Clarification: This refers to the Pasuk (cited earlier) "Toras Emes Haysah be'Fihu ... ", as the Pasuk concludes "ve'Rabim Heishiv me'Avon" (and many are those that he turned away from sin).

Implied Question: Why does the Gemara then say in Perek Bameh Madlikin that one first asks a person whether he performed his business dealings with integrity, and only then whether he fixed times to learn Torah?

Answer #1: That Gemara is speaking about someone who studied Torah, but who did not fix times to learn; whereas here, it is referring to someone who did not study Torah at all?

Answer #2: Alternately, everybody is first questioned about his business dealings, only he is punished first for not laxness in Torah-study.

Explanation: And what the Gemara means here, is that the first sentence that is carried out is the one that is for being lax in Torah.

Clarification: Just as the planks of a bridge prevent a person from making contact with the water, so too, does the beginning of Machlokes solidify, and prevent a person from learning Torah (which is compared to water).

Clarification: In other words, he is learned and understands well, as is evident from the fact that the Gemara then cites the case of the Bei Nesi'a, who appointed a Dayan who was not learned.

Alternative Explanation: The Gemara in Kesuvos however, cites this same D'rashah with regard to a Dayan who does not accept bribes, and 'who does need anything' because he is wealthy.

Clarification: This is said with regard to a Dayan not instilling fear into the hearts of the community by subjugating them excessively.

Proof: And so it is evident from the Gemara later, which Darshens, based on the same Pasuk, warns the Dayan to be patient with the community.