Chapter 12 of Mishlei deals extensively with the power of the mouth and the paths of wisdom. In this lesson, we will examine two verses: one addresses the value of speech versus action, and the other deals with the difference between the fool who follows his own eyes and the wise person who listens to counsel. Together, these two verses teach us a fundamental principle: a person is measured not only by what his hands do, but by what his mouth utters and what his ears are willing to absorb.
מִפְּרִי פִי־אִישׁ יִשְׂבַּע־טוֹב וּגְמוּל יְדֵי־אָדָם יָשִׁיב לוֹ׃ (יד) - From the fruit of a man's mouth he is sated with good, and the recompense of a person's hands will return to him. (14)
Rashi explains: "From the fruit of a man's mouth" - from the reward of the speech of those who engage in Torah study, they enjoy the good fruit in this world, while the principal remains intact for them in the World to Come.
Rabbeinu Yonah explains that the verse comes to awaken a person to pursue righteousness and merit through his speech. One might have thought that only an action performed with one's hands possesses true virtue: you gave charity, helped someone lift a heavy load, donned tefillin, took a lulav - any physical deed has value. But when a person merely speaks - well, you just talked; it does not seem comparable to the virtue of action. To this, the verse comes and says: know that when a person produces only the "fruit of the mouth," he will be sated with good through it - no less than what the recompense of a person's hands will return to him, no less than what he will receive for deeds performed with his hands.
Rabbeinu Yonah cites examples: a person who meditates on wisdom, speaks words of Torah, offers good counsel to his fellow, strengthens the hands of truth, sanctifies the Name of Heaven, or turns many away from iniquity - as it is written, "The mouth of a righteous person is a fountain of life." All of these are deeds accomplished through speech. Are they any less than actions performed by hand? To revive the heart of the downtrodden and broken - is that any less valuable than someone who shows "the whiteness of teeth more than milk," giving his friend a warm smile? The verse draws an analogy: just as a person performs physical deeds and receives an immense reward for them, so too is the portion and merit of one who speaks pure words.
Indeed, Chazal have already stated, "Greater is one who causes others to do good than the one who actually does it." Suppose I went to fundraise from you, and you gave the money - whose merit is greater? That of the one who motivated the deed. And let us examine it: what did you do? An action. What did I do? Speech. Here you see that speech is in no way inferior to action. Do not disparage speech - "From the fruit of a man's mouth he is sated with good."
Additionally, one can explain that "the recompense of a person's hands" refers to a person's sins, for which he will be repaid and punished according to his deeds. Why do we read (the keri) "yashiv" (He will repay) while it is written (the ketiv) "yashuv" (it will return)? This hints at the verse, "Out of the mouth of the Most High does not come evil and good" - when evil occurs, it is not the Holy One, blessed be He, Who brought harm upon you, but rather the person brought it upon himself through his own deeds. As it is said: "A man's foolishness perverts his way, and his heart frets against Hashem" - a person harms himself through his negative actions, bringing destructive forces upon himself, and then complains against the Almighty. Yet "For He does not afflict from His heart" - your suffering does not stem from Hashem's desire. Therefore, the written form is "yashuv" (it will return), telling you: what you do will return to you. Do not think you can cast something out and walk away; the trouble you generated will pursue you. And the traditional reading is "yashiv" (He will repay), because it appears as though Hashem is repaying you - but in truth, what you did has simply rebounded upon you, rather than the Holy One, blessed be He, inflicting some separate evil upon you.
The Vilna Gaon notes the shift in terminology: first, "From the fruit of a man's [ish] mouth," and then, "and the recompense of a person's [adam] hands." What is the distinction? "Ish" denotes stature, authority, and prominence, as in "To you, men [ishim], I call," and "Are you not a man [ish]?" and "Who made you a man [ish], a ruler and a judge over us?"
Shlomo comes to teach us that a person must always rebuke his fellow for his corrupt deeds, as it is written in the Torah: "You shall surely rebuke your fellow." And when you rebuke him and he mends his ways - who benefits? You do. For all the mitzvot he begins to observe are credited to your merit as well. "From the fruit of a man's mouth" - from the fruit of the mouth with which you rebuked him - "he shall be satisfied with good."
