Latest / The Mishlei Podcast / Mishlei 17:27 - Knowledge, Understanding, and Minimizing Speech

Transcript

Mishlei 17:27 - Knowledge, Understanding, and Minimizing Speech · The Mishlei Podcast

• 0:21
  Okay, so we are up to the second to the last puzzlock in um in the chapter.
• 0:27
  Not the chapters are real, but um uh and I I'll say right away that a lot of the commentators on this one connect it to next week's, but I want to take it on its own because it seems like there are people who do take it on its own, and I think it could be taken on its own.
• 0:41
  So Khosech Amarav, Yodea Da'as, uh, and then Yakar Ruach Ish Tabuna.
• 0:48
  All right.
• 0:49
  So um I it's been a while since we've had one of these things.
• 0:52
  Let me just explain here what's going on with um the parentheses and the brackets here.
• 0:57
  All right, so my my understanding of this, okay, uh, which anyone could jump in and say uh what they uh what they want here, uh if they have different uh if they differ with me here.
• 1:08
  So let me just type this in transliteration.
• 1:11
  Okay, so you've got something in Hebrew called the uh I don't know if this is the proper way to say it, but people the Ashkenazim call it the Cree and then the I guess Kri and then the Ksiv.
• 1:25
  Okay.
• 1:25
  Um, so this is a thing where actually let me go, let me go up.
• 1:29
  Okay, so Kri Kxiv is what people call them, which is when the written Torah spells a word, uh, or I guess written Torah says one thing, but the oral Torah um tells us to read it differently.
• 1:46
  Okay, so it's like a oral Torah for how to read the written Torah.
• 1:51
  All right.
• 1:51
  So the question is uh the question is uh oh, and then in terms of the terms here, the Kree is the way we're supposed to read it, and then the Ksiv is the way it's actually written, all right.
• 2:04
  So the question obviously is why, right?
• 2:07
  Or like like, you know, what are we to make of these?
• 2:12
  All right.
• 2:12
  So in my experience, there's really three categories, okay.
• 2:17
  Um so the first one is um first category is um let's call them, there's probably like a fancy word for this, but uh we'll call them typos, okay?
• 2:28
  Is that um you know, is that that uh manuscripts or I guess handwritten documents um contain errors, okay.
• 2:38
  So when the text of Tanakh was, you know, finalized, all right, uh in the form or forms we have uh we have it today, they they fixed certain errors, but left the original in case um it wasn't an error.
• 2:58
  Okay, so usually you can kind of not you not you can't always tell for sure, but you can guess which ones are like that.
• 3:05
  So, for example, here it's written as Vav Kufresh, but you're supposed to read it as yud kufresh.
• 3:12
  So it's not hard to imagine that what happened was, you know, some somewhere along the line, someone uh um, you know, uh I guess uh elongated the Vav or the sorry, elongated the yud and made it into a Vav.
• 3:26
  And then people became uh you know had a question about which one's the right one, and then eventually they decided it was the yud.
• 3:31
  Okay, so that's like typos.
• 3:33
  Second one is a category that is uh I know it's in Khumish, I I don't know if it's it's in Nah, euphemisms, okay, is that sometimes uh that's not you spell euphemisms?
• 3:42
  Eumphisms, euphemisms.
• 3:45
  So sometimes the um the written Torah will use a more um blunt or or like vulgar term, and the oral Torah um will uh will fix it.
• 3:57
  Okay, not fix it, we'll uh will uh use a nicer term.
• 4:00
  Okay, um, so an example of that is uh at least according to um uh some.
• 4:07
  Okay, so in the in the tokukas, in in the rebukes, when saying all the bad stuff that's gonna happen to the Jewish people, uh, it says that you know uh a man will marry a woman, and then another man will, and it says yishgalena, which is like a very vulgar term for uh like having intercourse, so it will ravage her.
• 4:27
  And then we read it though, is yishkavena, that another man will lie with her.
• 4:31
  So we're using like a nicer language, and then the most fun one, okay, is the the dual meaning, okay?
• 4:39
  Uh, which is that sometimes um the we we consider both readings to have validity, and the oral Torah um is adding a a layer of meaning to what the written Torah says, okay.
• 4:57
  Uh now there's no instruction manual that says like how you can tell which one's which.
• 5:02
  So um it's just up to the different commentators to speculate about it.
• 5:06
  Okay, so here we have a Kreexiv, so it's written as I'll do this in the translation here, uh, but I just wanted to preface it before we even start translating.
• 5:13
  Okay, so um who would like to translate to attempt a translation here?
• 5:18
  Hose Amarav Yodea Da'as, and then we'll go with the uh the Cree here.
• 5:23
  Yakar Ruach Ish Tubuna.
• 5:28
  I know Ruven sent me his translation already, so we'll get to his.
• 5:31
  Well, it's displayed on the thing.
• 5:32
  So yeah.
• 5:34
  Anyone want to try?
• 5:37
  Our usual uh volunteer readers.
• 5:39
  Yes, that's going ahead.
• 5:41
  Someone who withholds his speech uh will know knowledge.
• 5:48
  Okay.
• 5:50
  And um, I don't know, precious speech precious speech.
• 5:58
  Um also just reminds me of that Hokkar word, right?
• 6:12
  Yeah, like when you it's uh it's like the judicious use of speech is someone who will be is a person who is um intelligent.
• 6:22
  Okay.
• 6:23
  Or wisdom or has wisdom.
• 6:24
  How about wisdom?
• 6:25
  Wisdom?
• 6:26
  Okay, all right.
• 6:26
  So I'm gonna uh uh you know the the the translation you gave me is is good for stars.
• 6:31
  Let's uh I'm gonna uh uh modify this a bunch and try to show all the ambiguities here.
• 6:36
  Okay, so Khusik is one who withholds.
• 6:39
  That one I'm I'm good with, okay.
• 6:40
  I would translate Amarav as his statements.
• 6:45
  Is that grammatically correct?
• 6:47
  I think so, right?
• 6:49
  Sure.
• 6:49
  Yeah, okay.
• 6:50
  I'm trying to do it while drive, so okay.
• 6:52
  His statements, yeah, okay, right.
• 6:54
  Now you said will know knowledge.
• 6:56
  Um, so technically speaking, I think if we keep it in the present tense or not in the future tense, I think that's more faithful to the literal Hebrew Yodas knows knowledge.
• 7:08
  Okay, he knows knowledge, which kind of sounds funny, okay.
• 7:12
  And then oddly enough, this is not one of the Michelin pseudogam that has an and or a but in the middle, it just is a separate clause here.
• 7:18
  So yakar ruach, one whose ruach, okay, um is yakar.
• 7:27
  Okay, so I I'm I'm I'm uh gonna try to do the different translations.
• 7:31
  So ruch literally means spirit or breath or speech.
• 7:36
  I think those are the three main ones.
• 7:38
  Okay, and Yakar is uh, as you said, first precious, okay, or I think judicious is a good one, okay.
• 7:46
  Uh, and then we'll say here is a person of Ishtuana, a person of uh of understanding, okay.
• 7:53
  Uh, or you could say discernment if you want.
• 7:55
  Um, discernment if you like that translation better.
• 7:57
  Yeah, okay.
• 7:58
  Now, this is translation A.
• 8:01
  Okay, we'll call this translation a.
• 8:03
  The other way to do it is uh is to reverse them and say one who knows knowledge withholds uh his statements, and then a person of understanding is Yakar Ruach.
• 8:18
  Okay, how do you want to translate Yakar Rua?
• 8:20
  All right, so I think oops, sorry, I said A twice.
• 8:22
  I think those are two different translations that are both uh legitimate here.
• 8:25
  Okay, so let's hold that.
• 8:27
  We might have to modify it when we uh when we go on.
• 8:29
  Let's look and see what our other translators say.
• 8:30
  So we have Mitsuh Sion who says, Chosich is Monea, one who withholds.
• 8:34
  All right, we got that.
• 8:35
  Sadigon says, I don't need to, that's just how we translated it.
• 8:40
  Um hold on.
• 8:41
  Uh I'm just gonna move.
• 8:43
  I'll delete him.
• 8:44
  Okay.
• 8:44
  Uh Sadigon says, Ha chosich amarav huhayodea esadas.
• 8:50
  Uh the one who uh withholds his statements is the one who knows the knowledge.
• 9:01
  And one who is uh, you know, Yakar Ruach um is one who possesses understanding.
• 9:11
  Okay, so not super different, but it seems like he's doing nuancy stuff.
• 9:15
  Targum says, Tachich Miloi Yadea Yadisa.
• 9:18
  So the first half is the same, Vdimikhihah Dmikhicha Ruche, which I think means uh, and one who is humble of spirit or lowly of spirit, uh Gabron Demispayan is a person of understanding.
• 9:33
  Okay, so there are our uh Hebrew minimalist uh translations or minimalist non-English translations.
• 9:40
  Okay, now we got Alter.
• 9:41
  Who sorry?
• 9:42
  Also says, one who is sparing with his words knows knowledge, a man of understanding speaks sparingly.
• 9:47
  Okay, so that's very similar to the way Seth uh translated it, and I spelled judicious wrong.
• 9:50
  Um, Alter says, one uh who is sparing in speech knows knowledge, and who and cool headed is the man of discerning.
• 9:57
  Now, this is where we get our first example of someone who took the uh the ksiv, the way that it's written here.
• 10:01
  So um he says like this, he says, cool headed, literally cool of spirit.
• 10:05
  Uh, this idiom is not otherwise attested, and hence the meaning is not entirely certain.
• 10:09
  The marginal gloss in the Masoretic text, which is what we are reading here, corrects car, cool to yakar, precious or rare, which does not help matters, attempts to make the freeze uh the phrase mean reticent, rest on shaky grounds.
• 10:21
  Okay, fine.
• 10:21
  So he goes with cool headed.
• 10:23
  Okay, and then Peskin, who is here live, says, Um, uh, he who restrains his words, a knower of knowledge, and he who is cool of spirit, he goes with uh with the way it's written, a man of understanding.
