Chapter 28 of Mishlei deals extensively with the distinction between the wicked and the righteous, between those who abandon the Torah and those who keep it, and with the great question regarding Hashem's governance of the world: why the way of the wicked prospers. In this lesson, we will focus on three central verses: "Those who abandon the Torah praise the wicked," "Evil people do not understand justice," and "One who turns his ear away from hearing the Torah, even his prayer is an abomination."
עֹזְבֵי תוֹרָה יְהַלְלוּ רָשָׁע וְשֹׁמְרֵי תוֹרָה יִתְגָּרוּ בָם׃ (משלי כח, ד) - "Those who abandon the Torah praise the wicked, but those who keep the Torah contend with them" (Mishlei 28:4).
Rabbeinu Yonah in Sha'arei Teshuvah enumerates the categories of flattery, listing as the second category: the flatterer who praises a wicked person before others, whether to his face or behind his back. This applies even when he does not justify the man's injustice or misrepresent his judgment, but merely says of him, "He is a good man." He does not say, "Good for him that he stole," or "Good for him that he deals drugs," but rather ignores the wicked deeds and relates ostensibly to his character: you should know that he is a decent person, a good man. Regarding this it is said, "Those who abandon the Torah praise the wicked."
Rabbeinu Yonah explains: for had he not abandoned the Torah, he would not praise someone who transgresses its words and violates its commandments. How can a person praise such an individual? Only because he himself has abandoned the Torah. And let a person not say, "I only said positive things about him" - that despite all his wickedness, he also helps people, gave to this one here and helped that one there. Why are you looking to recount words of praise? About criminals? About offenders? You go to people whose entire occupation is wickedness, and try to find merits in them? This happens solely because that person has abandoned the Torah and violated its commandments, and only because of this is he capable of glorifying and praising the wicked.
And one must understand the consequence: when you praise a wicked person, people no longer view him as an outcast. Suddenly he is acceptable in public society - "I heard he has good qualities," "They said that he also..." For example, a person whose entire path was anti-religious suddenly arrives at the Kotel and dances with a Sefer Torah, and his wife performs *hafrashat challah*. And what is really behind this? Simply that he has a good advisor who told him: You want to reach the top? It starts from the bottom; the people are not against the Torah, the people respect the Torah. And from then on, that person ceased speaking publicly against religion, and began speaking about security - because that is what the people like to hear - and shifting to the right. If anyone thinks he changed his views, let him not be confused: he changed nothing, but the road to leadership sometimes takes a detour. And one who now comes along trying to find merit in him, what does he show by doing so? That he is trying to praise someone who is an enemy and hater of the Holy One, blessed be He.
Rabbeinu Yonah continues: even if he praises the wicked person only for the good qualities within him, this too is a grave evil. For by mentioning the good and ignoring the evil, he conceals all his crimes - and he will be deemed righteous by those who hear, and they will accord him honor, empower him, and he will prevail. If you recount good things about him, fine - but recount all the bad things as well: "Although he does such and such." For when you present only the positive side, on the contrary, through this he will rise and prevail, and perhaps even become prime minister. And Rabbeinu Yonah already made known the pitfalls and corruptions that occur when the wicked prevail. And this is only a small example, for there are even greater evildoers than this.
In contrast to those who abandon the Torah, the keeper of the Torah acts in the exact opposite manner: an arrow in the eye of the Satan. He makes no calculations, does not flatter, does not attempt to search for praiseworthy points in him, but rather exposes him in his nakedness as an empty vessel, exactly as he truly is.
And this is precisely what occurred in the saga of the High Court of Justice. What the Charedi public has been crying out for thirty years suddenly dawned on the Prime Minister when they struck down his natural gas outline. Then one realizes that the High Court is like a golem that turned against its creator. You might think you were elected in democratic elections, and that this is a democratic state ruled by the will of the people - but a handful using the "friend brings a friend" method, individuals with a very specific agenda, will always come along and ultimately dictate what is allowed and what is not. And who elected them? Who decided they should sit there? And how did it happen that all of them hold specific views, all graduates of one very specific university? Are there no intelligent people in other sectors? After all, back when there was an effort to appoint Gavison, who held different views, they said of her that she had "an agenda different from ours" - in other words: we have an agenda, let us carry out our revolutions as we please, and do not involve those whose views differ. A friend brings a friend, without transparency, without records, without protocols - and they are the masters of the land.
And Gafni once remarked that never, in even a single ruling, has the High Court ruled in favor of those who observe the mitzvot. And regarding the Reform movement, there is nothing even to discuss: Aharon Barak, who spearheaded this entire revolution, was awarded the title of honored friend of the Reform community and received honors and benefits from them after stepping down from the bench. He did not even attempt to conceal it. A person who was supposed to adjudicate as a neutral figure turns out to be aligned with a movement whose entire aim is to undermine traditional Judaism here and across the world. At the very least he should have been ashamed and said: I am a public figure, I cannot permit myself to do this. But no; he answers to no one.
