.jpg)
The Mishlei Podcast
The Mishlei Podcast
Mishlei 17:20 - Crooked Hearts and Reversed Speech
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 17:20 - Crooked Hearts and Reversed Speech
עִקֶּשׁ לֵב לֹא יִמְצָא טוֹב וְנֶהְפָּךְ בִּלְשׁוֹנוֹ יִפּוֹל בְּרָעָה:
Length: 1 hour 23 minutes
Synopsis: This evening (3/16/26), in our Monday Night Mishlei shiur, we took up a pasuk that felt simultaneously generic and specific. We came up with good approaches, some complete and some on their way there, but then I hit a wall of exhaustion (due to a short, interrupted sleep the night before). We quickly had to deploy my own approach that I developed with my high school students earlier that day. Because my mind was zonked, I don't know if I got it out clearly. We did one more interpretation from the meforshim, then called it a night even without review. Still good Mishlei, even if it wasn't up to par.
-----
מקורות:
משלי יז:כ
תרגום כתובים
הואיל משה
פירוש רס"ג
מצודת דוד
-----
This week's Torah content is sponsored by Seth Speiser, in honor of the yahrzeit of his father, Rabbi George Speiser (Rav Yosef ben Dovid). Rabbi Speiser was a kind and gentle soul as well as an intellectual and a scholar. He received smicha from Rav Hutner at Chaim Berlin. His love for teaching and making puns was only outweighed by his love of family.
-----
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/
YUTorah: 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, we are on Mishlay 1720. And um, this is one of these. I got to come up with a nickname for them where like almost none of the Mafarshim say anything. Okay, so um the good news is I actually did work on this with a couple of my high schoolers this morning, and we did come up with a good uh interpretation, which usually I don't you know have time to prepare it, but uh usually this time I did. So we got something, uh, but we'll see what happens. Okay. Ikesh Liv Lo Yimsa Tov, the Nehpach Bilishono Yipul Bera. Oh, also I have to say, oops, I have to say that I am without my uh without my second monitor. So um if you put something in the chat, I will try to see it, but I am very bad with the chat when I only have one monitor. So uh yeah. Okay.
SPEAKER_04Who wants to try translating? Yeah, go ahead. You see.
SPEAKER_01Okay. Um, anyways, so one who is crooked of heart will not find good, and one who turns over um or is uh I guess yeah, I guess literally one who turns over his speech will fall into evil. Okay, fall into evil.
SPEAKER_03Okay, okay, so a couple comments here. One is that you correctly inserted a subject, um, which is a person. So literally, it is uh a crooked heart will not find good, right? Um, but I think uh it makes sense to say one who is a crooked of heart, right? Like it's describing a person. Um uh unless you're gonna say that ikesh has to qualify a person, or sorry, that ikesh lave itself is an adjective that has to qualify a person. I don't know, but all you're in a good company, I just wanted to point that out. Um and then uh yeah, so the first part I agree with. Second part, um, Nepach. So I think there is a more precise translation for Nepach. This is not wrong, it's just I think there's a more precise one.
SPEAKER_02Anyone try? No, is it like one who lets it say again?
SPEAKER_05Is it like one who lets us to be slash?
SPEAKER_03What's making you say that? You might be picking up on the on the thing. Okay, yeah, so it is stated in the I think it's stated in the nif all. Yeah, you get see?
SPEAKER_01Oh, I was gonna say it means like opposite.
SPEAKER_03Okay, that's also true, right, right. So so I would say like this. Um, yeah, let me just go with both of these here. So one is one who is reversed, I think is reversed is probably the more precise one, nehpach. Um, but we'll see that that's not even so simple. I'm just saying like it's the most literal, okay. Reversed in his speech, or one who is reversed, which I think is what you're saying about like turned around, like nahafou um in his speech. Um, and there's probably other translations. And then this is something that I happen to be um like harping on my eyov students for right now, is that um ra and ra in Hebrew, um, I think is uh more I find that like if you translate it into English, you're kind of forced to commit to a certain kind of bad. So, so like in Hebrew you could just say ra, but in English you have to say either evil or harm or badness or like you know corruption or um or or something like that. So I want to I want to keep it like a little bit um I don't want to say it has to mean evil. Okay, so we don't have uh Matustion, Sadugaon, we don't have someone to translate it for us, so I assume it's just literal. Targum says you could recognize anyone recognize uh Akim in Aramaic from a context that comes up once a year. I'll give you a hint. Suka.
unknownRight?
SPEAKER_03I think Akuma. Yeah, Akuma, yeah, Dophan Akuma is uh uh uh curved or um not curved. Uh I mean do we try how do you translate it in English? Crooked? Like a I thought crooked or bent. Yeah, crooked, I think is good, yeah. Crooked wall, right? Okay, so Mant Akim Lib, someone whose heart is crooked, lomashkach tafasa will not find good. And then here, I think he the targ is translating it like uh like Yitzi did. I don't know my Aramaic grammar, but I'm sure that means that he reverses his tongue, like he's the one who does it not, it is reversed. Um, so uh one who reverses or in his tongue, right? In his tongue, naff all bivishta falls into bad. Okay. Now the Hoyel Moshe does something that I like look as looked askance at. Um, and I don't like starting off with this approach, but I want to mention it. He says, Nepah Nirdaf li ikesh shalfanov. He says nepach is a synonym for ikesh. Okay, so nepach is a synonym for crooked. So he does not seem to learn that it's two different words. This is just like a classic case where Mishlay is saying the same thing but using different words. Yeah, uh, Yeti. I'm just wondering who the Hoyil Moshe is, Risho and Akro and Okay, so Hoyel Moshe is uh Moshe uh Moise Tedeschi or Moshe Hay Ashkenazi, who was a um not a student of Shadal, but a uh Ben Baez of Shadal and studied in Shadal's school. So he is like in the late 1800s. Um and he was an Italian grammarian. Um and a lot of his uh that's why he has a lot of like grammar grammatical interpretations, and he's Italian, so like does not fit into any neatly into any category, right? Like uh like you know, just like I like it. Um not a copyist, not a philosopher, uh, he's a thinker. Um, but yeah. Um, okay. Art Scroll says the perverse of heart will not find good. Um art scroll really likes women with perverse for E.K.H. I just don't like perverse because um I feel like it's uh weighted, uh it's a heavy term. Uh I feel it's like, especially in in today's society, using the word like pervert is not the same thing as like crooked, um, the way we use it. Uh Loyum Titov will not find good. The Nepakh Bilishono, one duplicitous duplicitous in his tongue. So someone who's like uh you know uh two-faced or or double-tongued um will fall into evil. Okay, uh there is no rehearsh. The Koran translation says he that has a crooked heart um finds no good, and he that has a perverse tongue falls into bishop. See, that that I guess supports uh the Hoyel Mosha's um contention that these are synonyms, because Arskle took one as perverse and Koran took another. Alter says a crooked man will come to no good. Uh, I don't know why, I mean, I guess he's just taking Ikesh Lathe as like a description of a person and just not touching the hard part, and the perverse of speech will fall into harm. Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and copy and paste all of this into the chat because I think all of them are good candidates here. Okay, so there's that. And then we've got these, and then I'm gonna move these upstairs. Uh yes, Racheli.
SPEAKER_08Um, I don't know if I'm like misreading this, but does it say the same thing twice in the parentheses? Oh, did I reversed in his speech or one who is reversed?
SPEAKER_03Oh, sorry, yeah, yeah. You're right. Um yeah, you're right. I tapped it twice. See, I'm keeping you on your toes now. Uh one who who reverses uh in his speech. So it's what the first one is is reversed, meaning it's nepah, it's uh passive, and the second one is is active or he's the subject doing it. He reverses in or with his speech.
SPEAKER_08Okay, thanks.
SPEAKER_03All right, thanks for pointing that out. Okay, questions and problems.
SPEAKER_12Yeah, Rokele.
SPEAKER_08Um, what's the difference between not finding good and like falling into evil?