• 10:33
  Okay, and then in the commentary, this he says this is fresh off the mind presses, sent me this morning.
• 10:38
  Uh, a knower of knowledge or uh knows knowledge.
• 10:41
  Um, right, so in other words, it could be a person or it could be a uh quality of the person, right?
• 10:45
  That either knows knowledge or he is is a knower of knowledge.
• 10:48
  Okay, I'm gonna actually put this in our translation, or is a knower of knowledge, right?
• 10:55
  Um well now.
• 10:57
  I'm gonna just like this.
• 10:59
  Okay, and then he says, uh, and he who is cool spirit, that is a cool headed, okay.
• 11:02
  That's like altar.
• 11:03
  So the cseive, that's what the written version says.
• 11:05
  The Cree has he who is spare of speech, like we said.
• 11:07
  The subtugion has and the patient man, okay.
• 11:10
  Um the psychitha, which is the Syriac uh version of the Torah, it says, and he who of the Tanakh, he whose spirit is patient.
• 11:17
  Okay, similarly, the Vulgate, uh, that's the Latin translation says, and a man of precious spirit.
• 11:21
  The Tarkim has and he whose spirit is humble.
• 11:24
  Uh, Sadigat has he who is firm of spirit, that is unshakable.
• 11:27
  Okay.
• 11:28
  Um, oh, that's a different translation than the way the one I had.
• 11:31
  Um when I looked it up, uh, I saw that it meant uh oh sorry, yeah.
• 11:39
  Wait, no, no, I didn't have that.
• 11:40
  I'm thinking of something else.
• 11:41
  Yeah, it was hold on a second.
• 11:42
  Sadigone.
• 11:47
  Firm of spirit.
• 11:48
  Where are you getting firm of spirit from?
• 11:50
  So the Arabic, yes, yeah.
• 11:53
  The Arabic is uh Walaziz Alruh, and the word uh doesn't mean like not moving, yeah, yeah, yeah.
• 12:03
  So like it's similar to Hebrew um uh ayan Zion Zion, which means like strength.
• 12:11
  Yeah.
• 12:12
  Okay, but it's also it also overlaps with uh yakar.
• 12:17
  Okay, all right, good.
• 12:18
  So let's let's do an uh we'll go with your unshakable, okay?
• 12:21
  Um that's that's nice.
• 12:22
  I did not know that you knew uh the the Arabic that helps.
• 12:26
  Okay.
• 12:28
  Yes.
• 12:29
  Um also if you just think about cold, cold makes things very stiff.
• 12:34
  So you can get it from the just the cold itself being more difficult to move.
• 12:40
  Okay, that's good.
• 12:40
  That's good.
• 12:41
  That's okay.
• 12:41
  I'm gonna copy and paste it.
• 12:42
  But Sadia is explicitly translating the uh way that it should be read.
• 12:49
  With your car, right?
• 12:49
  Meaning not the not the gold, yeah.
• 12:51
  Yeah, that's clear from this commentary, yeah.
• 12:52
  But okay, but uh that is sure.
• 12:54
  Good to know.
• 12:55
  Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and copy and paste these into the chat as well, and hopefully they fit.
• 13:00
  Yep, they fit.
• 13:01
  Okay, and then I'm gonna move these upstairs.
• 13:03
  Okay, so now we do our questions.
• 13:07
  All right, so who uh who has questions or problems on the post?
• 13:12
  Yeah, Ariel.
• 13:13
  Yeah, it um on the surface it it seems a little posha, you know.
• 13:18
  Like um the Ariel question.
• 13:20
  The Ariel question, which is this seems obvious.
• 13:25
  Okay, so yeah, sorry, I could cut you off.
• 13:28
  No, I mean I mean uh can you can you imagine why I might think I might say that?
• 13:34
  Well, I don't know which way you're reading it, so I don't know.
• 13:37
  So I'm reading it as like, you know, if if if one withholds a statement, you know, it sounds like he he's pretty knowledge, he's pretty knowledgeable in the sense of like, okay, like I I think I know what statements to share, what statements not to share, and the one who, you know, and the one who um I'm sorry, where was that translation?
• 13:56
  Um it sounds like you're going with translation B, right?
• 13:59
  One who knows knowledge withholds his statements.
• 14:01
  Yeah, yeah, exactly.
• 14:02
  It's like like look what's going on, Ariana.
• 14:05
  Okay, so I mean you could say that, but you could also say that no, someone who has knowledge shares his knowledge, right?
• 14:09
  And like does not withhold his statements.
• 14:11
  Right, but I would also share with you this previous Mitchley Puzzleck that we did a few years ago saying that not every not every knowledge is shareable because you have to know the situation.
• 14:20
  So it it's you know okay, I I hear.
• 14:23
  So in other words, that um we I'll just say like this we we've learned before that um unrestrained speech um uh tends to be bad, okay, and people who who have knowledge are judicious about what they say.
• 14:39
  Okay, so what are we talking about?
• 14:41
  What is this uh adding, right?
• 14:42
  Yeah, okay.
• 14:43
  What's what's the kiddosh, right?
• 14:45
  Uh what is the kiddosh, the new insight?
• 14:47
  Okay, fair question.
• 14:48
  Yeah, okay.
• 14:50
  Um, I'm gonna just delete audio question.
• 14:53
  We all know it's audio.
• 14:54
  Yes, Stephanie.
• 14:55
  Um, what kind of statements are they withholding?
• 14:59
  Is it just any statement?
• 15:00
  Okay, good.
• 15:01
  So what kinds of statements are we talking about?
• 15:05
  All right.
• 15:05
  Um, is this you know all speech or a specific kind of speech?
• 15:12
  Okay, and then let's say, like, you know, how do we know and why, you know, well, I guess like how does you know, I guess like if the latter, let's say if the latter, how do we know?
• 15:26
  How do we know which kind it is?
• 15:28
  Uh, you know, or I guess how do we know when this applies and why and why?
• 15:34
  Okay, yeah.
• 15:35
  I mean the why is gonna be a big question in general.
• 15:36
  Yeah, that's a good question.
• 15:37
  Um, yeah, Sah.
• 15:43
  Sorry, just don't get into an accident.
• 15:46
  I got it.
• 15:47
  All right.
• 15:48
  Um just the difference between dot and tuna and the balance between rua and amarav, what's the relationship with the difference?
• 15:58
  So, what is the difference between um daas, uh knowledge, and tivuna, understanding?
• 16:08
  Okay, and I'm just using the conventional translations here, okay?
• 16:11
  And then what is the difference between, I guess, and then and then why is each um uh I guess predicate said of each subject?
• 16:23
  Meaning, like, why are we saying that that one who withholds his statements knows knowledge, but one who is Yakar Ruach is a person of understanding, okay, versus the other way around.
• 16:31
  And then what's the difference between um uh referring, I guess between um his statements and um ruach, okay.
• 16:43
  Assuming ruach means speech.
• 16:46
  Yeah, what is the what is the implication of each?
• 16:51
  Yeah.
• 16:52
  Okay.
• 16:53
  Other questions?
• 16:59
  Got plenty more.
• 17:00
  And so many of our regulars are not here, not so many, but enough of our regulars are not here.
• 17:05
  The people are usually raising their hands are not uh not here.
• 17:11
  Yeah, Stephanie.
• 17:13
  Did we ask like just basic definition questions of a bunch of things like your car?
• 17:19
  Like is it crackless or audition?
• 17:21
  Okay, so what does your car mean and I'm gonna go ahead and say what does your car ruach mean?
• 17:26
  Because I don't think we can answer your car without knowing what ruach means.
• 17:30
  And like taking your stamps and ruach will affect that.
• 17:32
  So what does your car ruach mean?
• 17:34
  Yeah, and what was the other thing you said?
• 17:35
  A plane flew overhead.
• 17:37
  Oh, um, I just asked other definition questions.
• 17:40
  Your dad got the two of them, right?
• 17:42
  Uh, I guess we have to ask um what is meant by restraining or withholding, I should say, right?
• 17:48
  What does actually sorry, you want that that would be over here?
• 17:52
  Uh yeah, all right.
• 17:53
  What what practically uh does it mean to uh withhold uh one's statements?
• 18:01
  You know, I also want to say here, maybe we should ask this question as well, okay?
• 18:06
  I mean yeah, what what does what does his statements imply?
• 18:11
  Like, in other words, is this just a generic uh term for speech or does it mean that he has and I'm gonna use this phrase because this is how like I'm conceiving of it, preloaded preloaded statements that he is not deploying, right?
• 18:29
  Like it to me it sounds like if you say, if you say, if you like when you say, for example, like I don't know, like I held my tongue, that implies that you were gonna say something and you didn't.
• 18:43
  So similarly, here, this is even stronger than that, saying like I withheld my statements, uh, like it's almost like I withheld my judgments, you know.
• 18:50
  Whereas there are ways to say it, let's say, like, if you just said sparing of speech, that does not imply that you have like statements that are ready to go that you're then holding back.
• 18:59
  It just implies that you're just not talking a lot, you know.
• 19:01
  Um, so I I I feel like there's an implication there.
• 19:04
  So I just want to ask about that.
• 19:06
  Yeah.
• 19:08
  Um okay, what are some other questions here?
• 19:21
  Okay, well, one of them, yes, Stephanie.
• 19:25
  Who is the intended audience?
• 19:27
  And also what is the consequence positive relationship that we're learning from here?
• 19:34
  Okay, yeah.
• 19:34
  So who is the intended audience?
• 19:37
  Okay, and then what is the um what is the practical uh I shouldn't say the publication, what what are the practical benefits and consequences um of you know of following or not following this?
• 19:55
  Okay.
• 19:56
  Um, yeah.
• 19:57
  Another question which I do think we have to ask you is what's the relationship between the two halves?
• 20:01
  What is the relationship between the two halves, right?
• 20:05
  Um, usually they're opposites, but these don't seem like opposites.
