.jpg)
The Mishlei Podcast
The Mishlei Podcast
Mishlei 25:28 - Are YOU a Breached City Without a Wall? (Part 2)
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 25:28 - Are YOU a Breached City Without a Wall? (Part 2)
עִיר פְּרוּצָה אֵין חוֹמָה אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֵין מַעְצָר לְרוּחוֹ:
Length: 39 minutes
Synopsis: This morning (6/11/26), in our Morning Mishlei shiur, we continued our analysis of yesterday's pasuk. After reviewing and refining our understanding of yesterday's main peshat, we spent most of the rest of shiur on Saadia Gaon. This led us into a related-but-also-tangential discussion about methodology, some of which was not recorded. We concluded with the Meiri, which included more methodological reflections about teaching.
And with that, we have finished Chapter 25! I have now given shiur on every pasuk in Mishlei Chapters 10-25, and I can't wait to continue our journey, wherever we end up next!
---
מקורות:
משלי כה:כח
תרגום ופירוש רס"ג
מאירי
-----
The Torah content for this month has been sponsored by Meir Areman, l'zeicher nishmas Zelda bas Ziesel, his grandmother, whose yahrzeit is on the 21st of Sivan.
-----
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider supporting my work via Patreon, Venmo, Zelle, or PayPal — links below. Even a small contribution helps cover production costs and gives me the freedom to create more Torah content. To sponsor a day's or week's worth of content, or to inquire about tutoring or teaching, reach me at rabbischneeweiss at gmail. Thank you for listening, reading, and supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.
Patreon | [Venmo: @Matt-Schneeweiss] | [Zelle/PayPal: mattschneeweiss at gmail]
Substack | YouTube | YUTorah | Instagram
Podcasts: The Stoic Jew | Machshavah Lab | The Mishlei Podcast | Rambam Bekius | The Tefilah Podcast
Alrighty, day two on Michel 25-28. Uh, Ir Prutza in Homa Ishesher in Matsar Larucho. We translated it as a breached or broken city. Breached is probably the better one, without a wall, is a man without restraint for his either spirit, that's a literal translation, speech, emotions, temper. I think those are the four. Um, and uh yeah, okay, we'll do Sadiq on later. All right, our questions were very few. It's probably like the fewest questions we've ever had. Kruza and Enchoma are contradictory. If it has no wall, inchoma, it can't be breached. And if it's breached, then there must then then there must have been a wall. Um uh two, what's the relationship between the mushal and the nimshal? Especially given the fact that the normal purpose of a city wall is to prevent enemies from getting in, but in the nimshal, seemingly the person has nothing preventing things from getting out. Specifically, what are the ear of the prutza and inchoma? In the mushal, uh three. In the mushal, what why does the city not have a wall? Is it just not that kind of city, or is this a lapse in their strategic thinking, or does it not need a wall, or did they have it, but it was prutza, which I think we're assuming the last one. Four, what is or should be the Maatsar Lubrufo? Like, what does that look like? How does that work? Five, is Ish a generic term for a person and not limited to a specific archetype, or is this an archetype? Yeah.
SPEAKER_03Uh just uh you think line 15 today?
SPEAKER_00Am I what?
SPEAKER_03Are you going to line 15?
SPEAKER_00Yeah, did I uh yeah, okay, good, all right, good. Yeah, I just didn't check it. All right, that's fine. All right. Um yeah, we are going to line 15. All right. Um, okay, so our ideas yesterday were Ezra's was the main one, which is that um if you have a city with a wall, but there's a breach, then effectively it's like there is no wall in the sense that people can get in. The whole uh, you know, there there uh there's gotta be a term for this as well, that there are certain things where like the difference between 99% and 100% is purely quantitative, but this is qualitative, yeah, exactly. Right. Um, so too, the person who is lacking even restraint for a single emotion, even in a single instance, any foreign and false influences can potentially rush in and undo him. So the havamina is that if you're near perfect, but you occasionally lose your temper, so then yeah, you're 99% good. But Kamash Alan, no. Effectively, it's like he's defense defenseless because the temper issue can let in influences that cause as much wreckage as if you were otherwise not perfected, or they can um they can be disastrous from one instance, like with the Moshe Beno example. Uh, you can't just write these things off. Um, and then Ezra had theorized that it's possible that the one deficiency indicates that the other walls are not as secure. And we said, yeah, it's possible, but not necessary for the idea. Yeah, Moja.