But what happens if you spoke and spoke, yet the words fell on deaf ears? The person did not want to change, continued just as before, and nothing in him changed. Do you still receive a reward then? The Vilna Gaon cites a wondrous teaching in the name of the holy Ari, and it is likewise cited in the name of the Zohar: if you rebuked someone and he did not accept the rebuke, do not think you come away empty-handed. Know that you take from him the holy spark that was within him - and this is the mystical secret of "If one is meritorious, he takes his own portion and his fellow's portion in Gan Eden." There is no scenario where you lose: if he begins observing mitzvot as a result of your words, you receive a share in the merit of his mitzvot; and if he does not observe them, you take the good portion within him - the good part is sifted out and clings to you, while he takes the bad part within you and it clings to him. It turns out that a person is purified by rebuking his fellow, even when his fellow did not accept it from him.
One could say in jest that there is a defense here for those who say, "I do not want to go hear lectures; I do not want to hear sermons." Why? Whichever way you look at it: he does not want to repent, so why should he go and listen - just so that his merits and his good spark will be taken from him, and he will not even have his share in Gan Eden left? Insofar as one can find merit for such people!
And this is the verse: "From the fruit of a man's mouth" - even if you offered rebuke and the fruit seemingly yielded nothing, and he did not repent - "he shall be satisfied with good," for you receive the portion of his good spark. And if he listened to you and began to put on tefillin, observe Shabbat, take the lulav, and fulfill all the mitzvot - "and the recompense of a man's hands shall be returned to him," you also receive the recompense for the deeds he performs with his hands. Either way, you gain.
Based on this, the Gemara's statement was explained: "Israel are holy" - there is one who wants to give but does not have, and there is one who has but does not want to give. Regarding the first, it is understandable: he is truly unfortunate, his heart full of desire to give and bestow, yet he has nothing - holy shall he be called. But one who has and does not want to give, do you call him holy? Tosafot there senses this question and explains that this refers to a person forced to give for lack of choice: someone visited him, and having no choice, he was forced to serve him food. In the end he gave, though unwillingly - and therefore "Israel are holy." Yet it remains puzzling: a person who gave in such a manner, would you include him among "Israel are holy"?
Rather, it is explained: with every mitzvah a person performs, he creates an angel. If you performed a mitzvah without intention (kavanah), you created an angel's body without a soul, for you too performed the mitzvah without a soul, without intention. And if a person desperately wanted to do a mitzvah but was unable to - he lacked money to give, or he waited and waited but tefillin did not reach him - he created an angel's soul without a body, since there was no physical deed. What does the Holy One, Blessed is He, do? As cited in the name of Reb Zusha: He takes the body from the one who performed the mitzvah without intention, and the soul from the one who only intended and desired but did not perform it in practice, and joins them together. And this is the meaning of "Israel are holy" - together they are holy, for from the deeds of both of them, one complete angel is created.
Based on this, the relationship between the hadas (myrtle) and the lulav (palm frond) is explained. Our Sages said regarding the Four Species: "Let these come and atone for those." The hadas has fragrance but no taste - mitzvot without Torah. The lulav, which produces dates, has taste but no fragrance - Torah without mitzvot. They complement one another. Just as will and deed complement one another, so too the Torah of one and the mitzvot of another complement each other.
But what about the aravah (willow) and the etrog (citron)? The etrog has both taste and fragrance and lacks nothing, while the aravah seemingly only receives. With the hadas and the lulav, each gave something and received something, but the etrog seemingly received nothing - why is this partnership worthwhile for it? The difficulty is that Chazal stated, "Let these come and atone for those," implying that everyone gains from this arrangement; it does not say, "Let the etrog come and atone for the aravah," but rather a mutual balance.
And the explanation follows what we have explained: when the tzaddik rebukes the wicked, the etrog influences the aravah. If the aravah responded and began to give its fragrance and taste - the wicked person changed - the tzaddik gains, for the Holy One, Blessed is He, grants him a share in the reward of his mitzvot. And if the aravah did not accept the rebuke, would you say the etrog lost out? The commentators explain: the etrog also received. In the aravah, there is a holy spark that sustains it, and its good spark clings to the holy spark of the tzaddik. The tzaddik takes that person's merits, while the bad spark in the tzaddik - for "there is no righteous man on earth who does good and does not sin," and he too has some slight flaw - transfers to the aravah. The wicked takes his portion and the tzaddik's portion in Gehinnom, and the tzaddik takes his portion and the wicked person's portion in Gan Eden. Thus, the partnership proves worthwhile for the etrog as well. The lesson is: even when a person acted and seemingly did not succeed, in the end he will gain from it.