• 20:10
  Okay, are they um levels or you know, different kinds of application, or I mean, alternative choices, I mean, or something else, right?
• 20:24
  So what is the relationship between the two?
• 20:26
  Um what else?
• 20:28
  I feel like there are a couple more.
• 20:31
  I do want to ask, I mean, I I I I know I just uh refrained from saying this, but I do want to, I think we need to ask this here.
• 20:38
  What are the practical parameters of this?
• 20:43
  In other words, like don't talk ever.
• 20:46
  You know, how do you know you know uh how much or when to withhold?
• 20:52
  All right, uh, or or how sparing to be.
• 20:57
  All right.
• 20:57
  Uh again, I'm not saying that the puzzle has to answer that.
• 20:59
  I'm saying that in order for us to make use of it, we have to have some sense of how to do that.
• 21:04
  Um yes, Stephanie.
• 21:08
  Do we have a Mishlayc definition for tuna?
• 21:11
  Because it sounds like the type of word that they would.
• 21:13
  Uh, I will actually thank you for reminding me.
• 21:15
  I'm actually before we do our thinking minute, I am gonna start off by giving a working definition of tuna, uh, because it's the easiest one of all of the knowledge uh um words.
• 21:27
  Um yeah, okay, but we'll we'll do that later.
• 21:29
  And then we already asked what DOS is, right?
• 21:31
  Uh yeah, what is DOS and tumuna?
• 21:33
  Yeah.
• 21:34
  Um okay, and then I'll ask the Kreexiv question in case anyone wants to tackle it, okay, which is that um is there any meaning we should care about in the uh you know, cool uh or cool headed, right?
• 21:53
  Um as opposed to sparing in the in the spirit, yeah.
• 21:58
  Okay.
• 22:00
  Um I'm also gonna ask another question we we always ask, but I do think it's warranted here.
• 22:05
  What, if anything specific, is the decision making scenario?
• 22:10
  Okay, uh, you know, or is this just talking about all the time?
• 22:16
  About all the time.
• 22:17
  Oh, I know a big question that we didn't do.
• 22:20
  So this Really, more of a question.
• 22:22
  See, uh, Ariel's question is um, according to translation B, this seems obvious, right?
• 22:29
  If you know knowledge, you're gonna um uh withhold the statements, but the big problem is according to translation A, it doesn't seem true, right?
• 22:39
  Like just because you withhold your statements doesn't mean that you actually know what you're talking about, all right.
• 22:49
  Um, and uh and likewise, if you're sparing in speech, right?
• 22:54
  Uh plenty of you know, there are as as my new proverb that I just invented goes, there are plenty of quiet idiots in the world.
• 23:02
  All right.
• 23:02
  Uh, and maybe that's not like fully true because idiots do like to talk, but uh, but you know, I don't know.
• 23:08
  I feel like there could be someone who's shy, right?
• 23:10
  Let's say you're a shy idiot, right?
• 23:11
  I'll say that.
• 23:12
  Plenty of shy idiots in the world.
• 23:14
  Um, probably good for the world, but all right.
• 23:18
  Now I feel like we got most of the questions.
• 23:19
  So I'm gonna go ahead and start importing these into the chat.
• 23:22
  Uh, and then we will take our thinking minute.
• 23:26
  Uh oh no, I went overboard again.
• 23:27
  Okay, so one through five, and then six through there's we're not gonna get all of them here.
• 23:34
  Not even gonna try.
• 23:36
  Six, seven, eight.
• 23:38
  Oh, I'll give the the um working definition of Tavuna uh before we have our thinking minute, by the way, in case you were wondering.
• 23:44
  There's that, and then the last questions are oh you know what?
• 23:49
  Let's ask another question.
• 23:50
  This is definitely connected to the one after it, but the one let's see what was the one before it.
• 23:55
  Oh, the one before it was Gam Anosh Latig Lotov, Lahakos and the Divim Al Yosher.
• 23:59
  Uh, I'll ask this anyway.
• 24:00
  Okay, is this connected to the previous hazuk?
• 24:05
  Um, even punishing a tzadik is not good to strike um nobles for uprightness.
• 24:16
  Okay, uh, I'm not I do not think it's related, but uh uh just you know, to be a responsible Mishlay learner, we have to at least ask the question.
• 24:23
  All right, 13, 14, and 15.
• 24:27
  Okay, so let me give an elementary working definition of tbuna.
• 24:31
  So um in the Mishlayic hierarchy, the order of the levels of knowledge is always chachma, wisdom, uh tbuna, understanding, and then uh das, knowledge.
• 24:45
  Okay, and and we know this from um uh the fact that it's repeated several times in that order here.
• 24:50
  So I think the first time is in chapter three, maybe not, uh yeah.
• 24:57
  Um Hashem, this is in uh 319.
• 25:03
  Hashem founded the earth with wisdom.
• 25:06
  Uh, you know, wisdom here is actually not, I mean, might not be the best translation here.
• 25:10
  Um, okay, whatever.
• 25:11
  So what with Chachmah.
• 25:12
  Hashem founded the earth with Chachmah, Konin Shemain Bitvuna, he established the heavens with understanding.
• 25:18
  Bedato to homos Nifkau, uh Ushakim Yirafu Tal.
• 25:22
  And with his knowledge, the depths were cleaved and the heavens dripped with dew.
• 25:26
  Okay, similarly, I always forgot where this one is, is uh Bachma Yibane Bayas.
• 25:33
  Yibane Bayas.
• 25:36
  Uh it's in what is it, 15?
• 25:39
  No, it's not gonna be 15.
• 25:41
  Let's see.
• 25:44
  Uh 24, nowhere near 15.
• 25:46
  Okay, Bachma Yibane Bayes, Uvisvuna Yiskonan, uh, 24, 3, and 4.
• 25:52
  With wisdom, uh he will build a house, with understanding, he will establish it.
• 25:55
  Okay, very similar to what Hashem did with his house, so to speak, or with the earth.
• 25:58
  Uh das, khadaram ymalu kohonya yahabina'im.
• 26:01
  And with knowledge, uh the rooms will be filled with all forms of precious and pleasant wealth.
• 26:07
  Okay, so so the order is Chachma and then Tvuna and then Das.
• 26:11
  All right, similarly, actually, one more thing I want to show you, maybe.
• 26:14
  In two, we have La Hakshiv L Chma Aznacha.
• 26:18
  So to listen intently to Chachma with your ear, Tata Libchal Tvuna, incline your heart to understanding.
• 26:25
  Okay, kim la bina tikra titinghulaka.
• 26:27
  Okay, similarly a repetition of or seemingly a repetition of bina and tibuna.
• 26:31
  If you only call out tabina and be uh and uh and give your voice to Tabuna, Im Tvakshana Kakesef, Vukhamat Monim Tachpesena, and you search for it like silver and like hidden treasures, you look out, you look for it, as tavin yreshem, then you will understand fear of Hashem, the das elkimtimsa, and knowledge of God you will find.
• 26:50
  So again, you have here the same order of chachma, tvuna, and das.
• 26:53
  Okay, so that's one clue we have, okay, which is um in or in in in order, it goes it goes chokhma.
• 27:04
  Sorry, it goes, I'm gonna do the translation, chma, then tivuna or bina, okay, and then da'as.
• 27:12
  Okay, that's one clue.
• 27:14
  Second clue is anytime any Rishon I've ever seen explains the term tivuna, they always say the same thing, which is maybe um, which uh I think Rashi says it.
• 27:26
  Oh, that's not Rashi, that's why I'm not finding it.
• 27:27
  Rashi says, for example, in uh, I think it's in Navon, Mosiv al Khacham, so uh or musaf alchem.
• 27:36
  I don't know, sheodel having dab mitokdavar, mosif al shmuas.
• 27:40
  So you increase your knowledge by in by understanding one thing from another.
• 27:45
  Okay, so in other words, this is um derived knowledge, okay?
• 27:50
  Uh knowledge that you deduce or induce from prior knowledge.
• 27:56
  All right.
• 27:57
  And I'm I have not seen an exception to this in terms of like the Rishonim defining this term.
• 28:02
  They don't say it always in these exact words, but they always um sorry, I shouldn't say that.
• 28:06
  I have seen exceptions to this.
• 28:08
  Uh, this is just the most common thing that I've seen, which is it's derived knowledge or knowledge that you you infer or you deduce from other knowledge.
• 28:16
  Okay, so those are our two definitions of uh Tibuna.
• 28:19
  And uh again, yeah, Das, it sounds like is the um I don't have a clear definition of Das, but it sounds like Das is the uh is the highest of the levels.
• 28:28
  Okay, there's a similar thing also.
• 28:30
  Oh no, that was one that I read.
• 28:31
  Das Kidoshim, did I read?
• 28:33
  No, there's another one.
• 28:34
  Das.
• 28:35
  Das Kidoshim.
• 28:37
  I think that's in nine or eight.
• 28:43
  See, that might be another important one.
• 28:47
  Nine?
• 28:47
  Yeah, there we go.
• 28:48
  Uh oh, that's a funny one.
• 28:51
  Tchilas Khoma Yuras Hashem, the beginning of wisdom is Fuhrer of Hashem, and knowledge of Kadoshim, of things that are kadosh, is Bina.
• 28:59
  Okay, that that's more confusing than helpful.
• 29:01
  Okay, so let us now take our thinking minute to think.
• 29:40
  According um to translation B, one who knows knowledge withholds his statements.
• 29:45
  So the question I'd add I'll just go to the bottom.
• 29:47
  The question I'd add is according oops sorry, according to translation B, if you don't withhold your statements, um does that mean that you do not know knowledge?
• 30:05
  Okay.
• 30:06
  Ditto for understanding.
• 30:30
  Anyone have any ideas?
• 30:32
  No hands going on.
• 30:34
  Or and if you don't have full ideas, well I'll I'll hear halfway's ideas.
• 30:44
  You know, if no one has anything to say, that would actually be a first in all six years of teaching Michelay, that no one had any ideas.