And do not think that there were not others who understood this earlier. Olmert understood this long ago, and that is why he sits where he sits. For anyone appointed Minister of Justice who declared that he intended to clean house had a case concocted against him. Look at what happened with Ramon, and look at what happened with Ne'eman. Olmert was clever and said: I am bringing in someone from the outside, from academia - Friedman. What could they dig up on him? They found nothing on him. So they said: What do you think, that we go after the stick? We go after the one holding it. And they brought down the Prime Minister, launching investigations against him from every angle - and unfortunately he had plenty of vulnerabilities, not that others do not; wherever you touch, it is all wounds, bruises, and open sores, and several other cases were quietly closed. But why did they go all the way specifically against him? Because here was someone who tried to bring about a revolution in the High Court, and they told him: Do not touch them; if you try - we will take you down.
This is "Those who forsake the Torah praise the wicked": those who insist, "We must safeguard the Supreme Court." But "those who keep the Torah contend with them" - we have never flattered them, and we have never petitioned the High Court, because we never imagined that we would find relief from them. One who truly guards the Torah makes no such calculations: true, you feel like the master of the land, but everything here is temporary. We had Pharaoh too, who also felt he was master of the land, and that passed. We outlasted Pharaoh - we will outlast the Supreme Court as well, and we are not alarmed. Flattering them and seeking to curry favor with them is the way of those who forsake the Torah; but guardians of the Torah are not afraid to speak the unvarnished truth, and what you are feeling now, we already cried out about many years ago.
The Gra explains that "those who keep the Torah contend with them" refers to both: those who keep the Torah contend both with those who forsake the Torah and with the wicked person himself. Ibn Ezra, by contrast, explains that the contention is directed solely at those who forsake the Torah, not at the wicked. Ibn Ezra apparently maintains that one should not provoke the wicked directly, but rather confront those who abandon the Torah and praise the wicked.
The Metzudat David notes the precise phrasing "those who forsake the Torah": Scripture does not say those poor in Torah, simple folk, or the wicked, but "those who forsake the Torah" - people who were once engaged in Torah study and abandoned it. Such a person is worse than an ordinary wicked man. Why? Because the wicked man knows that his deeds are improper and acts merely out of bodily appetite; but one who leaves the Torah falls into the category of "one who learned and departed," who is the most difficult of all, and he does so with full relish. Therefore, it is specifically he who praises the path of the wicked. The wicked man himself, if you were to ask him in his heart of hearts, might tell you: My friend, do not choose my path; it is not the right way. But the one who has forsaken the Torah, seeking to justify his departure, grasps for rationalizations and declares that the way of the wicked is correct and proper to follow. He praises the wicked to legitimize himself. For in reality, he left because of lusts, and it is uncomfortable to admit, "I abandoned the Torah because of my desires" - so he finds words of praise and acclaim for the actions of the wicked. But those who keep the Torah contend with them: they clash with the wicked, do not flatter them, and on the contrary - challenge them.
The Malbim explains that "shall praise the wicked" stems from envy: they envy the success of the wicked and therefore praise his deeds, as he serves as their role model. When they see the wicked prosper, they say: This is how it should be; this is how one ought to act. But those who guard the Torah understand that these actions are evil and that he is destined to give an accounting and be punished for them, and they contend with those who praise the wicked - which aligns with the view of Ibn Ezra, that the contention is directed at those who abandon the Torah and praise him, rather than at the wicked themselves.
The Malbim adds another explanation, which continues what we saw earlier regarding "For the transgression of a land, many are its princes": when a revolt takes place, many wicked rulers and ministers rise to govern the people, which is far worse than a single king ruling over us. Those who forsake the Torah praise that wicked man who rises to power, whereas those who keep the Torah do not flatter him; instead, they wage conflict and war against the wicked one and those who support him.
אַנְשֵׁי רָע לֹא יָבִינוּ מִשְׁפָּט וּמְבַקְשֵׁי ה' יָבִינוּ כֹל׃ (משלי כח, ה) - "Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek Hashem understand all." (Mishlei 28:5)
Rashi's wording implies that "will not understand" means they will not contemplate, and "justice" refers to retribution: the Holy One, blessed be He, executes judgment upon the wicked. Evil men do not contemplate and do not take notice that judgment is destined to come, that calamities are due to befall them, and therefore they do not turn back from their ways. "But those who seek Hashem understand all" - they contemplate everything destined to unfold, both good and bad, and draw lessons from it. Winds of war are blowing? Reflect, awaken. But evil men do not contemplate that the judgment of Hashem is about to befall them, God forbid.
