And just when there’s something a little crafty in Solomon’s judgment and the two women, the Talmud in Makkot 23b comes along and says that a heavenly voice went out and revealed to him who the mother was.

Question — the Talmud says there: “How did Solomon know? Perhaps she was being cunning” (the one who said, “Don’t kill him,” said it so they would think she was his mother). What does the Talmud mean here? The one who said “Don’t kill him” may indeed be cunning, but the one who said “Cut him” is certainly not his mother, so apparently the second one is his mother. Not because there is proof that she is his mother, but because the reasonable alternatives were eliminated. (And along these lines the question of the genius from Meitshit about migo is no difficulty at all, as was explained there and there.)

My memory failed me partly, because the Talmud itself there continues and says: “Solomon too reasoned: this one is compassionate and that one is not compassionate.” And the Ritva wrote: “That is to say, although this one’s compassion is not proof, since it is possible that she is being cunning, still the other one, who is not compassionate and said ‘Cut him,’ is not his mother; and once she is not his mother, it cannot be that the other is not his mother, for this child came from one of the two of them.”
And similarly one can discuss answering the question of the genius from Meitshit. It came up once here https://mikyab.net/%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%93%D7%95%D7%A7%D7%A1-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%92%D7%95 and later came up again elsewhere.

I’m reminded of an article by Eli Hadad that tries to identify the mothers in that story.

I just read it. He tries to identify the real mother by the forms of expression and not only by the hard content. As an empirical field of research that could be very interesting indeed (like almost anything), but in this article there are only hypotheses — psychological ones — that can’t be checked from the outside (and on their own they don’t seem like much to me). It reminds me that once I saw on the Otzar HaChochma forum that a dayan testified about himself that people can’t lie to him because, thank God, he identifies liars..

http://forum.otzar.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=9787&p=96855&#p96843

Nobody told me he was not like that, but no significant progress in technology / philosophy etc. (all the topics mentioned above) is known from his period. Was he simply a very wise person of whom only a little of his writings survived, Shoshani-style?
In short, from our standpoint today we recognize the genius from the verses written about him, and only someone who knew him really knew what was being talked about?

It depends who is asking and who is answering.
The questioner — “After all, he wasn’t the greatest philosopher / prophet / scientist / psychologist / thinker / rabbi, so what was it?”
That is, you assumed something and then raised questions.
The respondent — “True, in light of his writings I don’t see the great genius.”
That is, the respondent thinks he is in a position to recognize King Solomon’s wisdom from his writings.

For if the medieval authorities were like angels, then we are like human beings; and if the medieval authorities were like human beings, then we are like donkeys. (And not even like the donkey of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair.)
And for example, in tractate Sukkah 28 it is written about the least of Hillel’s disciples: “They said of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai that he left unmastered neither Scripture, nor Mishnah, nor Talmud, nor halakhot, nor aggadot, nor the fine points of Torah, nor the fine points of the scribes, nor a fortiori inferences, nor verbal analogies, nor calendrical calculations, nor numerology, nor the speech of the ministering angels, nor the speech of demons, nor the speech of palm trees, nor the parables of launderers, nor the parables of foxes, nor a great matter nor a small matter. A great matter: the Account of the Chariot. A small matter: the discussions of Abaye and Rava.”

And King Solomon certainly knew much more than all this. The primary issue, when we come to evaluate the knowledge of an ancient sage relative to us, is whether we understand at all what “ancient” means — and where we stand next to him.

In your second comment you changed the question a bit — “No significant progress in technology / philosophy etc. is known” — and that too is again something where you assume a premise and then raise a question.

True, they didn’t invent airplanes and spacecraft, satellites, Waze, and the atomic bomb in the days of King Solomon. And not only in his days, but also not in the days of all the ancient sages who could have developed the world technologically.
The answer is fairly well known: one also needs the wisdom of what not to invent. That is, some inventions really do contribute convenience for us, but some may amount to the vanities of this-worldly life, and some may bring destruction to this worldly life. For example, damage to the ozone layer, waste that is not recycled, things that cause disasters and have cost human lives. Like the invention of dynamite and from there the Nobel Prize. And above all — and I say this to you from experience in my work — Western progress has produced depressed and anxious people.
The same applies to progress in other branches of wisdom — apparently they advanced only what was needed for that period and for our lives in this world.

Indeed, a well-known answer, and also a reasonable one.
(A full recovery, with God’s help.)