The Malbim explains that man is compared to a tree of the field. There is a barren tree and there is a fruit-bearing tree, and in a fruit tree the primary essence is the fruit. And in man - where are his fruits? In his mouth. Just as the choicest part of a tree is the fruit it produces, so too the choicest quality in man is speech. This is also his unique distinction, through which he became the crown of the human species: "And He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life" - which Targum translates as "a speaking spirit," and through this man is distinguished from animals. Neither the branches nor the leaves nor the treetop are the finest part of the tree, but rather the fruit; and so it is with man - the virtue that sets him apart, the place where his wisdom and greatness are revealed, is speech.
It is said that speech is the pen of the heart: when a person speaks, you understand what is written upon his heart. If you see someone speaking words of contempt - you understand who he is. If you see someone speaking words of praise, encouraging words, words of love and brotherhood toward every fellow Jew, speaking words of Torah - through this you understand what is within his inner essence.
The "mouth" mentioned here represents wisdom. When a person speaks words of wisdom with his mouth, he brings forth his fruit; the yielding of fruit is the expression of words of wisdom that the wise man brings forth with his mouth. But if he is a barren tree, a person entirely empty, then when he speaks he has spoken nothing - "like a mute and deaf person who does not open his mouth," as is said of the fool. A barren tree, what does it have to give? What will he talk to you about, the news? The sports league?
Furthermore, the fruit of speech also brings the wise person himself to completion. When a wise person speaks words of Torah, he does not only benefit others; he himself is elevated and attains a virtue that leads him toward perfection. We have explained before that when a person learns something, he understands it on a certain level, but when he explains it to others, he upgrades his level of understanding: the concepts become clearer, sharper, and better comprehended by him. Thus, the fruit of speech benefits him directly - through the very act of speaking, he acquired a spiritual virtue, and also deepened his grasp of the subject.
The Malbim explains: Man has two ladders by which he ascends toward perfection - one is contemplation and wisdom, and the other is action. From wisdom, a person is satisfied within himself: speaking words of wisdom benefits him as well. But in action, the primary beneficiaries are others. When one gives to another, feeds him, gives him charity, helps him - it is difficult to say that he gained personal benefit from this; on the contrary, he spent money from his pocket and food from his home and bestowed it upon another. Therefore, precisely in that realm, it is the Holy One, Blessed is He, Who will repay man according to his deed.
This is the plain meaning of the verse: "From the fruit of a man's mouth he shall be satisfied with good" - in speech, one benefits personally, gains advantage, deepens his understanding, and profits. But as for "the recompense of a man's hands" - what did he receive? He only gave, he only expended. Concerning this it is said, "He will restore to him": the Holy One, Blessed is He, will restore to you, for on this giving you receive no inherent return or direct response.
The Malbim further clarifies the difference between wages and recompense. Recompense is determined, in his words, by "the inner emotional impressions the soul undergoes in its performance, stemming from the character traits implanted in his soul." If a person gives charity out of love for others, or out of his traits of mercy and compassion, his recompense will correspond to that. But if he gave begrudgingly, because others were watching and this person gave and that person gave and he felt uncomfortable being seen not giving, and he tossed it without choice with a sour face - the act is evaluated according to the intention and the soul's inner state at the moment of giving. This is the definition of recompense: one is repaid according to the disposition of his soul. Wages, however, are not like this: a laborer who worked is paid his wage, and it does not depend on whether he came to work joyfully or not - wages are received according to the deed, while recompense is according to the intention behind it.
The Malbim also distinguishes between wages and recompense on the one hand, and restoration on the other. One who restores returns the very object itself. If you lost a camera and it was returned to you, they did not buy you another one; they returned yours. But wages and recompense are always something else in exchange for the deed: if one manufactured tables, do they pay him with tables as his wage? Likewise with recompense: if you lent someone your car for a while, or even gave it as a gift, does he repay you by returning that very same car? Recompense is always something else.