The Gra explains differently: "They do not understand judgment" - they do not understand why the wicked prosper in this world. On the contrary, when they see that Hashem's judgment appears outwardly in their favor, they draw further encouragement from it: look, the way of the wicked has prospered. He has questions, failing to realize that this prosperity is "so that they may be destroyed forever." Who understands this? Only those who seek Hashem understand all: they realize that everything the Holy One, blessed be He, does is done with justice, and that what is granted to the wicked is given in order to bring about his ruin, while what is granted to the righteous is given to grant him merit. But evil men do not understand the judgment of Hashem - why the wicked prosper and why the righteous suffer.
מֵסִיר אׇזְנוֹ מִשְׁמֹעַ תּוֹרָה גַּם תְּפִלָּתוֹ תּוֹעֵבָה׃ (משלי כח, ט) - "He who turns away his ear from hearing the Torah, even his prayer is an abomination." (Mishlei 28:9)
First, one must understand: what is considered moral by one person is not necessarily moral to another, and what society considers moral may not be moral according to the Torah. For example, people might say of someone: he is so moral, he does not eat meat at all because he cannot bear to harm animals. Yet this is not the Torah perspective. Not that there is any objection - a person may choose not to eat meat, and indeed, such individuals can even be praised for unwittingly aligning with the sages: for Chazal state that an am ha'aretz (an unlearned person) is forbidden to eat meat. He prophesied without knowing what he prophesied! And why is an am ha'aretz forbidden to eat meat? Just because you are stronger than the cow, should you eat it - are we living by the law of the jungle? On the contrary, the cow fulfills its purpose in the world: Hashem placed it here to give milk, graze on grass, and sleep, and it does so faithfully. But what about you - are you fulfilling your purpose? You were given 613 mitzvot and another seven Rabbinic commandments. A person who does not fulfill the purpose for which he was created - the mosquito precedes him, and he is lower than a mosquito. The cow was meant to serve man so that he might elevate it through the blessing he recites and through the service of Hashem powered by eating that meat; without that, certainly not.
It follows, then: if a person turns his ear away from hearing Torah, how could he possibly conduct himself properly? Moral conduct, derech eretz between man and his fellow, and between man and God - without Torah? Certainly, such a person's deeds are an abomination, for without Torah, one's deeds are abominable.
There is a revealing encounter with a young man in Beersheba who claimed that he was moral even without Torah. When asked, "Where does your morality come from?" he replied that he observes the Ten Commandments, and beyond that, he does not believe he needs mitzvot. He was asked first whether he was aware that keeping Shabbat is one of the Ten Commandments - and this was news to him. One might well wonder: which ten commandments was he keeping, and whose? To say nothing of "Do not commit adultery." At any rate, he was asked: "May I ask you a moral question?" He said, "Sure, why not." He was asked: "Suppose your girlfriend comes and tells you that she is pregnant - what do you do?" He thought and thought, and finally conceded: "You've stumped me."
He was not astute enough to see the trap inherent in the question, for it is a dilemma with no secular way out. Whatever answer he gave could be challenged. If he said, "What, just because I have a problem should I abort the fetus and kill it?" - the response would be: "So you won't kill the child, but you will ruin her life? A seventeen-year-old girl will give birth tomorrow, and live her entire life knowing she has a child somewhere whom she did not raise? And if she does raise the child - starting motherhood at seventeen - you have destroyed her future," and all the familiar arguments from that worldview. And if he said, "Of course I would choose an abortion, for those very reasons" - the response would be: "Just because someone is inconvenient to you and limits you, do we murder them?" This is a question with no answer unless one has the Torah. Only the Torah can weigh one value against another: does taking the life of the fetus outweigh the woman's convenience and her "right over her body" and all those asserted rights, or is it the other way around? Who can determine this? Only the Holy One, blessed be He. Anyone attempting to formulate a purely human answer can never be certain he has done the right thing or decided upon the truly moral path. In matters of morality, human judgment alone can never yield an absolute verdict that can be declared definitively right.
Ralbag explains: since a person cannot straighten his path without Torah, one might think, "True, I cannot straighten my ways without Torah, but at least I can pray." Regarding this, the verse declares: "even his prayer" - not only are your actions abominable, but your prayer too is an abomination. Why? Ralbag explains that his intention cannot possibly be proper when he has turned away from the path of Torah. Furthermore, the Rambam writes that when a person acts wickedly, he prays and his prayer is flung back in his face; he is hated, abominable, and detested. But once he repents, he is beloved, and when he prays, his prayer is accepted. Thus, not only are his actions flawed and corrupt, but his prayer itself is considered an abomination.