Ah, dear Tamim! I understand that the sentence “True, in light of his writings I don’t see the great genius” sounds more reasonable to you. Tell me who your rabbi is and I’ll tell you exactly who you are!!
You should look at the comment I sent on the question titled “But We Are Guilty” — those words apply to you too.
I’ll gladly accept your blessing, in the spirit of “Let not the blessing of an ordinary person be light in your eyes.”
And in practice, if you encounter something in my words that you don’t understand, I’m always happy to be at your service and explain what isn’t clear.

I myself see no reason to believe that Solomon had great wisdom in general fields, and I also greatly doubt whether he was even such a mighty king, and from Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs there is no reason to assume that he literally composed them with his own hands — plain and simple.

In any case, I responded only to the casualness with which you assumed that he knew all the wisdoms of the world (which are thousands of times more numerous and complex than everything in our holy Torah, and of even a trace of that Torah itself, according to what we possess today, Solomon of course did not know). In my opinion this is a deranged conspiratorial view that I see no point in even discussing a refutation of. To me it indicates a completely wiped-out critical sense, to the point that one cannot agree on any premise because you can always invent some invention to get around it. Really, sometimes there are levels of delusion beyond my comprehension. Go from strength to strength.

Oh. Now we can talk seriously. But first let’s summarize your claims:
A. You see no reason to believe in the wisdom of King Solomon, and you doubt his greatness.
B. You see no reason to assume that he authored the writings attributed to him.
C. You claim that my assumption that he knew all the wisdoms of the world is a casual / deranged conspiratorial assumption.

Here is the explanation (and although in some of it I am not telling you anything new, wait until the end):
The wisdom of King Solomon is found in the prophet I Kings chapter 3, regarding the dream at Gibeon. And in chapter 5: “And God gave Solomon wisdom and very great understanding, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore. And Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the East and all the wisdom of Egypt… And he spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of the wall; he also spoke of beasts, birds, creeping things, and fish…”
Now from the plain meaning of the verses you can already see that Solomon knew general wisdoms. For surely you do not suspect the people of the East or the ancient Egyptians of engaging in knowledge of Torah. And it is also written that Solomon’s wisdom was in flora and fauna.
And to save a long response, look there in Rashi, who refers to the knowledge in the Pesikta about the red heifer for an explanation of what the wisdom of the people of the East and the wisdom of Egypt are. And that Solomon was wiser than Adam. (That is in Pesikta Rabbati chapter 14.)
The Metzudat David writes: “The people of the East” — they knew the constellations and were clever in bird-lore, which is the language of birds. “Egypt” — they were experts in natural science and the combination of the elements.
And Abarbanel goes on at great length explaining the greatness of Solomon’s wisdom.

And in chapter 10 — it says that the Queen of Sheba heard about Solomon “and came to test him with riddles.” You don’t think she asked him Torah questions; clearly they were about general sciences.

Likewise, in many Talmudic passages there is the expression: “And Solomon too said in his wisdom.” And in tractate Berakhot 57b: “One who sees Solomon in a dream may hope for wisdom.”

B. Regarding the writings attributed to Solomon, see the Talmud in tractate Bava Batra 15a and the commentaries of the early commentators on the Talmud.

C. Unfortunately I’m busy with something, so I had to cut short, but with God’s help I’ll come back with more sources. But you see that this is not a casual assumption. (Except that if you do not believe what is written in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) or the explanations of our ancient commentators, and you want to find decisive proof from some papyrus or scroll, that I probably won’t be able to provide.)

You are bringing straw into Ephraim — and even that with pebbles mixed in, enough to incur full damages. I am astonished — did you really think I didn’t know most of what you brought? What is your point?
First, my view that Solomon did not know the slightest fraction of what would be required to invent an airplane is stronger for me than my view that the Written Torah and Oral Torah were given at Sinai, and all the words of the sages and the Geonim and most of the Rishonim. So there is no point in bringing me quotations. And if your faith in the words of the sages leads you to seriously maintain absurdities like these, then in my opinion you have a problem with critical judgment.
Second, even according to the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), Solomon was wise relative to his generation, no more. And perhaps he was very wise for his generation — so what? The distance between all the wisdom known by the entire world put together 3,000 years ago and the ability to develop a pitiful Nokia phone is greater than the distance between someone proficient in the phrase “Thus did our sages do” and Rabbi Akiva Eger.
What is described there is practical wisdom, not a consolidated framework of precise theoretical knowledge. Maybe he knew what kind of soil is good for planting palms, how to treat sheep diseases, and how to evade traitors plotting against his kingdom like Shimei ben Gera.
There are serious challenges to the extent of Solomon’s (and David’s) kingdom and wealth, and to the unity of the biblical text concerning him, so it is hard for me to reach conclusions. You — eat your bread with joy, because out of lack of knowledge everything seems simple and smooth to you.