SPEAKER_03Okay, so what uh let's actually broaden it just a bit. This will get to what you're saying, but what what are these two consequences? Um what is the difference? And then let's say also like why um why um state the first one as lack of a positive and the second as presence of a negative. Yeah, we talk, it worked.
SPEAKER_07Um, what are the two like halves or opposites of the pasuk? Like how are they opposite?
SPEAKER_03Yeah. How uh or let's just let's actually let's not assume that they're opposites because it's not so clear. Let's say what is the relationship uh between the two halves, and then we'll say if they're opposites, um opposites how, if they're not, what are they?
SPEAKER_07Yeah, also what does it mean exactly by like crooked of heart, like ek ekesh leave?
SPEAKER_03Right. What uh you want to actually I'm gonna type this in ekesh, ekesh like go sad sounds like pretty vague.
SPEAKER_07Like what are the specifics, I guess. Also, something I wanted to ask.
SPEAKER_03Uh sorry, what was it what do you say was vague?
SPEAKER_07I was just saying, like, let's say ye pull vira uh is like okay, like that's very vague, and also like crooked of heart, like somebody could be like crooked in one way, but then like totally fine in other ways. Like, is it like an entirely encompassing thing? Like an aspect right here.
SPEAKER_03Okay, so I actually want to divide those into two questions. I think the the the um the question about the generic um consequences, I think should be part of the consequence question. So, like um uh what's up with these extremely um generic consequences, right? Not very helpful um for a book that is supposed to make ideas real to the emotions um uh through like vivid particulars, right? That's like Savigon's uh approach to Michle is like you're you know you're supposed to describe it in detail to impress it upon the animal uh psyche. Okay. Then what is what is the definition of uh ikish live? Um uh ikish leave. Um it's uh like that also seems a bit generic.
SPEAKER_07Yeah, so not only are they generic, but they're also like pretty intense. Like what? They're they're gonna fall, they're like he'll come to no good, nothing good will ever happen to him ever. Like it's a little dramatic.
SPEAKER_03Yeah. So you know what's interesting? I I when I was talking about this with my high school students this morning, then um we had different intuitions. For me, like if you just had Loyim Satov, you won't find good, I would view that as dramatic. But for me, the juxtaposition to will fall into bad makes the first half seem like it is a lighter consequence. Like, like the first guy, he just won't find good. But the second guy is gonna fall into bad, you know. Um, so I guess like uh we'll put this here uh as as part of this part of this question uh as well, which is like um uh are we supposed to take um will not find good as an extreme um statement or is it meant or is it or the opposite? Um it's uh it's deliberately less than will fall into e into bad. Yeah. Okay, Rufki.
SPEAKER_10So my question was on the if allora. Um like I think like kind of like Avital's intuition that it feels just like a little bit um, you know, like what does that actually mean? And like I feel just the whole vagueness of it doesn't really lend to um, you know, what are we trying to learn from? Okay, like what is raw actually? And I think what you were saying about like to me, I think raw sounds worse than like that he won't find Tove.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, me too. Right. Yeah. Um, what does Ra mean in this context? And then like why fall? Yeah. Uh actually, you know what? I shouldn't say fall into. Fall in or into. I think it could be both. Meaning that you could, I think you can also read it that the ra is what will cause him to fall, uh, or he will fall into a situation of raw or into a care uh a quality of ra. Yeah, Isaiah? Okay, my question is a little bit like a little bit vague.
SPEAKER_05I feel like this pusuk. Not vaguer than the puzzle, yeah. Uh well, it's about that. The puzzle feels unexpected because like the person being crooked of heart or uh reversing of speech, whatever that means. Like I feel like he's doing he's like actively partaking in harm, like in harming. Sounds like he's harming. Yeah, he's like just like running into bad things instead of like I feel like usually pseudonym about people who are doing harm are usually like talking about active consequences that happen to them. Right.
SPEAKER_03Sorry, I I I just missed it. Uh who did you say sounds like it is doing active harm? Both.
SPEAKER_05Both someone who someone who definitely someone who is crooked of heart, but also someone like like you're not just like uh crooked of heart without like doing something crooked.
SPEAKER_03Oh, see that that's really see, that's really interesting. So I took it the exact opposite. I took it that that's interesting. Yeah, I took it that the second half, we know this is the guy in the second half is doing something because he's speaking. The first half, though, I was taking it as like if you're only crooked of heart, you know, then you just won't get good. But if in addition to that you are are Netpock Piloshono, then uh then that then you're gonna fall into bad. Uh and and the reason why I went in the other direction is because so it's funny because I also I also had the same inference as you is that the ekesh lave, the the crookedness of heart has to show up somehow, but the quality that the public is focusing on is not the actions, it's the it's the internal, you know.
SPEAKER_05I feel like that's interesting. I think the reason I thought ekesh was more like a positive is because it's such like a um a strong term, like at least in English, crooked of heart. Like right. People who are crooked don't just sit sit by, they like do bad things.
SPEAKER_03I guess I guess this will depend on what we mean by heart. Okay, so let's have I'm just gonna incorporate these observations into this question here. So it seems a bit generic. And then furthermore, are we supposed to view this guy as extremely uh bad and um and actively so? Or is this supposed to be you know less severe than the guy in the second half, uh because it's only in his heart as opposed to his actions or speech. Yeah.
SPEAKER_10Um, just quickly on that, I don't know if I missed this in translating it, but why are we saying only um heart and not mind?
SPEAKER_03Oh, good question, yeah. Um uh yeah. Yes, that is an important thing, right? So what um right, so let's actually ask that as its own question here. What what does live mean? Heart or mind in this context? Yeah. Uh yeah, Alex?
SPEAKER_06Um, I have the same question, but also in relation of crooked uh what was it? Uh reverse in speech. Why would these body parts specifically and also for someone who isn't a keshlev, is that like a natural state of someone they have to work against, or is that like a much like flaw that you can fall into? Like is it Okay, quality of person, or is it a trait?
SPEAKER_03Yeah. So that's an interesting question. Let me actually go with the first one first. So, first thing you just said, I just blanked. Give me one second, give me one second. I had it. Um say it again.
SPEAKER_06Um reverse of tongue, crooked of heart, why these body parts specifically. Oh, body parts, yeah. Yeah, that's right, right, right.
SPEAKER_03So um who uh yeah, what what what is a nephach belishono uh in this context? And then let's say, like, let's just put all the questions here. What is he doing? Okay, why you know is this described in the passive um for a reason? Um, and then like why the emphasis on tongue as opposed to other ways of expressing speech? So, like, you know, lips or mouth, or uh, or just use the words, you know, speech. Um uh yeah, and then the other question, um, I wanted to take that in a different oh yeah, and then and then hard, right? Um why focus on on live altogether? Yeah. And um, why am I not able to hold the question in my mind? Say this your second question again.
SPEAKER_06Um, is the um first of all.
SPEAKER_03Oh, yeah, quality from yeah, misleic uh yeah. So what oh, I know what I was gonna say about that. Okay, so so it's an interesting question. I don't believe that question has ever come up before. And it's possible that the reason why is because I think we always assume that all the mishlayc qualities are qualities that you can either develop or that maybe you're predisposed to, but you can also get out of. So I I think maybe the closest question would be like sometimes we have the question of you know, at what point does this bad characteristic uh like this bad action become a quality? Um so I guess the question is I'm just gonna cast a very, very large net here, which is um like how archetypal like okay so on the on the scale of Mishleyic archetype to particular defect, uh where is this? I uh that's not exactly what you're asking, but um, but I'm I'm I'm I do I I I do think that Michael also does assume that you can acquire or get rid of all character traits. So that's why I'm not asking it in that in that way, unless I'm misunderstanding your question.
SPEAKER_10No, that makes sense.
SPEAKER_03Okay. Uh Rifki.
SPEAKER_10So I think this is just a normal way of asking what you just asked, less complicated. But yeah, like the Mishlayic um characters in this, like, is this everyone? Is it a specific person? Like it seems specific, but you know, it's not like Tadik, Russia, whatever. So is that encompassed in what you just asked?