• 30:52
  Well, don't hold on a minute, hold on a minute.
• 30:53
  Let's take a step back for a second here.
• 30:56
  Okay, okay, okay.
• 30:57
  I don't have a full idea.
• 30:57
  I have a basic.
• 30:58
  It's fine, half-baked is good.
• 31:00
  It's it's it well, I don't even it's it's half-baked, but it's basic, which is gonna run into an issue with the second half of the positive.
• 31:06
  Okay, that's fine.
• 31:07
  Uh any step is good.
• 31:08
  So you know, but I was thinking about the difference between you know the uh the post that we learned a while back, you know, versus here.
• 31:18
  From my memory, you know, I think back then, I think it had to do with you have a lot of information, you have a lot of knowledge, and you just want to just just spill it out, you know, just gonna tell it to everyone, and and that could be it's ready here, ready to orchestrate.
• 31:35
  I lost you.
• 31:41
  I assume that was intentional, but sorry, can you hear me?
• 31:44
  Yeah.
• 31:45
  Okay.
• 31:46
  So um, you know, so back then I you know it had to do with you know, you know, causing the other person damage, because like you you wouldn't know what would be appropriate to say or not.
• 31:56
  But here maybe you could say that I think that you know the knowledge here is going one step further in you know, you have this information, but it's also like the knowledge and in in understanding the situation and in uh in turn in meaning like on a deeper level.
• 32:18
  So you you have this, you have information, but it's not it's it's not just information at that point, it's also like like how to use that information effectively.
• 32:25
  Okay, I'm getting the same vibe.
• 32:27
  Yeah.
• 32:27
  Um Stephanie, are you uh are you wanting to add to that or do you have a separate idea?
• 32:31
  A separate idea.
• 32:32
  So I can let's uh yeah, let's talk this one out first, okay.
• 32:36
  So so in other words, um tell me if this is what you are saying, and then we'll we'll work out the the rest.
• 32:42
  Is that that um uh a full knowledge of anything, okay, would include knowing the the place of that knowledge, okay?
• 32:59
  Um or I guess like um I guess not yeah, I I know you said application, but uh not just the application um but also you know how it should fit into another mind.
• 33:18
  Okay, so in other words, if you if you think you have knowledge, but your uh your attitude towards it is uh is uh I don't know if cavalier is the right word, but is so uh maybe undiscerning that you just spout it off in any context without regard to its um uh to you know to to to whether it fits, okay, then you don't really understand the knowledge.
• 33:52
  Okay, and and the exam the example I'm getting here is like the um, I don't know, this is just stereotypical example that comes to my mind, is like the nerdy kid uh who happens to know a ton in a certain area, and when he's with people who don't really know as much as he does, he just thinks that if he just says the knowledge, then somehow that's gonna magically like be relevant, you know?
• 34:15
  But what it shows is that he might possess the information, but he doesn't actually understand.
• 34:20
  In reality, knowledge is a knowledge is of the world, right?
• 34:25
  So if you don't know, and when I say of the world, I mean it's of it's of systems, it's of it it fits into whatever system you're doing.
• 34:33
  Like even if it's not knowledge of the world, like mathematics, it mathematics a mathematical concept doesn't exist in a vacuum, it's part of the entire system, you know.
• 34:40
  So if you don't, if you're lacking in that like holistic um grasp of the knowledge, then even if you could say the words that correspond to the truth, or even if you could give over the information, you don't really know it.
• 34:54
  All right, is that me projecting onto your idea or is that along with it?
• 34:57
  Uh no, I I like it.
• 34:59
  It's interesting.
• 35:00
  Uh I don't know if what I'm up about if what I'm about to say next is similar to this idea or not.
• 35:07
  Yeah.
• 35:07
  Because it sounds like here, uh uh from the way you're saying it, it's almost like you know, true understanding of knowledge means like knowing how and when and who to say it to.
• 35:22
  Yeah, yeah.
• 35:23
  Or I wouldn't say it means that.
• 35:24
  I would say that if you don't know that, then you don't have full knowledge.
• 35:28
  You know, like like the knowledge itself, like in other words, like it's like a measure in in how complete your knowledge is.
• 35:35
  And I'm just clarifying here, I don't necessarily mean that you're good at doing it.
• 35:39
  Like, for example, teaching is a separate art.
• 35:41
  Like there are people who know stuff and they can't, they're just bad at presenting it or whatever.
• 35:46
  I'm not even talking about that.
• 35:47
  I'm talking about like if you think that you can just go and like you know, drop knowledge on people and uh uh you know, then you're not, you know, and it'll affect them the way that it's affecting you or that you think it's affecting you, you're missing something.
• 36:01
  You're you're not really getting what the what the knowledge is.
• 36:04
  Right.
• 36:04
  Like, um, so let me ask you this question.
• 36:07
  Is it different than you know, like it's funny, like I I'm just gonna reference this, this, uh, this, this uh a comedy bit by Jerry Seinfeld, you know.
• 36:16
  Um, there was a pro-Palestinian individual who crashed his his uh you know um his whatever comedy, and he was hitting Jerry Seinfeld on the spot and said, Look, you and I are in the same industry.
• 36:32
  We both have the knowledge that we want to convey.
• 36:36
  You just need a platform.
• 36:37
  I have a platform, and you see my my jokes are landing well because I have a platform.
• 36:43
  What you need is the same thing.
• 36:45
  Do you think this is the platform for it?
• 36:48
  That's great.
• 36:50
  So yeah, so so um, so would that be the same thing here?
• 36:55
  Because it sounds like it's still a little different.
• 36:57
  Yeah, it does sound like it's still a little different.
• 36:58
  I mean, I think we're in we're we're in the same ballpark, you know, but uh but there might be two ideas in here, you know, next to each other.
• 37:04
  Um Right.
• 37:05
  So the issue with this is for the second half of the idea.
• 37:08
  So what's the second half of the plus a you know doing so the the uh yeah, right.
• 37:14
  So that's that's a good question, right?
• 37:15
  Um uh let's see here.
• 37:17
  Okay, so I'm gonna just say this, you know, plus me, because we'll we'll we'll divide them if we have to divide them later.
• 37:23
  Um, so what is the second half adding, right?
• 37:26
  And in fact, it's a little bit more difficult because the form of it is Yeah, that's my issue.
• 37:33
  Yeah, right.
• 37:34
  The form of it is if you apply the same thing, we're saying if you really know knowledge, then you withhold your statements.
• 37:39
  If you're not withholding your statements, you don't really know the knowledge.
• 37:41
  But here, person of understanding seems to be a certain like skill of um of uh certain intellectual skill.
• 37:48
  So what's the correlation at all between if you have if you're a person of understanding, then you're gonna be um you know judicious in your speech or in your spirit?
• 37:57
  Like what is that even saying, you know, or saying, yeah, yeah, right.
• 38:03
  In form, it should be saying that um a per only a per you know uh if you really are a person of understanding, then you will be Yakar uh Yakar Ruach.
• 38:19
  And if if you're not Yakar Ruach, uh then you are lacking in your understanding, right?
• 38:27
  But but what does that mean?
• 38:29
  Anyone have any ideas there?
• 38:31
  And Stephanie, I haven't forgotten about you.
• 38:33
  You'll you're next in line.
• 38:39
  See, I mean I think the first step to take is to recognize that ish tbuna might not just be a cognitive ability, uh, in the same way that knowing knowledge is not just a cognitive, sorry, I shouldn't say that.
• 38:51
  It is we are talking about the cognitive ability.
• 38:54
  Actually, a question we didn't ask is why ish tbuna, right?
• 38:58
  Yeah, that's a that's an important question, okay.
• 39:00
  Is why why a person of understanding as opposed to a you know um a Navon uh or Mavin, okay, i.e.
• 39:14
  um i.e.
• 39:16
  normal mishlaik terms for people defined by their understanding.
• 39:23
  Okay, um yeah, so so maybe so one possibility to take here is that an each tabuna is that you are using your understanding in a certain way, but I don't know if I don't know what that is.
• 39:36
  That's just my intuition here.
• 39:42
  All right, let's leave this on the side burner, not the back burner, and we'll go to Stephanie for now, and then we'll come back uh if uh if we have an idea.
• 39:48
  Stephanie, you're up.
• 39:50
  Okay, I think it's a little disjointed.
• 39:52
  It also might be adding on to yours.
• 39:54
  It just this PUSIC just has a lot of moving parts.
• 39:57
  Yes, it exactly has a lot of moving parts.
• 39:59
  Um yeah, specifically.
• 40:03
  My code word for this is like a Rubik's Cube uh PUSIC, which is that you you turn one thing to get the colors on the right side, and then like, oh, you messed up the other side, and then you have to work with that.
• 40:11
  Yeah, go ahead.
• 40:12
  Yeah, so I see this as um you wanted to know the relationship between the two halves.
• 40:19
  I think it's showing uh different levels of kind of obtaining knowledge, and so there's the unwritten level of where there's just an idiot who will just keep talking, or an idiot that stays silent and doesn't learn.
• 40:35
  And then there's the next level where there's somebody who knows information, but kind of adding on to what you were saying, isn't having a discussion with people, so they're not reaching the ultimate amount of understanding that they can have because you can only have a certain amount of thoughts with yourself, like you're not going to reach a new perspective, and then um the next level is somebody who makes it their business to kind of ask questions and have discussions with other people.
• 41:10
  Um, and that's what makes them an Ishtvuna, because that it doesn't say an Ishtvuna withholds his statements, he speaks his statements, and you know how there's like the thing, there's no stupid questions, which is not true, but I think that's how somebody who isn't smart can become much smarter than they would be thought of, like could have been right by just like asking the questions that they don't understand.
• 41:37
  Yeah, okay, hold on just one second here.
• 41:40
  So I just want to make sure I know how you're reading the puzzlook.
• 41:43
  Oh, yeah, let me yeah, I can explain that.