Yet in this context, one must beware of a mistaken conclusion. The yetzer hara takes these words a step further, telling a person: "You do improper things; it is better that you do not pray at all. Hashem does not want your prayer, and your prayer is an abomination." This is the yetzer's classic tactic: making us into "righteous" purists. "What is your prayer worth? You committed a sin and now you stand and pray? Better not to." It gives a person a false sense of righteousness, making him feel conscientious and moral - so that he commits sins while still fancying himself a decent person. This is an utter mistake. A person must know that even if he slipped up or failed in a certain area, that is no reason not to get up tomorrow to pray, or not to go pray right now. Whatever mitzvot one can grab, he should grab. If you committed a sin, that is one reckoning; if you performed a mitzvah, that is another reckoning. There are no offsets in Heaven; it is not a simplistic set of scales as many imagine. For mitzvot one receives a full reward, and for sins a full punishment if one does not repent for them. Therefore, a person should never say, "I committed a sin, so praying is no longer worth it," and stop praying - that is certainly the wrong conclusion.
Metzudat David sees here a measure-for-measure dynamic: a person turns his ear away from hearing Torah - someone is delivering a shiur, and he scoffs: "What, is he going to teach me? Who is he to tell me?" He dismisses the words of his fellow - and consequently, the Holy One, blessed be He, dismisses his words; you stand and pray, and your words are disregarded. A similar explanation can be offered: someone shares a Torah thought or insight with him, and he brushes it off: "No, I've heard that already, it's familiar, forget it." He does not want to listen. Then that same person stands and prays the Shemoneh Esreh, and the Holy One, blessed be He, says to him, as it were: "Forget it, I've heard it, it's familiar; you've been reciting the Shemoneh Esreh for forty years - it's familiar." Because he turns his ear away from hearing Torah on the grounds that "it's familiar," his prayer too is treated as "familiar," and even his prayer becomes an abomination.
The Malbim explains: who is the one who does not want to hear Torah? One who turns away because the time for prayer has arrived, and he wishes to cut off the Torah class for the sake of prayer. Everyone is familiar with those who arrive between Minchah and Maariv: he came for Maariv, not for the shiur, and finds himself caught in the class against his will. Then, according to his calculations and his minute-by-minute reckoning, thirteen and a half minutes have already elapsed since sunset and the rabbi is continuing, so he calls out, "Rabbi Chananya!" And if they do not take the hint, he announces right in the middle of the rabbi's words, "Chazak u'baruch!", to signal to the rabbi that from this point on, he is burdening the congregation. Especially since the evening news broadcast is starting in a few minutes, and if not the first edition, then the second or third; he is pressed for time, the Torah holds no interest for him, and he is ready to cut the rabbi off in the middle of his shiur.
Notice the profound insight the Malbim reveals: this applies even when the person truly intends to pray, and not because he is rushing off to his mundane pursuits. The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (10a) relates: Rabbi Yirmiyah was sitting before Rabbi Zeira, and they were engrossed in a legal discussion. The time for prayer arrived and it was growing late. Rabbi Yirmiyah was urging Rabbi Zeira to finish, as time was running out, sunset was approaching, and they might miss Minchah. Rabbi Zeira applied to him the verse: "He who turns away his ear from hearing Torah, even his prayer is an abomination." That is to say, even someone who genuinely wants to pray because the time is about to pass - if he turns his ear away from hearing Torah, even his prayer is an abomination. And why? Because Torah is eternal life (chayei olam) while prayer is temporal life (chayei sha'ah), as explained at length in Nefesh HaChaim.
One must realize that Torah is more precious than anything. To come along and say, "We have to pray, stop the shiur" - that is certainly improper. Indeed, one of the sages in the Gemara declared: I was never among those who disperse the study hall - meaning, I was never among those who say, "Gentlemen, that's enough, we must stop learning now, we need to perform a mitzvah, to pray," or anything else; I was never the one to interrupt the congregation from their study. Interrupting a congregation from Torah study is an exceedingly grave matter. Therefore, all those who resort to tricks and tactics to halt a Torah class in order to pray fall under the category of "He who turns away his ear from hearing Torah, even his prayer is an abomination." If you are in such a great rush, go and stand and pray off to the side; it is far better to pray on your own to the side than to interrupt the shiur of the entire congregation.
The three verses we have learned revolve around a single axis: one who has abandoned the Torah loses the capacity for sound judgment. He praises the wicked - whether out of flattery or out of envy of his success - and thereby justifies his own abandonment; he does not contemplate Hashem's justice and fails to understand why the way of the wicked prospers; and without Torah he lacks any moral standard with which to decide life's difficult questions, so that not only his deeds but even his prayer becomes tainted. In contrast, those who keep the Torah contend with the wicked and with those who support him, refusing to flatter him; those who seek Hashem will understand everything - that all is governed by justice, both the good granted to the wicked and the suffering of the righteous; and one who listens to the Torah and values it above all else merits that his prayer, too, is pleasing before the Omnipresent.