In Chapter 21, Shlomo HaMelech continues to analyze the character traits of human beings. Until now, we have dealt with traits typical of the majority of people: the perverse, the stranger, a contentious wife, and the like. From here on, Scripture turns to discuss the character of the wicked - a minority among people, yet Scripture addresses them directly. In this lesson, we will examine three verses: the character of the wicked person and his attitude toward his fellow, how the simpleton and the wise person learn from the punishment of the scoffer, and the righteous person's recognition of the ways of the wicked.
The Soul of the Wicked Desires Evil - A Constant Craving to Do Harm
נֶפֶשׁ רָשָׁע אִוְּתָה־רָע לֹא־יֻחַן בְּעֵינָיו רֵעֵהוּ׃ (י) - "The soul of the wicked craves evil; his fellow finds no favor in his eyes." (21:10)
Rabbeinu Yonah explains: until this point, Scripture spoke of the character traits of the majority of people, and here it turns to address the trait of the wicked. While average people (beinonim) might not truly be distressed when they see a friend in trouble - it does not disturb them deeply, they do not genuinely care - nevertheless, they do not crave evil. They have no constant aspiration to inflict harm. If they hear that something bad happened to someone, it might not hurt them, but to constantly strive to do harm, to always yearn for misfortune to befall one's fellow - average people do not live that way. By contrast, the wicked person: "The soul of the wicked craves evil" - he has an innate, constant craving and desire to do bad and cause harm.
And not only that, but "his fellow finds no favor in his eyes." Even if he appears to be fond of his friend, he will never truly pity him or show him favor. And if you say, "Behold, we saw him help him, give to him, arrange things for him!" - Rabbeinu Yonah answers: this is solely for his own pleasure. The wicked person looks only for self-interest and personal advantage. What does a wicked person think? "What do I get out of this? How will I succeed? What will I gain?" It is never for the sake of the other person or with the intention to do good, but rather because he benefits from his company and "draws warmth from it" (yisachen bah) - finding utility in it. The word yisachen is like "he who cleaves wood is warmed by it" (yisachen bahem), which has several explanations, but along this line it means to be warmed. It is similar to "and let her be a companion (sochenet) to him" - one who warms, which also connects to sakhanah and sakhun in Arabic, meaning heat (as well as sakhina, the Moroccan Shabbat stew). That is to say: he derives utility and enjoyment from the friendship, and that is why he gives to him.
Yet the moment he sees that it is no longer worthwhile, or that he no longer derives pleasure from him - the Moor has done his duty, the Moor can go. This is what one might call a "battery-operated friend": once the battery runs out, the friendship is over. Someone once put a bumper sticker on a car: "Better a dog of a friend than a friend who is a dog." There are people whose entire pursuit is what they can get out of you and what they stand to gain, and the moment they see that you offer nothing - it is finished, they have no need for your friendship. This is what Scripture means: regarding mercy, he will show no favor on the day of calamity. When you face trouble, he will not spare you or have mercy on you. And why? Because "the soul of the wicked craves evil," and if his fellow ever found favor in his eyes, it was purely out of self-interest; once that interest ends, his fellow will find no favor in his eyes.
Love Exists Among Equals - And Why There Is No Love Among the Wicked
The Malbim establishes a profound principle here: the philosopher has already explained that love exists among equals (shevim, similar in nature). When a person says, "I love so-and-so, I feel connected to him, I am his friend" - what did he find in his companion that causes him to feel a bond with him and an inner desire to be with him? Usually, it is because "I found in you what is in me." We both love the same things, which is why we are good friends. But if I love one thing and you love another, we will never walk together: I want to go here and you want to go there; I love to read and you love to play games; I love to go to the mall and you to a restaurant. People whose desires diverge do not bond together. We love those in whom we recognize our own nature and inclinations.
If so, according to this rule, there ought to be great love among the wicked; for while they may be worthless, at least they are alike in that they are equal in their wickedness. Why, then, is there no love among the wicked? Why is the Sitra Achra (the side of impurity) called in the Zohar alma de-peruda, a world of division - like Esav's "four hundred men with him" - whereas the realm of holiness is characterized by oneness and unity?
The Malbim explains: it is a mistake to say that the wicked are united. First, in what are they united? In their desires - yet this one desires food, another desires immorality, and a third desires money. Their desires are fragmented. We have already learned that "he who separates himself seeks his desire" (Mishlei 18:1), and for this very reason: I cannot be with you, because our desires are not identical; each one craves something else. As in the example we mentioned: a person who gets an urge to smoke must step outside; he cannot stay with everyone; he who seeks his desire separates himself. Thus, one cannot say that they are all bonded together simply because they are all wicked: wicked they may be, but each one leans toward wickedness in a different direction.
