Author: Acquire@pos

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 10:11-12

One of the seven rules that permit lashon hara l’to’eles is that the speaker’s intentions be purely l’shem Shamayim (for the sake of Heaven), to right a wrong or to teach others not to learn from the person’s sinful ways. Based on this rule, we can derive the following:

Yonason entered into a business deal with Mr. Stockman and had a very bad experience. Yonason is certain that Mr. Stockman cheated him out of thousands of dollars. He wants to publicize what Mr. Stockman did, so that others will realize how shameful such behavior is. Yonason also hopes that when Mr. Stockman realizes that he is being scorned by the community, he will change his ways.

The Chofetz Chaim says that it is virtually impossible for Yonason’s intentions to be entirely l’shem Shamayim. Though he may think he has only the purest intentions, there is no doubt that if he does publicize what Mr. Stockman did to him, it is because he is angry and bitter towards him. That being the case, he is not permitted to spread such news. There is one situation which the Chofetz Chaim does not mention here: Yonason would be correct to warn someone considering entering a business deal with Mr. Stockman, provided that the seven rules of to’eles are met.

The following scenario is sad, but unfortunately not far-fetched:

Mr. Dinstein is marrying off a child and needs to borrow a large sum of money. He approaches Mr. Brigsman, one of the wealthiest men in the community, and requests a $10,000 loan. Mr. Brigsman refuses to lend him anything.

Mr. Dinstein is furious. He knows that Mr. Brigsman is a millionaire, and has extended loans to others. That night, between Minchah and Maariv, he tells his friends all about “that stingy miser, Brigsman.”

There is no question that Mr. Dinstein has spoken lashon hara. The Chofetz Chaim says the following:

To our misfortune, many make this mistake, as we see before our eyes. If someone feels that a certain community has not treated him in a friendly manner, then, when he visits another city, he disparages the leaders of that community for not helping him. Certainly, if he disparages the entire community, he is guilty of a grave sin. For the sin of lashon hara, even when the facts are true, is transgressed even when one speaks against an individual — and all the more so when he speaks against an entire city of Jews who hold steadfast in their faith in Hashem. Surely, this is a terrible sin.

It is interesting that the Chofetz Chaim refers to those who are being slandered as “those who hold steadfast in their faith in Hashem.” The person who spoke against the community is lacking in faith in Hashem. If his emunah would be strong, he would realize that everything in this world, including aggravation and satisfaction, are decreed from Above. If this man arrived in a city expecting assistance and did not receive it, his reaction should have been “Gam zu l’tovah, this too is for the good.” With this attitude, he would accept whatever happened calmly and even happily, and would have no need to resort to lashon hara.

IN A NUTSHELL

Someone who has been personally hurt by someone else is usually not acting purely l’shem Shamayim when he speaks against that person.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 10:9-10

R’ Yaakov Yosef Herman was a great American Torah pioneer. In All for the Boss, R’ Yaakov Yosef’s daughter Ruchoma Shain paints a picture of a man whose heart and home had a place for every Jew, and who feared no one but Hashem. R’ Yaakov Yosef would do anything to help a Jew in need or to help someone come closer to Torah. At the same time, he stood ready to defend the honor of Torah and to ensure that the halachah was not trampled upon.

He lived in America in the early 1900’s, a time when many who viewed themselves as observant Jews sometimes did things in public that clearly were contrary to Torah. R’ Yaakov Yosef did not hesitate to point out their error, even if it meant becoming the object of scorn and insults.

We mention this because R’ Yaakov Yosef was the kind of person described by the Chofetz Chaim in today’s segment:

If the speaker is someone known to everyone as a man who does not show favoritism; whatever he says when his friend is not present, he would say in his presence; he fears no one; and he is renowned as someone who speaks only the truth …

In the previous segment we learned that when speaking lashon hara l’to’eles, the speaker must address a group of at least three people so that no one will suspect him of lying or of trying to conceal the report from its subject. In today’s segment we learn an exception to this rule. If the speaker is the fearless, truthful person described above, then no one will suspect him of lying or trying to hide his intentions. Therefore, he is permitted to relate the information even to one or two people.

Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetsky, a great Torah leader of recent times, was renowned as a man of truth. When he was past the age of 90, someone asked him if he could think of a particular zechus (merit) that earned him long life. R’ Yaakov replied, “Never did I knowingly say an untruth.”

As a young man in Russia, R’ Yaakov was ordered to appear before an army officer for possible induction. When R’ Yaakov stated why he felt himself exempt from army service, the officer accused him of lying. R’ Yaakov replied, “I have never lied in my entire life.” His words were said with such conviction that the officer exempted him.

Even a non-Jew believed the words of a man who would speak noth­ing but the truth. Certainly, a Jew would believe the words of such a man and not suspect him of distorting the truth.

IN A NUTSHELL

Someone whose integrity is beyond reproach can relate lashon hara l’to’eles even to one or two people.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 10:7-8

Before telling others, he must first speak to the guilty party in a soft tone and attempt to con­vince him to mend his ways.

This is rule #3 for relating lashon hara l’to’eles. This rule applies only in a case where there is a possibility that the guilty party will accept the criticism and cor­rect the wrong that he committed. However, in a case where it is clear that he will ignore any criticism, no matter how gently and respectfully it is offered, then one is not required to speak with him first.

However, says the Chofetz Chaim, in order to speak lashon hara l’to’eles, the person must have a group of at least three listeners who will hear the report together (in a case where one must relate the information to friends or neighbors, not to the guilty party’s parents or rav.) This is necessary so that his goal will be accomplished. If he tells the report to only one or two people, the listener(s) might be thinking:

“Now, why is Shlomo being so secretive? If Meir really did drive recklessly, then shouldn’t Shlomo want more people to know about it? It seems to me that he doesn’t want Meir to know that he is talking behind his back. I wouldn’t be surprised if Shlomo made up the whole story to make Meir look bad.”

When the speaker offers his report before three or more listeners, everyone present knows that news of the report is bound to spread and will probably reach Meir’s ears. Therefore, says the Chofetz Chaim, it is as if Shlomo said his words in Meir’s presence, and his listeners will not suspect him of deceit.

Nevertheless, they are not permitted to believe his words as fact. As we have learned earlier, even when a person may listen to negative reports for important, constructive reasons, he may only suspect that they are true. In this case, though they know that Shlomo is an honest, G-d-fearing person and surely means to be truthful, they have to consider the possibility that he may have left out some detail or been unaware of some fact that would have painted a different picture. (Perhaps Meir did not want to reveal to Shlomo that the car’s faulty brakes made it appear as if he was driving recklessly.) They should take proper precautions and speak to Meir privately, confront him with the information and weigh his reaction.

If the guilty party is a difficult, angry person who, if he should find out that someone spoke against him, would take revenge, then, says the Chofetz Chaim, it is possible that the speaker could relate the information in private to one or two individuals.

