Matt,
I notice that your labels are based on chapter numbers. Is that only for ease of reference or do you see the chapters as unifying themes of the specific pesukim?
- Yaakov
Yaakov,
The labels are based on chapter numbers for reference purposes only. Other than Chapters 1-9 and Chapter 31, the other chapters are not thematic and the pesukim are not related to each other. I also recently rediscovered the following statement of the Meiri at the end of his commentary on Chapter 9:
We have now concluded the first section of Mishlei (i.e. Chapters 1-9), and the section section (Chapers 10-25) will follow. [This second section] does not proceed in a continuous order of ideas (סדר דברים נמשכים), like the first section, but it consists entirely of distinct pesukim with no relationship or connection between them other than the relationship of proximity. Each and every pasuk is a distinct subject (ענין), except for a minority of pesukim which are somewhat related to one another.
The question is: Why is Mishlei written this way?
Perhaps the answer is in the story of "chavlei shlomo". He connected rope to rope which represents the connection of m'shalim. Mishlei are pithy sayings (in fact some of the sayings found in Mishlei have been found in Egyptian collections of wisdom sayings). It makes sense that they themselves have no particular order. The key is in the first 9 chapters and the last chapter which connect the m'shalim together into one long rope (=one overarching system of wisdom). The m'shalim of mishlei on their own are pithy sayings that people enjoy and find enlightening but do not connect to any deeper wellspring of wisdom. Shlomo's wisdom was using the common folk wisdom as the base from which he led the people to higher enlightenment.
ReplyDeleteI think for the same reason that R' Yisrael Salanter came up with hispa'alus, and why many people find Mesilas Yesharim's structure frustrating.
ReplyDeleteMost people do not have the same task, to work on the same things in the same sequence, and can actually work on a program that is one-size-fits-all. If I were to study Mesilas Yesharim in the same order of my progress, I would never make it past the three chapters 2-5 on zehirus!
Instead, Shelomo haMelekh offers constellations of thoughts without a rigid structure, ideas that we can pull together to fit my own curriculum as Hashem presents it to me as an individual.
Self-work is very slow and incremental. One pasuq could represent many months of reiteration, thought, and self-application.
-micha
I agree with Yehuda that the objective of learning Mishlei would be to understand it as one long rope to reach the good, sweet water. But the question is, how do we do that? The method of learning a book that we are all familiar with is Adler's method. But if we are starting with the premise that most of the book is disconnected, unrelated statements, how do we go about connected one rope to the next?
ReplyDeleteFebruary 11, 2009 12:11 AM
Dan,
ReplyDeleteI think that is why the study of the first nine chapters and the last chapter (Eishet Chayil) is so important. One must, in addition, use what ever means necessary to gain the larger paradigm of knowledge whereby the ropes can be connected. For us this will be more easily gained from the Rambam's Sefer HaMada, Shemoneh P'rakim, Hakdama to Chelek and other such works. I also agree with Micha's sentiment and Matt's method that not every mashal will equally pull one in. The key is to use the m'shalim as hooks (or ropes) to pull the mind up from pragmatic pithy sayings like "a penny saved is a penny earned" to grasping the deeper underlying wisdom that they are based on. One should focus on the m'shalim that pull them in.