SPEAKER_03I think that's a different question. Um, which is no, I guess that is a more uh a similar way of asking the question. Like, yeah, are these yeah, um, did we talk about the two in a single question? No. All right, um Yeah, I think it is encompassing what I asked, but it is a similar way of saying it. Like, are these Misha archetypes? Yeah, Racheli.
SPEAKER_04Archetypes. Uh Racheli, are you having connectivity issues? Oh, there we go.
SPEAKER_08There we go. Okay. Um, forces just for three. Wait, can you hear me?
SPEAKER_04Yeah.
unknownOkay.
SPEAKER_08For three, did we say like we're translating it as passive?
SPEAKER_03Like we didn't say for sure. We just said that though it does appear to be passive, uh, but the targum did translate it as active. So we we can go both ways theoretically.
SPEAKER_08Okay, fine. Also, just another basic question is just like how do these actions slash intentions lead to the consequences?
SPEAKER_03Okay, good. Um, how do these qualities slash actions result in these consequences? Uh quen sis. Yeah, yeti.
SPEAKER_01Okay, I had three questions. Number one about the generalness of the PUSUC.
SPEAKER_04Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Um, uh on at least on the surface level, it just sounds like we're saying when you do things uh with trickery, so bad things happen to you, which just seems to be very basic Michelay ideas. Yeah, right.
SPEAKER_03Like what's the fiddish of the PUSU? Okay, good. So let me get that question down. So um I'm gonna put this in the uh RL slot. Um, this is obvious. Um, if you do something, sorry, if you uh if you use duplicity and trickery, uh you'll get consequences. Uh what's the fiddish? Yeah. Okay, second question.
SPEAKER_01Yeah. Oh, by the way, sorry, Ariel, for stealing your question.
SPEAKER_03It's okay. He didn't he didn't take it.
SPEAKER_01He thought it was so obvious that he even need to ask the question, but it's so obvious. Uh I got that. Okay. Um, number two, I think you alluded to this in the translation, but nahpach is like lashon nif al, which is passive. So I is ek sh leave the person's actively being ek shlave, then pach will show no. It sounds like something that almost happens to them without being the active party.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, that's interesting. Can you read Ikesh that way also?
SPEAKER_01Um, I think in I mean my Hebrew grammar skills don't go too far, but I think the when we have neakh like a neak kosh would mean like someone who who like kind of crookedness of heart happens to him.
SPEAKER_04Yeah.
SPEAKER_01So that nifa meaning you're the one being acted on instead of the one acting.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, right.
SPEAKER_01I think when you have the nun in the beginning, that like will apply to nepah. I don't know the exact structure of EK. Yeah, I don't know if it would be good, yeah. It's not, it doesn't have that like nun in the beginning that you're the one acted on instead of the actor.
SPEAKER_03Yeah. All right. So let's uh let's I I I have another example in my mind. Give me one second. Just give one second. I know, never mind. I don't know enough grammar. All right, so let me I'll just ask this as um I'll add this on here. Is this described as passive for a reason? And then if so, um why is the ekesh lev ekesh leve um active? Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, just like for an example of that, like if you say like ne echal, that means like is eating, but an oh is like the one who's doing the eating. Right. Um, and then the last question is in general, when we have tov and ra, it's like kind of it's like good and bad in terms of what? Like are we talking about subjective good and evil, or is it in terms of the person's intentions?
SPEAKER_03Okay, good. Also, uh good and bad in terms of what? Okay, good. Yeah, Stephanie.
SPEAKER_09Um, I just want to know if there are other places in Michlay where they use terms like raw and tove this generally, and if they do, is it can it be a catch-all meaning of multiple things ever, or is it always just pointing to a specific example that has to do with the person doing the act?
SPEAKER_03Right. So I'm not gonna do a search because I feel like that would be a really, really difficult search. But um, but um, but I do feel like it does show up every once in a while, and my memory impression is that we do learn it as warranted, meaning that it is Michel is talking about general bad or general good for a reason in those kind in those contexts. So I think that's good intuition. Yeah. Okay, uh, Rockele.
SPEAKER_08Um, just about translating ikesh, is there anyone who says it more in the sense of like confused or like yeah, confused rather?
SPEAKER_03You know what's funny? The um the puzzle that was quoted, the puzzle comes to my mind, but the puzzle that was quoted by the BDB is I don't know if this is gonna help, is in Hazino. Um Sheis Lo, Lobanab Mumam, Dor Ikesh Ufsatol, a generation that is twisted and crooked.
SPEAKER_08Um so could it be read like in sort of like an unintentional way, meaning like yeah, I'm not sure.
SPEAKER_03Um, I and that might be what uh uh Alex was getting at about like how uh intentional uh is this? I'll I'll attack that on to here is like like is Ikish um live the result of you know deliberate um corruption, or is this something that can happen uh to someone um uh like I know you're not using these terms, like against their will.
SPEAKER_08Um just like if it is, if it's only that it's like deliberate, and then the other one we're translating as um passive, it's just very interesting that like the first thing seems to the first consequence seems to be less bad than the second one.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, right. Uh did we ask why let's see. Um uh is it deliberately less than following? Yeah, yeah, right. Uh also, yeah, I guess um, and then I'll say uh and if the the first the first is supposed to be less severe uh than the second half, why? Yeah, Rufki.
SPEAKER_10So I'm not sure this was asked, but on the Lo Yimsa Tov, is that like objective, or is that like the I don't know if this is already going into an approach, but like is it literally he won't, or is it like in his own eye?
SPEAKER_03Yeah, so Yeti did mention that, but I forgot to write it. So is this uh objective good and bad or uh or relative to this person? Um, or subjective, yeah. Isaiah?
SPEAKER_05I thought for a second Ruth was still my question, but actually um also not sure if this is RDF, but is it always true that he doesn't find good or that he'll fall into Roth? Yeah, or is it like sometimes true?
SPEAKER_03Yeah, to what extent are these consequences true? You know, always or high probability, or sometimes. Yeah. Okay, I'm gonna import these questions into the chat for starters, and usually someone asks another question while I'm doing that. I'm also gonna do the uh entire thing because I cannot see if anyone came after I paste that into the chat. Okay, that's that. And then there is this. Uh okay, that worked. And then there is oh, I'm not gonna no, it's gonna, it's gonna over under, over under. Are we gonna make it? Is that a yes? Oh, we are 18 letter uh characters under the limit. We made it, but I just have to change the numbers. Okay, and then before we have our thinking minute, um I have a sponsorship to read from someone who is in the zoom room right now. Um, tonight's Mishleish year is sponsored by Seth Spiser, uh, in honor of the Yardsite of his father, Rabbi George Spiser, uh, reveal Seth bin David. So Seth um uh wanted to sponsor the shear, and then I said, Do you want to do uh do you want to say something about him? Um in the Mishlaic sense of, and I know there are people who do not know that this comes from Mishleigh, Zechar Tzadik Livracha, Vishim Roshai Mirkov. Uh, the mention of a tzadik or the recollection of a tzadik is for blessing, and the name of the wicked will rot. Now, if you remember, those of us who are the longtime Monday night mishleigh uh people, we started with chapter 10 in 2020, in September 2020. So this was the seventh puzzle that we did. So I don't remember what we said, but I'll tell you my my um recollection of the first half, which is that that like when you uh you know, the essence of a tzadik is um is their good qualities, you know, their chokma and their midos and their justice that they did. So so when you uh mention that or you bring that to mind, it perpetuates those same good qualities, and it is as if that tzadik is still having that effect on other people. Whereas the Russia lived in the world of fantasy, and so when he dies, then his identity rots because it was not rooted in anything like real or permanent. So the idea is that whenever you mention a tzadik, it perpetuates those same qualities. So I asked Seth if he wanted to add anything to the dedication. So he said um Rabbi Speiser was a gentle, a kind and gentle soul, as well as an intellectual and a scholar. He received smicha from Ruf Hudner at Heimberlin, which is extremely prestigious. Uh that that's a that's a good person to receive smicha from. And um his love for teaching and making puns was only outweighed by his love of family. I was gonna say that it's entirely a good profile until you got to the pun part. Yeah, but uh that's a controversial thing. But uh, you know, I I'm a fan of puns. But uh, you know, yeah, I know I know some people view that as as not not good, but yeah, uh I think I I think that's good. So that is the dedication of this year. And someone else, you know, in the Purim video this year, uh, when they were making fun of um of me, then they someone made a comment about like, yeah, what's up with people like making dedications? This is the real way to make dedications, is you want to promote the values of the person and the memory of the person uh who embody good values and like it's a useful thing to do for everybody. Everyone gains if everyone knows who you know who this person is, and the more we know, then the more we can gain. So um, thank you, Seth, for sponsoring uh the shear for tonight. And um uh it is a good zaher. Um okay, so let us take our thinking minutes and think. What is the subject of this puzzle? Okay. And you you could get that from just like what's the relationship between the two has, but I think it's very important to think about it in terms of in those terms.