Anyway, so that this not be an empty coming, I’ll mention a homily by the Mishneh LaMelekh that deals a bit with Solomon and his Torah wisdom, and with what I mentioned about Shimei ben Gera.
Shimei ben Gera cursed David when he fled from Absalom, and when David prevailed, Shimei came and begged David to spare him, and David indeed spared him and swore to him that he would not die. But afterward David told Solomon to bring Shimei’s gray head down with blood to Sheol. And the commentators worked hard to explain the matter.
I remember that the Mishneh LaMelekh in Parashat Derakhim explains, in his well-known style, that David spared Shimei because Mordechai was destined to come from him (as the sages say that Mordechai was from the descendants of Shimei), and David acted measure for measure, just as God spared the Moabites because two good “mules” were destined to come from them (as the sages say regarding “Harass the Midianites” — Moses inferred by a fortiori reasoning that one should harass the Moabites, since the Midianites only came to help the Moabites, and the Holy One said to him: “Do not harass Moab and Ammon,” because Ruth the Moabitess and Naamah the Ammonitess were destined to come from them). And for this reason David said: just as my ancestors were spared for my sake, so I will spare Shimei for Mordechai’s sake.
And this is despite the fact that in human courts, if someone is liable to death, he is judged to death and we do not consider his offspring (if he deserves death, we kill him even if worthy descendants will come from him, and if he does not deserve death, we do not kill him even if nothing will come from him). But in heavenly judgment, if he deserves death, then he can be killed by human hands on condition that no worthy descendants are destined to come from him. Therefore Moses checked the offspring of the Egyptian before he struck and buried him in the sand (because according to Jewish law, a gentile who strikes a Jew is liable to death only at the hands of Heaven).
And now it is well explained: David spared Shimei so that Mordechai would come from him, but by Solomon’s time all of Shimei’s sons had already been born, and from then on he could properly be killed. But Shimei did not think David had spared him for that reason; rather, Shimei thought that at the time of the flight from Absalom David did not count as a king (it is written, “When a leader sins,” and he brings a male goat; but an ordinary person brings a female goat. And there is a statement of the sages that during the flight from Absalom David was judged with a female goat). Therefore Shimei thought he was not rebelling against the monarchy and so was not legally liable to death, and therefore he disagreed with Solomon, who sought to kill him. But Solomon held that certainly with respect to rebellion David did have the status of king, and therefore Shimei was liable to death, and David only spared him because Mordechai was destined to come from him, and measure for measure because David merited that his ancestors were spared for his sake, as explained.
And as for the fact that David had the status of king at that time even though he atoned with a female goat like an ordinary person — it seems to me one can say this is Solomon’s reasoning: since the whole reason David was not currently king was that Israel had rebelled against him, then surely each of the rebels is judged for having rebelled, and it is all one extended rebellion. But for other matters, such as the offering, at the end of the day he was not king in practice, and therefore he brings a female goat. So you have shown that Solomon knew our Torah in full, and let our conversation not be too idle.
Nevertheless, at this point I withdraw from this learned discussion, because in my eyes it is extremely bizarre. If it is comfortable for you to believe that Solomon knew how to solve a quadratic equation — believe it. I do not believe this at all, and that is that.

I did not come to spar with you. You have the right to remain with your opinion.
I’ll add 2 final sources for the benefit of Idan, the questioner.
1. The commentary of Radak on chapter 5: “Three thousand proverbs” — these are not found among us, and likewise “his songs were one thousand and five,” for many books were lost from Israel during exile; and likewise what he composed in natural science, as it says, “He spoke of trees,” meaning he made known their nature and their remedies; and likewise about beasts, birds, creeping things, and fish — in everything under the lunar sphere his wisdom prevailed, and he composed books about them, and they are not found among us…
2. Maimonides in the laws of repentance wrote that the Messiah king will be wise like King Solomon. And according to your words, what use would his wisdom be??