• 41:45
  Yeah, go ahead.
• 41:46
  Okay, so um the subject for the first half is the Yodeya da.
• 41:52
  So somebody who knows knowledge withholds his statements.
• 41:57
  Somebody who knows knowledge withholds his statements.
• 42:02
  Okay, and you're taking that to mean that because I think the part that threw me off is uh is not engaging in discussion is gonna limit them.
• 42:13
  And this guy sounds like he is oh you okay, that's what you're saying, right?
• 42:16
  You're saying that he he and is therefore only know knowledge, he won't understand it.
• 42:23
  Okay, right, right.
• 42:24
  Because he's withholding his statement.
• 42:25
  Okay, okay, good, good, good.
• 42:26
  All right, so in other words, uh uh um uh in other words, he only knows knowledge, but doesn't understand it because he's not engaging in discourse.
• 42:40
  Uh okay, whereas uh the um yeah, so yeah, and uh you want to do the second one?
• 42:47
  How are you doing uh your car?
• 42:48
  Yeah, so it's kind of an implied he's not withholding because there's no action part of the second one, it's just kind of like a descriptor of him that he's precious, um, judicious.
• 43:00
  So I think it more shows that the character trait is kind of transformative of like kind of who you are as a person or your spirit, it's like when you become an understanding person, it becomes a part of you somehow.
• 43:15
  Yeah, I don't know if I'm explaining that right now.
• 43:17
  You know, uh here's what I'm wondering, and now now we actually have uh someone we can uh well, we have two people we can ask now.
• 43:23
  We have Seth and Ruven, who both know more about language than I do.
• 43:25
  Is is there a way to read it where where somehow Yukar Ruah can mean that he that he values speech or speech is of value to him?
• 43:38
  Because that would fit in really well with what Stephanie is saying.
• 43:40
  That um but I'm not sure.
• 43:47
  That would be nice.
• 43:48
  Yeah.
• 43:50
  I'll think on it, but it it doesn't sound it doesn't sound like it either, I know.
• 43:55
  Yeah, uh yeah, okay.
• 43:57
  So I'll I'll just write out the um uh I'll just write out the idea of even if we can't figure out how it goes.
• 44:05
  Okay, meaning that that um he is talking, um, and that's what allows him to get to the level of understanding.
• 44:15
  Okay, and then the only question is what does Yukara Ruach mean?
• 44:19
  Right?
• 44:20
  You're in seven you're not A stance on that, right?
• 44:22
  Um, I think one aspect of it could be that it's something that is enriching because you said yakar can mean like precious, and so when you have something precious, is it's something that enriches your life, but it doesn't.
• 44:38
  I didn't give like a clear definition.
• 44:39
  Yeah, okay, yeah, yeah, yeah.
• 44:40
  Right.
• 44:41
  I think precious is also the way I would go, but I also can't can't figure it out right now.
• 44:44
  Okay, good.
• 44:44
  All right, so now we have two things on the side, burner.
• 44:46
  Okay, two like three-fourths developed ideas.
• 44:48
  All right, Seth, well, what do you have for us?
• 44:52
  Okay, another half fake.
• 44:53
  Okay.
• 44:54
  Um, but I just want to make sure I understand that dot is the highest level.
• 44:58
  That's what it seems the way the Michelin uses it, yeah.
• 45:00
  Okay, just want to make sure about that.
• 45:02
  Okay, so I want to read the first half of the postbook negatively.
• 45:07
  Okay.
• 45:07
  Okay, so so if you think about dot, like adam muha, adam nucleava, it's like it's a very intimate form of knowledge.
• 45:16
  And when it's intimate, it's something that you are you're clinging to, you're you're holding to yourself.
• 45:22
  It's it's a selfishness to it.
• 45:25
  Somebody who is your dea dot, yeah, so he's really smart, but he also he's gonna be the person who maybe will tend not to share his knowledge and love and and withhold his his his great knowledge and not share with the rest of the world.
• 45:42
  Okay.
• 45:43
  So that's a negative statement.
• 45:46
  Not sure how I'm gonna do the next.
• 45:49
  Okay.
• 45:51
  But I'm working on it.
• 45:52
  Okay, all right.
• 45:53
  All right, so that that that that that that's good.
• 45:55
  Um the only thing I would ask, not as a uh problem, just as a question here, is I get where you're getting da'as from as an intimate form of knowledge.
• 46:04
  I just want to understand more, like the way you're saying it made it sound like like it's stemming his his withholding is stemming from the kind of knowledge that it is, whereas to me it seems like there's some sort of you know flawed relationship to that knowledge.
• 46:20
  Um okay, so so so what what I'm seeing it from is Yodea dot.
• 46:24
  Yeah, that's a very strange way to phrase it, right?
• 46:27
  It's like a tautology almost.
• 46:29
  In his mind, in his mind, yeah, I'm the guy who knows knowledge.
• 46:33
  I'm the Yodea dot.
• 46:35
  Yeah.
• 46:35
  Almost a dick type of way.
• 46:37
  Yeah, right.
• 46:38
  Okay, yeah.
• 46:38
  So so it's using this strange phrase uh to highlight the the critique that he fancies himself as someone who really knows knowledge, uh, but but uh he's not what he thinks he is.
• 46:58
  Okay, all right.
• 46:59
  So we'll we'll uh we'll leave that to the side as well.
• 47:01
  Okay, Ruben, you got something?
• 47:04
  Yeah, here's on approach.
• 47:07
  Okay.
• 47:07
  I'm gonna be focusing in on some words and completely flattening out others because I don't know what to do with them.
• 47:16
  Um welcome to the club.
• 47:18
  Yeah, yeah.
• 47:19
  So, first off, Josehamaro.
• 47:22
  I'm taken as forgive me for my exotic pronunciation.
• 47:26
  Yeah, you're one of those.
• 47:27
  Go ahead.
• 47:28
  Sorry, I can't help you.
• 47:30
  I try.
• 47:31
  Yeah, uh, I'm taken, I'm focusing in on that.
• 47:35
  He is, like you said, biting his tongue.
• 47:38
  He is withholding speech, he's restraining it, reeling it in, because he has what to say, and it's actually something harmful, something potentially hurtful.
• 47:50
  And I'm getting that from the second half, uh, taking it as it is written with Kara, uh, he who is cool of spirit, a cool-headed person, some someone who is cool, comic-collected, someone who isn't easily excited, disturbed, perturbed, and so on.
• 48:12
  I'm allowing that second half to color the way I'm understanding the first half.
• 48:16
  Okay.
• 48:16
  I'm also understanding the second half as being an intensification of the first half.
• 48:21
  In the first half, he has what to say, he got a little disturbed, but it's not manifesting outwardly.
• 48:29
  He's not saying anything, he's biting his tongue.
• 48:31
  And that person is a Yodya Dalath.
• 48:34
  Or whatever that means, yeah.
• 48:35
  I'm just taking it to mean uh a wise person.
• 48:38
  Uh uh sagacious in the sense of he knows how to live life, he knows when it is right to step in, when not, when to answer a full according to his folly, and so on, that type of thing.
• 48:51
  Yeah.
• 48:52
  Uh and in the second half, it's a level above with Karar Ruah, even his spirit is cool.
• 49:00
  Okay.
• 49:01
  So he's, I don't know if he's completely unagitated, but he's at least gotten to a point where it doesn't bother him that much.
• 49:09
  He's a he's a step above the first guy.
• 49:11
  Yeah.
• 49:11
  And Ishtavuna, I'm also understanding as a step above.
• 49:15
  You're right that uh usually it's hachma, right?
• 49:20
  Uh uh Bina and Daath, but in uh in Proverbs 2.6, this order of here I have it.
• 49:28
  Um yeah, me piw da'ath utvuna 2-6.
• 49:33
  Over there, yeah, it's the order is right first, then daath, and then right, that's true.
• 49:40
  Okay, so based on that verse, it seems that at times it could be that too.
• 49:48
  Okay, that's level.
• 49:50
  Okay, that's that that's fine.
• 49:51
  So you know, I I think uh I have uh either a restatement or another level of developing your approach here, is that according so I this is where we really need to ask the the the rabbi Moskowitz question.
• 50:01
  Where is it?
• 50:02
  The rabbi Moswitz question is um is what is the subject of this Pasuk?
• 50:09
  So you're learning it to be a different subject than the way we are, which is um which is I'm gonna just say uh uh is uh I'll call this an addendum uh for now, uh, and unless we see that's another idea, okay.
• 50:22
  Is that the subject is um how to become cool headed, okay?
• 50:29
  All right, which is that I think uh just talk it out first.
• 50:33
  I'm not gonna type it out.
• 50:34
  So, in other words, I think that that um there is a certain type of person who thinks there are people who are naturally cool-headed.
• 50:42
  We're not talking about those because Michele is telling us how to become good things.
• 50:45
  It's not saying, oh, by the way, here's a person who's naturally like good, fine, great.
• 50:49
  Okay, but um what this is telling us about is that that I think a mistake people sometimes make is believing that they can just develop the character trait itself without engaging in behavioral um cultivators of that character trait.
• 51:10
  Uh, and that the at least the way I'm hearing your statement here is like this first guy does get bothered, okay.
• 51:18
  The fool will just vent out the statements and basically give priority to his own emotional release valve, regardless of what the harm is or regardless of what it does.
• 51:26
  So that's that's the unstated um uh um person in this post, which by the way, the next post uh I think does talk about that person uh in a different way.
• 51:35
  And then this person gets mad, but he holds his tongue.
• 51:39
  And you know, I'm sure there is a person who can is in that situation and says, like, well, I'm still getting mad, and that's bad.
• 51:46
  Yeah, compared to the ideal, it's bad, but you are going to be training yourself, and there is like a transition between exercising that and then becoming someone who's cool headed.
• 51:56
  And what I'm wondering, and this is why I'm saying this might be like a uh another development of the idea, is instead of just contrasting these two people, can we say that practicing this first half is what gets you to the second half, or is that too much?