SPEAKER_11Okay, let's start with Aryo. All right. Um I want to say that the subject of the PUSIC is you know, um, uh unintended consequences.
SPEAKER_03Just when I thought that the PUSIC wouldn't get more generic. No, I'm just kidding. No, unintended is important. I I agree with you, yeah. Yeah.
SPEAKER_11Um, you know, I and uh I I guess I'll go into my idea right now.
SPEAKER_03So uh let's start with the second half of the post-lick because before you go into your idea, I want to say you're already on a good track given last week, right? Didn't we have a PUSIC about unintended consequences last week?
SPEAKER_11Well, I I don't remember. I I just go with one puzzle at a time.
SPEAKER_03Good good call. Um I believe we did. All right, fine, but yeah, I I if that's true, then that's then that that that is good. But anyway, go ahead.
SPEAKER_11Okay, so I I I definitely remember in a Monday night shear while I was still in Ishiva, we were learning about uh a postk about being duplicitous. And in that pussock, I remember it being a lot more like intentional being duplicitous. Here, I don't I don't know. I I don't think this is being intentional. Okay, good. Yeah. I think that look, sometimes people and and and we I think we all fall into this trap. And and and I'm specifically dealing with the client right now. Uh-oh. You froze just a little bit. Say again, you're specifically what? I said I'm specifically dealing with the client right now. She's wavering back and forth every other week about wanting to sell her house or not wanting to sell her house. And it's drive it's driving everyone crazy. The attorney is everyone crazy. And she now got herself in a situation where, like, if she actually does change her mind for real, it's kind of like, okay, well, she's in contract right now, and now she she she could be held liable. So you're in a you're now in a situation where Ron now befalls you. But you're not necessarily intending on being trickery, it's just you're just saying conflicting uh contradictory uh statements, which which is not in line with what you really want to accomplish, which is going to result in uh in a negative consequence.
SPEAKER_03Right. Okay, good. Uh, not because you are trying to deliberately um take advantage of another person. I think that's a good distinction, and I think that would be a a sufficient reason why uh it's passive, right? Like it's it's yeah, okay, good. I I really like that step.
SPEAKER_11And the first step of the post, like um it's almost like if you have a crooked heart, I think that's just a like a distorted way of looking at you know uh of like what's what the good is, or like you know, uh a different outlook on reality versus reality itself. I don't think you'll ever find happiness. I don't think you'll ever find the good in reality. Oh he's so frozen.
SPEAKER_03I think it might be unless I'm frozen. Yep. Oh, there we go. Okay.
SPEAKER_11Um what was the last thing you heard?
SPEAKER_03Um you he has a distorted way of looking at reality.
SPEAKER_11Yeah, then then it's just not gonna be, it's just not going to, you know, if you if you if you have a uh you know um a crooked way of looking at the world, you're you're just never gonna find something that is gonna be in line with what you want because the what what you want is not in line with what's what actually is out there, and like you're never gonna find the good in that.
SPEAKER_03Okay. So now my question is, what is the relationship between the two?
SPEAKER_11So I think they're both saying that a crooked heart, it's interesting. It it um I I kind of want to take I kind of want to give this guy Don Lakoff's class. I don't I want to say that he's not necessarily a bad guy. You can have a crooked heart uh because you're misguided or because you're just not informed or whatever it is. So I think the relationship of the two have the postuk is, you know, um, you know, it's showing you two different ways of.
SPEAKER_03Maybe on my end. If if it's not going out for other people, uh, but it's gonna affect the recording if it's on my end, I think also. If I if I if I think if it works that way. Say it one more time. This guy is not necessarily a bad guy, but what?
SPEAKER_11Um sorry, I'm I just lost it. Um it if if it's right. So so in both in both um halves of the pasta, it's uh it's it's talking about um falling into a situation where like, you know, you're not intending on you know uh doing these things, but it's just kind of befalls me because you don't have the proper way of either looking at the world or you're just yeah, either you you don't have a proper way of just looking at the situation, either internally or externally. Okay.
SPEAKER_03You know, this really uh this really reminds me, I'm pretty sure this is this is in line with what we said last week. I should I have to check. Um I don't know if anyone else is getting that vibe. And I forgot whose idea. Um yeah, right. So we had um at least here in Stephanie's idea. No, wait, I mean the Stephanie said that also, but where was the Yeah, here we go. Rivki's idea. Um, so the positive last time was one who loves Pesha, one who loves crime or negligence or offense, whatever, loves strife, and one who raises his mouth deserves um seeks breaking. And um Rivke said, or we have had for Rivki here, both halves are about someone who's not cognizant of how their actions are affecting the people around them. Um first half is someone who loves Pesha, doesn't really realize that if they don't think oh, even if they don't think that they love strife, from the perspective of the people around them, they do, since their pesha always leads to strife. Um, and then the second half is when you raise the threshold of the door, even if your intention is not to cause pain to others by tripping them, then they're still gonna do that. Hold on a second here. I thought we had yeah, Ariel, you had ideas like this also about like I think a lot of us had ideas here about um about you have a certain quality that the intention is coming from something that's very different, but in action, you're doing something as bad as as uh you're gonna get you're gonna like provoke the consequences. So I'm just bringing this to show that this is a good support for Ariel's idea, that these are more examples of the of the same thing. Okay, good. I like this approach, Ariel. All right, uh, let's go to Stephanie.
SPEAKER_09Um, so I was looking at the words and seeing like the relationship between the two.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_09So I noticed that like being EK Shlave is a very it's a passive quality that you have. You're not like seeking out to do that. That's just some the way that you're thinking. And matzah is like something you're finding. So that's like an intentional looking for. So it's saying that you won't find good. Um, and the opposite for the other side is that where you're intentionally trying to like, you know, reverse speech, then you will fall into evil. So it's basically saying that if you come at things from like a distorted way, I don't have a clear idea of what that is exactly. You will in a complete opposite way go to the opposite extreme. So it's not like you're trying to find good, you're you're trying to fall into good by just being that type of person, but you won't even find good. And for the other one, you're, I don't know, I kind of lost it.
SPEAKER_03But okay. I actually I I don't know if my own prejudices made me mishear you, which is why I stopped typing. But the for the first half, EK Slav is a passive quality, and he's trying to do an active thing, and it's not gonna work. Second half, were you taking the nepok bi lashono as passive or as active?
SPEAKER_09Uh no, I'm saying that that's an active thing.
SPEAKER_03All right, so that's where my yeah, that's what uh okay. So um the uh Nepach Nepach uh bilishono uh is an active um uh form of distortion. Uh and he will, and then you're saying will fall is a passive thing.
SPEAKER_09Yeah, that like the complete opposite thing that he's trying to do is happening.
SPEAKER_03People are getting the opposite uh result of the way they uh do due to the way they are trying to engage the world.
SPEAKER_09Yeah, like to add on to that, it's like the thing that they're like the way they're thinking is upside down, so the results they have are also upside down.
SPEAKER_03Okay, so that's a really good observation. It's possible that this is gonna fit into the idea that I came up with with my high school students this morning, but I think it's a good step, it's a solid step. So uh we'll we'll just keep that here for now, sideburner. Okay, Rivki.
SPEAKER_10Um, I think Amy Tolerance.