As criticism, you can always raise doubts and questions. But I do not see any question in your words. Only a declaration that you do not desire faith in the sages.
And if you have read the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), it is written there that there was no one as wise as Solomon and after him there will not be. So what can criticism already do?? Do you disagree with the verse?
Everything you wrote at the beginning of your words is null and void. It is advisable that you review the matter carefully again. And not for nothing did I repeat it, because if you read but did not review, etc. And if you have a refutation or some actual proof for your view and not just declarations, I’d be happy if you made me wiser with them.
Or maybe you too are like your rabbi — weak in this.

If you think that the Holy One revealed to Solomon, in hidden mysteries, all the wisdoms of the world, but commanded him to behave exactly exactly as though he knew only according to his period — then there is no way to test that hypothesis. Maybe Balaam’s donkey also knew how to fry schnitzels with golden chef-edition bread crumbs, but hid its power out of excessive modesty? Maybe I myself am a prophet of God within you, and all my words come out from the Temple? Maybe and maybe.
Though if that’s the hypothesis, then I also have no reason to argue with it, because it is close to meaningless in my eyes. I argued with the claim that Solomon was so wise that by his own understanding he sat and innovated everything needed to invent an airplane (deafening nonsense number 1), and nevertheless revealed nothing to later generations because of the bizarre reason you gave, that he thought it was not worthwhile (deafening nonsense number 2).

As I said, quotations from the sources will neither help nor save here, and I have no reason to search for refutations of anything. If one has to interpret the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and the sages in all sorts of strange ways so that they won’t be speaking nonsense, then that is what you should do. And if there is no interpretation except the distortion you are entertaining, then one should conclude that an error occurred there.

Earlier you wrote something about serious challenges and about the unity of the text. I thought you would bring something from that.
But fine. Let’s put all the quotations aside for a moment and touch the root of your words.
If King Solomon could build an airplane, why didn’t he do so? Or why didn’t he reveal it to others?
I’ll explain again: we have no source before us saying that the Holy One gave him wisdom but told him not to develop it too much.
King Solomon knew and was proficient also in general wisdoms. (For that one needs faith in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and in the sages who explain it.)
But think for yourself — even in later generations. The Vilna Gaon, who was a genius also in general sciences, or the Hazon Ish, who understood science and medicine well — and no one disputes that they never studied in the academy. If these geniuses had discovered the ability to invent some technological invention, would they have invented it?? Apparently (and for me this is certain) not!!! And the reasons are simple: A. neglect of Torah study. B. the vanities of this world. C. some things bring disasters with them, or just hassles.
Maybe that is puzzling to you. But to me it is utterly simple.
King Solomon made his generation wise in what they needed. And had he seen a reason and a need for an airplane for his generation, perhaps he would have invented it.
Surely you know Maimonides’ words in his introduction to the commentary on the Mishnah, Order Zeraim, about “the crazed ones” —
“And all the pleasures of the world are frivolity and complete folly, but they are a cause of settling the world.”
The world did indeed develop through crazed people. But it is not certain that they were thinking of the good of the world.
And you can still challenge these things, but I think they are completely logical.

Answer me whether you think this was a miracle — that God implanted the knowledge in him and also commanded him not to reveal anything (in which case I have no more problem with it than with the chariot of fire and horses of fire that accompanied Elijah when he went up to heaven in a whirlwind. Miracles do not occupy me, and that God decided not to reveal up-to-date science to everyone — that is certainly true. And why God saw fit to create such a strange creature that knows everything and can’t do anything with it — well, people don’t die from a question),
or whether Solomon on his own decided it was not worthwhile to reveal it,
or whether Solomon had such immense talent that by his own powers he sat and thought thoughts and did what all humanity did over thousands of years of effort by hundreds of thousands of people (even if you take only the last 500 years — centuries of effort by hundreds of thousands of highly intelligent people, and future generations after us will, with God’s help, discover wonders and marvels so amazing that we will not understand their speech or their conversation. I very much long to live another thousand years and hear, broadly speaking, what tremendous innovations will have been made in the world. Too bad I was born in this generation and not in the last generation before the world returns to chaos).

The Vilna Gaon knew a little geometry from books that existed before him and innovated nothing. What the Hazon Ish knew a little in medicine he probably learned from doctors or medical books, and he could not invent a quarter of a medicine that would prolong someone’s life by a week. I thought you were saying only that Solomon was uniquely special — do you think this way about the sages too??