Furthermore - and notice how true this is - someone who knows he is wicked treats his own wickedness with great leniency, but views his fellow's wickedness with extreme severity. He himself may be dishonest and unethical, but when he sees his fellow act deceitfully, he will exclaim: "That man is a fraud, I tell you! He is so crooked in business, cutting corners right and left!" But what about you? He might engage in the exact same behavior, yet when he sees it in another, he despises him for that very same negative trait. He might be extremely arrogant, yet upon seeing pride in someone else, he loathes him for it; and so it is with every single matter. That is, he recognizes that the trait is negative, but regarding himself he closes his eyes, makes peace with his flaws, or convinces himself that he is actually far better than he really is; yet the moment he detects that same trait in another, he criticizes him, finds fault with him, and looks down upon him - precisely because he possesses that very same trait and flaw within himself.
It turns out, therefore, that with the wicked person, even though "the soul of the wicked craves evil" and it would seem fitting that his fellow should find favor in his eyes - after all, we are both wicked, we are both in the same boat - in reality, "his fellow finds no favor in his eyes." First, because I am wicked through one type of lust, he through another, and a third through yet another - "A presumptuous, arrogant man: scoffer is his name" - each with a distinct category of desire. Second, because I know what my desire is, I despise your desire; and on the contrary, because I recognize my own weaknesses, when I see that same weakness in you, I say: "You suffer from that disease too." Thus, the wicked person does not view his fellow's weaknesses with forgiveness; rather, he scorns and disparages him in his eyes, knowing that his fellow is driven by base desires. Therefore, even though they seemingly share common ground, his fellow finds no favor in his eyes.
"When the scorner is punished, the simpleton becomes wise" - What the Simpleton, the Wise, and the Discerning Learn
בַּעֲנׇשׁ־לֵץ יֶחְכַּם־פֶּתִי וּבְהַשְׂכִּיל לְחָכָם יִקַּח־דָּעַת׃ (יא) - "When the scorner is punished, the simpleton grows wise; and when giving insight to the wise, he acquires knowledge." (11)
Rashi explains according to the straightforward meaning: the suffering of the scorners causes the simpletons to become wise and repent. The entire penal system in any government or regime is based on this principle: the scorner is punished, and the simpleton - who initially wanted to follow in his ways and misdeeds - sees what the scorner received, grows wiser, and avoids doing so.
Rabbeinu Yonah cites a similar verse: "Smite a scorner, and the simple will become prudent" - the same principle: strike the scorner, and the simpleton acquires shrewdness and wisdom to avoid repeating the scorner's mistakes, for he does not want to receive blows like him. And "when giving insight to the wise" - when you give insight to the wise man, teach him understanding, correct him regarding an error in his hand, and show him where he erred - through this, "he acquires knowledge": he keeps this knowledge in his heart and will never repeat his mistake. As Chazal taught: A person does not truly grasp the words of Torah unless he has first stumbled in them. Once he has stumbled, he is careful from then on. A humorous observation is that the surest way for a man to always remember his wedding anniversary or his wife's birthday is to forget it once - from that day on, he will remember it for the rest of his life. While that point relates more to "Better to dwell on a corner of a roof," all the verses here are interconnected. The general rule is that when a person stumbles in something, he grasps its depth, learns from it, and draws conclusions - and that is the mark of the wise man.
And regarding the discerning person, it says: "And reprove one who has understanding, and he will discern knowledge" - the discerning person (navon) will understand to be cautious in other matters as well, based on your rebuke. And what is the difference between a wise person (chacham) and a discerning person (navon)? Rabbeinu Yonah explains: the chacham knows what he is taught, while the navon deduces one thing from another (meivin davar mitoch davar). If you reprove a chacham about a specific matter, he will be careful from then on; where he erred, he will not err again, and that is already genuine wisdom, for the fool repeats his folly, whereas the chacham is careful not to repeat it. But the navon says: If I was corrected on this, I understand that in a similar situation it is also not good. No one spoke to him about that similar case at all, yet he understood it on his own. This is the definition of a navon: from what you told him, he has the discernment to understand and acquire knowledge in other matters as well.
The Malbim's Explanation: Shrewdness versus Wisdom, and Wisdom Transforming into Knowledge
The Malbim connects this verse to the verse in chapter 19: "Smite a scorner, and the simple will become prudent; and reprove one who has understanding, and he will discern knowledge." His foundational principle is that there is a difference between shrewdness (ormah) and wisdom (chochmah). With chochmah, as we have seen, a person accepts upon himself the laws of wisdom in order to live by them - and according to the Malbim, the laws of wisdom refer to integrity, justice, and morality. Regarding the laws of chochmah, there is no mathematical proof or absolute demonstration; rather, one must accept them by tradition. After all, people can always debate morality - one person claims something is moral, while another argues that the exact opposite is moral. This is the Malbim's consistent approach throughout the book, as discussed at length previously: in chochmah, a person accepts the laws of wisdom in advance, even if he does not yet fully comprehend them.
By contrast, shrewdness (ormah) pertains to mundane, human affairs: being clever, finding a way to get things done. It does not mean accepting the laws of divine wisdom as a guide for life, but rather a practical shrewdness for navigating this world - what people might colloquially call finding a clever angle or a practical workaround, not necessarily in a negative sense, but as an earthly tactic for managing effectively here below.