SPEAKER_03Oh, sorry, I'll yeah, yeah, thanks. Yeah, don't have my second monitor, I can't see. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Yeah. Um, what I was thinking is kind of the inverse of what Stephanie was saying. Okay. That E.K. Shaliev is someone that's actively trying to be tricky and like they're trying to be tricky so that they get to a result. So because they're actively being tricky to get a result that they want, the Pustic is saying that they won't end up getting the thing that they want. Uh okay. Other hand, one who's in that pock will show no, which means like he's turned over in his speech. I was saying that sometimes in conversation or in like uh, you know, an argument or relationship when things can be tense, uh, it's just easier to say something that's not exactly the truth or to kind of not be completely honest, not because you're trying to lost you again. It's easier to just say it the way that things are.
SPEAKER_03I think the I think the internet is on on my end is unstable, but everyone's frozen right now. We'll see if I lose the connection. All right, I'm I think you're back. Start again.
SPEAKER_01Okay, where did we leave off?
SPEAKER_03Is turned over in a speech. That's all I got. Right.
SPEAKER_01So we're saying that's like kind of he's the one being acted on, that when sometimes in a conversation or a relationship in a 10 situation, a person isn't actively trying to lie, it's just that the easiest out in the situation is to not give the full truth, to start, you know, spinning things a little bit, not with like malicious intent per se, but just because a lot like saying not the full truth can be easier than telling the truth. So in that situation, the person's trying to avoid the negative, and the pasik is saying that he will end up falling into the negative that he's trying to avoid. So just to take a step back, the gay shlav is actively trying to find good with his crookedness, and with the passing, he won't find it, then Apach Bil Shono is kind of passively or like not even on purpose, trying to avoid evil, so the evil will come to him. So what the idea of the Pusik is is that no matter what our motivation for um doing the evil is or how active we feel like our decision to do it is, no matter what, it's not in the long term, it's not gonna end up accomplishing what we are trying to accomplish through it.
SPEAKER_03Okay, good. Uh no matter what our motivation is when engaging in these behaviors, um we'll get the Mishlayak uh Mita Kenegan Mida. Yeah. So you know what's funny about this? Uh I I I think of the two readings, um, I like Yitzis better. I'm still I have to wait till I say the idea that I came up with this morning with my students to see which one it matches up with. I I thought it matches up with Stephanie's, but now I'm seeing a commonality with Yeti's. So we'll we'll we'll see. But I think it's a good idea that Yeti said, though. Okay, uh Rifki.
SPEAKER_10Okay, so I think it's actually like more in line with like Yeti's approach, also, but I guess we'll see.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_10So I was thinking that the um first half to me, I think is worse, even though I think the second half sounds worse. And I think it's because the well, I'm seeing it kind of the the subject of the puzzle as like objective raw versus subjective raw. Like that's kind of the view that I'm taking. And I think in the first half, the person it says, like it literally says that they will not find good. And I don't think that that's an objective view of the world. I think that the way, I mean, it literally says like it's a perverse way of like living. Um, and it's because I think of like uh some deeply rooted, whatever you want to say, I think it works for like leave as heart or mind, that just the way that they see and interact in the world, it's just wrong. Right. And I think that's why they never find good. Whereas I think the second half of the puzzle is saying that like I don't think that the root of the person is crooked. Like I don't think that they're inherently going to get raw because like it's a midachneganda thing. Like I don't think that they necessarily deserve it in the way that we see the world running, but they happen to get themselves into those situations Oh no. I think he's gone.
SPEAKER_03Oh, we lost it. All right, I'm back. We'll see if it's still recording. Uh no, it's still recording. Okay, good. All right. So we were gonna have to do the whole thing over again. No. Uh I did not hear any of Rifki's idea other than objective raw versus subjective raw.
SPEAKER_10Okay, we're gonna go back. Uh hopefully it should be your fine now.
SPEAKER_03Okay.
SPEAKER_10Um, you're good. You can hear me.
SPEAKER_03I can. Who knows if it's gonna stay?
SPEAKER_10Okay, so I was basically just saying that the subject of the PUSUC is objective versus subjective raw. And the reason why I see that is because I think that the first half, it just seems like it's more deeply rooted within the person. That like literally the way that they see the world, whether that's I was saying like heart or mind, um, they just don't have an objective view. So every single thing that happens to them, they're not gonna find good. And I think that's why it literally says like him saw as opposed to, you know, get, right? It doesn't say, you know, receives. It literally says find. And I think that's why. So that's for the first half. And I think that in contrast to that, um, the the second person, I think this is where it's similar to Yitzi's idea. I don't think that the second person is like literally deserves that raw. Like I think that sometimes like it's a meak mida that, like, yeah, like if you, you know, murder someone without a purpose, right? Then like, that's gonna be bad and you're gonna get raw. But I don't see it that way. I think that this person, like, whether it's because they don't have like full control over their speech, or whether it's because they get anxious or stressed or whatever it might be, like, I don't think it matters what the reason is. They just can't control their speech. So therefore, it makes them have these negative situations, which is I don't see it as like an inherent evil, just more of like, you know, bad. Um, so yeah.
SPEAKER_03So that's kind of like Ariel's, right? Um like the like person is like engaging in duplicitous speech, not because they're trying to like take advantage of someone.
SPEAKER_10Yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_03So they're gonna get the consequences of it. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Did now I don't know if I understand what you mean by objective raw versus subjective raw.
SPEAKER_10So I guess like just the way I was seeing it. Let me just read the post and see if I can like put it inside. I guess the way I was seeing was that the will not find good makes it seem like it's that's the way it is. Like that to their mind is it's objective raw. But in reality, it's not actually like that.
SPEAKER_03Which is they're not getting what they want.
SPEAKER_10Yeah, they're just not getting what they want.
SPEAKER_03So it's it's subjective versus objective raw.
SPEAKER_10Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_03Because you said it in the order not of the box.
SPEAKER_10Yeah, the opposite way I was reading it. Yeah.
SPEAKER_03Okay. Yeah. Um, okay, let me think about this for a second.
SPEAKER_12I'm thinking I'm not frozen again.
SPEAKER_03Yeah. I I so I see the individual pieces. For some reason it's not clicking into place for the uh for the entire thing. So uh this is also very similar to what we came up with this morning. All right, you want I'm gonna can I put this on the sideburner also? Okay, uh we'll maybe maybe come back to it if we can uh if something uh uh clicks into place there. Okay, uh Abital, yellow hand, yeah.
SPEAKER_07Um my idea, I think, is a little similar to Rifkey's, um, but it's also a little different in terms of like who the PUSOK kind of is for.
SPEAKER_03Yeah. Oh, did we ask that? No. Okay, this is an important question. Hold on a second. Who is the intended audience of the PUSOK? And broadly speaking, there are two possibilities. Is this for someone who has or could develop these negative qualities? Okay, or is this for someone who is prone to be uh, you know, I guess who is interacting with such a person?
SPEAKER_07Yeah, so I kind of took the second approach.
SPEAKER_03Okay.
SPEAKER_07That I think somebody with a kind of twisted um like heart or mind. Um, and I was thinking honestly, like a little bit like whether you want to say like Iran, or whether you were talking about like people who have these like myths, just like really have been kind of twisted in what they know and think, let's say on college campuses or whatever it is, or have been brought to think certain things.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_07Um, so sometimes when they speak, they're gonna speak in a way that is at the end of the day, like that's what like caused them to speak in this sort of either duplicitous or like not like not like straightforward, like real kind of way. And I think for somebody who's trying to interact with them, sometimes you're you're um and sometimes whatever. There's a specific student that I'm I've been having some issues with that when she talks, she's like, it's almost like I'm like, I don't understand. Is she like not trying to tell me the truth all the like trying to not tell me the truth all the time? Like it can't be. Like, I really think kids are good. And like I started to realize I met her mom actually, which was what kind of clarified it.
SPEAKER_12Oh, that always happens.