You are going on at unnecessary length.
I already wrote to you that there is no source for the idea that the Holy One asked Solomon to limit his wisdom.
And likewise regarding what I wrote about the Vilna Gaon or the Hazon Ish. I did not write that they innovated something; I only gave an example of a situation where “if” some idea had been newly discovered by a Jewish sage, would they reveal or invent it.
From Maimonides’ words I showed you that inventions and developments are “madness,” folly, and frivolity.
In my humble opinion the sages also had knowledge of general sciences; I brought a quotation from tractate Sukkah about Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai. And there are also well-known sayings about Shmuel, who said, “The paths of the heavens are as clear to me as the paths of Nehardea.”
It seems that what mainly bothers you is: why would a sage who can invent suppress his wisdom and not invent?
I have already said that as far as I’m concerned, these things are simple.
In my humble opinion Solomon did not even think about inventions. Rather, he used his wisdom (miraculous — certainly that is what is written) for the benefit of humanity in the purest way. Without any craziness. This too is part of the immense wisdom: to know what is needed for life in this world and what is madness.
And as I said: you are free to challenge the truth of these things, but why challenge their logic?

By the way, your reasoning about Solomon and Shimei is very nice. True, I’m not steeped in the topic, so I can’t give more of an opinion than that.

Fine.

“Fine”? Is that all??? No, just kidding.
I owe you a huge thank youuuuu. You were simply an agent of Divine providence. And you don’t even know what I’m talking about.
Above I “cut off” in the middle of a comment and went to undergo a surgical tooth extraction. During the treatment I distracted myself with thoughts about King Solomon and his wisdom. And afterward I distracted myself from the pain by corresponding with you.
“One is granted merit through the meritorious,” etc. And truly, thank you.

May it be His will that just as that pain was distracted, so too other pains be removed from you, to learn and to teach, to observe and to do, and may you be only joyful.

Dear Idan — I just now found something like your question in the book Imrei Binah (by the Ben Ish Hai) in the fourth section, Chikrei Lev, section 17.
What’s surprising is that he answers somewhat like what I answered. Blessed is He who guided me to his words — so a surprise for you too, dear “Tamim”!
I also saw a nice article on the matter by Dr. Hadassah Melamed about the wisdom of King Solomon — I recommend it.

This idea is familiar, hackneyed, and has been passed from mouth to ear for a long time already. It really is a huge surprise to me that the Ben Ish Hai did not refrain from far-fetched ideas when he wanted to insist on believing in the absolute plain meaning of everything he found written.

The honorable Rabbi HaChuilik, may he live long. I read the words of the Ben Ish Hai. And behold, they bring one to ridicule and levity. He wrote that Solomon could certainly have built airplanes and telephones etc. But he refrained from it because if this idea were to fall into the hands of the hostile nations, they would use it to destroy the nest of Israel, God forbid.
https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=31373&pgnum=206

And this requires examination as to his holy intention, of blessed memory, for if all the Jewish people were armed with tanks, they could certainly subjugate the entire globe and place all the nations of the world under their feet forevermore. And this follows by an a fortiori inference: if a few cities in Greece and a few cities in Italy subjugated the whole world without tanks or F16s, then all the more so the entire people of Israel, of whom it is said that they are as numerous as the stars of heaven — if they had tanks and F16s they could subjugate the whole world, and no enemy or foe would stand before us until this very day.
And if after a very long time one should fear lest this wisdom leak to the nations that oppress us, surely the wondrous genius Solomon could have thought of some brilliant patent for preventing the wisdom from leaking at all. So why did he not do that? Difficult indeed. And furthermore, does he not have some brilliant patent for persuading all nations to stop oppressing Israel? To this day the entire world behaves with great childishness and they fight and kill, and all these idiotic quarrels (which at the moment can’t be avoided, but the whole business is terribly idiotic) — could the genius Solomon not think of some patent that would prevent all these wars? Refutation.

And one must further consider that in our own day our enemies are armed with all manner of ships of fire and the telegraph, and still our strength remains in our loins; we are all alive here today. Has the hand of God become too short to save us against ships of fire? Astonishing. And regarding this, the book Imrei Binah says that nowadays, when the sciences have been revealed, there are alongside them international peace regulations and so on. What would he answer to that ball of fire that the people of the US dropped on the Land of the Rising Sun, and to all the wars in recent generations in which more millions died than in all the wars of the past, while the international regulations were brushed aside — all by the power of that same technology that Solomon withheld from Israel.