The Malbim explains: If the scorner is merely beaten, the simpleton acquires shrewdness to be cautious. It takes no great wisdom to understand: if someone is being struck here, run away so you do not get beaten too. As the popular saying goes: "If they give to you, take; if they hit you, run." That basic shrewdness of practical self-preservation in worldly matters is something even a simpleton possesses.
However, "When the scorner is punished (ba'anosh letz)" does not mean he merely receives physical blows, but that he receives a formal punishment - through the judicial system or by the hand of Heaven - in a manner that makes it evident the punishment came as a consequence of sin. Then, "the simpleton grows wise (yechkam peti)": he accepts the laws of wisdom and understands that there is reward and punishment - that there is right and wrong, morality and immorality, and that sins incur divine retribution. Where does he find proof of this? When he sees the scorner punished, and sees that "judgments are prepared for scorners" - from this he grows wise and is transformed from a simpleton into a wise person. That is, he accepts the laws of wisdom and recognizes that wisdom is divine and stems from Hashem. If the scorner was only beaten, the simpleton would merely become shrewd, realizing he should stay away so he does not get hit. But when he witnesses how the scorner receives his punishment from Heaven, he gains the wisdom to know that one who transgresses God's commandments faces divine punishment. This already enters the realm of chochmah rather than mere shrewdness; it is not just a lesson about navigating this physical world, but a profound understanding beyond it: that there are true, divine laws decreed by God.
The Malbim adds: And the wise man, who has already accepted the laws of wisdom - yet they are not completely clear to him by his own intellect, but rather accepted through tradition, since the laws of wisdom initially exist in the category of chochmah, which must be received from a prophet or a sage, and only after one delves deeply into them and contemplates them does he attain the level of da'at (knowledge), which is clear, demonstrable comprehension - that wise man, who accepted the laws of wisdom as an axiom from a prophet or a sage, for the word of Hashem is not something comprehended by ordinary human intellect, when he gains insight from the punishments of the scorner and sees how the scorner received measure for measure, through this his intellectual capacity gains insight into the matters of wisdom as well, and "he acquires knowledge" (yikkach da'at). What is da'at? Absolute clarity, tangible and distinct. Therefore the verse says: "When the scorner is punished, the simpleton grows wise" - the simpleton acquires chochmah, whereas the wise man, who already holds the laws of chochmah, "and when giving insight to the wise, he acquires knowledge" - from this he gains a clear, definitive understanding born of deep comprehension, not merely received tradition. How so? He observes that so-and-so acted in a certain way and received retribution "in the very thing in which they dealt willfully against them"; he sees the hand of Hashem point for point, seeing each one punished precisely according to what he deserves - cooked in the very pot they used to cook. Through this, the wisdom that was previously held merely by tradition transforms into absolute knowledge, rather than remaining something external and abstract.
"The Righteous Man Considers the House of the Wicked" - The Tzaddik Recognizes the Ways of the Wicked
מַשְׂכִּיל צַדִּיק לְבֵית רָשָׁע מְסַלֵּף רְשָׁעִים לָרָע׃ (יב) - The righteous one considers the house of the wicked; He overturns the wicked to ruin. (12)
Rashi explains that "the righteous one" here refers to the Righteous One of the world, the Holy One, Blessed be He, and He sets His heart to destroy the house of the wicked - as in the command, "You shall blot out the memory of Amalek." That is, the Holy One, Blessed be He, applies wisdom and discernment to how to wipe out the house of the wicked.
Rabbeinu Yonah explains a very true and profound insight, writing: Many people might think that a righteous person cannot understand the ways, arguments, and nature of the wicked, because they are the exact opposite of the righteous person's own nature. In other words, you, the righteous person - how could you know the tricks and schemes of the wicked? How could you know what goes on in his head, or understand his mindset, when you are as far from that as east is from west? To this, the verse says: Do not be mistaken - "The righteous person considers the house of the wicked." The tzaddik knows, discerns, and understands his deceptive ways and ultimate intentions. As our Sages said: Lest the deceivers say, "Torah scholars are not familiar with our schemes." Deceivers make their schemes and assume the sage neither understands nor knows - but they are mistaken.
In summary: The three verses we studied paint a unified picture. The wicked person constantly craves evil, and even his friendship is purely self-serving; and although the wicked ought to love one another under the principle that "love exists between equals," there is no unity among them - for their desires diverge, and "one who isolates himself pursues his desires," and whoever recognizes his own flaws forgives himself while condemning his fellow for those exact same flaws. On the other hand, the punishment of the scorner serves as a house of study for everyone: the simpleton learns shrewdness from it, and when the punishment is clearly recognizable as having stemmed from the sin, he acquires wisdom and accepts the rules of Divine wisdom; while the wise man, who initially accepted the laws by tradition, transforms them into clear, tangible knowledge through witnessing measure for measure. Finally, let the deceiver not imagine that the tzaddik is naive and blind to his ways: "The righteous person considers the house of the wicked" - the tzaddik discerns and understands the ways of deception and their ultimate end.