מִתְאַוָּה וָאַיִן, נַפְשׁוֹ עָצֵל; וְנֶפֶשׁ חָרֻצִים תְּדֻשָּׁן
"The soul of the sluggard desires but has nothing, but the soul of the diligent shall be abundantly gratified."
Questions:
At first glance, this Pasuk seems to be stating the obvious. After all, the definition of a lazy guy is someone who does not have the motivation to do tasks that he would like done, and the diligent person is basically the opposite. So what is Shlomo teaching us here? At the end of the day we should be able to answer why each person in the Pasuk receives what they receive.
Gateway:
A good question in this Pasuk, and in some other Psukim as well, is: "What about the middle guy??" Mishlei many times gives us two extremes to bring out the consequences of each side, but often in the heat of figuring out the extremes we tend to forget about "The Middle Guy."
In the case of this Pasuk, there is a clear jump from the lazy guy, who has nothing, to the diligent guy, who is abundantly gratified (I believe תְּדֻשָּׁן implies an "extreme" gratification). It seems like the middle guy is someone who is just plain gratified- not a crazy idea in its own right, but it allows us to set up the next step in understanding the Pasuk.
Now that we see each of the three people, we can proceed to the next question: What is the defining factor of each of them that causes their respective consequences?
Answer:
Let's use two things to answer the question: A general action "x" that causes result "y," and a specific example of playing poker to win money.
The lazy guy desires "y," and concludes that involving himself in "x" will get him that. That is the extent of his effort, and is also why he is lazy: He merely thinks that partaking in "x" will get him results, without finding out what "x" actually is. It seems that he has an immature view of "y," in that if there exists a way to get there, it will happen to him, no matter what. In the poker example, the lazy guy is someone who has this thought process: "Look at these guys who make so much money at playing poker. I want money... I'm gonna go play some poker with them!" It is clear that this person will fail immediately, as he has lost sight of the activity of poker in light of the fantasy of winning money. Without a proper understanding of poker strategy, the lazy guy is guaranteed to lose, to gain "nothing."
The middle guy, on the other hand, desires "y," but understands how "x" is directly tied to "y"; he has correct knowledge of rules of causality. He does not have an infantile view of "y," which allows him to study the rules of "x." In the poker example, he understands that not everybody who plays is going to win. In order to win, you have to know the strategy: fold when you have certain cards, play certain cards, know when to bluff, when to raise, etc. The better you know the established rules, the better you will play, and the more successful you will be in winning the money. This is "normal gratification," as it comes from normal rules of causality.
The diligent guy, on the third hand, desires "y," understands how "x" is directly tied to "y," and understands the system that exists behind the scenes that causes the relationship between "x" and "y." A person diligent in a certain area realizes that the rules only exist insofar as the system governs them. In other words, knowing the rules only goes so far, but to really gain the most you can from an area, you need to understand the system behind it. In the poker example, the highest level of poker playing understanding why the strategy works, based on the system of poker. When one understands the system behind poker, he can also understand when the normal strategy should be used and when it shouldn't. For instance, a diligent poker player can beat a middle-guy poker player without even looking at his cards. So the abundant gratification of the diligent guy is twofold: He gains the most efficient result "y," and he has an intellectual pleasure in understanding a governing system of x-y.
Obviously the three levels will be different depending on the specific area. Sometimes a level won't even exist at all. But I think this Pasuk does apply to many areas of life- can you think of one? Also I think the Pasuk is a good example of showing how the presence of the middle guy can help shape the Pshat.
0 comments:
Post a Comment