Human nature naturally gravitates toward praise and recoils from criticism. Yet the true test of words is measured over time. Honest and sincere criticism, even if difficult to hear at first, ultimately builds a much deeper and more stable connection than empty flattery. Two distinct figures emerge in this dynamic. The first is the honest critic who corrects a friend about their wrongdoings in order to guide them away from harmful choices [רש"י, מצודת דוד]. Opposing him is the flatterer who offers smooth and pleasant words, sometimes going so far as to praise a friend's worst traits [רלב"ג, ביאור שטיינזלץ].
The primary approach among commentators views this dynamic through the lens of time. Initially, people seek the company of those who flatter them and avoid those who offer correction [מלבי"ם]. However, when reality sets in and individuals face the negative consequences of their actions, they realize that the flatterer only caused them harm. In contrast, the critic acted out of genuine concern for their well-being and honor [רלב"ג, מלבי"ם]. Once a person abandons their harmful behavior, they look upon the critic with much greater favor than the flatterer [ביאור שטיינזלץ, מצודת דוד]. Eventually, there is even a strong possibility that the flatterer himself will admit the truth and come to appreciate the honest correction [אלשיך].
Beyond the general passage of time, this principle reflects the personal experience of King Solomon. He assures that anyone who offers correction by following his specific path and teachings will eventually find favor with others [אבן עזרא]. Solomon was acutely aware that his warnings against the pursuit of wealth and pleasure might be met with cynicism during his lifetime, given his own immense riches. He therefore anticipated that only after his death, when personal jealousy faded, would his warnings be truly accepted and appreciated [אלשיך, עמנואל הרומי]. Because Solomon experienced all worldly pleasures and testified to their emptiness, any subsequent critic can use his life as undeniable proof. This gives the honest critic a distinct advantage over a flatterer who has no evidence to support their smooth words [חומת אנך]. Another approach shifts the focus to the person receiving the correction. Even a fickle individual whose character has regressed and gone backward will ultimately value a sincere critic over someone who merely flatters them [עמנואל הרומי].
On a broader historical and spiritual level, these two character types are mirrored in past leadership. The honest critic is identified with Moses, who corrected the Israelites out of deep love and concern. The flatterer is represented by Balaam, who attempted to bring the Israelites down through smooth prophecies and flattery that ultimately led them to sin [רש"י, מנחת שי]. This contrast establishes a profound rule: anyone who offers sincere correction to a friend for the sake of heaven merits having God close to them, actively sharing in the closeness of God [מנחת שי].