SPEAKER_03Uh little question on the perfection doesn't seem to be like one single outer, like outer shelf armor. It seems to be the it would be perfection in the mushroom, it'd be multiple walls. So I guess I'm not understanding why one breach in one wall would lead to effects everywhere else. I just think that a person would be.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, it doesn't, it's not necessarily going to lead to effects in the other walls, but in terms of what the other walls are trying to prevent, then it will that one breach will let you in. Unless I'm misunderstanding the question. Right, I mean it just doesn't seem like you're you're let me just make sure I understand. You're asking on Ezra's possible side interpretation in the parentheses, or you're asking on the main idea. Um, the main idea, then I don't understand.
SPEAKER_03I think that's 99% perfected. I'm not having no understanding why one uh why one fault would undo it.
SPEAKER_00If it's 99% effect perfected, won't he have a lot of performance of means of resisting I mean he'll be better equipped, but it's not but it but at the end of the day, if he at the end of the day, Luke Skywalker destroyed the Death Star because there's that one port that if you fire into that one port, then it destroys the whole thing. Yeah, Ezra?
SPEAKER_01I mean, I think just to spell it out, yeah. There's like lots of areas where the Atari is to sort of get in. Yeah. And you need a wall bag everyone. So if you don't have one, I mean it's all exactly the same thing.
SPEAKER_04Right.
SPEAKER_01Solid can build up lots of walls of perfection, and now it's a break through each one. All it needs to break through its one. Right.
SPEAKER_00Exactly. Here's another example, and I see another example is Shell Hamelech, right? He was undone by that one decision about sparing Agog and the spoils of a Malik. You know, now if you had a king like Akash Verosh in that position, he'd probably make a lot more mistakes. So there are, in other words, I think what you're maybe what you're bothered by is it's not like the other defenses are doing nothing in one framework. But in the other framework, if anyone can get in, then it's almost as if you the other defenses were were worthless.
SPEAKER_03I mean, not insofar as how it affects you as a person, but how it affects the decisions you make.
SPEAKER_00Well, it could be both. Uh, it could be uh as a person, it could be in terms of the decisions you make, it could be in terms of one particular decision that has disastrous consequences. You know, uh it's not, I mean, that's kind of the point of the injoma or the breach, which is that who knows who you're gonna let in. Like, you know, if we're using our southern border, you know, example, could be that the people who you're letting in are even gonna help, maybe, but like, but one guy gets in who's like a terrorist or who's a uh, you know, like it could be you the point is that you don't know. Yeah, Isaac.
SPEAKER_02I'm noting that there's I think um there's points out that there's there's two ways of reading the first half of the PUSIC. Um either it's um two like I'd say adjectives of the mushroom, like two two descriptions, yeah. Or it's making a statement like earprusa is inchoma.
SPEAKER_00Ah, that's interesting. Yerprutza, just as an earprutza is uh in choma, or just as an ear that is prutza has no wall, right? So too then isher imatsuko and then look the other way.
SPEAKER_02The um that it's it's just it's really like two two facets of one description.
SPEAKER_00That was what I think someone we said that um the you what you said, maybe? Yeah, it's what I said about the right. Right, correct. Yeah. Mosha, does that clarify it?
SPEAKER_03Not what Isaac just said, but uh yeah, I think my Corbin unconsciously reading it that way.