Hence the insight: "and the recompense of a man's hands He will restore to him." The Holy One, Blessed is He, personally restores to him what he gave to others, in such a way that he lacks nothing. You gave and bestowed, and from Heaven you are rewarded according to your intention - but not with something else, rather with the very same thing. "Tithe so that you may become rich": with the very thing with which you acted generously, with that very thing He will restore to you, in complete restoration. It seemed to the person that he was diminished in some way, but he is told: No, my friend, you were not diminished at all; you lack nothing of what you had initially.
דֶּרֶךְ אֱוִיל יָשָׁר בְּעֵינָיו וְשֹׁמֵעַ לְעֵצָה חָכָם׃ (טו) - The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who hearkens to counsel is wise. (15)
Rabbeinu Yonah says something that the masters of Mussar frequently discuss: the evis (fool) never suspects himself. It is always clear to him that whatever he does is right; he never has a second thought - "Perhaps I did not act properly?" "Perhaps I did not act wisely?" After all, he holds a monopoly on wisdom, so how could it be that he did not act wisely? The evis does not need advisors; he is his own advisor, he understands on his own. If someone tells him, "What you are doing is folly," he replies, "Do not explain it to me; it is fine, I know."
Seemingly, one could ask: here we are not dealing with a kesil, but with an evis - how is his way right in his own eyes? Rather, this person's lust sways his heart, and on account of his lust he makes every possible mistake, failing to notice that he is acting out of desire rather than intellect. Had he listened to advice from others, he would have gained wisdom, for another person is objective - he does not share your desire, and can therefore offer you clean, unbiased counsel. But you analyze the situation through your desire, saying, "That is worthwhile," because there is something there you crave that attracts you, and you fail to think logically that the risks there are great and that another option, which seemingly appears less appealing, is preferable. When a person is driven by desire, his thinking is not objective, and his decision is not an objective decision.
In contrast to him, "one who listens to counsel is wise." Notice: a wise person has something to rely upon, he has real substance, and he could say to himself, "I am wise, I can rely on my own judgment." Yet despite this, he listens to the counsel of others, because he knows that "bribery blinds the eyes of the wise" - not the eyes of fools. If bribery blinds the eyes of the wise, all the more so the eyes of fools! The Torah did not say, "Be careful, bribery might warp the mind of a fool"; rather, even if you are wise, bribery will distort your thinking.
And who is this "wise person"? Not someone whom you and I would call wise. If the Rambam were to say about someone that he is wise, we would say he is an unimaginably great sage. If Shlomo HaMelech, the wisest of all men, were to call him wise, he would be a sage of peerless wisdom. And if the Creator of the world says of him that he is wise, who could possibly fathom or describe it? Yet it is precisely about such people that the Torah states: bribery blinds the eyes of the wise - the very sages whom the Torah itself designates as such. Once bribery is involved, it is over; one's judgment is distorted.
And what is bribery? It is not only a judge who is handed an envelope of cash. The bribery of desires, the bribery of negative character traits, is also bribery. "I am deciding this way because I feel more like it, because that option winks at me more, because this speaks to me more" - all of these are bribery. Therefore, the wise person suspects himself and says: Be careful, all your wisdom will not help you; a single drop of bribery will bias your judgment. And therefore, the righteous and the wise always suspect themselves.
We have already mentioned the story of Rabbi Chaim Ozer Grodzinski, who once had to travel to the Knessiah HaGedolah of Agudas Yisrael, an important rabbinic gathering held in the big city. He said to himself: Who knows, perhaps the entire reason I am going there is simply because on my last visit, I saw an umbrella in one of the shops that I really liked, but I did not have the money at the time, and I said that the next time I was there I would buy it? Who knows, maybe my entire motivation for traveling now is because of that umbrella! Who among us would suspect himself of such a thing? After all, this was a gathering of the greatest Torah luminaries to decide weighty matters concerning Klal Yisrael. Yet such is man - sometimes smallness, a petty detail, is what touches him and speaks to him. A small person does not sense this; a great person suspects himself.