• 52:13
  One step removed, I think that works.
• 52:16
  I don't think that's actually what the verse is saying.
• 52:19
  Yeah, I think the verse is more a statement, like a plaque, like right.
• 52:23
  But one step removed, it's right there.
• 52:25
  It's yeah, right.
• 52:26
  So that can be an application of the idea, then, right?
• 52:28
  Yeah, it could be application, yeah.
• 52:29
  Um, by the way, I do want to say also just another thing I noticed here is it I I noticed this when we were reading it.
• 52:35
  I said that this puzzle does not have an and in it.
• 52:37
  I think the and in the csiv, I mean, it that's the normal way that the puzzle would be, right?
• 52:44
  Is that you have a first half and and the second half.
• 52:46
  So it is a little weird that the second half doesn't have an and, uh, whereas the way that you're reading it does, which makes more you know, it fits into Michelin more.
• 52:53
  Yeah.
• 52:53
  Okay, I I like all these half-baked ideas.
• 52:56
  We got like a nice little um uh uh uh bakery tray of uh of half-baked uh half-baked ideas.
• 53:03
  Um so um uh that's better than nothing, yeah, Stephanie.
• 53:07
  Uh can I add on to a translation for my idea?
• 53:11
  Yeah, uh so for Yakar Rua, yeah, I'm gonna translate it a little bit differently.
• 53:18
  Okay, I'm gonna say so Yakkar, I'm gonna say enriches.
• 53:22
  I don't know if I can do that, like enriches um your soul.
• 53:27
  So like an Ishtfuna does things that enriches his soul, and then uh tell me if I'm like making things too much of a stretch.
• 53:37
  Like your Selim Elohim, things that like feed that are like either like knowledge or understanding, or just you know, the things that have like depth.
• 53:47
  Yeah, and that's okay, I'm kind of losing it, but yeah you understand where how this kind of fits into my yeah, my only my uh it definitely fits into your into your approach here.
• 54:02
  So according to Stephanie, also I should say here, I want to do the subject we use.
• 54:05
  According to Stephanie is really the subject here is um how to uh how to acquire or develop knowledge.
• 54:14
  Um and then according to me and Ariel, subject is um is speech as a measure of uh, I guess speaking habits as a measure of how developed your knowledge is.
• 54:32
  Um yeah, I'm I don't know whether that translation works, but it if if it did, then it that is uh it fits in very well with your idea.
• 54:40
  Um okay, let's turn to our commentaries now, and hopefully we'll get a full idea from one of these.
• 54:45
  So as we usually do, we'll go first to the Monsieur's David.
• 54:48
  So he says, uh uh Jose Kamarav, Hamonea Dvarim Betalim, who he dead adopt.
• 54:52
  Okay, so he posits that we're talking about a specific kind of statement here.
• 54:55
  Okay, he says, one who uh withholds um uh uh uh pointless statements.
• 55:02
  Okay, Divarim Talem is like like not uh it's not nonsense, it's like you know, pointless, you could say um uh you could say trivial, uh you could say idle, okay, uh statements, null one second.
• 55:19
  Uh who Yodas, uh he knows knowledge, okay, and then uh the second half is someone whose uh speech, the breadth of his mouth, is precious and um and not important here.
• 55:41
  Uh what's another word for here?
• 55:44
  Almost like valued, you know, but not that not really valued.
• 55:47
  Um not prominent.
• 55:52
  Significant.
• 55:53
  Esteemed is uh yeah, say esteemed and esteemed.
• 55:56
  Um uh mishruch piv who ya karbhashov the in my behem, and he um reduces his speech, uh his his his uh now behem, I don't know, but his statements.
• 56:11
  You'll see what he's getting at in a second.
• 56:13
  Uh hu ish tvuna.
• 56:15
  He is a person of understanding, and then he says the classic Matsu's David phrase, which we actually don't get a lot in Michali, surprisingly, is Vikafla Davar B Miloshonos.
• 56:23
  Uh he repeats the idea in different words, uh, ironically, ironically, uh using extra words uh to say this.
• 56:32
  Okay, so so um so the summary here is uh again we'll we'll figure out what he's saying in a second, but the summary of how he's reading it is that um that someone who um knows knowledge, whatever that means, will minimize uh pointless statements, okay, and actually I think this is the best way.
• 57:04
  Someone who knows knowledge uh and and possesses understanding, okay, will minimize pointless statements.
• 57:11
  Okay, so here on this, we could really ask Audio's question is isn't this obvious?
• 57:17
  Okay, so what is the uh the idea?
• 57:22
  Okay, I mean like apparently it's not obvious, and I think it is uh I think there are people who uh and I always worry that I'm one of these people, there are people who like are into knowledge, but they just talk a lot, you know.
• 57:36
  Um, and so like I don't think it's a grand, and I don't think it's you can take it for granted that that that you're gonna minimize pointless statement, uh minimize pointless statements.
• 57:43
  But what what would be the uh I guess yeah, what what I guess what is this teaching us about knowledge or speech or or pointless statements?
• 58:01
  You know, I don't know, I don't know what the what the address of the idea is.
• 58:04
  I have something.
• 58:05
  Yeah, go ahead.
• 58:08
  So it could be there are two levels of knowledge or wise person.
• 58:13
  One is where it's in the head, and the other one is where it is integrated into the heart, into character as well.
• 58:19
  This reminds me of what uh Rambaum writes, how he translates, how he defines, sorry, how he defines a ha-ham.
• 58:26
  Um I forgot where it is somewhere in like Hill's Dale.
• 58:30
  It's in Hill's Dales 111.
• 58:33
  Right.
• 58:33
  We'll see, we'll see, I'll see what you're gonna say first, but I think that's the one you're talking about.
• 58:37
  He I don't remember the exact wording, but he says a bunch of stuff, and then he says, that's what a ha-ham is.
• 58:45
  And it it doesn't really have anything to do with intellectual prowess, it has more to do with the way he conducts himself in the world.
• 58:54
  Right.
• 58:56
  In this case, yeah, someone who knows knowledge, someone who's a wise person, is not really the guy who knows a bunch of stuff, knows a bunch of facts, but he knows how to live in the world.
• 59:08
  He know he has uh cultivated a character which I don't know works with that or is a result of that.
• 59:22
  One of those.
• 59:23
  Yeah.
• 59:26
  That's it.
• 59:27
  Okay, so you know, what I'm starting hearing you talk about this made me wonder is this what Ariel and I are saying, but just reading the puzzle differently, that that like I mean, when I first read it, I thought and and I still think this is the the shot here, is that you know, Devar and Batalim usually just means like pointless statements, you know.
• 59:48
  But the more I think about it, the more I'm realizing that like you know, if you are really um like actually hold on a second.
• 59:56
  Let me just actually this is this is not the Ram that you meant, but while we're here, um the Rambom does talk about speech.
• 1:00:05
  Um he talks about how Chacham, uh oh, sorry, he says like this.
• 1:00:12
  Um, these might be relevant here.
• 1:00:14
  Um, so I'll start from here.
• 1:00:23
  Okay, so he says like this is in Hill's Deus 5.7.
• 1:00:26
  So the the the title of the chapter, or not the title, the um subject ishachum nikar bokmaso of Deosav, just as a wise person is discernible or recognizable in his wisdom and his character traits, who moved over himself, and he's distinct or separated through them from the other rest of the people.
• 1:00:44
  He needs to be discernible or recognizable Bamasov in his actions, Bema Khalo, Uvumeshkehu, Uvav Ilaso in his eating and drinking and sex, Uvasia Strachav, and in how he goes to the bathroom, Uvadiburo, and in his speech, Uva Hiluko, Uvumabusho, and in his walking and in his garments, Uvakilkul Dvarov and in his business, Ubum Masanov Matano.
• 1:01:03
  I forgot the difference between uh Kilkul Dvarov and Masanov Matano, his his business dealings, uh Vihu Koh Hamasim Elu Naim Um Sukani Bioser, and all of his actions must be um beautiful and and exceedingly refined.
• 1:01:16
  Okay, so then he goes through all these cases, but then when he goes to speech, he says like this.
• 1:01:22
  Where is he?
• 1:01:24
  Okay, so he says, Okay, I definitely make this mistake.
• 1:01:33
  I actually I don't know if this is a mistake or not, but he says, uh Tom Khacham does not cry and shout when he speaks like like uh domesticated animals and wild animals.
• 1:01:45
  So he does not raise his voice.
• 1:01:49
  His speech is pleasant with everyone.
• 1:01:50
  Now, if he means like yelling at people, then I think I'm pretty good at not yelling at people.
• 1:01:55
  But if he just means talking loudly, I I have a very hard time not talking loudly when I'm excited or what I'm teaching.
• 1:02:00
  Ukshi Dabr Banachas, and when he speaks gently, Yizahir Shalyisrach, uh, he's careful to not distance himself.
• 1:02:09
  Until he appears like uh the haughty.
• 1:02:11
  Umakim Lushalam Khu'adam, he greets everyone preemptively.
• 1:02:14
  He's the first to greet everyone because they should hear ruha nocha himeno so that people uh feel pleasantly uh about him.
• 1:02:19
  Vidan es koladam the Kavaskus, he judges every person favorably.
• 1:02:25
  He speaks uh in the uh in praise of his friend and does not speak degradingly about him at all.
• 1:02:29
  Oh if shalom rode shalom, he loves peace and he chases peace.
• 1:02:31
  Okay, now here's where we get to more particulars.
• 1:02:34
  Umra a makum should devour moelinish omer.
• 1:02:39
  If he sees a place or an opportunity where his words will benefit and will be listened to, then he'll say it.
• 1:02:45
  And if not, shows it, he'll be quiet.
• 1:02:47
  Okay, Kzad, how so?
• 1:02:49
  Loy Rat Havero uh Bishast Kaso, he will not attempt to appease his fellow at the time that his fellow is angry.