SPEAKER_00Okay, yeah. Um, and then I added that um this is it's uh I think the strongest read of the Pusuk in this way is that Ruach is Gova Ruach or Ruach like as in cas, because those are the two emotions that can undo everything and that have unlimited damage capacities. Um uh not that it's not true of the other Bamidos, but I think your objection is more like solid with these other meetings. You know, again, like I use the example like gluttony. If you have gluttony, you know, it really is very circumscribed how much it's gonna harm you. And it's not gonna be that much, but something like this could could undo anything. Um and um what do you call it? Uh the mushroom of in oh, I this is Isaac saying that um hold on a second here. Oh, yeah, yeah. Is that manipulation, right? Is that uh it's not just that foreign influences can get in and cause harm. They can actually get in and hijack the entire decision-making, you know, apparatus. Um, and uh yeah. Okay. So then we had um Dovid's approach, which is the idea that in addition to the act the breach and the actual harm, there's also an insecurity that you don't know what could happen. That's true, but that's not a I don't think that's the primary shot. Okay, first idea I want to uh explore today is Sadjugon. So let's reread the Sadjugaon. Um, I didn't really prepare except for the Sadigon. Uh and prepare that either. I just read um the Sadigaon uh translation. Ukir prutza l'alohoma ka adam sh in sikum umaskana l rayono. Um, so just like a breached city with no walls, so is a person who has no finalization and conclusion to his thoughts. So Sadjugaon in his parish, which you don't have in the thing, says, Kumo Shakira. I'm gonna make this a little bit bigger. Oh whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa calm down. Okay. Um shakira l'olochoma, kola rota lika la yik nechnas, just as a wall without a wall, sorry, a city without a wall. Anyone who wants to enter can enter. But rota liteth meena yotte. This is interesting, and one who wants to leave can leave. So you are keeping people in also. Uh kah ish ha tahapuchos. So this is interesting. This is a um what they call a hafakpach, a fickle person. Okay. Um, so too is a uh, or or actually, I think you'll see this fickle. Sometimes ish tahakuchos could be a person who's deceptively like two-faced, but I don't think he means that here. You'll see Morelu Ruven Davar, Umokabla. I think this means Ruben teaches him something and he accepts it. Shimun Bhefko, Umokablo, and then Shimon teaches him the opposite and he accepts it. In Mavorar et'lo, low cane below lav. Um and there's no, there's nothing clear for him, uh, either uh yes or no. Okay, I mean there's let's see what Tabic says. Uh that kind of personal yeah, of the um the sieve and the strainer and the colander and the sponge.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_00Right, that the sponge absorbs everything, right? And like I think that people think that that's the good one. Like, oh, your your your mind's like a sponge. No, uh, you know, um, but uh uh it's bad to let it in everything, right? Um uh yeah, Totem says, uh, I mean um Kafka says Tugumiluli in kanovolavo roaring low. That's a little it's a proverb, right? His uh his yes and his no aren't clear to him, right? Uh yeah, um I want to pause this for one second here. Uh okay. Um and then he brings up Shal. He says, Um, Kvarya Data Al-Shal, which is this is this again, I I wish uh Ariel was here, uh so I can like you know see if he weighs in. I know enough to know that he did have a very inconsistent way of relating to the David. Like sometimes he'd be like, You're my favorite person in the world, and sometimes he'd be like, I'm gonna kill you, you know, and uh and and it was not a it wasn't uh um like just one-time change. I think it like went back and forth. Um Vititkya B Inyano im Yurmia. Okay, I uh regrettably, even though Malachin base is something that I do have more knowledge of, I'm not familiar with uh with what he's talking about here. This is an interesting statement. I don't know what he means. He just throws that in there. Uh I don't know if that means uh and we in uh over an extended period of time in our affairs with Hashem. So just as um Shaol was inconsistent in what he accepted from or or how he related to David and Sitya in relation to your mouth, so with us and Hashem, the Hakomaguna, all of it's bad. So what what what do you think he means there? I mean, I think his shot is good and uh is it's pretty clear, but what does he mean there about Hashem?
SPEAKER_01I think it just means we often just like go back and forth and review it, so we're like not.
SPEAKER_00So so that that's what that's what I initially thought as well. But everything else about his uh sorry, let me back up for a second here. Up until he gave the examples, I thought that it was a and based on his translation, I thought it was about what ideas he accepted, right? But then with the Shaol and then the Shaol and Sitkia, because I don't know the facts as much, then it might be it might still be that. In other words, like like trusting David entire completely as like a trusted advisor versus being suspicious of him. But then with so if you transfer that to Hashem, then the emphasis is not so much on the consistency of our Avodas Hashem. Like I want to see, is there a way to interpret it as what we get from Hashem, you know?
SPEAKER_01Right. I would thought about the same thing as ideas, but his first two examples I also don't have. Yeah, I'm not sure.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I'm not sure.
SPEAKER_03The only thing that I can think of is uh golf of their chosen where it's it's not necessarily ideas, but insofar as they were they didn't recognize their sins after being, you know, uh like being uh like all these bad things from both the enemies and then recognizing the uh recognizing he's a god and repenting. And then afterward, you know, after when he's a case that they go back to the old ways, oh that's similar.
SPEAKER_00Uh yeah, I mean that that that would be that would be behavioral as well. I guess uh I think it's it's uh the same kind of question, right? Is that is that are we talking about our inconsistency in in obeying Hashem or in accepting uncritically what we get from Hashem? You know, I'm not sure. Um yeah.
SPEAKER_01What is the khidish?