And even if we grant him all his own assumptions — that deep counsel was in Solomon’s heart to conceal the secret of a ship of fire — why did Solomon not reveal sound philosophy, on which the greatest minds of the world toiled for many years? And what about penicillin? It would have been enough if he had just said that there is such a thing as bacteria; immediately he would have saved many millions over the generations. But that, perhaps, in my humble opinion, can be resolved due to the force of the question: just as Pharaoh bathed in the blood of infants, perhaps Solomon wanted to hear from the ground the cries of all those dead people whom he prevented from having the cure, and for that reason he hid that information lest they live and not cry out. Consider this well.

And all this I have said besides the hallucination itself, to show you that even within it one can hack away at it endlessly with axes.

Thank you both very much, I’m still confused 🙂

A congregation of confused people. The Buddha is considered wise on an inconceivable scale not because he invented or wrote rocket science, but because he attained enlightenment and wakefulness and taught how to do so. That is wisdom of life that a thousand academies will not confer — and everyone involved in the field, including Western philosophers and academics, says that under every leafy tree. Solomon was wise in that sense. Nothing more.

As for the two prostitute women, it’s easy to ask after the fact, but his wisdom lay in the elegance and the out-of-the-box thinking — the very solution he came up with, which proved itself. Instead of dragging them through endless legal proceedings, searching and searching, candle to candle, and Form 17 — that was the genius.

On the matter itself, in the responsa of Rabbi Mashash there is a several-page responsum to the question why Solomon did not invent electricity.

Interesting how many pages he would need for an answer to why the orange I ate today did not blow the great shofar to gather the dispersed of Israel.

Hello Gil. Can you give the source of where Rabbi Mashash’s responsum is?
Tamim, you’re a hard nut, thank God. (That’s a compliment — I need a study partner like you.)

The whole matter of Solomon’s wisdom is based on a dream.

“And God said to him: Because you have asked this thing, and have not asked for yourself long life, and have not asked for yourself riches, and have not asked for the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to hear judgment — behold, I have done according to your words; behold, I have given you a wise and discerning heart, so that there has been none like you before you, and after you none shall arise like you.”
…
“And Solomon awoke, and behold, it was a dream.”

Dreams need not be taken too seriously.

The result is also described:

“And God gave Solomon wisdom and very great understanding, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore. And Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the East and all the wisdom of Egypt. And he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Kalkol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol; and his name was known among all the surrounding nations. And he spoke three thousand proverbs; and his songs were one thousand and five. And he spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of the wall; he also spoke of beasts, birds, creeping things, and fish. And people came from all nations to hear the wisdom of Solomon — from all the kings of the earth who had heard of his wisdom.”

With God’s help, 20 Shevat 5781

What astonished the Queen of Sheba, to the point that “there was no more spirit in her,” was that after she heard his wisdom and his success in answering all her questions, and after she saw the wisdom in the building of his house and its order, she saw his ascent to the House of the Lord — how such a man full of wisdom goes up in fear and humility to thank his God, and does not grow proud of his wisdom.

Solomon’s wisdom included the desire to have “an understanding heart” to understand the needs of the people of his nation and judge them justly. “And besides Kohelet being wise, he also taught the people knowledge,” and the main point of his wisdom is to teach knowledge and ethics / morality, how to walk in the way of the good and in paths of uprightness, as it is written: “Behold, fear of the Lord, that is wisdom” (Job 28). And as the Vilna Gaon instructed his wife in the letter he wrote to her on his way to the Land of Israel, that she should study the books of Ecclesiastes and Proverbs, for they are the best books of ethics.

With blessing, S.Tz.

Dissenter, I wrote a long answer on my phone but it didn’t go through. When they open the synagogues I’ll check the source for you — broadly speaking it’s in his four-part responsa and can be found in the index.

[Gil. Too bad. It may be that the reason is that if one stays a long time (long-writing time, especially on a phone), then the site connection disconnects. If one is worried in advance, it’s possible to save everything to the clipboard before sending.]

ok. I found Rabbi Mashash’s words in the book Ner Mitzvah page 9 (found, of course, on HebrewBooks). It really is a long and detailed responsum, mentioning almost all the answers I gave. Including not to destroy this world, and not to cause neglect of Torah study among Israel. And he also added there that the nations should not use Solomon’s wisdom for idolatry. And likewise that they should not use it for their wars, as was their way then in their lust for conquering lands.
Much appreciated.

