh like I I think that you know I don't think that's falling under the scope of ISR uh at least in terms of the of this iser. Yeah. I wanted to share with you an interpretation which I thought was really interesting and I haven't thought about yet but it goes back to the puzz about parenting okay um that was two psukim ago. Uh Yolid Xilatugolo Vloyismach avinaval uh that one who begets a fool uh that'll be a source of depression for him uh and the father of a of a low life will not rejoice okay so um who is this the Rifsheshis Bin Yitra Grondi so he's the one who uh tries to explain the flow of the Psukim he says like this I again I'll read the Hebrew because I didn't bet this yetam asher who mate deracha mishpat bagului when you see a guy who openly uh tilts the way of justice um like he you know he does it without trying to conceal it's nomar so in truth we say huha shokad asher kibel baseser we say that the that the the cause of this must definitely be a bribe that he received in secret cane nomar okay so I will have to analyze that in a second cane nomar me garam laksiel asher lok lokibel uh musur haab asher kirbil hochiko liasro so too we say what caused the fool who did not accept the discipline of his father who you know who was excessive in rebuking him and and punishing him uh uh what caused him to become a fool basically or to not accept the musir dovrhanistar something hidden who koach ivalta which is the the faculty or the capacity of his foolishness a shirbo which was in him mana mimenohatov uh withheld the good from him so uh the puzzle goes on at this he ode za he isn't loose la abus asherlohi shrutokasam because this is a he's not i would translate that as an excuse or justification uh the uh claude as a defense of fathers who were not negligent in their approof okay so let's just do the the the summary here right so he's saying like like if you see someone uh openly uh perverting uh justice you can assume uh it uh it began or originated uh in a bribe given in secret now i i don't think that's an unqualified claim here i think he means that like uh like if you see a judge for example who's just like you know just openly showing favoritism you know uh you know based on bribes I think he's saying that like don't assume that he just like started off that way assume that it started gradually in private and then now it's like gotten to the point where it's in open. Okay so so too if you see a a uh uh you know a Mishlaic seal um who didn't uh accept his father's um uh you know excess uh excessive is the wrong word like abundant uh you know uh discipline uh and uh chastisement you can assume that um that there is also a hidden cause namely his inner uh foolishness uh and then he says this is uh a a an excuse or defense or justification uh for fathers uh who do uh make an attempt uh a a a good attempt uh to discipline their sons so my question here is like like uh what's the the main idea like mishley isn't here to give excuses for for parents um like who and what is this for uh i've never seen a puzzle like this before uh you know and again i know he's not explaining the idea in the puzzle he's explaining why the puzzle is is saying this uh you know what what the flow is here but i just think it's an intriguing like you know uh an idea here it's like almost telling you how to be done the kopf's for for certain types of fathers I mean practically speaking let's just talk this out practically okay so like first of all practically speaking this category does exist okay like like genuinely good fathers who really do a a a uh uh you know a a valiant uh job raising their their kid but the kid turns out bad anyway you know like you know don't you know like you know even though in general kids turn out poorly because of bad parenting there are cases that that don't fit that mold. Uh and an example that I'm thinking of here this is not really um I wouldn't call this like a Michleik fool necessarily but um thinking of what was that one movie based on a true story um Steve Carell uh and Timothy Chalamet Beautiful Boy uh so this is a 2018 movie um it's about addiction and like in this movie um oh it's actually hold on this this is uh if anyone is a fan of The Office I think am I thinking of the right movie uh no thinking oh yeah Amy Ryan yeah yeah right so yeah so she and Steve Corral are both in this movie anyway so um like Timothy Chalamet plays this kid again based on true story who was like raised in a completely like good home with like loving parents you know good education wealth and all this stuff but like he he uh became an addict and uh and like got into all sorts of like bad trouble and like you know I I'm sure it's easy for for people to look at that from the outside and say like you know like why is your kid getting arrested for stealing or whatever I don't know what happens in the movie uh like you must be bad parents and like it's not necessarily the case that they were bad parents so it is a good way to be Don Lakov exclusive in certain cases.
SPEAKER_09Yeah yet yeah I'm not really sure about the parallel between the two cases because if somebody accepts a bribe given in secret and then perverts justice they're still culpable for the perversion of justice because they're the ones who accepted bribe that led them there. So how is this parallel to the parent case where the parent like the kid has an inner foolishness and the parent tried and like it didn't end up working.