SPEAKER_00Of the Pasuk? Yeah, let's let's stop and ask that. Uh also uh he didn't really um dwell on the uh harotze latses me menu se right, like someone who wants to leave can leave. He could have just omitted that and it would have been a cleaner mushal. So, like, uh do we have is that part of the nimshal as well?
SPEAKER_01Maybe once he hears Shimon saying he throws out Ruin.
SPEAKER_00Uh that could be also, right? Mean meaning the output of his ideas, right?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, meaning throwing discarding what was previously, which is right.
SPEAKER_00That could be, yeah. I mean, I I uh this is also um something that I'm wary about. Um, and I really do have to be judicious about this. That um I will usually only try to say stuff that I'm absolutely certain about. And if I am not certain, I'll mention that I'm not certain or I might be misremembering the source. But there are people who will not differentiate when they talk between different levels of certainty, uh, of whether they're sure that this is true or not, or this is accurate or not, and they'll just like let everything out. I think that'd be like the closest parallel to letting everything in uncritically. Yes, what's the kiddish? Yeah.
SPEAKER_03Maybe let's say he's referring to the opposite regard of um of letting asset influences in, but it is also as I could something uh as I'm in that's fairly it's not always going to result in a bad action. This is saying that you are your motions are under string.
SPEAKER_00Okay, that's interesting, also. Right.
SPEAKER_03And that it's it's one thing to um either ignore ideas or pull that a bad idea, but then to actually let that affect your decision scenario as a right, that's a good point, also.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, so the output could be in the uh the decision making, right? The the indiscriminate output, yeah. Yeah.
SPEAKER_02Actually about um the last part um the last thing about about enough to reach on the other thing from the channel. Um I think um I think you could um I guess we'll get the first part. Um it could be that it's also about like the like not just the ideas called like doing that gives him one like I don't think he's trying to decide what to do, but yeah, he's gonna do a show being he's gonna do b. So I think we know what we've seen we've seen, the same sort of like figure behavior with yeah, it could be.
SPEAKER_00I think I have another interpretation though that's much simpler is that that you know we accept uh our ideas and beliefs from Hashem, and we turn around and accept it from Baal and assume that Baal is God. Like we're not treating Hashem consistently because we're accepting things from other sources that are contradictory to what Hashem is saying, and we're just you know, and like that's Iliah who's uh you know, re uh rebuke is like if Hashem is God, go after him, if Baal is God, go after him. But the emphasis is not on decision making, it's on the contradiction.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, but yeah, uh weren't Skipia and both Shal both beings were by their advisors in contrast to the I don't know the Tsityahu case.
SPEAKER_00Uh Shal, yeah, Shal, that definitely happened. Yeah, right.
SPEAKER_03That that that okay, so yeah, I think that I think who like had a bunch of things was it five when he died around when he became I don't remember.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I think it could be when I think he let the Egyptians pass through Israel to see if I can get rid of orders.
SPEAKER_00I don't think that's Sitkyahu. I don't think that yeah. I could be wrong, but I don't think it's Sityahu. So yeah, things were already really, really bad. Like he was the last king, that much I know. Yeah, he was a puppet king, yeah. Yeah, yeah, looked like a Muppet, yeah. Okay, all right. Uh let's do the Miri, who I've not read yet. Uh it really starts on the last page of the thingy if you're following along there.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, more thought about that. Yeah. Um I think this is something that's oh we didn't say the kiddish yet, also, yeah. Yeah, I actually think this is something that really distinguishes Judaism from other religions. Because other religions because it's supposed to just like blindly accept the idea of like anything about the you know, we like have you know every year about like being very like I asked you like critical questions about the about the idea of the and not just blindly accepting. I think I think someone who has that method of finding acceptance will end up that's true.
SPEAKER_00That's good, that's a good point. That's a good point, yeah.
SPEAKER_02I think it's like about the the the acceptance, not about the fact that he's waffle.