IN A NUTSHELL

In most situations, lashon hara l’to’eles should be related to a group of three or more. The listeners should act on the possibility that the information is true, but should not accept it as fact.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 5-6

“Rachel is a horrible person. I can think of 20 things I don’t like about her,” says Sarah.

Leah responds, “You really should not say such things. It’s pure lashon hara.”

“I don’t care. I can say whatever I want,” is Sarah’s retort.

Leah says to herself, “This is not the first time I’ve heard Sarah talk like that about others. I’m going to tell people what she said about Rachel so that they will know to avoid conversations with her until she changes her attitude.”

This seems to be a classic case of lashon hara l’to’eles. However, there may be a problem. Suppose Rachel has no idea that Sarah has spoken against her. If Leah tells people why they should avoid conversations with Sarah, word might get back to Rachel about what was said. This would cause Rachel to have bad feelings towards Sarah. When someone utters words that cause bad feelings between Jews, he or she is guilty of speaking rechilus.

In such a case, Leah would have to find some other way to convince Sarah to mend her ways.

There is an exception to this rule; there is a case where Leah would be allowed to spread the word about Sarah’s forbidden talk although Rachel knows nothing about it.

Leah responds, “You really should not say such things. It’s pure lashon hara.”

“I don’t care. I can say whatever I want,” Sarah retorts. “In fact, tomorrow when I get to school, I’m going to tell everyone exactly what I don’t like about Rachel.”

In this case, Leah has to act quickly to prevent Sarah from carrying out her evil intentions. Leah would be correct to warn her friends in advance that Sarah is planning to say nasty things about Rachel — and that they should not believe a word of it.

IN A NUTSHELL

Lashon hara l’to’eles should not be spoken if it will result in rechilus — unless a specific situation warrants such talk.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 10:3-4

In sefer Melachim, the prophet decreed that the family of the wicked King Achav would be eradi­cated because of the widespread idol worship that Achav had brought about. This prophecy was fulfilled through Yehu, and Hashem rewarded Yehu by decreeing that he and three succeeding generations would rule over the Ten Tribes.

However, Yehu himself was later guilty of idol worship. Therefore, he was held accountable for killing the family of Achav. A person has no right to execute punishment upon others for sins of which he himself is guilty.

From this we learn an important halachah regarding lashon hara l’to’eles. A person can only report on someone else’s misbehavior if he himself is innocent of it. However, if he himself is guilty of such behavior, he may not relate it to others, although he wants to do so for an important, constructive purpose. The reason for this is simple. If he himself is guilty of the same “crimes” then his intent in relating such information cannot be entirely pure.

Chanina has the bad habit of riding his bicycle on other people’s property without permission. In the process, he has destroyed gardens, knocked down wooden fences, and broken children’s toys. He and his parents have been spoken to, but nothing has changed. Chanina’s parents insist that since the gates of the properties were left open, their son innocently assumed that he could ride inside, and therefore there is no reason he should have to pay for damages.

Is it permissible to speak about Chanina’s reckless, damaging behavior?

A number of benefits can result from speaking about it. When other children hear how people scorn Chanina’s behavior, they will learn to be different, to respect the property of others and to pay when damages occur. Perhaps when Chanina and his parents become aware that people are voicing their disapproval of his antics, they will finally realize that he has to cease this practice of riding on private property, and that the victims of his recklessness have to be paid for damages.

The Chofetz Chaim notes that one has to be careful to relate such information only to someone who will understand that such behavior is wrong. If, however, another boy is guilty of the very same recklessness and his parents are also guilty of indifference, there is no license to speak to them about Chanina’s behavior. In fact, great harm could result from this. Since they don’t disapprove of such behavior, they may tell Chanina and his parents what is being said about them, and offer them moral support. In doing so, they would be guilty of speaking rechilus, lashon hara that causes bad feelings between Jews. Furthermore, this could lead to a full-scale machlokes (feud) within the community.

The Chofetz Chaim points out an all-too-common mistake.

Mr. Goldberg drives a milk truck, which he keeps parked in his driveway. One morning, he finds the car of his neighbor, Mr. Milton, blocking his truck. He rings the Miltons’ doorbell, but no one is home. He gathers a few strong neighbors, and together they push the carfar enough aside to allow room for the truck to pass. Still angry, Mr.Goldberg phones his brother, a hot-tempered fellow, and tells himwhat happened. The brother calls the police, who come and ticket Mr.Milton’s car.

Mr. Goldberg was wrong for thinking that he could share what happened with his brother, and his brother was wrong for believing the report about Mr. Milton. Even if the report was true, this did not prove Mr. Milton’s guilt. Perhaps he has an explanation for why he blocked his neighbor’s driveway. Even if Mr. Milton’s action was inexcusable, the brother had no right to call the police without consulting a rav to determine if the halachah permits this.

What is at the root of the Goldbergs’ mistakes? People mistakenly think that when it comes to relatives, the rules of shemiras halashon fall by the wayside. This is completely incorrect.

IN A NUTSHELL

Before relating lashon hara l’to’eles, be sure that you are not guilty of the same misbehavior, and that you are relating the information to someone who has the desire and ability to correct the situation in a way that the halachah permits.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 10:1-2

The Chofetz Chaim now turns to the laws of lashon hara l’to’eles, lashon hara that may be repeated — and often should be repeated — for an important, constructive purpose.

Nosson observed how Tzvi, a new driver, drove recklessly and nearly crashed into a parked car. Nosson mentioned to Tzvi that he should have more supervised practice before getting behind the wheel again while unaccompanied. The next day, he sees Tzvi driving alone, recklessly.

Nosson should report what he has seen to Tzvi’s parents. The Chofetz Chaim lists seven conditions that must be fulfilled in order to relate lashon hara l’to’eles:

1. The person has to know for sure that the action has occurred. If someone heard about Tzvi’s reckless driving from Nosson, he would not be allowed to repeat it (l’to’eles) unless he investi­gated the report and determined that it was true.

2. He must be certain that the person actually did something wrong. If Tzvi was driving on a rainy day and the car skidded, this does not necessar­ily mean that he was reckless.

3. Before telling others, he must first speak to the guilty party in a soft tone and attempt to con­vince him to mend his ways. In our example, Nosson told Tzvi not to drive alone without more practice, and Tzvi ignored this advice.

4. When relating what happened, he must be careful not to exag­gerate. If Tzvi’s recklessness was limited to his swerving around corners without slowing down, this is all that should be said.

5. His sole purpose in relating what happened must be to correct the wrong, not out of hatred or any other personal reason.

6. There is no other way to correct the wrong. In our example, other than talking to Tzvi directly (which accomplished nothing), there is nothing that Nosson can do other than speaking to Tzvi’s parents.

7. By relating the lashon hara, the speaker must not cause the guilty party to suffer consequences that are unfair. In our example, Tzvi’s parents should refuse to give him the keys to their car until they are convinced that he can be trusted to drive safely even when unsupervised. This is fair and correct. If Nosson knows that Tzvi’s parents might react by locking him in his room for a day without food or drink, he should not tell them. Instead, he should approach Tzvi’s rav or someone else who has influence over him and ask what to do.