Why are you so pleased that Rabbi Mashash also got himself stuck with nonsense? Just so as not to cast aspersions on Rabbi Shalom Mashash (the former Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem), it should be emphasized that we are talking here about Rabbi Yosef Mashash (who already made a name for himself in flimsy things, and even Rabbi Ovadia set aside his piety and wrote sharply against him, unusually for him in relation to rabbis with whom he had no personal quarrel).

All right, I went and read everything written there so I wouldn’t speak out of thin air. I haven’t seen such a pile of gibberish in a long time. And as the Rashba wrote somewhere: “Because of the abundance of the obvious nonsense there, I wearied of summarizing his words and refuting them one by one to find an accounting.”

A. I too do not know that Rabbi Mashash in question (who was the chief rabbi of Haifa).
B. In light of your disparagement of rabbis (including the Ben Ish Hai), I hereby remind you of what is said in the Mishnah in Ethics of the Fathers 2:10, and also protest the honor of Torah scholars.
C. I would not want to enter historical arguments with you that are unrelated to the question. But in my words above I mentioned the Vilna Gaon and the Hazon Ish, and from your words there seemed to be disparagement of them as well. And part of that stems from a lack of historical knowledge concerning their knowledge in scientific fields.
D. And if you are so wise (that everything before you is like nonsense), accept rebuke in the spirit of “Reprove a wise man and he will love you.” (Just don’t overdo the love.)

A. What does “I too do not know” mean? I know him very well and have read quite a bit of what he wrote.
C. Who disparaged the Vilna Gaon and the Hazon Ish?! You made me laugh regarding lack of historical knowledge.
As for Rabbi Yosef Mashash and his stature, there is no comparison between him and either the Hazon Ish or the Vilna Gaon, or even the Ben Ish Hai. Each man according to his praise. And I indeed do not think he was a great sage. Have you studied his books before being impressed by him? I have. The Ben Ish Hai was certainly a sage, and he surely does not need me or people like me — and I allow myself to assume that I have studied twice as many responsa in Rav Pe’alim as you have, and as anyone who wandered into this strange thread has studied — and still, when he went outside the bounds of the actual learning, he could say unserious things.

As for the rebukes and references, I am recording them before me in black fire on white fire, many thanks.

Tamim, is there a chance you remember where the homily you mentioned above in Parashat Derakhim is found? (And since then it has become a distinguished thread. By the way, I didn’t hear your opinion on the matter of “since it has been done,” etc…)

I volunteered to look it up for you. Derekh David, the tenth homily: https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=30749&st=&pgnum=87
It’s been a long time since I really returned to this special book. I don’t know who invented this genre of dialectical Torah analysis in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) based on Jewish law, but Parashat Derakhim certainly holds a place of honor in the field. I remember that the Chida says something about it among the great books, perhaps in the section on the homilies of Rabbenu Nissim.

Regarding “since it has been done,” the short quotations did not tempt me to believe there were convincing things there, so I was too lazy to open something I am not involved in, and it just happened to come my way by chance.

Thanks.
Too bad you aren’t looking at the Hatam Sofer — I actually enjoyed the proof he brought from the Talmud in the name of his grandfather.

To “Be Wholehearted” (if only…), off the cuff: after all, Solomon knew many forms of wisdom in matters of nature and spirituality that today no scientist has the faintest clue about. For example, he knew how to understand the speech of birds, and today no scientist (and, to distinguish, apparently no rabbi either) knows that. And he also understood astrology and more (yes, there is something real to it, because the stars indicate higher things in heaven that are manifested through them. And in any case, even Maimonides [the greatest rationalist among the great sages of Israel] was mistaken in thinking that the stars have a soul, as all this is explicit in the laws of the foundations of the Torah). So perhaps Solomon did not know and had not the faintest idea how to invent an airplane, but he knew the future and things far more impressive. And by the way, note that some claim that the “sea” he made was based on electricity, though on that it is already easier to argue.

Dissenter, “2. Maimonides in the laws of repentance wrote that the Messiah king will be wise like King Solomon. And according to your words, what use would his wisdom be??”
One can interpret it as “like King Solomon in his generation” — just as Solomon was the wisest of those before him, so too the Messiah king will be wiser than all who were before him, and there is no difficulty.