• 1:02:57
  He won't question him about his vow at the time he makes the vow, ashitiskar dato vi noach until his friend's mind cools off and he and uh and is uh quieted.
• 1:03:09
  He will not attempt to comfort his fellow at a time when the his dead lies before him, he may show Bahu Ashik Aji Kaver, because his friend has uh is preoccupied or in a state of anxiety until he buries him.
• 1:03:20
  Uh and similarly, like these.
• 1:03:23
  Veloy Rai Luchavero Bashas kill Kaloso, he will not um be won't see his friend at the time of his degradation.
• 1:03:33
  It means he he's not gonna like look at his friend when his friend's going through something, uh when his friend's like um in a bad state, uh, he'll hide his eyes.
• 1:03:39
  So you see from most of this so far is basically he's judging whether his words are actually going to have uh purpose here.
• 1:03:47
  Okay, so that's what got me to wonder here of maybe when when Matsuda Steun uh David says Devarn Batalium, he does not mean like talking about the weather or talking about sports, he means if your statements like actually have a purpose and actually accomplish something or not.
• 1:04:05
  Okay, now here's where I get okay, we're gonna go on a little bit more.
• 1:04:08
  Um, Veloyishane Bidiburo, he should not um um uh literally change his speech, but what it means is to not like lie at all, like this something like white lies should not like um uh deviate from the truth in his speech.
• 1:04:21
  Velo Yosef Loyagra shouldn't add or detract shalom vakyotabehan, unless it's about matters of peace.
• 1:04:27
  We know you're allowed to lie for peace.
• 1:04:28
  Um, okay, fallosho Davar.
• 1:04:30
  Now, this is the part that this is the part that brought me here.
• 1:04:33
  The the sum of the matter, he only speaks words of kindness or chachma or wisdom and things like that, okay, meaning beneficial things.
• 1:04:45
  Belichapper im Isha Bashuki shouldn't converse, he doesn't converse with a woman uh in the marketplace, a feel he isto oakosa obito, even his wife or his uh sister or his daughter.
• 1:04:56
  Okay, I think uh times have changed about that.
• 1:04:57
  Um, yeah, so in other words, the point I'm trying to make here, and I don't know if I'm forcing this into the Matsudas uh David, but um, but I was thinking about what Ruben was saying about how like a Khacham is not just someone who possesses knowledge, it's someone who lives in a certain way, and they are there's a certain like integratedness that they have with other people.
• 1:05:16
  And the highest level of this you see in the way that the Ramam describes the speech of a Talmud Khacham is that his speech is valuable, but it's also calibrated to actually have these beneficial effects.
• 1:05:26
  And he doesn't speak if it's not gonna have the beneficial effects.
• 1:05:29
  So, like that's the I don't know if I'm projecting into the Mitsudis Dovit but Devarin Batalim, but uh that's that's at least an idea.
• 1:05:38
  I mean, and and again, that's why that's why the question, maybe this is what Ariel and I were saying all along.
• 1:05:42
  Uh, only Ari and I were starting with the assumption that we're talking about in learning and in knowledge, but maybe it's more more broad than that.
• 1:05:49
  So I'm just gonna say Rambam inspired approach.
• 1:05:53
  Uh, and I'm gonna lump this here approach, which is that um in Hilchos Deus 5, Ramam um goes on at length about how um a Talmud Chachamim um only speaks in ways that are beneficial and kind and wise, and does speak uh in other ways okay perhaps perhaps those other ways uh are what the Matsudis David uh is saying is is getting at with um you know pointless uh statements okay uh not like idle small talk but statements that don't accomplish anything okay um accomplish anything and then and then this is where um this is where what we were saying before comes in is that like this shows this shows that he knows uh that you know that that his knowledge is shaping his personality in a manner that aligns him with good living and not just good thinking okay something like that again i i if someone says you're projecting into them so it's it'd be like okay guilty but uh you know because divine betaim usually just means pointless stuff but i think this is a good idea nonetheless i agree that i think it's a good idea but uh can i point to a different rambam yeah i think it's more it is more banal um yeah it does take uh the barim betalim as the way that it usually is taken but in two four in two four uh you want to pull that up yeah two four can kakosov yeah if you search oh no sorry uh rambom and in the ram two four yeah yeah okay uh yeah I was thinking there also about silence and speech yeah I think that's more to the point yeah okay so I'll read it ulam yarbi adam bashtika person I always love that phrase person should always increase or like be excessive in silence Veloy Dabar El Obudvar Khachma oh that was actually the one I was thinking of that was I was uh searched for Obadivar Khachma yeah um yeah why did I go the other place?
• 1:08:08
  Oh I know why I went to the other place because we were talking about uh Chacham yeah Veluid Dabr El-Badvar Obadvar Khachma Obudvaram should Sarah Flam Like yeah that was one I was thinking of so this is normal conduct okay like we read what we read is like the highest level this is normal conduct that people should strive for is you should only speak either in a matter of wisdom or in something practical okay that you need for your practical life.
• 1:08:30
  Amr al-Rav Tamid Rabbain Okadir they said about Rav, the student of Rabbeinu Qatar Nasi, Shalosikala Koyamab he never spoke uh idle chatter in his entire life's Rov Koladim that's the majority of people's speech.
• 1:08:46
  Even in uh in bodily in in practical needs a person should not be excessive Valzet Sibukamin Vamru regarding this the sages commanded and said Kulhamarbi Dvarim may viche uh the uh all who are excessive in in in statements anyone who uh speaks excessively bring sin.
• 1:09:02
  Vamru Lomatsasi Luguf Tov Elishtika they said um I have not found anything better for the body than silence.
• 1:09:11
  Even in words of Torah and words of Khachma Yihu Divri Hakak me atim vi nini hamrubim the words of the Khachm should be few but the their uh concepts their ideational content should be uh a lot this is what the sages commanded saying adam latamidov derh katsa a person should always teach a student concisely mrubim ba inyan mu'at if the um uh statements are many but the ideas are few harizos sikhlos this is fool uh you know uh folly while Zen Nemar as it says uh in Kohalas 5 2 inyan v koksiok brov dvarim that a dream comes in an uh in an abundance of concern uh and the voice of a fool is in an abundance of words uh last one Siaglashtika uh a fence for wisdom is or safeguard for wisdom is silence loy mahar lahashiv a person should not be quick to respond below yarbi ladaber and should not be excessive to speak the laminatamidin Beshuva Vinachas and should teach students uh calmly uh and uh gently not with shouting below a requisition not with the uh of uh you know prolixity uh like long speech loma omer uh divri khamim banachas nishmaim um that the words of the heard uh with uh gentleness or or gently yeah that is that is much more directly on point here um yeah so let me just note that in the notes um in uh in hilchos deus 24 okay and even more in yeah um okay yeah fine um yeah so the idea then is that um that a quality of uh a chakham i i know it doesn't say chacham here but like a yeah so so can we explain i i i we have the application i just want to understand the what what's the relation between knowing knowledge and being a person of understanding and then having this effect on the speech like where where is that uh where does that come from or what is that where does that show I mean it's possible that we've covered it before but I just want to think about it with Mathuis Dubbin in mind I mean let's just think like it it it is a pointless thing if you say it's pointless word like you're you're you're not you're not applying your knowledge to your speech right I mean like if you're just firing off um statements that serve no purpose there is a uh there's a lack of thought there yeah there's there's it's not complete knowledge it's knowledge in content but not in form right right yeah and so the but here's the interesting thing I think maybe the the test case to think about here is what about the Chachum who is speaking in Chachma and Torah but is just being very very verbose about it right the Ram includes that in this statement so like what's the mistake there?
• 1:12:05
  I mean I think that's what you said is that it's in content but not in form.
• 1:12:08
  So like what's that step that this guy's missing?
• 1:12:10
  Because if you if you call him out on it say what do you mean I like conceivably you can have a guy or girl who is only talking about Chachma all day long but he's just constantly talking and using a lot of words.
• 1:12:20
  And the Ram would say oh you're not you're not uh reaching this ideal of silence like there is something lacking here you know true but like you said it is ironic that Ram Bum always talks a lot when he talks about talking I know it is funny yeah and also that might not be what the Mitsuh David is talking about because I don't think the Mitsubished David would call that Devarn the talim necessarily yeah Stephanie So I think like the consequence for the person who's knowledgeable and they're just kind of like talking a lot is that people won't want to be around them.
• 1:12:49
  And that's why the person who is like reserving their speech for when it's important people will want to listen to them and hear what they have to say.
• 1:12:58
  Like let's say someone who's really quiet and then they say something like really funny or like really smart just every now and then you really listen.
• 1:13:06
  Yeah yeah right okay so that that gave me this idea here is that maybe I I don't know this is uh another you know uh um a piece of the puzzle okay is that that in all the forms of speech that the Rambaum um you know um dissuaded us uh from in 2-4 okay all of them exhibit a certain like detachment from the reality of living and this is what Ruben was saying earlier but like reality of living like like either you're not thinking about the effects of your words okay or the the way they land or um or whether they achieve what you want them to achieve okay or what Stephanie just said uh how people will react okay so so there is this like core here is like speech that only someone who who understands the value of knowledge and speech will use it judiciously I mean again it sounds like we're just repeating the ideas here but I'm getting a a better sense of like what we're talking about.
• 1:14:31
  Yeah it's a hard one oof okay tough night tough night okay let's do one more I want to do the Riniyona and uh here again we have the uh flaw translation which I have not vetted so I'm just gonna I'm gonna read and translate here.
• 1:14:51
  The person who knows knowledge and the words of Chachma are arranged on his lips who kose gammar he will ref uh withhold his his statements okay this is like so far what are you and I are saying he'll only speak a thing that's proper in its time Kamoshkaz it says initially uh Vadavar Bito Matov how good is a statement in its time gam li dabarim uh bomb zulasi al ozin shamas of machum shim machabavina marav the showsin buttama devarov also he will only speak of them or he will not speak of them except to a listening ear and in a place where they will value cherish his words and drink them in thirstyakes ha mida hazos el hayodea das it ascribes this mida to someone who knows knowledge he who makir Bamala because he recognizes the value of the virtue of Khachma Umetuk Devereha and the sweetness of its of its words and its preciousness and all this other good stuff.