Before speaking lashon hara l’to’eles, it is a good idea to ask oneself, “Did I ever have a bad experience with this person? Is it possible that I harbor a dislike for him and I really want to see him in trouble?”

There is a famous story involving Rabbi Boruch Ber Leibowitz, in which he wrote a letter of recommendation for a young man who had once committed a terrible wrong against him. Before mailing the letter, R’ Boruch Ber asked someone to read it to make sure that he had not omitted any possible praise that he could have written. He understood that people have a tendency to bear a grudge, and wanted to make sure that he was not guilty of this in any way.

IN A NUTSHELL

Lashon hara may be related for a constructive purpose, provided that the seven rules of to’eles are met.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 9:5-6

Shlomo HaMelech said: “Train a youth according to his way; even when he grows old, he will not turn away from it” (Mishlei 22:6. When children are trained to do what is right in a way that they understand and appreciate, this training will remain with them for the rest of their lives.

When children speak lashon hara, adults may feel, “Leave them alone — they are only children.” The Chofetz Chaim says that this is incorrect. If we want our children to grow up to be G-d-fearing Jews who carefully avoid forbidden speech, we must educate them regarding shemiras halashon when they are young.

In the Chofetz Chaim’s words:

How important it is for a parent to train his children on a constant basis, from their youth, regarding shemiras halashon. As the Vilna Gaon wrote, much practice is needed to develop good habits in proper speech and midos, and habit dominates a person’s behavior.

When we ponder the matter well, we realize why the bitter sin of lashon hara is widespread. People are accustomed from their youth to saying whatever they please — and no one protests! They do not even consider the possibility that such talk is forbidden. Even if, at some later time, they become aware that it is forbidden, they find it very hard to change a habit that has been part of their nature for so long.

This would not be the case if a parent would frequently caution his children and train them from their youth to avoid lashon hara against any Jew (and not to curse or lie). Then it would be implanted in their souls as part of their nature, and it would be easy for them later to be fully careful in guarding this holy midah (of shemiras halashon). And through this, they would merit the World to Come, and all that is good in this world.

The Chofetz Chaim concludes this chapter with an important halachah: If someone tells his friend a private piece of information, it is forbidden for the friend to repeat it to anyone without the person’s permission. This is true even if the person did not say, “Keep it a secret.” The rule is: Do not repeat anything told to you in confidence unless you are absolutely certain that the person does not mind it being repeated to others.

IN A NUTSHELL

Children must be taught to carefully avoid lashon hara.

Secrets should remain secrets.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 9:3-4

“Mr. Friedman is such a wonderful person; the other day, he lent me $10,000.”

“If any of you ever needs a place to stay or a good meal, go to the Morgans. I stayed there for a week and they treated me like a king; every night I was served a five-course meal and they gave me exclusive use of their second car!”

It may come as a surprise that the Chofetz Chaim places the above statements in the category of avak lashon hara.

Yes, these statements are highly complimentary, but they could cause the person spoken about much distress. Mr. Friedman probably does not want the entire community to know that he lent this person $10,000. It is quite possible that there was a specific reason why he lent him such a large sum. Now that this was announced, people will come ringing his doorbell expecting the same — and he will have a hard time explaining to them that he cannot satisfy their requests. And, as the Chofetz Chaim notes, one or two dishonest people may be among those who will now request loans of him, and if he does honor their requests, he will later regret it.

The same applies to the guest who was treated so well by the Morgans. It is wrong for him to pub­licize their exceptional hospitality. This could bring unsavory people to their door who will be a source of aggravation to them.

However, if the man who received the loan knows that his friend, an honest person, needs to borrow money, he could tell him privately, “Speak to Mr. Friedman; he might be able to help you.”

And if the former guest knows that his friend needs to find lodging for a few days, he can pick up the phone and ask the Morgans if they would be able to host his friend.

The Chofetz Chaim concludes his discussion of avak lashon hara by cautioning us not to make statements that are in fact permissible, but which people might misinterpret as being lashon hara.

In the following chapter, we will learn of situations where lashon hara may be related l’to’eles (for a constructive purpose), but only in the presence of three or more. This is so that the speaker will avoid the impression that he is trying to be secretive because there is an element of falsehood in his report. If he does relate the information in a secretive way, thereby giving a bad impression, he is guilty of causing others to think that he is speaking lashon hara.

One should not socialize with baalei lashon hara, people who have little regard for the Torah’s prohibitions against speaking lashon hara, and who frequently engage in lashon hara.

If someone innocently sat down among a group and in the midst of conversation realized that the current topic is full-fledged lashon hara, he should speak up for the sake of Hashem and His Torah, and tell the others that such discussions are forbidden. Even if he knows that his words will be ignored, he should still speak up and make it clear that he is opposed to such discussions. The only time he should remain silent is when it seems that these people will react to criticism with anger and will speak even more lashon hara than they would have had he remained silent.

IN A NUTSHELL

Do not make complimentary statements about someone if this might cause him distress.

Voice disapproval when lashon hara is spoken, unless this will lead to more lashon hara.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 8:13-14

It is told that a chasid once came to his rebbe and said, “Please, Rebbe, give me a berachah that my children should want to study Torah.” The rebbe replied, “I suggest that if you want your children to learn, you yourself should begin to learn. Otherwise, your children will grow up the same way as you, and they will one day come to me for a berachah that their children should want to learn …”

The point of the story is that children imitate what they see. The Chofetz Chaim says that the same applies to instructing children to avoid lashon hara. If parents set a proper example and are careful to avoid speaking lashon hara, then they can demand of their children to do the same. If, however, parents regularly speak against others and then tell their children, “Stop speaking lashon hara!” their words will have little effect.

If a father tells his child, “Mr. Stone, that fellow who sits next to me in shul, is not a very nice person,” the child is not permitted to believe it, just as he may not believe such lashon hara from anyone. What the child should do is tell his father privately, “I do not mean to be disrespectful, but could it be that what you told me about the man in shul was actually lashon hara?” It is a great mitzvah to point this out to the parent, so that hopefully he will be more careful with his words in the future.

The Torah states:” Rebuke your fellow Jew and do not bear a sin because of him.” It is a mitzvah and an obligation to try to correct another Jew’s sinful behavior. Our Sages learn from the words, “And do not bear a sin because of him,” that we should not sin in the manner in which we offer criticism. This means that though we have to criticize a sinner and point out his mistakes, we should not sin by embarrassing him. Rather, we should address him respectfully and preferably in private. This applies any time we must point out someone’s sins.

Surely this is true when pointing out a parent’s sins. If parents are speaking lashon hara, we must try to stop them. The Chofetz Chaim states that if we remain silent, we will be held accountable in Heaven for permitting them to continue to commit this terrible sin. At the same time, we must be very careful to address them with the utmost respect. We must speak to them in a way that makes clear our great love and respect for our father and mother, who brought us into this world and do far more for us than we can ever repay.