SPEAKER_00Okay, right. Uh yeah, uh that's a good point. I I have to make a separate point on this um that I might want to write about this summer, but uh this is a good opportunity to say this. So I think there are gonna be people who hear this, okay, and object this and things like this, and say, like, you're you're engaging in a straw man argument, lumping all other religions into one category and saying that that is, I'm not saying you're doing that, I'm just saying, you know, and uh and then like painting them with broad strokes. Like, really, like Thomas Aquinas just uncritically accepted stuff. Like, no, he actually engaged in way more uh uh you know uh rational analysis of his faith-based religion, identifying contradictions and stuff like that. So, like, you know, and and you know, you you lumping Buddhists into this guy, you know, so people people will object and and say that you're we're we're just sitting here on our high horse, like assuming that everyone else is irrational and like not actually like bothering to like like you know discriminate. So the question is, A, are we doing that? And B, is that legitimate or not? Or what what do we make of that? So the answer is is yeah. So my my answer right now, my working answer is yes, we are doing that. Okay. There are people who do that who legitimately think that that is the case, and that everyone just accepts things based on faith, and that that's it, and they're all dumb and we're all smart, you know, and that is wrong because it's inaccurate. And it's also uh shortchanging yourself from actually understanding the nuances of stuff. And and I think the people who exemplify this the most are like who exemplify the the the counter to this. I mean again, I keep thinking of uh uh Rabbi Dr. Alan Brill, who is the authority on not only, you know, Hindu, the Jewish Orthodox Jewish academic authority on Hinduism, but also on the Trinity and on other religions. And like he's written books about this explaining the all the nuances of how it's not just, oh yeah, they just worship idols. Okay, so on the one hand, yes, it's a valid critique. On the other hand, Judaism itself in Tanakh and throughout the ages does have a tradition of polemicizing against other religions using inaccurate depictions of what they believe. And the best example of this is the way that the Naveam make fun of idols, okay? That the way that Avodazara is portrayed in Tanakh is as if the Ovde Avodazara think that their idols are living creatures that move, and then we mock them for thinking that, like, oh, you think that this idol is going to eat the food, you know, stuff like that. No Ovidvodazara actually believed that. What they believed is that there is some sort of spiritual connection between the idol and the god or whatever. And it was way more sophisticated than what we than what we see. Like, you know, uh, they have eyes and they don't see, they have ears and they don't hear. Yeah, the Ovid Vodasara would agree with that. No Ovidvota Zara thinks, no actual, maybe the kids or like the Amiharas do, but they don't think that their idol is like a living creature. But the thing is, is that there is a move of, you know, cole uh uh Litzanusa Assira Bharmi Litzanusa Devodus Kokaven, that all mockery is Usir except for mockery of Avodazara. And there is a move of of mocking and deriving in a straw man way those beliefs. And it serves two purposes. One is polemicizing in terms of people like developing a stigma around those. And the other is there is a truth to what you're saying that may not be as nuanced, but there is an un there's an uncritical acceptance of being uncritically accepting in other religions that may vary in its forms and degrees, but but I there is a truth there. So I just wanted to say that because I do think in especially in this yeshiva, just like like yo, I think we sometimes do this with other people's false beliefs that we disagree with. And Even if we're right that those are false beliefs, we do caricature them. And I think you need to be aware: are you caricaturing them, or do you actually think that it's as simplistic as you're saying it is? And you need to be discriminating about that. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01I think another point is that ultimately I guess they're too optionalistic for like someone like the coinist who believes in Christianity. Right. Like, do you think that he made an intellectual error and therefore believed in it? Or do you think the source of his error was an emotional error?
SPEAKER_00Right. And yeah.
SPEAKER_01If you think the source is an emotional error, then that's a much more leaving things not just based upon what makes sense. Right. Yeah. It's true. Explain that rationalize that. Yeah. Well ultimately the source of his error is an emotional one. Then I think that's a good thing.
SPEAKER_00Right, that's true. Right. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's that's an another example of what I meant when I said that there could be a kernel of truth that is that is true in the critique. Yeah. Another example, by the way, is like, and I I've called people out on this uh before, is we like the briskodera, right? But there are certain people who will just treat it as though anyone who does not use, not just the briskodera, our briskadera will treat it as though they're just bumbling idiots and they just learn halakha superficially. And I have to remind them, you know who Rebbe got Smeeka from? Ravmosha Feinstein. You know what he didn't use the briskotera? You know, like, and you know how many people there are in history who are Tamil Kahamim, who were actual Tamil de Khamim who didn't use the briskodera. And like, so to just say, oh, they learn halacha non-conceptually and just paint it with a broad brush. Like, I understand that you like the briskoderiff, and if you want to like like uh polemicize, but you need to know whether you are engaging in a straw man argument. So that's uh, and I think I I'm not uh as I was talking, I realized this is not just me giving an FYI. This is part of the idea. Like the uncritical, like, you know, uh uh like it there's an a lack of critical thinking in sometimes the way that we talk about other ideas. And again, it's not, and then here's what happens internally is like, let's say you start to say this. So then the the diehard zealots say, oh, so you believe that they're true? And that's another type of straw man, you know, like that's another type of thing where like, no, just because I'm saying that the Artomita Kamim don't use the briskodera does not mean that I'm saying that the briscodera is not, it's just like it's this this need for this like uh this simplicity, this like black and white thing. And I think it stems from an insecurity about your own ideas. If you're really insecure about your your if you're really secure about your your own ideas, you will be able to acknowledge that other people can be sophisticatedly wrong, but they're sophisticated or they're nuanced, or you can admit that you don't know the nuances of the other views. So I think that that's just an important like methodology, meta-methodology point.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, this was a wee-up call that I had when I went to Big Doll. Uh huh. I was like, you know, I was like, I I know everything before I even spend any any time. Yeah, I knew I knew everything. Yeah, um and boy, uh you know, and then people find different beliefs. I was like, they're they're they're like you know, are we like easily disprove it? Yeah, that was not the case. Yeah, right. Like you know, I think uh like very sophisticated things are much more fun out of the like the like reasoned positions that I did. Yeah.