SPEAKER_07Yeah, I was like, oh wow. But like in that way, they just have like certain things in their views which are really like kind of twisted, like they totally move away from anything that is like conflicting in any way, and they like kind of whatever, because of whatever worldview they have, like things get twisted, and the way that they talk sounds like they're trying to go around and behind your back. And they kind of are, but it's not because they're trying to do the second half of the pasuk, it's because of the first half. And sometimes when you're trying to like deal with um people that are talking this way, if you recognize that it's larger than just what they're trying to tell you, but that it has to do something with a worldview that's different, I think you could potentially have a lot more success in dealing with them or come up with different ways for yourself to deal with them to say, like, okay, this is not the type of situation where they're rational, I'm rational, we're on the same page, and we just have to kind of like that point where okay.
SPEAKER_03Can I just I I want to say something, which is that I think this is a good candidate for the whole moshes reading because he's saying that um, and I I didn't bring this out because it didn't occur to me. He's saying that the nepok is a synonym for crooked. I think according to him, this is all describing one person, not two people, right? So, in other words, the the so in other words, the symptom you're seeing is the twisting of speech, but it's coming from a twisted uh mindset. And the result is it's gonna be both that they're not gonna find good and they're gonna fall into bad.
SPEAKER_07Right, exactly. And I think they'll fall into bad also because they're not living in the proper upright world that of like things that are going on almost in that way, they're like not living in line with reality because of whatever twisted situation they have.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, okay, good. So, in other words, uh, this is addressing good, all right. Someone, this is a very, very good, different approach. This is addressing someone who is interacting uh with with uh such a person, and the mistake is to focus on the particular and think that that is the cause of what you're witnessing, uh, but in reality, it's their entire distorted uh mentality. You know, it's funny, uh, I didn't uh read this, but I just glanced at it. I just want to show you Sadjuagon. Uh Sadagon, he didn't say it's Iran, but it reminds me, he says, he says the uh this um crookedness um the og uh is like the crookedness uh of Sikon and Og. These are the kings in the uh the Benezer encountered when they were in the midbar. Uh Mila Sais Ma'avar Le Umma, um, which prevented them from giving um uh passage to the nation. Um uh the Hatahapuros Kaparov amo aseresmonim. Um and the duplicitousness is like Paro and his people uh 10 times. So I I don't know how Sahiko is learning the relationship between the two, but I think both of those are examples of what you're saying, right? I mean, I don't really know Sikon and Og why they didn't allow passage, but like certainly in Paro's case, any rational person would let the people go, right? Like after you know, maybe the first couple of plagues. But he was insistent on not accepting that Hashem is the god of the entire universe. And then Sikon and Og seems like a similar thing. And Iran also, like it is a distorted worldview about Israel. No rational actor would do something like this, but yeah, it's coming from this. I like that.
SPEAKER_07I'd say two more comments on that.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_07One is just um sometimes you come into contact with people who are like trying to almost deal with Iran in like a rational way, it based on the way that we see the world from here. But if you go in with the idea, like, oh, we don't care how many people die, at the end of the day, our goal is to like convert everyone and take over whatever it is, like it's a totally different perspective that you can't talk face to face and like it just doesn't totally doesn't work like that. And then the second thing also is just like practical for like people falling into this trap of having this in little ways is like a teacher told me that she wanted to tell a kid who she doesn't know how to basically deal with in class that like if you're dealing, she's that I thought of something to tell her today, like if you're if you're acting like right now is your recess time, then during recess time you'll have class time. And I said to her, like, okay, like that's pretty punitive. And like, what's I said to her, like, what's your goal in this? Like, what are you trying to achieve through this? She's like, Well, I want her to behave. And so, like, I told her, like, if you switch it from, oh, like she's bothering me to I want this kid to be able to succeed and build skills for the future, that it very much shifts. And it's like, right now you're making a choice and give her a little bit of like the reality of the choices that she has. Because, like, at the end of the day, you're not actually upset with this kid, or maybe you are, but like you don't the goal is really to help this kid improve and succeed. And in that way, like the whole perspective is off when it's not like that. Right. Because of that, her speech is much more um, it's honestly like against what she wants to actually do. I think she's yeah, that's good, right.
SPEAKER_03That that's that's a good uh example of uh applying this to the person who's struggling with this problem and not realizing it. That like, like, yeah, I mean that it's it's so much harder to diagnose it in yourself, though. Um yeah, like many things in Michel. Yeah, that's good. All right, Isaiah and then Rakeli, and then I'm gonna share my idea.
SPEAKER_05All right. Um, yeah. So the way I was thinking is again.
SPEAKER_04Oh no.
SPEAKER_05Um can you hear me?
SPEAKER_03I'm gonna keep talking and see what happens.
SPEAKER_05Oh, there we go.
SPEAKER_04Yeah, go ahead. All right.
SPEAKER_05Can you hear me now? Yeah, I can hear it. Um yeah, the way I was thinking about this, uh actually I need to change this one second. Because I can't see the buffets this way. Um okay, yeah. So I was thinking like maybe an EK slave is not is like maybe it's a person who is like uh sort of like psychologically crooked. Like he he he experiences like um reality in a way that his like his his perception is like distorted, I guess maybe emotionally or something because of his emotions or something like that. Um and so he attempts to like go about a normal life. Everyone is seeking good, but he never finds good because of this e case that you know exists within him. So like he's looking for good just like everyone else's, but he doesn't get to it. Yeah. And I think a Nab hoc the Shono is like someone who is it's like a similar case. S sometimes people like talk about things a certain way, they intend something, but like like um they're convict they're not internally like fully convicted of what they're saying. And so it'll flip sometimes, or like it'll come out that like really they felt a different way, or like like something something different will like come out of their mouth that they didn't mean to say. But like really like they had been saying talking in like a one-way for a long time, and then all of a sudden, like they're talking a different way about this thing. Um because they're not like they want a certain thing, like they say that they want something, but they're not inter internally convicted in it. Um and so that causes them to fall into raw because they were like going about a certain path. Um, but they couldn't like they couldn't hold it up and then it like resulted in bad consequences. Um yeah. So I think the relationship is yeah, I'm not sure exactly what the relationship is.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, okay. So this is also yeah, I I I I'm really curious what either I'm either the idea that that my students and I came up with is very universal, or it I'm very unclear on it because this also reminds me of that. Uh okay, I really want to share the idea. I'll I'll I'll hear everyone out first and then I'll I'll come back to this if need be. I do yeah, I do think this needs a unifier, but uh, it's very close. Yeah, Racheli.
SPEAKER_08Okay, so like A Vital, I think it's describing one person.
SPEAKER_03Okay, good.
SPEAKER_08Um, so I define crooked of mind.
SPEAKER_03And once again, I'm frozen. I don't know why this is happening, but I'll just keep talking until we unfreeze or until I get booted from Zoom again.
SPEAKER_08Oh no.
SPEAKER_12Oh, now I can hear you.
SPEAKER_08Okay. So I want to define someone um who is crooked of mind or heart as viewing um people instrumentally or like as a means of end. So basically, why will this cause someone to not find good? Because by having this perception of reality as everyone is a means to an end, you miss out on what's like actually good in life, like the objective good. Um, and you might think that you can still be materially successful through using people to your towards your own um end, or not necessarily materially, but like that kind of like shallow success. Um and then like eventually you'll just move on to other levels of success and good, but this mindset actually prevents you from ever going there, if that makes sense.
SPEAKER_03Okay, so I I I get the person you're talking about, but I don't see how hmm anything about it it connects to the next part.
SPEAKER_08Maybe it'll make it okay.
SPEAKER_03Go ahead. Oh, sorry, I thought that was a whole idea. Okay.
SPEAKER_08Okay, fine. And then okay, so for the second part, it's like the logical outgrowth of someone who views people um in this way because he or she just doesn't value um honest communication if there's a way of okay of negative, uh not negative, of like dishonest communication or reversing his speech in order to get what he wants from people, um, which leads to harm. I didn't figure out the last part so clearly, but are we frozen again?
SPEAKER_04Okay, you're back. Yeah.
SPEAKER_08Okay. Um yeah, the last part, I just like it's bad. I didn't work that out so clearly.