SPEAKER_05I thought the direction he was going here is that like there must be something within the kid like I think I I don't know the uh I don't know Rafsheshis well enough to say this for sure but the when he says coach Ivalto, coach is usually being used by medieval johniman like the sense of like a you know some sort of like faculty you know uh you know some psych psychological disposition here you know so I I got the sense he's saying that like like the parent did his part but like sometimes the kid just has a penchant for mislaik foolishness that like no amount of good muster is really gonna like help you know um and so so in other words like you see the kid when when he was a kid it was hidden but then it grew and grew and grew and grew and now it's in the open so you automatically blame the parents but it's not really it's not really the parents it's not it's not the smoothest parallel but it's it's so showing how like the thing started off hidden and then now it's like totally taken over you know so I I guess if it's if the parallel is just limited to things start out in small ways and then get big then I see it but like oh no it seems like the the more we go into the parallel the more it seems to fall apart. Yeah well just just uh I said this really quickly but the goal of Sheshish Binyitka Girondi is twofold. He's trying to explain what the PuSuk is saying but he's also trying to provide like meaningful sequencing for the PUSOK. So for me the the the bar is lowered from that very like effort. So in other words what he's trying to do is like this is you're going through Michle and you're reading this and you're like okay so PUSIC21 is about um a uh a Russia sorry not about Russia about a uh uh bad parenting okay and then 22 is about um I think he said there it was about the uh another motive no that was being Yona but with the same idea is that like it's showing you another reason why you should make sure to to uh parent your kids well because if you don't then and you're and you're uh you're depressed it's gonna actually affect your physical health you know and then you're like wait why are we switching from there to bribes you know so hmm so well how does that work you know and so like that that's the that's where he's trying to to to approach this from that like like well like I see this judge that what who's this judge think he is like it's obvious that he's taking bribes like how did this ever come about and oh well he it started off in in in private he's trying to make a similar move for the uh uh for when you see like this blatant example of a of a poorly raised kid it's not necessarily a poorly raised kid though you know again I agree with you that it's not the smoothest thing but I'm trying to like be um to explain like the the the level of idea that he's trying to like get at here.
SPEAKER_09Gotcha.
SPEAKER_05Yeah okay I think this is a good stopping point for tonight because I didn't have any other uh ideas that I'd wanted to share from here. So let's just do a quick review. So we've got Ariel's idea where are we? Ariel's idea that this is talking specifically about the effects of it on the judge of accepting a bribe from a Russia. So all bribes distort your thinking but when you take it from a Russia like I think it's gonna be very hard to not chalk up oh this Russia won and that's gonna change your view of the relationship between Russia between evil and justice and that's going to really corrupt your mind in a way that's beyond like okay I'll let I'll give this guy a pass for now you know that's a real uh real corruption. Schiffer's idea which I still would like to uh explore a little bit more is about the fragility of the system of justice so not perverting justice in your mind but perverting justice like on the ground um and um and the question that we did not fully answer was why is this the chirish case right like I understand the secretiveness of it because you're you're telling yourself no one's gonna know but why is this the case? I still don't have an answer to this um if we think of one let's share it in the in the after party chat okay uh Racheli had this idea that um that it's talking about the Russia's the guy who takes the bribe and he tells himself like oh whatever like he tells himself he's not being like a Russia but if you are perverting justice for your own personal gain you that is the meita of a Russia. You're using a system to fuel your own self-advancement uh at the expense of the rest of the system. So like that is the meetup of a Russia. So don't tell yourself that you're not a Russia. You may not be a full-fledged Russia but you are engaging in the meta of Russia and that could blossom even further if you if you go into it more uh yitsi said the idea of the litmus test is how do you tell whether something is a bribe or not? Sorry, whether uh an interaction with a litigant is is a bribe like like maybe uh certainly give you money that's one thing but like you know there are more subtle ways of bribing. So if they are you know like doing something secret and perhaps if they are guilty, you know like if you if you know that they have guilt so then that is a bribe. Don't try to like and again the the the point here is that it's very easy if you're a judge to rationalize like tell yourself this is not a bribe because you don't want to face the cognitive dissonance of accepting bribes because then how can you be a good judge if you do that? So like this is just giving you two very clear limits tests. So uh you know I I think that's a good uh interpretation. Um to this david we said the idea here is that um on one level you are doing uh you're putting another Russia into the system by yourself being a judge who takes bribes. Second is that you're perverting the entire nature of justice of the the ways of justice is really the the we are all subordinate to justice and our verdict is an outcome of the laws of justice. But what you're doing is you're taking the entire system of laws and you're warping that to serve a verdict that you've already decided. So it's like defeating the entire purpose of the thing and and misusing it. And oh sorry I said the wrong idea first. Yeah 70's idea I think paired with the uh Yeti's original idea here is that that you're also doing uh uh an act of of of uh evil by trying to cover it up and protect your reputation of like masquerading as a good judge when really you're a judge who takes bribes. Rubane Yona had the idea here that um that the Taurus uh Michel is telling you that it's not only bad to accept a bribe but also to give a bribe and don't try to excuse yourself by saying oh it's the judge's decision. And also it's telling you how to to tell whether something is a uh whether someone is liable by the fact that they gave a bribe is that if they give a bribe, there is a good chance that they're trying to cover something up so you should be at the very least more you should scrutinize them more. And then you have the uh secondary idea from Sheshanyatok uh Girondi who says that um that even though we just got through Tupsukim talking about bad parenting leads to uh mishlately foolish kids and bad health outcomes if you see a situation like that you should know that there are some cases where it is something that is hidden in the kid that the father couldn't see and that's really what what ended up taking over and making uh his uh musir uh ineffective okay nice puzzle as uh as I hoped we got some nice khidushim here and uh looks like we have one two three four five such him left in the chapter so we're we're coming down the home stretch uh and home stretch of the year also right what week of the omir is this we're in the third week so yeah all right well I don't know when we're gonna end here but uh we'll see what we do. Uh okay uh thanks for coming and uh should be on for next week uh God willing. Uh okay Have a good uh good rest of the week. Bye. Thank you.