The Alter of Slabodka once observed: In their day, it was customary to hold a mishmar in the yeshivah on Thursday night, learning throughout the entire night, and they would serve cake and coffee. He said: Who knows, perhaps we are staying here to learn all night only because of the cake and coffee? Torah, of which it is written that "all your desires cannot compare to it" - and you equate it to cake and coffee? Such is human nature. And if you do not suspect yourself, it is a sign that your situation is very dire, for the wise person always suspects himself. If you do not suspect yourself, Heaven forbid, you fall into the first part of the verse: "The way of an evis is right in his own eyes" - he is certain that he is acting for the sake of Heaven, certain that his intentions are pure, certain that he has never faltered. He is always certain. Only the righteous person always suspects himself.
It was also related about Rabbi Aharon Leib Shteinman, who was once on an airplane passing over the border between the United States and Canada, where Niagara Falls was visible below. The Rav sat in a seat from which they could not be seen, and someone said to him, "The Rav can come to the front of the plane to see the falls, to stand, recite a blessing, and thank Hashem for the wonders of creation." The Rav arose from his seat and began walking, but halfway there he turned around, returned to his seat, and sat down. They asked him, "Why did the Rav not go see them?" He replied, "Halfway there, I asked myself: Why are you going? Is it truly to thank and praise the Creator for the wonders of creation, or simply because you are curious to see Niagara Falls that everyone talks about? Do not misunderstand: even if you go to see it out of curiosity, there is no prohibition in that. But a righteous person suspects himself and does not deceive himself, and the Rav felt there was an element of self-deception here - so he returned to his seat."
This is what Shlomo HaMelech is telling us: the evis never suspects himself. But the wise man, despite all his wisdom, before making a decision says: Come, I want you to hear this; I was asked such-and-such, and I am deliberating whether to do this or that. I have an opinion, but I also want to hear what you have to say. It is true that I am wise - but hearing another person will provide me with further discernment, another perspective. "One who listens to counsel is wise."
The Vilna Gaon explains: the evil (fool) immediately does whatever enters his heart, and this is upright in his eyes. But the wise person does nothing without first consulting a wise person, because he knows that "every imagination of the thoughts of man's heart was only evil continually" and "the inclination of man's heart is evil from his youth."
The Gra notes precisely: with the evil, sight is emphasized - "upright in his eyes," while with the wise person, hearing is emphasized - "and listens to counsel." What is the difference? The eye and the ear hint to the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Written Torah depends on the eye - one reads from the book, "Let us bring the book and see." But the Oral Torah depends on the hearing of the ear, being transmitted from mouth to ear. Today the Oral Torah has also been written down, but in their time, when it was not written, it came only through the ear.
And as is known, things in the world are divided into duchra and nukva - male and female. In abstract concepts, this means that duchra is always the giver, the influencer, and nukva is the recipient, the one influenced. If we divide the eye and ear in this manner: the eye is the aspect of duchra, and the ear is the aspect of nukva. This is not merely because the eye protrudes while the ear is recessed and perforated - not due to the physical difference - but because the eye is what oversees. With the eye, you supervise what is happening with others, and this is an aspect of influence: "I am in charge here; I am overseeing everyone." The ear, on the other hand, is nukva, through which I receive from others: whatever you spoke, I absorbed and took in. The ear does not give or influence - I have no ability to influence you through my ear, but only to receive from what you bestow upon me.
Which is better for a person - to be in the aspect of nukva or in the aspect of duchra? Surely in the aspect of nukva, for then he is receiving, being influenced, and adding to himself; whereas in the aspect of duchra, he influences others but receives less from them. "Be a tail to lions and do not be a head to foxes" - the head to foxes is duchra, the giver, but to whom? To foxes. It is better to be a tail to lions and be nukva, because as a tail you receive from those who are greater than you.
A certain rabbi was once asked to give a sermon in a place where other rabbis and speakers were present. He told them, "There are other rabbis here; I prefer that they speak." They asked him, "After all, the Rav can give and bestow merit through this - why does he not wish to?" He told them, "Look: when I speak, I repeat things I already know; when I listen, I learn new things." This is the concept of nukva: when you are in the role of a receiver, you have received and absorbed. But if you gave, you only gave from what you already had, adding nothing to yourself. Again, do not misunderstand this to mean that one should not give or influence others; there is a great reward for one who gives, and it is truly wonderful. But if the question is which is preferable when both options are available - to go deliver a shiur or to go hear a shiur - go hear a shiur. If you listened to a shiur, you received. And this refers to someone from whom there is what to receive, a great person from whom one can learn.