IN A NUTSHELL

We are not permitted to listen to lashon hara spoken by our parents. It is a great mitzvah to respectfully ask parents to refrain from speak­ing lashon hara.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 8:12

In his preface, the Chofetz Chaim taught that whenever a person speaks lashon hara, he is guilty of chillul Hashem. The chillul Hashem is due to his lack of regard for the Torah’s prohibition against speaking lashon hara.

Just as there are various levels of kiddush Hashem, so too are there various levels of chillul Hashem. When a Jew speaks negatively about his fellow Jew before non-Jews, his sin is particularly severe. When a Jew speaks badly of a Jew before other Jews, there is a reasonable possibility that his listeners will not accept his words as fact. After all, why should they believe something negative about a fellow Jew, especially since they know that the speaker is sinning by issuing his report?

A non-Jew, however, will probably be quick to believe anything negative that one Jew has to say about another. Aside from this, says the Chofetz Chaim, when a Jew speaks badly about Jews to non-Jews, he is desecrating Hashem’s Name.

Think about it: What might go through a non-Jew’s mind when he hears Jews speaking badly of other Jews? “After all these years of suffering and persecution, these Jews still can’t get along. My goodness, all those nasty things he said about that fellow — and more! Where is their loyalty to each other? Aren’t they the ones who preach about loving your fellow as your very own self?”

Rabbeinu Yonah, one of the great Rishonim (Early Commentators), writes that other than death, there is only one way to atone for the terrible sin of chillul Hashem. Someone who has brought disgrace upon Hashem’s Name can be forgiven through kiddush Hashem, bringing glory to His Name.1 A person who has spoken lashon hara about Jews to non-Jews and wishes to repent should make a special effort to show the world the greatness of Torah and the beauty of its ways. As our Sages teach:

“And you shall love Hashem, your G-d”2 — that the Name of Heaven should become beloved through you. A person should study Torah, be honest in his dealings, and speak pleasantly to people. What will people say of him? Fortunate is his father who taught him Torah, fortunate is his teacher who taught him Torah. This person who studied Torah — how pleasant are his deeds, how correct are his ways …

The Chofetz Chaim also discusses the tragedy of a moser, informer. A Jew who informs on his fellow Jews to non-Jews, and thereby brings suffering and misery upon them, is a grave sinner who may never be able to fully repent for his sins. Of such a person, the Chofetz Chaim says “His sin is too great to bear.” This expression, borrowed from Parashas Bereishis, where Kayin murders his brother, Hevel, shows us the seriousness of the sin of malshinus, informing.

IN A NUTSHELL

The sin of speaking lashon hara about a Jew to a non-Jew is particularly severe and is a great chillul Hashem.

The sin of a moser (informer) is too great to bear.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 8:10-11

In Pirkei Avos, Yosei ben Yochanan teaches: “Do not speak excessively with a woman. They said this about one’s wife; surely it applies to someone else’s wife …”

Avos d’R’ Nosson elaborates upon this teaching. A man should not come home from work or the beis midrash and tell his wife lashon hara about people whom he finds difficult. As the Chofetz Chaim notes, when someone does not follow this halachah and vents to his wife every time he is upset with someone, the result will be not only lashon hara, but machlokes as well. His wife will be upset at that person, she will encourage her husband to “stand his ground,” and might very well vent her anger at the other person the next time she meets him.

The importance of this halachah cannot be overstated. There are those who mistakenly think that because husbands and wives are so close, the laws of shemiras halashon do not apply to them. They erroneously believe that they may share with each other anything that happens in their dealings with others. The above mishnah tells us that this is incorrect. Whatever I cannot tell to my neighbor or friend, I cannot tell to my wife or any other close relative.

There is an exception to this rule. It is obvious that if a child is having a problem with a classmate who is bullying him, he should discuss this with his rebbi, menahel or parents. This falls under the category of lashon hara l’to’eles, lashon hara that is spoken for a constructive purpose. Similarly, if, for example, a woman is being tormented by her boss or fellow employee and she needs to share her pain with someone, she would be allowed to discuss the matter with her husband.

A husband may also tell his wife not to do business with someone whom he knows to be dishonest. Even if he has only heard that the person is dishonest but has not confirmed it, he can warn his wife to be careful, though neither he nor his wife can believe the information as fact.

It is forbidden to tell lashon hara to someone about that person’s relative. For example, if Yosef and Asher are brothers, it is forbidden to tell Yosef, “Boy, did Asher get into trouble today. He …” If the person wants to convince Asher to correct his behavior, he should speak to him directly. If this attempt is unsuccessful, and the person believes that Asher would accept criticism from his brother Yosef, he would be permitted to speak to Yosef.

The same applies to a father and son. One should not tell a father about his son’s misbehavior without first attempting to speak to the son directly, if speaking to him has a chance at succeeding.

IN A NUTSHELL

We are not permitted to speak lashon hara to our close relatives, nor are we permitted to speak lashon hara to someone about his relative.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 8:8-9

The opening chapter of Sefer Melachim tells of the failed coup of Adoniyahu, son of Dovid HaMelech. At the end of Dovid’s life and without his knowledge, Adoniyahu attempted to establish himself as the new king. Long before that, Dovid had sworn to his wife, Bas Sheva, that her son Shlomo would succeed him as king.

Nosson HaNavi, who was loyal to both Dovid and Shlomo, knew that Dovid had to be informed about Adoniyahu’s rebellion and take action before matters got out of hand. He therefore instructed Bas Sheva to inform Dovid of what had happened and to remind him of his oath regarding Shlomo. Nosson told her, “And I will come in [to Dovid] and add to your words.” From this, we derive that one is allowed to speak lashon hara about a baal machlokes, one who initiates a dispute for no valid reason.

In the case of Adoniyahu, Nosson reported on his rebellious actions in order to put an end to the machlokes. Similarly, one can speak against a baal machlokes only if there is a good possibility that this will bring about an end to the dispute. It is not permissible to speak against a baal machlokes merely to vent anger or frustration.

The Chofetz Chaim adds three more conditions:

• The speaker must be certain that the one against whom he is speaking truly is the baal machlokes. He needs to know this either firsthand or from information that he heard and later confirmed as fact.

• His purpose in speaking against the baal machlokes must be to end the dispute, and not because he dislikes the person and is happy to speak against him and cast him in a bad light.

• It must be that the only way to end the dispute is by speaking out against the baal machlokes. If there is a possibility that one can bring about an end to the dispute by speaking directly to the baal machlokes himself, then certainly he must try that first. The Chofetz Chaim notes that at times the baal machlokes is a difficult character, and speaking to him may backfire. Not only will he not listen to reason, he might try to sabotage any attempt to end the dispute. In such a case, it is not necessary to first speak to him.

The Chofetz Chaim ends with a word of caution: Don’t jump to con­clusions! Before “launching a campaign” against a baal machlokes, be certain that you truly understand the situation and know, beyond the shadow of a doubt, who is at fault.

