משלי טז:טו
בְּאוֹר פְּנֵי מֶלֶךְ חַיִּים וּרְצוֹנוֹ
כְּעָב מַלְקוֹשׁ:
Mishlei 16:15
In the light of a king’s countenance is life, and his favor is like a rain cloud.
Major Questions/Problems
- Is this pasuk limited to actual kings, or is "king" just an example of a broader category?
- What does it mean to be "in the light of a king's countenance"?
- What "life" does one gain through this?
- What type of "favor" is it talking about?
- How is the king's favor "like a rain cloud"?
- What is this pasuk teaching us beyond the obvious point that it is beneficial to get on the king's good side?
Instead of writing a single four-sentence summary of the main idea, I'm going to write an eight-sentence summary of the main idea according to both the derech ha'nigleh and the derech ha'nistar. Scroll past this picture when you're good and ready!
Eight Sentence Summary of the Main idea
Derech ha'Nigleh: It is natural to seek the approval and favor of a king (or any person in a position of influence, such as a boss or supervisor), but one must guard against two errors. The first error is to undervalue the benefit of the king’s favor, failing to recognize just how much he can improve your life simply based on the fact that he likes you. The second error is to overvalue the benefit of the king’s favor by regarding his approval is an actual good when it is really only a potential good – much like a rain cloud, which might yield benefit, but is not guaranteed.
Derech ha'Nistar: Likewise, it is natural to seek Hashem’s favor, but one must guard against these same two errors. The first error is to undervalue the benefit of Hashem’s favor (i.e. hashgachah pratis); Hashem is Omnipotent, and has the ability to completely transform a person’s life from bad to good, as can be seen throughout Tanach. The second error is to overvalue the benefit of God’s favor by treating His blessings of material success as an actual good rather than a potential good. In truth, the material blessings granted by Hashem to those whom He favors are but a means of facilitating their involvement in the true good (i.e. involvement in Torah and wisdom, by which we merit life in the World to Come). In other words, Hashem’s blessings only provide us with the potential for attaining the true good, but it is up us to actualize that potential through by our own free will.
Nice ideas! But I'm confused. You said that the hidden interpretation is an "allegory about how to achieve intellectual perfection." How is that so in this case? And I asked this before in general, but I'll ask again here in this particular pasuk, why is the hidden interpretation hidden? It seems like good information which could enrich anyone's life, not just the elite's
ReplyDeleteTypo: "which isn't might yield benefit, but is not guaranteed."
In my post about learning Mishlei allegorically I hesitated to use the term "intellectual perfection," which is much narrower than tikun ha'nefesh. The latter encompasses more than just "higayon" (BOOM), but includes anything which brings one toward the objective of true success. In this case, the derech ha'nistar is about how to obtain the benefits of hashgachah pratis.
Deleteso that's what the nistar is actually about? tikun hanefesh?
DeleteThe first error is to undervalue the benefit of Hashem’s favor (i.e. hashgachah pratis); Hashem is Omnipotent, and has the ability to completely transform a person’s life from bad to good, as can be seen throughout Tanach.------this is certainly true.
ReplyDeleteNice post!
Nice! It's interesting that this pasuk doesn't seem to include opposites at first.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: Did you come up with your derech hanigleh idea without any mind towards the derech hanistar?
Yes. Although I haven't done an official tally, I'd say that around a third of the pesukim in Mishlei are not formulated as opposites. In those cases, you have to infer the opposite from what is stated.
DeleteAnswer: Always.
OK, good. I thought the nistar matched up surprisingly nicely, but I suppose that experience can come from looking at an idea after it has already been formulated.
DeleteIf you haven't already done so, check out the additional point I made in my comment to Yaakov below (in the paragraph beginning "while I'm at it").
DeleteT,
DeleteIf I understand Kol correctly, the matching up occurs because he is coming up with the derech hanistar with a very strong mind towards the idea of the derech hanigleh that he discovered.
Yaakov,
DeleteI am sure that is true. I had initially been surprised that the derech hanigleh led to a neatly-parallel-and-still-sensible derech hanistar when the former was formulated with no mind towards the latter. But hard-to-find connections can often seem obvious after you've seen them. So I think that pseudo-obviousness is what I was observing.
Interesting, I would of thought to interpret the pasuk as life being life of the soul and light being the light of knowledge (within the derech hanistar). In other words showing the true existence of the person is insofar as he is a recipient of ideas.
ReplyDeleteWhat pushed you to view the derech nistar as being about material benefit?
Also, what pushed you to view the rain cloud as one which might produce rain but is uncertain, as opposed to one which does produce rain. With the idea focusing on the rain-like benefit of ideas (similar to its use in haazinu)
Your approach is more along the lines of the Ralbag, who interprets this pasuk - and many others - as being about Olam ha'Ba. I find myself more inclined toward the approach of the Meiri, who usually (maybe even always?) learns the derech ha'nistar as being about tikun ha'nefesh with an emphasis on Olam ha'Zeh, even though there will be benefits in Olam ha'Ba. My mind is more inclined toward the latter because (a) that's where I'm at in my development, and (b) at this point, I have a hard time seeing chidushim in Ralbagian interpretations about Olam ha'Ba. I find myself reading them and saying, "Great, Ralbag. So this pasuk is telling me that I can get Olam ha'Ba. I already knew that." (Obviously, I know that the Ralbag is bringing out a chidush, and in some cases - such as this one - it is clear that he's getting at a more specific idea, but since the other approaches to the pesukim appeal to me more, I usually don't invest the energy in trying to figure out what he's getting at.)
DeleteIn this case I was pushed to view the derech ha'nistar as being about material benefit because of how I learned the derech ha'nigleh. According to my interpretation, the derech ha'nigleh is correcting mistakes about how one relates to the king's favor. I saw that these same mistakes apply to the way people generally relate to hashgachas Hashem.
As for your last question: I was struck by the fact that the pasuk uses the expression "rain cloud" instead of just "rain." When I asked myself, "What's the difference between a rain cloud and rain?" I answered: "The rain cloud is potential rain, whereas rain is actual rain." When we went through the meforshim afterwards, I saw that Rabbeinu Yonah takes the same approach.
While I'm at it, there's an additional idea which I didn't incorporate into the summary. The pasuk doesn't just say "rain cloud" but "עב מלקוש" ("late-rain cloud") which Rashi (Devarim 11:14) as "the rain that falls just before the harvest time, to fill the grain on its stalks." This fits with my interpretation. The berachos of Hashem are more similar to the late rain than the early rain. Without the early rain, the crops don't grow at all. Without the late rain, they grow, but not to their full measure. So too with berachos: man can attain a certain measure of perfection without receiving additional hashgachic assistance, but the berachos of Hashem bring man's efforts to full fruition.
Also, a general methodological question.
ReplyDeleteWhy did you choose to analyze this pasuk in isolation as opposed to as part of a sequence, since the previous few pesukim also seem to be addressing the idea of a king?
We only saw those other pesukim after we learned this one. :)
DeleteBut in general, we try to analyze the pesukim one at a time before we take on the group - unless an pasuk can only be understood along with another. Thus, if we had realized that this was part of a cluster, we still would have taken them one at a time, but we would have started with the first one in the series.