According to this, the verse is wonderful: "The way of a fool is right in his eyes" - it is right in the eyes of the evil to be in the aspect of "his eyes," the aspect of duchra, the giver. He immediately runs to be among those who influence. But the wise person is not eager to be among the givers; rather, on the contrary - "and he who listens to counsel," he desires to be among the receivers. This is the way of wisdom: that a person should be a receiver and not only a giver.
The Malbim explains that there is a path that appears smooth and straight at first, yet leads to destruction in the end; and there is the opposite path, which at first is full of thorns, thistles, and obstacles, but in the end is a level plain. The path where a person is drawn after lusts - wine, meat, bodily desires, physical pleasures - is a path whose beginning is smooth, full of delight and pleasure; but ultimately that person may die young, and afterward in Heaven he will have to pay a very heavy price for all that he indulged in here in this world. The second path seems harder, where one shuns pleasures here and distances himself from worldly desires and faces struggles - but in the end lies all of eternity, happiness and spiritual refinement beyond all measure and description. Its beginning is thorns, and its end is a level plain.
And what is an evil? The Malbim always distinguishes between an evil and a kesil. The kesil is not necessarily an unintelligent person; he can be very clever, even a professor, but he does not live according to the wisdom he knows: he knows an action is wrong and does it anyway. The evil, on the other hand, is the skeptical thinker: "Maybe," "Who says?", "Do you have proof?", "How can anyone know?", "There is no certainty," "It is not necessarily so." Whatever you tell him - maybe yes, maybe no, everything with him remains in doubt.
The Malbim says: The evil doubts the laws of wisdom. He always harbors doubts as to whether what you say is correct, whether the Creator of the world truly wants things done specifically this way; he does not believe in them and is unwilling to listen to advice. People show him: "Look, sir, this is what you should do; this is the right advice and this is the upright path" - but the path shown to him seems flawed in his eyes, while his own path seems upright. And why does he follow his own sight? Because the path that ends in thorns and thistles begins as a level plain, a pleasant and good path of pleasures and delights. People tell him, "In the end there are thorns; in the end there are pains and travail." And he replies, "It's not certain; I don't know; right now I see a level plain." This is "The way of a fool is right in his eyes" - he sees a path whose beginning appears smooth and straight, assumes everything is fine, and continues along it. Thereby he strays from the path of reason and "shall rest in the congregation of the shades," as King Solomon says in chapter 21.
"And he who listens to counsel is wise" - the wise person conducts himself according to the ways of wisdom and the ways of the Torah. He does not walk along the path that seems upright in his eyes, but listens to the counsel of wisdom. It tells him: "Do not be enticed; this path may look beautiful, smooth, and pleasant, full of gardens and orchards, but in the end you will eat bitterness." Even though he sees the opposite with his own eyes, he does not follow the sight of his eyes like an evil. And wisdom tells him that the second path, though difficult at first - requiring self-sacrifice, overcoming, and subduing desires - will ultimately lead to honor ("and honor will come in the end"), and at its end lies an eternity of delight and happiness. He listens to the counsel that wisdom offers him and chooses the right path, thereby proving in itself that he possesses wisdom: that he knows to follow the counsel of wisdom rather than what appears immediately visible to his eyes.
These two verses complement each other. "From the fruit of a man's mouth he shall be satisfied with good" teaches us that speech is man's fruit, through which he perfects both himself and others: words of Torah, sound advice, rebuke, and encouragement - their reward is no less than the reward for physical action, and the one who offers rebuke gains whether he was listened to or not. And "the recompense of a man's hands shall He render unto him" - for giving, in which you seemingly only lost out, the Holy One, Blessed be He, restores to you the very thing itself, according to the character of your soul and your intention, so that you will lack nothing at all. Furthermore, "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who hearkens to counsel is wise" teaches us that the fool is fully confident in himself, following his eyes and his desires without ever suspecting his own judgment. The wise person, however, knows that bribery blinds even the eyes of the wise; therefore, he suspects his own motives, listens, accepts guidance, and seeks counsel - turning his ear into a receptive vessel. This is the way of wisdom: to be among those who receive, to choose a path whose beginning is steep but whose end is level, and not to follow what merely seems appealing to the eye at this moment.