It is forbidden to speak lashon hara about someone who has departed this world; the sages of earlier generations considered this a very seri­ous matter and enacted special penalties against people who engaged in such practices. It is particularly serious to speak against a deceased talmid chacham; it is even worse to ridicule his divrei Torah.

IN A NUTSHELL

It is permissible to speak against a baal machlokes in order to end a dispute.

It is forbidden to speak lashon hara against the deceased, especially a deceased talmid chacham and his words of Torah.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 8:4-7

The Gemara tells us, “Even the empty ones among you are filled with mitzvos like the seeds of a pomegranate.”1 Every Jew is deserving of our concern and respect. The fact that someone is ignorant of Torah does not give us the right to speak of him in a derogatory way.

The Chofetz Chaim lived in a time when thousands of Jewish young men and women were being swept away by the winds of Socialism, Communism, and other secular movements. Tragically, some of the leaders of these movements were raised in religious homes and not only left the Torah path, but tried very hard to influence others to join them. The Chofetz Chaim labels these people apikorsim (heretics), and he derives from the Torah that it is permissible to speak lashon hara about them. As we have already mentioned, it is correct to speak badly of someone who is a bad influence, in the hope that this will convince others to stay far away from him and his sinful ideas.

At the other end of the spectrum is the talmid chacham, who represents the Torah and therefore is deserving of special respect. The Gemara labels as “foolish” those who rise in respect for a sefer Torah (as the halachah requires) but do not rise for a talmid chacham.

Speaking lashon hara about a talmid chacham is a particularly grave sin.

The Chofetz Chaim discusses a false attitude that people sometimes have. “Why must I respect him?” they argue. “You consider him a talmid chacham? Had he lived in the days of the Rambam, he would not be considered a talmid chacham at all!”

This is wrong, for we judge a person’s scholarship according to the level of his generation. “Yiftach [HaGiladi] in his generation is like Shmuel [HaNavi] in his generation.” Each generation must revere and obey their Torah leaders in the same way that earlier generations revered theirs.

Rabbi Chaim Shmulevitz added another insight. In each generation, Hashem places Torah leaders who are appropriate for that time. The leaders of later generations may not be on the level of those of earlier times, but their personalities and qualities are what their generation needs. For this, too, they should be accorded the highest respect.

When people do not show rabbanim and roshei yeshivah proper respect, the Torah is disgraced and the community’s spiritual level is lowered. Megillas Rus opens with words which our Sages interpret to mean, “And it was in the days when the judges were judged.” This sort of climate, when leaders are being judged and criticized by the masses, leads to disrespect, sin and, ultimately, destruction.

IN A NUTSHELL

We must respect even those who are ignorant of Torah.

To speak against a talmid chacham is a particularly grave sin.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 8:3

Once, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein was visiting a family on yom tov when he heard a baby cry­ing. The family was so enthralled by the visit of this Torah giant that they ignored the baby’s cries. Seeing this, R’ Moshe said to them, “It is yom tov for the baby too.” R’ Moshe was saying that though a baby cannot communicate his feelings, he is a person and his cries are the cries of a person who is upset — and should not be ignored.

Rabbi Avraham Pam made a similar point. He spoke of the common practice of adults to take away a child’s toy for “fun.” The adult hides the toy behind his back and then has the child guess which hand the toy is in. The adult switches the toy from one hand to the other as the child becomes more and more upset. Rav Pam said that just as it is forbidden to make an adult upset, so too it is forbidden to make a young child upset.

Regarding lashon hara, just as we cannot make statements that might cause harm to an adult, so too, with children. The Chofetz Chaim offers an example of an orphan who is being raised by people who took him into their home as a kindness. If someone witnesses this child fighting with other children, he has to be very careful about relating this to the child’s benefactors. They may decide that if this how the child behaves, then they don’t want him in their home.

Of course, this does not mean that such a child should be free to do whatever he pleases. What it does mean is that before relating such information, one should be absolutely sure that all seven rules of lashon hara l’to’eles (for a constructive purpose) have been met. Before relating such information, the person must carefully consider the outcome. If the result would be an injustice to the child, then some other way should be sought to correct the child’s behavior.

The fact that words can build or destroy is especially true regarding children. Rav Pam would tell of the time a father of one of his talmidim came to inquire about his son’s progress. Rav Pam was truthful, as the halachah requires. He said that the boy was learning, but was not meet­ing his potential.

The father said, “Really? I’m going to call him over right now!”

Rav Pam’s heart sank, because it sounded as if the father was going to give his son a real tongue-lashing.

The boy came over and the father said to him, “Your rebbi said that you are doing nicely, and it needs to be just a bit better. So let’s see that ‘little bit extra’ and then you’ll really be terrific!”

The boy beamed with pleasure. His learning improved and he went on to become a respected talmid chacham and teacher of Torah.

IN A NUTSHELL

We cannot relate information about children that might cause them harm. If they have misbehaved, the rules of to’eles (constructive pur­pose) must be met before relating this information.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 7:1

In Hilchos Lashon Hara, we learned that the laws of proper speech are in force within the family no less than outside the family. A husband has no right to tell lashon hara to his wife, nor can a child tell lashon hara to his or her parent — unless the rules of to’eles have been met.

The same applies to the laws of rechilus.

The girls were having a cake sale in school to raise funds for tzedakah. When Chavi displayed her marble cake, Rina said, “My mother said that you would bring in a marble cake — it’s the only cake your mother bakes that comes out good!”

Chavi was very hurt by this thoughtless, hurtful comment.

Chavi would be wrong to repeat Rina’s comment to anyone — especially her mother. Chavi’s mother would surely be hurt by the comment, probably even more than Chavi. Furthermore, the comment has the potential to cause bad feelings and even a feud between the two women. Thus, repeating it would be a transgression of the laws of rechilus.

If Rina’s mother did make the comment, she quite possibly did not mean anything nasty. She might be a perfectionist, whose baked goods are picture-perfect, exactly as they appear in a magazine. Chavi’s mother bakes good, tasty cakes, but they don’t have that professional look — except for her marble cake.

Sometimes, a fairly innocent comment can be repeated in a way that gives a very bad impression, and may be the spark that ignites a terrible dispute.

Parents are very protective of their children, and rightfully so. It is for this reason that one must be very careful before telling parents that someone else’s child harmed their child in some way. The Chofetz Chaim notes that it is forbidden to speak rechilus about children, and he adds that problems of this sort often happen in shul.

Zalman Kochlefel loves excitement. If all is calm and peaceful, Zalman finds a way to stir up trouble.

On a quiet Shabbos afternoon during Shalosh Seudos, Zalman runs into shul and announces breathlessly, “Isaac, your son is really get­ting it from that Goldman kid. I tried to break up the fight, but the kid ignored me.”

Isaac is a hot-tempered man, a fact that Zalman knows very well. With Nachman Goldman not far behind, Isaac dashes out of the shul, grabs hold of young Chezky Goldman and lifts him into the air. “Don’t you ever touch my son again!” he bellows, before putting the frightened child down.