SPEAKER_03Okay. Yeah. Um yeah, I yeah, I think there is a there's definitely something here. Uh like uh uh the the personnel you're describing is real. I don't know. And I like the thing you're saying about it's not gonna, they're not gonna be using direct speech because they're just using speech as a way to manipulate people. Yeah. Not sure. Um you know, I also I I apologize, I should have said this at the very beginning. I apologize, I got a uh a very interrupted sleep last night. I don't know if I have the bandwidth to develop people's ideas um as I as much as I I I ordinarily uh am able to. So um, and I might have to end here a little bit early. So let me hear Seth, and then I'm gonna give you my idea, and then we will do one of the Mufars, and then we'll stop for today. Okay. And this uh um audio thing is also bothering me. Yeah, Seth, go ahead.
SPEAKER_00Okay, keeping it simple, I was gonna start the same way Isaiah did uh about um it being it's an internal thing, and his focus, his negative focus leads him to only find negative things and can't find good. So that's the simple part, but that's the internal going to an external. And what the Vinepach Lachonot in my mind is is somebody who goes back on his words, his words going back on it. He may, and some whether he realizes or not, some people do it intentionally, and some people don't even realize they tell one story here and another story there. But the result of going back on your words and not being consistent in your story or how you're speaking results in misery befalling him because he can't keep his story straight.
SPEAKER_03Okay. Uh, and that will lead to consequences uh because he can't keep his story straight. Okay, all right. I think this I think this is the idea that we came up with this morning. Okay, so let me let me talk about the idea that we came up with this morning and I'll see which aspects this uh this ties into. So, and and I'll tell you, it's gonna be hard for me to say the idea because when my my my my uh when my 11th graders first started saying this, I was thinking to myself, like, this is totally wrong. And then as we developed it, I was like, no, this is definitely like right, and this really, really uh it came together. So it's gonna maybe might take me a couple tries here. Okay, so I agree with Isaiah and Seth that um that this is talking a about a type of person. So the way my student said it is he said he he he described it as a person who is um is apathetic. Okay. And so we were like trying to figure out well, what do you mean by apathetic? And he said he's just not seeking um, he's not seeking good. And we said, you mean like someone who's depressed? And he's like, no, that's like an example of someone who does this, but it could be in any area there is a person who basically has, due to a distortion of the mind, has convinced himself that the good is unobtainable. Okay. Um and I'll give you examples in a little while. Okay, but then the second half is someone who is trying to um to uh convince others of a of a reality about himself, but since it's not true, then he's gonna fall into the problem that Seth described, which is he can't keep his story straight and he's gonna get caught in his own lies. And so we were saying, what is the connection between these two people? Um is that okay, now I'm losing it. Just give me one second. I'm gonna open my notes for this morning. Sorry, I gotta look at this. Um, I'm my mind is really starting to flag right now. Um what did I call it? Ninja?
SPEAKER_02Okay, let me look at these notes.
SPEAKER_03Uh okay, so this is I think our most refined version here. Okay, so so okay, first of all, what we just okay first thing we described is that there there are vicious cycles going on here, which is that the guy who is who is uh what my assumes calling apathetic is has convinced himself that he doesn't that that he can't get this good, and then that convinces him to not even put in the effort to try, and then that convinces him that he's right, that it's unattainable, and he just spirals downwards. And then similarly, the person who's trying to um to uh we we said he's reversed by his own speech, which means that he's basically talked himself into believing his own lies. And but because it's not true, then the consequences are gonna end up getting to him. So then we said, what's the relationship? Sorry, I gotta go through this. I'm really not thinking clearly tonight. I just have to go through this. What's the relationship between these two highly specific people? Um so oh hold on. Man, I just really hit a wall. All right, I'm gonna stop after this. Um but I want to get this idea out. Okay, let me try this. Both people have talked themselves into a certain belief about what's good for them and how to get it. First guy talked himself out of pursuing goods, and the second guy's talking himself into pursuing them in a specific way. So let's think about that for a second. So the I think I'll work with an example. There was an example of a person I know who in his youth was like a uh an athlete, okay? Like very athletic, did competitions, and then he, over the course between his 20s and his his uh 50s, I guess his 40s, he became extremely overweight, and he was Always talking about how he is like out of shape and how there's nothing he can do to get back into the way he he used to be. And then what he started doing is he's and so that was like this vicious cycle where he has convinced himself that he cannot be physically healthy anymore. Okay. But what happened is he started tracking his steps and then he kind of like gamified it and then got into this position where he would walk more and more and then he started losing weight. And then now he's like starting to be able to do physical activities again, you know. But the point was that he had convinced himself that there's no way to get this good. And insofar as he was locked into that mindset, then he was not going to find the good because he had convinced himself that it's impossible. Or there's another case where there are people who convince themselves that they don't like learning, you know, uh they don't like learning Torah or they don't like like school in general because they have not had good experiences. And they lock themselves into this narrative about, you know, I this is not good for me, or I can't get good out of this. And as long as they're locked in that narrative, they will not seek the good. The only way to break them out is to forcibly like break the narrative and to expose them to experiencing the good that they haven't had, and then they can get out of that. Or here's another example is um another, you know, I've over the years talked with certain people who suffer from depression. And one of the patterns is they withdraw into their room and they just remain there and they they convince themselves that there's nothing going on for them, no one, you know, they don't have friends or or or there's nothing good for them. And it becomes this vicious cycle where this good is just not available to me. And the way to get them out, obviously, if it's clinical depression, then they have to like seek professional help. But the way to break them out of that is if you force them out to spend time with their friends or to do things that they enjoy, like walking in nature or whatever it is, it reminds them, oh yeah, I can access this good, and then they can break out of that. Okay, so like that's the first half. Again, it's it's very similar to uh Seth and Isaiah in that it's an internal distortion where the person convinces themselves that they cannot get this good, and um and uh and and that that's what precludes them from getting the good. Um, okay, yes. Seth is writing in the chat that modern Hebrew for EKSh is stubborn, uncompromising, and transit, or opposite. Yeah, that was in my mind also, because I I know the word ekesh more from the Rishonim than from uh the Tanakh. And the Rishonim do use it as stubborn. So it is a kind of stubbornness. Okay, so that's the first half. Second half is uh we wanted to say it's someone who feels like he needs to lie in order to get a certain kind of good, but in doing so ends up buying into his own lie, and then that ends up creating problems. So let's say the classic example is you're not qualified for a certain task or a certain job, but you kind of like like fake it till you make it, but you talk yourself into it in an unhealthy way and start talking yourself into believing that you could do something you can't really do. Like either you don't have the skills or it's beyond you, or it's more than you can manage. And what's gonna happen is you're gonna keep, you know, developing that until you you end up falling into the consequences of that that you're trying to mask over with this lie, you know, or another crazy example is, you know, there are cult leaders who are deliberate manipulators, but then there are cult leaders who end up buying their own story and then actually believe that they are chosen by God and that they are like, you know, um, you'll have these like uh like like this grand destiny, and then they end up falling into this uh consequence, um, into the consequences of that lie. So what we said is, and then we this I thought was a good move is why does the public speak in generic terms? Not because the consequences are generic, but because this is not a Mishlayc problem that characterizes your entire personality. We want to say that this is something that you can have a mistake about in how you approach a specific good, or in terms of a specific way that you're you're you're um you're uh buying into your own lies. You know, in other words, like the the case of the health or the case of the knowledge is you know, school is not for me, or learning is not for me, that you are closing yourself off to a specific good, or you are like disposing yourself to falling into a specific bad because of your lies. So um so what's the subject of the puzzle? The sp the subject of the puzzle is self-deception. Um, in uh vis-a-vis a certain good. Let me just take this. Okay, is my approach is let me try typing this out now. Okay, the subject is self is is localized self-deception. Okay. Uh the first you know, the the the the guy in the first half uh convinces himself that uh a specific good is unattainable to him, and that story about himself is what you know becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and precludes that good. Uh the guy in the second half convinces himself that the only way to obtain a good or avoid a bad is to is to like you know create a false narrative um narrative, but the more he buys into that narrative, the more um uh prone he is to the whole thing falling apart, um falling apart. So what's the solution is break that vicious cycle, okay? That vicious cycle, okay, which is for the first guy expose him to the good to show him that he can attain it. For the second guy, yeah, actually, I think for the second guy we wanted to say that he's he's trying to avoid a bad. Um, so for the second guy, we said um uh show him that the more he keeps up uh this charade, the worse the fall will be. Okay. Um and so you need to convince him to cut his losses and not make the sunk cost fallacy of like like trying to like sustain this narrative that won't work. And I again I don't know if you've seen these people in real life, but I I have, where a person like is not qualified for something, but they just double down on it and just try to convince themselves that they are qualified, and then it they end up crashing. Yeah, Rufki.