SPEAKER_00Um, you know, you you might think that uh that that maybe I shouldn't have recorded this, but this part I'm not gonna record. Okay, we've gone far afield, but also not, yeah. Uh I recorded, but you want me to stop it again? Yeah, hold on a second here. Uh people are gonna wonder didn't you say you had 45 minutes and it's gonna be half an hour share? Okay, all right, let's do the meat eerie. Oh, well, the finish is now.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, uh you have to uh you have to um kind of do oh sorry, no go ahead. You have to have a wall in your mind for ideas so that you know you can question them at the ink before they before they enter into the okay.
SPEAKER_00That is true, but uh I I think I have a better fetish. Is I think this is a continuation of the last puzzle of a whole devash harbos lotov, kavod. Uh it fits in line with what you said and the way that the Miri took all the honey psukam, that there is a Havamina that when it comes to knowledge, the more the better, but that could lead to a certain uncritical, um, like a lack of critical thinking. And like one person who's actually very good at well, two, I think two people who are the best at exercising this, and I shouldn't say the best, two people who uh strike me as the best in conversing with them are Rabbi Moskowitz and then your dad. Because I feel like so with Rabbi Moskowitz, it's easier to talk about, is that you could say anything. And if you're a high school student saying a good idea, and if you're a Yeshiva student saying something in the name of Rebbe, if it doesn't make sense to Rabbi Moskowitz, he won't accept it. And if it makes sense to him, then he'll accept it. It does not matter who you're you'll say, but the Ramam says, and like it just doesn't matter to him. Like if the idea doesn't make sense, you know, and same thing is like your dad is very good, and for those who are listening to the recording, Joey Lifter is is uh is very good at like no matter how excited or authoritative or or like on the bandwagon and ideas, your dad will stop and ask questions about it and and not accept it uncritically unless he understands it and it makes sense to him. You know, like that's but like and again, I'm sure there are a lot of people like this, but it strikes me in conversation with him um that that's a quality here. So so I again I'm not I'm taking one step towards the khidish, which is that that um the last plus was talking about quantitative um unrestrained imbibing of honey will make you vomit. This is qualitative, you know, there's like good honey and poison honey, you know, like like that you you have to exercise uh a qualitative filter here uh and not just let it in other words, even if you're circumscribing the quantity in obedience to the last cause, you have to be very, very careful about what you let into your mind with the, even though it's knowledge, like like you don't just say, well, it's knowledge, I'm just gonna eat it all up, you know. And this is another, this is the mistake that people made when they thought that the internet is gonna change the world because it's gonna make all knowledge available to everyone. So on the one hand, that's good. On the other hand, it had a tremendous problem here because no one is critical and everything's out there, and then people just get into their own echo chambers. Um, and so that and that could happen in Torah also. And that's a unique, it's funny, that's a unique, I shouldn't say unique, like qualitatively unique, but it's a problem that has increased once we started writing down Torres Balpah, is when it started. And as every generation goes by, we have the benefit of having access to prior generations of thinkers, but we also have a tremendous amount of quantity. And everyone's just swimming around in the sea of emotion. And not emotional emotion, also, yeah. I mean, everyone is swimming around in a sea of emotion, but of information, you know, that like that allows them to just emotionally gravitate towards their own echo chambers within Judaism. You know, like I sometimes see, I'm not gonna turn off the recording for this. I sometimes see like what other what Svarim other people are learning. And their titles I haven't heard of. And I'm like, I realize I see there are people who like post about what svarim they they they they learn. I'm like, like, where's Rambaum? Where's Ramban? Where's Ibn Ezra? Where's like Rajba? Like, like just like all these, like, like, you know, and again, that not that that's bad, but it's like there's just so much out there that that like people can easily fall into their own their own corn corners of uh of the internet of Torres Balpah and uh Hashkafa, yeah.