Chesky’s father runs up to Isaac and shouts, “You ever touch my son again, I’ll have you thrown out of this kehillah.”
Thus began a feud that never ended.
Zalman had his wish.

A fight between children is not that difficult to stop. If Zalman had cared to do the right thing, he could have approached others for help. The hot-tempered father should have been the last one to be called.

Someone who is truly interested in peace will be on guard not to fan the flames of strife.

IN A NUTSHELL

We may not speak rechilus to family members, and we should be wary of relating information to those who are hot-tempered or prone to quarrel.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 7:13-14

It happened once that Rabbi Avraham Pam was asked to preside over a din Torah [Jewish court case] between two distinguished parties. The din Torah was to be held in Rav Pam’s yeshivah office.

Two people who were on one side of the dispute arrived first and approached Rav Pam at his seat in the beis midrash, where he was engrossed in learning. When Rav Pam noticed the two men, both well known in the community, he did not even nod in greeting. He simply stood up and led them to the office where the din Torah would be held.

A few minutes later, the members of the other side arrived. Upon hearing that their opponents had preceded them and were in the “courtroom” together with Rav Pam, one of them exclaimed, “Oh, no! That means they had a chance to tell Rav Pam their side of the story without our having a chance to respond!” A talmid of Rav Pam responded, “I am sure that my rebbi would not allow them to say a word before the other side is present in the room.” He was right.

Resolving disputes requires wisdom, patience, and, most of all, impartiality. A judge or mediator who even slightly favors one side in an argument has no right to judge the case. In this segment, the Chofetz Chaim bemoans a situation that could happen in a community whose leaders wield considerable power.

… Many people make a mistake in these matters. If something is stolen from them and they suspect a certain individual, they tell the community leaders that they have strong evidence against that individual. The leaders, in turn, punish that person in an attempt to get him

to confess. This is contrary to halachah. Even if devarim nicarim (see previous segment) are acceptable as proof, nevertheless, these leaders need to determine that indeed there was a robbery (as the person claims); and they need witnesses who can vouch that the evidence is true, or determine for themselves that the evidence is true. They have no right to rely on the claimant and punish a Jew without cause. Even to believe in one’s heart that what the claimant said is true is forbidden, because of the prohibition against believing lashon hara …

Those who act in this way do so out of ignorance of the halachah; and out of prejudice towards the accused, whom they have decided is guilty without real proof. This is not the Torah way. We assume a person to be honest unless there is real proof to the contrary that we know firsthand to be true. We also have to be absolutely certain that there is no way to give the person the benefit of the doubt so that his actions can be inter­preted in a positive way.

IN A NUTSHELL

Community leaders are not permitted to accept one person’s accusations against another without valid testimony or concrete proof.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 7:9

Shimshy is one of the funniest people I know. Have you ever seen him on Purim? Last year, he came to the Purim seudah dressed up as a candy machine, and the whole night, chocolate bars were falling out of his shirt!

“You know, before every yom tov, he goes to cheer up the elderly nursing home residents — and boy, does he cheer them up! I’ve seen some of them with tears of laughter running down their cheeks.

“And he’s very imaginative. Once, in the middle of the year, he came to the office building where his father works dressed up in a suit and tie, walked up to the security guard — an old man who’s been at the job for the last 40 years — opened his wallet and flashed a fake badge. ‘I’m from the F.B.I.,’ he said, ‘and we’re investigating some strange happenings in the building. You may be taken in for questioning.’ The poor fellow was scared out of his wits!”

While the speaker may think Shimshy’s antics with the security guard were funny, they were not. To frighten and trick the security guard involves a number of sins, the most serious being chillul Hashem.

The speaker is definitely guilty of speaking lashon hara. The question is: May the listeners believe what he has said?

The question revolves around something the Gemara calls “mesiach l’fi tumo” a casual remark.

In certain rare situations, we would not accept a person’s testimony in beis din, but we would rely on a casual remark this person made. The reasoning is simple. Even if the person is not trustworthy enough that his testimony can be relied upon, we might be able to rely on something he said casually when he was not intending to testify.

Example: If Mr. X is not considered a trustworthy person, we would not rely on his statement, “I know for a fact that Mr. Z has died.”

However, if Mr. X is seen exclaiming, “Woe is me! That Mr. Z should be taken at the prime of his life — and in front of my eyes — how terrible!” we might rely on it and declare that Mr. Z is no longer among the living.

Now let us apply this to the laws of lashon hara. If someone would say, “I saw Shimshy play a practical joke on the security guard at his father’s place of work,” we would not be allowed to believe it. However, in our illustration, the information about Shimshy was said in a casual conversation in which the speaker intended to praise Shimshy. Are we permitted to believe this?

No, says the Chofetz Chaim. The sin of believing lashon hara is explicitly stated in the Torah, and therefore the leniency of a casual remark, would not apply.

Instead, we should tell ourselves that whatever was said about Shimshy and the security guard was either patently false or grossly exaggerated. Our esteem for him should be the same as it was before we heard this report.

IN A NUTSHELL

We are not permitted to believe lashon hara even when said as a casual remark.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 7:7-8

There are certain situations where it might be permissible to believe lashon hara about someone, even though he is not known as someone who often commits serious sins.

Mr. Jacobs has been a respected member of the shul for three decades. He is known to be exceptionally honest and forthright, and the rav sometimes discusses private matters with him.

The rav once commented, “If Mr. Jacobs informs me of something of which I was unaware, I consider it as reliable as if I heard it from two witnesses in court!”

One day, Mr. Jacobs is walking by McDonald’s when he sees Mr. Farloran, a member of their shul, sitting at a table eating a cheeseburger. Mr. Jacobs waits until Farloran leaves the store and approaches him. “Excuse me,” he says politely, “may I ask you a question?”

“Mind your own business. Mr. Nosybody,” the man snaps. “I know what you want to ask me; it’s none of your concern.”

In this case, says the Chofetz Chaim, Mr. Jacobs would be correct to inform the rav, for it is important that the rav be aware of this situation, even if he cannot approach Mr. Farloran about the matter. And since Mr. Jacobs is as trustworthy in the rav’s eyes as two valid witnesses — the rav is permitted to believe his report.

However, this halachah applies only if Mr. Jacobs witnessed this himself. He would not be permitted to relate it if he heard about it from someone else, and the rav would not be permitted to believe it if he did relate it.

Even when Mr. Jacobs did witness it and the rav is permitted to believe his report, the rav cannot repeat the report to others.

Let us examine another case involving our friend Mr. Jacobs:

Mr. Jacobs approaches the rav one day to discuss the upcoming bar mitzvah of Chaim Birnik. “It’s so wonderful to see how well this boy is doing in yeshivah,” he remarks. “I remember his father, Mendy Birnik, from when we were teenagers. No rebbi could handle him; he was usually out of class, and sometimes out of school. Baruch Hashem, he straightened out, and he and his wife are raising fine children.”