• 1:15:49
  That silk is precious in the eyes of someone who's accustomed to wear silk right in other words if you don't if you don't wear silk you're not going to really value it but if you know if you wear silk then you know what it uh that's really good stuff.
• 1:15:58
  Big day argomon and uh oh and big day argumon okay and purple garmentsel divre hachamim hachma viechadim therefore he will um uh I always forget what Yesalsa means uh how do they translate this here exalt has to do with rising anything uh yeah okay exalt he will exalt um words of of uh and uh honor them the um the uh ethical masters say do not be like those who cast uh pearls before swine that's the uh the the the idiom that made it into the English language Vashinis second thing oh all that was the first thing apparently the whole first thing was that he will only say them in the proper place and time okay fine second one is kihayode samakya malas a chokma in covenasomena lihispawn um uh his intent uh someone who really knows uh recognizes the virtue of Kokma his intention in it is not to glorify himself in the eyes of the masses he daio beatra shi itra lo ha khachma it's enough with the crown that Khachma crowned him with in other words the knowledge is its own value V ashir kana mimena yisron umala it's enough that he got the selfish benefit from it that he got a uh uh uh a uh superiority or an advantage uh in his own soul is the last pre-toelus umitva therefore he will only speak in a place where his words uh uh you know have a uh produce a uh benefit or a mitzvah okay so let me summarize first of all so this is very similar to what we were doing here uh summary is that um someone who knows who knows knowledge and recognizes its value will only speak uh in a place and time and to people where his words will will be beneficial okay and um he will not sorry ben official and he will not um uh attempt to glorify himself uh in the eyes of the masses because the he views uh sorry he views the the chokma as its own reward okay so that's part one of the Rubaniana okay let's read part two yakar ruach ish tvuna darko lihios yakar ruacher davar ach yishkol oso tchila bhmosne tivunaso so the person of understanding his way is to be sparing of spirit or I don't know how he's gonna translate it yet and he won't say anything and uh he won't say anything until he weighs it on the scales of his his uh understanding he won't uh be excessive in speech um he's afraid of error and mistake shaluhu davar when someone when people ask him something lo yashiv to bilti achrey mitun umakshava he will not answer it uh without uh unless it was after deliberation and and thought because the man of uh of tfuna has uh uh you know firmly possesses the methods of research the heaven theeda kotser hasadam he understands and he knows the deficiency of man's apprehension believe uh that they don't um uh investigate matters me i think he's talking about the who's the plural here oh sorry things will not be um uh investigated by him without this deliberation and and analysis in other words he's not gonna like make hasty judgments uh debr allavashalam al minios minus debre hachma shiyeda haqakham biyaksok osam lifne itamusmanam thal hoker ishtvuna as tvarov codim shitavar cult had sorak uh and now it looks like he's summaring here he's saying that um he spoke about the withholding of the words of that the chakam knows and withholds them before uh you know unless it's um uh he he holds on to them until it's their time and also on the the hoker i'm still not sure how he's translating hokare or yakar ruach but the the quality he's talking about is this like deliberation of the person of uh deliberation kodum shit is bonin badaver colour tsurak before he's understood something completely kasher amar hakasub ish tabuna nisbaer lanu kihu medaber al dvarim sho tsurchlies bonin behambina so a man of tabuna means we're talking about it's clear that we're talking about someone who is speaking about stuff that requires tabuna okay mean things that you need to like look into in depth nisbar call dabra ala dvaraam show yude and someone who knows knowledge is talking about any knowledge okay so let me summarize this so um the the uh the person of understanding recognizes um the need for deliberation and caution and protection from error so he will be very um careful to not uh you say to not say anything yeah to not uh to not speak uh excessively or hastily um uh about uh matters that require thought okay so now the question here is uh what is the subject and what is the relationship uh between the two halves uh okay i i think this is very interesting because uh what he's doing here is he's talking about two different types of people who both think before they speak but uh for different reasons or in different contexts right the the the knower of knowledge uh basically uh values knowledge and is only going to share it when it has benefit and he's not trying to get anything else out of the knowledge like popularity so that's the first case the second guy recognizes uh the treacherous path of research and will not make statements because they might lead to error so I feel like those are you know again they're similar in that they're both uh like exercising restraint and not speaking hastily but but like what is the uh what's the difference between the two?
• 1:22:18
  Like what's the uh yeah I'll start us off by just typing us uh what I just said here is that that both share the quality of exercising restraint before speaking okay but for different reasons the knower of knowledge truly values knowledge values the knowledge and therefore will not waste it uh when it won't have an impact nor will he try to squeeze out of it uh value other than the knowledge itself okay um the person of understanding the person of understanding recognizes how difficult it is to attain a correct understanding and how treacherous the path is so he'll restrain he'll he'll withhold uh he'll refrain from speaking um so as not to uh to you know um promote error yeah Stephanie so I can see it being about um disseminating knowledge like the for the data they're doing it on a much smaller scale to either their friends or just for their own like like benefit yeah and the um the understanding person understands like the whole system as like a whole that like everything you say kind of gets put into the system and is disseminated like you know how a rumor spreads very easily so they're very careful just from that perspective not just for respecting the knowledge itself.
• 1:24:15
  Okay uh so the person cares about the whole uh enterprise of knowledge in in uh you know among humanity right uh you know and we'll we'll even protect uh that yeah okay good I think that that that is a true statement yeah Reuben could you repeat the question one more time just yeah the question is just what uh I'm just trying to get at an understanding of either what's the subject of the Pusuk or what's the difference between these two kinds of restraint.
• 1:24:47
  Okay so in the first according to Rabena Yona the way I'm understanding it is in the first half the reason why he restrains his words is because he understands the value of wisdom yeah whereas in the second half the reason he restrains his words is because he understands the complexity of wisdom okay that's good that's a nice clean distinction so he understands the value of knowledge and then in the second half uh he he restrains his words because he recognizes the complexity okay that's good and um and so I guess uh what I'm wondering now so it's interesting these two can I'm not gonna say why in the first half where it's about valuing so uh knowing the value why is it a daath as opposed to the other way around why is each to na for the second and why is yodaiada for the first I think he also says that um I think he's understanding yod here as the way that I know a person I know a person not just I know an idea I know a person I know his worth I know yeah I know his worth uh and that knowing like in Hebrew knowing can mean like a deep intimate knowledge right so he really knows Daoth he doesn't just have it which is why I think translating it as instead of has knowledge uh uh instead uh knows knowledge uh emphasizes what he's getting at and in the second half each tivuna implies that whatever it is what whatever the reason is for his restraining his words has to do with tivuna which is understand so he understands that you need to go through ideas very methodically and only then are yeah good that's really good that's good good uh nuance yeah okay I like that uh his understanding uh and then I need to bolt this word really nose knowledge yeah okay good all right very good we got one idea no we had other ideas before now I I feel like I feel comfortable now we got uh Rubina Yona nice clean full idea yeah Seth I might be building on what was just mentioned yeah but the way I was looking at the last half of the talkbook and reading it Vikar Vikarua is that somebody who's uh a cool cucumber let's say yeah that is the method that he uses to gain his knowledge is he's gonna be cool and calculating and analytic and that's how you become an easy whereas the Odeya god already has gotten to that level and and it's more of what he's doing with that knowledge.
• 1:27:40
  So one is is a methodology of how to achieve a knowledge or understanding and the other is an application the first half is an application of judicious use as well that's good.
• 1:27:54
  You know it's it's an interesting uh quality you're pointing out here because I agree that like when you are researching something uh or analyzing something you do need to keep your emotions out of it but when you are on a higher level you need your emotions to be with it in order to be able to know how to apply it or to know how to share it or to whatever so it is it is uh it is interesting that the um that uh this is my I'll just say my addendum here is is when researching you need to be uh emotionless okay I mean I'm saying in all areas but like in in when in areas where your emotions can uh can um sway you okay but when but but but the full form of knowing needs this you know emotional intelligence um uh you know uh and and uh and would be lacking uh if the coolness persisted and that's why it's not in the first half that's why it's not in the first half because the person who has that level of knowledge now he knows when to withhold it or when to use it properly right okay good all right this is very good um I think I'm actually not going to summarize the uh the half-aced ideas even though these were good half-baked ideas uh I just don't want to summarize that but just to summarize the Biniona here that we have at the end is um uh where did my summaries go?
• 1:29:17
  Right is that there is a there's two types of of of uh of restraint in speech there's one that stems from really valuing the knowledge and and therefore this is very close to what Ariel and I said is that sharing it only with people who are going to listen and only when it's going to help and same thing with the Ramban or only saying it in a place where it has a point and a purpose that's really valuing it and also just not the people who are speaking uh sharing their knowledge not in those cases are doing it because they have some other value they're attaching to it that they want to feel smart or they want to be admired or whatever.
• 1:29:51
  And then there's the the type the second type the Ishtvuna that is is restrained because they recognize how complex it is and how easy it is to lead to misunderstanding.
• 1:30:01
  And ideally you have both of them um but um but uh you know we in other words having a PUSIC that shows both of them I think really uh compares and contrasts them really shows that it is coming from two different places here.
• 1:30:14
  That's very good.
• 1:30:15
  Okay.
• 1:30:16
  This is a tough PUSIC I thought it was gonna be easier.
• 1:30:18
  Now what's gonna be interesting is next week which uh Bleenetter uh next week this will be our last week uh before the summer is the uh another PUSIC that can be standalone but we'll see we'll keep these in mind and see if it really you know uh if if that's maybe why a lot of the commentators put them together because maybe maybe we couldn't understand this one because we needed the the the the the the one after this so we'll see maybe speaking all right thanks for coming tonight uh again not not a big uh crowd as usual but still a good cheer so uh all right until next time have a good week by