SPEAKER_02And makes the sense of right about this when I was in Yeshi.
SPEAKER_00Yes, you want to learn everything. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_03It's like to learn everything, yeah, right, right.
SPEAKER_00Okay, I don't know if we got closer to the Kiddish, but uh I want to do the Miri, uh, who haven't seen yet. Okay. Um, Ir Prutza Venchuma, Hinchne Lashonas Binyan Akad. So they're two expressions for the same idea. I don't know if that means that they're just synonyms. Uh Matsar, Bukamat, Hatsadi, uh Kmo Matsor, Bakulam. Okay, that's why some of the Mufarj Max said matzor. But Indian Fsharlafarish, the rucho, lvaro. So rucho is could be for his speech. Uh kmo uvruch piv kolt of that's a good example. Bukol rucho yotiksil. The Xil expends all of his breath, which really means his speech, uh, or expresses. He's here, algili has sod. That's a different interpretation. Uh, it is uh warning us about revealing secrets. I just oh em benigla bahamonios, bholdavert, if in the nigla referring to like mundane things, and in the nistar in Chachmos, Uvgalui, Uvgili sodos, Hatora, Lemish Ano Roiland. Oh boy. Yeah, all right. I have thoughts about this. Um, okay, new thoughts. Uh Vish Lomar. Okay, I'll just say the thoughts. Um I really struggled, I struggle with this every time I teach Eov, but I struggle with this with Eov particularly, that like the Ramam holds that Eov is a book that is esoteric, and then the Rambam Mor Nivuchum is esoteric is esoteric, and then within the Mornivukim, there's esoteric ideas. And when I'm teaching it, I'm unpacking it all uh to the extent that I can. And I'm incomplient about it. I was talking with Rabbi Marouf um a couple of weeks ago, and um one of the things he reminded me is in an area where a person will not, or in a time or a uh circumstance where a person will only encounter what their Rebbe exposes them to, then the Rebbe must exercise extreme caution in revealing sodos to people who aren't ready. But we're not in that world anymore. We're in a world where, just to go back to what I was just saying, everything is out there on the internet. Okay. Um there are there's Khira out there on the internet, not just Detroit. People and people, high school students that I'm teaching are gonna go to college. They're gonna be exposed to the the most blatant forms of opticors ever, and and the most horrendous distortions of Torah ever. So that needs to be taken into account. And it may be that, and I'm not saying this is just a carte blanche, like do whatever you want. It may be, oh, and also they're not many of them are not gonna continue learning. So there may be a shift in that, in the same way that the Ramam says in the morning of Bukham, I'd rather say the truth and be hated by 10,000 fools if it uh enlightens one perplex man. I think the way the the stance that I have taken is that I will I will do that in my teaching of EOV and in other areas like that, again, not indiscriminately, but like I will cater my EOF curriculum, knowing that I'm gonna introduce a bunch of people who are might not be royal for ideas that they're not royal for, so that the students who can get value from this will get the value before it is too late in the sense that they're not gonna learn anymore. And like if I can help those people move them one step forward, then I'll then I'll then I'll uh I'll do that. And is it without risk? No, there is risk there. But I think that it is a almost an ace lasos scenario that we're facing with the average person who is just at the push of a button can just get false idea. Like there are no walls, like like the walls that we're talking about here in terms of critical acceptance, the walls that he's talking about, the Miri is exposure, right? I mean, there's there's critical acceptance as well, but exposure and there there is no restraint for what people can access. And I think that I think anyone who's teaching needs to take that into account, yeah.
SPEAKER_02Got it, yeah. Like you know, I think even if it's assumed, they they can still like think back on what they learned in that. Yes, and then get a deeper understanding.
SPEAKER_00Right. I tell myself that as well, and it's true, yeah.
SPEAKER_02You know, you know, two thousand years ago, they have to ask someone the this this you know, let's say why why did bad things happen to go to the world? Yeah, right, you know, and then have a conversation with someone who might have more specific.
SPEAKER_00Exactly.