There is no reason why the well-meaning Mr. Jacobs had to volunteer this information to the rav. He has been guilty of speaking lashon hara. Though the rav considers Mr. Jacobs as trustworthy as two valid witnesses, he is not permitted to believe this report about Mr. Birnik’s past.

Ideally, the rav should have stopped Mr. Jacobs as soon as he said, “I remember Mr. Birnik from when we were teenagers.” At that point, the rav could have said, “One second, my friend. Please don’t tell me anything uncomplimentary about Mr. Birnik’s youth. It’s really not important for me to know this.”

As the Chofetz Chaim notes, if the rav realized where the conversation was heading and did not stop it, then aside from listening to lashon hara, he also transgressed “And before a blind person do not place a stumbling block”, which forbids a Jew to cause another Jew to sin. This is what the rav would transgress by allowing Mr. Jacobs to continue with a report that is clearly lashon hara.

IN A NUTSHELL

One is permitted to believe a negative report that he needed to know and which was related to him by someone whom he trusts like two valid witnesses.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 7:5-6

Rabbi Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, the great Rav of Jerusalem in the early 1900s, was known for his deep love of all Jews, even those who were fiercely anti-religious and considered themselves his enemies.

Once, one of Rav Yosef Chaim’s sworn enemies became seriously ill and was taken to a hospital run by Christian missionaries. The rabbanim of Jerusalem had issued a ban on using this hospital. During his hospital stay, the patient became progressively worse until his life was in danger.

The family knew that only the expert physicians at the Orthodox Jewish Shaarei Zedek Hospital could save his life. But they also knew that the hospital would not want to admit a patient who had ignored the rabbanim’s ban against using the missionary hospital.

To whom did the family turn in their hour of need? Rav Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, of whom the patient once said, “We will fight to the death against Rabbi Sonnenfeld and his cronies.”

Upon hearing of the patient’s predicament, Rav Yosef Chaim, who was then past 70, leaped to his feet, grabbed his hat and coat, and hurried outside into a driving rainstorm. Within minutes, he had arrived at Shaarei Zedek and succeeded in having the man admitted.

R’ Yosef Chaim felt a deep, unconditional ahavas Yisrael for every Jew. We should emulate him. When we see a Jew who was raised in an atmosphere ignorant of Torah, we should pity him and attempt to show him the beauty of Torah. If we see a Jew who was religious but has now strayed from the Torah path, we should pray for him and show him, if at all possible, that we truly care for him.

We have already learned that there are times when it is permissible to inform others of someone’s sins. In this segment, the Chofetz Chaim offers an example of a person who knows that a certain act is considered a very serious sin, and nevertheless intentionally commits this sin many times. His sinfulness is well known to all. It is permissible to warn others to keep their distance from him, and to mention other forms of his misbehavior of which others might be unaware. The purpose of this is so that others will not be influenced by him. While we are concerned for the sinner’s neshamah and pray for him, we need to be concerned for others as well.

Since his sinfulness is well known to all, one is also permitted to believe a report of his behavior that is not well known.

“Four years ago, when we were both in 10th grade, Baruch and I cut class three days in a row — and got away with it!”

We have learned that including ourselves in the report does not give us the right to speak lashon hara. The fact that the speaker proudly speaks of his own antics does not give him the right to say this about Baruch. And the listener cannot believe the report about Baruch, though there is nothing wrong with believing what the speaker said about himself.

IN A NUTSHELL

We are permitted to speak against a known sinner so that others will not be influenced by him.

We may not speak lashon hara about others even when we include ourselves.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 7:3-4

Consider the following scenario:

Speaker #1: “You have no idea what kind of tricks Devorah pulls behind the teacher’s back!”

Speaker #2: “Yes, I’ve seen some of her antics myself. If she ever gets caught, she’s finished!”

Speaker #3: “I once saw her put a spider on the teacher’s chair as class was about to begin!”

It seems obvious that Devorah is quite a trouble­maker.

The halachah, however, takes a different approach. We are not permitted to believe any of the above statements.

The fact that three people seem to agree on Devorah’s misbehavior does not make it permissible to believe them. Each one is guilty of speaking lashon hara, and therefore her words cannot be accepted.

The Chofetz Chaim makes an interesting point. Speaking lashon hara is a terrible sin. Someone who intentionally commits such a sin can certainly be suspected of exaggerating or even lying. On the other hand, an average Jew has a chezkas kashrus, meaning that we assume him to be innocent until proven guilty. Why, then, should I assume that the words of these sinners are true? Wouldn’t it make more sense to assume that those who have spoken lashon hara are misrepresenting the facts and that Devorah, who until now had a chezkas kashrus, is innocent?

What if three people agree on the following?

“Pinchas has acted recklessly with other people’s money. It is foolhardy to do business with him.”

In this case, it is correct to consider the possibility that the report might be true and to take the necessary precautions. However, we are not allowed to believe the report, even though three people claim that it is true, and even though if it is true, they are correct in relating it.

One may wonder: Why are we not permitted to believe a report delivered by two or more people? We know that according to Torah law, two witnesses are the minimum needed to testify in beis din. We also know that the testimony of two witnesses is as powerful as that of 100. So, if two Jews state that they know firsthand about Pinchas’ reckless use of other people’s money, why can’t I believe them?

The Chofetz Chaim explains that if the two would offer their testimony in beis din, we would be permitted to believe them. Witnesses know that testifying in beis din is a very serious matter. If they are caught lying, they are labeled false witnesses and would be disqualified from testifying in the future. Therefore, when they do testify, we assume that their words are true until proven otherwise.

Our case, however, is where the testimony is being offered outside of beis din. Here, if the speakers are caught lying they would be called those who spread slander a serious matter, but not as serious as being labeled false witnesses by a Jewish court. Therefore, we are permitted to consider the possibility that their words are true and act accordingly to protect ourselves, but we are not permitted to believe their words as fact.

We are also not permitted to believe rumors or reports about Jews in the media, no matter how many news outlets report the information. However, we are permitted to inquire about the report and protect our­selves in case it might be true.

IN A NUTSHELL

Even when lashon hara is related by three or more people, we are not permitted to believe it as fact.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 7:1-2

The annual shul dinner is in progress. The key­note speaker, a renowned community leader, is speaking about the importance of keeping the neighborhood clean and neat. “It is disgraceful,” he thunders, “when the schools in which we educate our children are sloppy and disorganized. Yeshivah Emes L’Amito is a prime example of this … ”

Mr. Gold turns to his friend Mr. Greenberg, and whispers, “I’m not familiar with that yeshivah — are you?” “No,” Mr. Greenberg replies, “but this fellow seems to know what he is talking about. I guess that place is a mess. I certainly won’t be sending my sons to that yeshivah.”

Of course, the speaker was guilty of speaking lashon hara. Such a statement about a yeshivah reflects badly upon the school administration, the rebbeim and teachers, and possibly the students as well.

Mr. Gold and Mr. Greenberg were not permitted to believe this lashon hara. The fact that the speaker was not afraid to make this statement in front of hundreds of people does not prove that it is true.