SPEAKER_10First of all, so triggering. Yes. Um, and second of all, just a question on specifically like the Loyam Satov. Yeah. Why are you saying, I guess I was seeing it as more of like a personality trait that in general, like in every situation, not every, but most situations, they won't find good. But why are you drawn to saying that it's not?
SPEAKER_03Yeah, so I can't explain. I it's possible that I just am drawn to this because that's how it ended up falling out in class, but it it it does work out to a good thing, which is that that again, these are not mishlay archetypes, I don't think. I've never seen them before. Uh well, I mean, maybe they could be, but I I don't think uh uh I don't think they are. And I I think it explains the generic, which is that you will not find that good, you know, or you will fall into that bad, like the specific. Like uh most of us tonight were, I think, focused on the generic good and the generic bad, but I think it's an interesting approach to say why is the positive speak generically? Because it's talking about you could apply this to any specific case, and it's not going to color your entire personality. Like, I don't like the all the examples I gave, I mean, except unless you're clinically depressed, all the examples that I gave, I think do play themselves out in the particulars, you know. Like uh I think people like like you know, uh they're uh just again, think about people who just are convinced that they that they they can never be good in a certain skill, you know, and they just talk themselves into that. Well, yeah, if you walk into it with that self-narrative, you're gonna preclude that from yourself, you know. Okay. Um I know I said I want to stop. I want to at least do one of my farshim. I always hate it when we don't get to the mefarshim. And we have this good, bad problem that started uh lately in Mishle, and I'm running at Michle is we have too many people with good ideas, so we don't get to the Mafarshim in time. Oh, am I frozen again? I think I'm frozen again. Um uh I'm gonna keep talking. Okay, now I'm back. Let's just do the Matsus David, okay? Um, uh, because I think I have half of an idea worked out for him. So Ikish Laiv, crooked of heart, hamachashit ikus, one who plots crookedness. Okay, which doesn't help us here. Okay, but you'll see why he does this in a second. Venehap bilishono uh and one who reverses his speech. So he says, Hamahapek atmo bilashono, one who reverses himself in speech, Ladabir Timimus to speak innocently, uh Uvikirbo, but internally, Yasim Orbo, he lays an ambush. Um, uh he himself will fall into the harm that he plotted against another. Okay, now I'm gonna go ahead and just summarize the facts here because I think there's a fact that um it took us a little while to realize in class today, is I think he's also going with the this is all one person, okay. Uh, this Pusuk uh describes one person, someone who who acts innocently in order to take advantage uh of someone else, you know, uh I guess to yeah, to let's say to victimize someone else, okay. Um presumably to take advantage, but to victimize someone else, okay. Um the consequence is that he will fall prey to that same fate. Okay. So the question is who says who, right? How? So what's the main idea? How do we answer that? I'll give you an example, by the way, is um the the stereotypical mean girl, right, who is like, you know, pretends to be friendly with this girl and then goes and like stabs her in the back by spreading gossip about her, you know, like like so she's putting on a friendly face, but she's eraber believed. You know, she has one thing uh in her heart and then another thing that she in her speech, and then she stabs her in the back. So how is that person gonna become um you know falter the same uh the same thing that she that she plots?
SPEAKER_07We didn't come up with a full approach, but we came up with a with a uh meaning it's absolutely likely that she has friends that are also similar to her and will probably end up doing the same thing to her.
SPEAKER_03Okay, that is true. Can we make it can we find a consequence that comes directly from this quality in her as opposed to just like you know, um like me, you know, is attracted to like.
SPEAKER_07Yeah, I mean, I think when you talk like that about other people, people tend to either not tell you things or do the same to you.
SPEAKER_03Okay, okay. So let me let me think how I put it here. Is give me one second. So I think the premise of what you're saying, and this is a guy that what I want to bring out here. I I think there is a mistake that happens, uh sorry, um a blind spot that a lot of liars have, is that part of lying habitually is you do get a feeling of superiority to people because you're constantly being more clever than them and pulling one over on them. So I think one of the blind spots of that is that you A, you don't realize necessarily that someone might do that to you because you're the clever one. And B, you don't realize that you're accumulating a track record of like of victims, and you're accumulating a resume of being the type of person who does this. So let's say you have the popular the mean girl who's doing this to all of the losers, okay, uh, in her mind, right? So her friends are all like like laughing also at this person's expense. But in the meantime, they're also realizing, oh, this is a person who's always talking duplicitously and stabbing people in the back. And I think that's what accounts for what Avital was saying is that like you're not gonna want to open up to such a person. And chances are like this person is, you know, uh uh is you know, clearly either like Stephanie said earlier of like using other people as a means, or um is a late and they're always like like taking advantage of people for their own pleasure, they're you know, their friends are gonna be victims also, and then people will want to take revenge and use the same tactics on them, you know. So um I think that's like uh uh the the the in broad strokes, that's the idea. Yeah, Rivki.
SPEAKER_10Um can I just ask if this is what you're saying?
SPEAKER_03Yeah.
SPEAKER_10So are we essentially saying that like when you act innocently, you act one way, and then in reality or not that way, that eventually you'll be found out because that's just reality?
SPEAKER_03No, I'm not saying that.
SPEAKER_10Okay.
SPEAKER_03So I think I'm so I'm saying it's like this, okay, is someone who who um who lays this type of duplicitous ambush for others, okay, um uh is blind, is blinded by that mida um in several ways. Sorry, that that mida in several ways. Okay. One is they always view themselves as the clever one who is in control, which makes them more uh vulnerable to being taken advantage of with the same tricks. Okay, that's number one. All right, and I'm not saying it's guaranteed, there is a certain type of liar who is very good at picking up on other liars. Okay, like um I heard I have not confirmed this, uh, but I heard that in a very early interview uh that Sasha Barron Cohen had with Donald Trump, then like Donald Trump immediately figured out that Sasha Baron Cohen was like that it was all an act and that it was a lie, because he could like pick up on it on his on the lies. I don't know if that's true or not, but like uh I do think that that that can happen. Hold on, I'm getting a chat here. Yeah. Um, okay, yeah, so Rokelie uh vouchers for that. All right. Um secondly, is that um that a person who who habitually does this um accumulates a public record of being a backstabber. Okay. Um so and then number three is a person who habitually does this uh acquires lots of enemies, and then a person who habitually does this um uh is likely to do this to people who were their friends, okay. Um so all these qualities are a recipe for rendering themselves vulnerable to that same kind of attack. Okay. Um why is they won't see it coming. Um they people know that they that they uh are a backstabber. Um uh they have lots of enemies, and even their friends can turn on them. So, Ruffy, this is not this is not the standard thing of just getting caught in your lies. This is really more about a backstabbing type meta. Yeah, and in this case of what goes around comes around. Does that clarify things?
SPEAKER_10Yeah, I really like it. It's really good.
SPEAKER_03Yeah, it's good. Yeah, I really want to do more. I am just totally uh done for tonight, and I can't even review. Um, so uh we got a lot of good ideas, and I really do want to go back. I I do think there is an interesting overlap between several of the ideas here. Um, and it'd be interesting to explore that, but I am done. So uh thanks for coming. Next week should be good, and I think next week is our last one before Pesach, because I don't think I want to do one the week of Pesach. I think I want to uh prepare for Pesach. Um yeah, okay. So hopefully next week we'll be uh we'll continue. All right, have a good rest of the week, everyone.
SPEAKER_02Thank you.