SPEAKER_02Whereas now they'll Google why the bad things happen to go and then find they would even Google it.
SPEAKER_00Yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_02So, so exactly, yeah.
SPEAKER_00Right. Um, and the first I just want to also share the first example of this that I ever encountered, which is that for a while Rapesov was giving shear on the Khidusha A Gados in the Raj Rajpah. And the Rajpa, I forgot where, I forgot which midrash, he talks about, you know, basically a um a non-literal interpretation of Ghanaiden. Okay. And like I asked Rapesov one year that I was teaching 12th grade Homesh, Brezhis, I asked, like, you know, the Rush Raj was very clear that this is a so. Like, is this something that I should like not tell my students, you know? And he gave me this argument that, like, like it is better for them to hear that this approach exists because what's gonna happen? Well, one of two things. Either they are gonna encounter members of the Rama second group who are gonna deride and mock Torah for its stupid thing about a talking snake and like man being created 6,000 years ago, and then they're gonna reject Torah, uh, or group one, but I don't think they're gonna really care about me saying it's uh uh it's uh you know a mushle. But like, or they will encounter this idea anyway, but not under the auspices of someone who actually knows how to teach them the idea. And therefore, like ace lasos, I'm not saying we're pace like use that exact phrase, but like there's an ace lasos scenario where, like, like in the past, if you introduce this idea to someone and there was no way for them to get that idea, that and it's at the wrong stage, that could unseat them. You know, that could like like totally like shake their entire uh Imuna or whatever. In this case, chances are that's gonna happen in some form anyway. So better for me to introduce this to them at high school, again, responsibly and with risk, but like it's I think it's good to do that, yeah. No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that that it it it's a different calculus and you shouldn't be just indiscriminate. And there is such a thing as damaging someone by revealing a sode prematurely, either damaging them intellectually or psychologically. But but this is uh is an important factor that we need to take into account. Yeah. So again, same thing with the printing press, right? Is that if the only way to get certain ideas was from your Rebbe Balpay, then it's all on the Rebbe whether the you're exposed here. But if I am going to have access to reading the Mornivukim or the Romban sodos, and then and then I'm gonna, or let's say my students are gonna have access to that and they're gonna draw their own conclusions. And then you've got the Narboni who's gonna uh interpret the Mor Navukim and expose the secrets. So it's out there. And now the question is not, is my student gonna be exposed or not, but do I want to guide them or leave them on their own? That's like it's a different calculus. Um, okay, View Lafaresh Lurucho Tavasa. Some say ruho is for his taivas, which is like in our category of emotions, but taiva is more specific. Romas Banistar, the Hizar Mihemshaf, Achara Taivas Agufios, Yosh Midai. So in the Nistar, it's warning you uh not to be drawn after your taivos more than necessary. Um what's the khiddish there? Rak viatzorhahi. Okay, this is a common theme in the Mi'iri, only according to the need. And same thing in the nigla in all areas. Don't be drawn after Taiva. Okay, we we would have to ask what the uh uh khiddish is. He goes to his favorite mushal in Kohalas about the the small city with uh with and then the old uh king who's uh uh uh Zaki and Axel, and then the young Khacham, that whole thing. You should manage your affairs uh in line with uh moderation. Mishpat here means moderation, and not according to your tagas. Yeah, okay. There's a lot more to go here, but uh we'll stop here for now. Um, and with this, uh I am now I have now completed Giving Shear on every Pusuk and Mishlay from chapters 10 through 25. Uh and yeah, and I want to just pitch this this uh not pitch, I want to just remind you like the uh the atomic habits type, you do one Pussuk each week, or in my case, two Psukum each week, you know, it really adds up, you know, and like it's a lot of psukim. I gotta count them up, not manually, but with the AI, but like, but like there's a lot of psukim, and um and yeah, it's uh and again, it the what Ryan Moskwood says is true, is it really does not matter if you remember the ideas. I shouldn't say it doesn't matter, is the the most important thing is not that you remember the ideas, it's that if you see the idea clearly, it affects your soul. And it's the process of learning Michle every week, multiple times a week, but just once, that like it changes the way that you think and you make decisions and you you internalize the Michle, you become the Mishlei, you know. Um, and uh, and that's I think the the chief benefit here. So um next week I think we can have a Michlear unless there's something comes up that I uh that you know that prevents it, but uh uh we'll decide what we want to do there. Yeah. Okay. Thanks for uh joining the journey and contributing. Yeah.