However, Mr. Greenberg, who had been considering that yeshivah for his son, is permitted to suspect that the statement might possibly be true. The best option would be for him to visit the yeshivah himself and see firsthand whether or not it is “sloppy and disorganized.”

The boys are quite upset. The gym door is jammed and cannot be opened with a key. They will have to spend their recess in the classroom.

Josh announces to everyone, “I know why it’s jammed. Every time the door is locked, Tzvi tries to force it open. Right, Tzvi? … You see, he’s not answering, because he knows it’s true!”

It seems quite obvious that Josh is right. After all, if Tzvi is not the culprit, why is he remaining silent?

The Chofetz Chaim states:

There is no license to accept lashon hara, even if the speaker makes his statements in the person’s presence, since we did not hear an admission from him … and certainly this is the halachah where the person is not present and the speaker says, “I would say this even if he were here” — it is forbidden to believe him because of this. Tragically, people transgress this halachah often.

Even if he is silent as the words of shame are being said in his presence, this is not proof that the statement is true. This is the halachah even if his nature is not to remain silent when hearing words that are not pleasing to him, and this time he remained silent. For it could be that this time he overcame his nature, and decided not to respond so that he would not be drawn into a dispute; or perhaps he realized that the listeners would more likely believe the speaker’s report rather than his denial. For this is the wicked way of people: they believe anything said in the person’s presence; even if he denies it 100 times, still they will not believe him.

The golden rule is: Don’t believe lashon hara. At times, this may be a very difficult test, but Jews also live by another rule. Hashem does not present us with a test that we cannot handle. The mitzvah of shemiras halashon is within everyone’s power to keep; if we will only make the proper effort, Hashem will help us to succeed.

IN A NUTSHELL
Do not believe lashon hara, even when it is said in front of a large crowd or in the presence of the subject.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 6:11-12

R’ Yosef Colon (1410-1480), known as Maharik, writes of a tragic episode that happened in his time. A woman spread a rumor in a certain town that an elderly Jewish townsman had committed a terrible sin. Many of the townspeople believed the woman and they prevailed upon the leaders of the community to treat the man as a sinner. From then on, he was never called to the Torah in that town and was an object of scorn and disgrace.

Maharik wrote:

Whoever embarrassed this man should beg Hashem for mercy for himself, for he takes a carefree attitude towards the honor of the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. Without a doubt, people who react this way (to rumors) are despicable in Hashem’s eyes and their punishment will be severe. … One who embarrasses his fellow Jew in public forfeits his share in the World to Come. … A person should investigate such a rumor thoroughly before acting upon it. One who does not is taking his own life in his hands.

The Chofetz Chaim points out that the testimony of a single witness in beis din can force someone to swear that he is telling the truth; however, it does not permit anyone to believe the testimony as fact.

The Chofetz Chaim bemoans an all-too-common occurrence:

Binny the Beggar has been collecting tzedakah for himself for years. One day, a respected member of the community announces: “You know what I heard the other day? Binny’s a phony — he has thousands of dollars stashed away in the bank, enough to live on for the next 60 years! Well, he’s not getting any money out of me anymore!”

People who listen to this announcement are quick to believe it. From that day on, when Binny approaches them with his hand outstretched, they offer him an icy stare, but no money.

These people, says the Chofetz Chaim, are guilty of believing lashon hara. They would be permitted to investigate the report to determine whether or not there is any truth to it. However, until they have conclusive proof that Binny is a faker, they are obligated to assume that he is an honest person and truly is poor. And they must give him the same amount of tzedakah as before.

If someone believed lashon hara and has not repeated it to anyone and seeks to engage in teshuvah, the process is not complicated. He must do his best to uproot the report from his mind; he must regret his sin and resolve to do his best not to repeat it in the future; and he must confess to Hashem for having sinned.

Uncomplicated, yes; easy, no. Once we believe something negative about someone, it is not easy to uproot it and convince ourselves that it is not true. Nevertheless, we must try our best if we truly seek to dis­tance ourselves from the terrible sin of lashon hara.

IN A NUTSHELL

Until a negative report is proven true, we must treat the subject with the same respect and kindness as before.

One who has believed lashon hara must engage in the standard process of teshuvah.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 6:7-8

Levi and Hanoch agreed to end their business partnership and have a beis din decide how their assets should be divided. On the day beis din issued its decision, Hanoch left very upset. As he walked down the street, he met his good friend Moshe, who was well aware of the court case. Hanoch showed his friend the written p’sak (ruling) and exclaimed, “Did you ever hear of something more ridiculous in your entire life? They gave virtually everything of value to Levi! Those rabbanim don’t know what they’re doing!”

Moshe shook his head in disbelief as he handed the p’sak back to his friend. “I can’t believe what I just read. You’re right. Those rabbanim really blew it! It’s a shame you didn’t bring the case before a more qualified beis din. Any intelligent person can see that you were not given a fair deal.”

If you were to ask Moshe whether or not any of his comments were in the category of forbidden speech, he might very well respond incredulously, “Forbidden speech? What are you talking about? I just stated my opinion about a p’sak — what could be wrong with that?”

The Chofetz Chaim teaches us that Moshe is guilty of accepting lashon hara and of not giving the judges the benefit of the doubt. The judges are, of course, talmidei chachamim. We are required to give a talmid chacham the benefit of the doubt even when it appears more likely that he has acted incorrectly. In our case, it is foolish for Moshe to side with Hanoch based on the written p’sak. Moshe was not in court and did not hear the arguments and counter-arguments. It is very possible that had he been present in beis din and witnessed certain points or questions raised by the dayanim (judges), he would realize that the p’sak is absolutely correct.

Aside from the sins we have mentioned, when people speak disrespectfully of a beis din and its rulings, they disgrace the Torah itself and they influence others to ignore, or even ridicule, the words of talmidei chachamim. This itself is a terrible sin.

There are other situations where not giving someone the benefit of the doubt will lead to kabbalas lashon hara — even where the listener knows the facts to be true:

Chayah called in sick and was not at work for two days. On the second day of her absence, two of her co-workers saw her eating lunch with friends in a restaurant. One remarked, “Look at that! I guess she couldn’t be that sick if she is able to go out and party!” The other responded, “I guess some people will resort to lying to take a couple of days off.”

In this example, the first co-worker is guilty of speaking lashon hara. The second is also guilty of accepting lashon hara. Both are guilty of not giving Chayah the benefit of the doubt. It is quite possible that Chayah did not feel well enough to work, but she was well enough to go out for lunch with some friends. Perhaps her fever broke a couple of hours earlier and then she started to feel better. Or, it may be that she really did not want to go out for lunch, but she felt that she could not refuse her friends’ request to join them at the restaurant.

The mitzvah of shemiras halashon and of giving others the benefit of the doubt is very much intertwined.

IN A NUTSHELL

Not giving others the benefit of the doubt often leads to accepting lashon hara and the disgrace of talmidei chachamim.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 6:5-6

In this segment, the Chofetz Chaim discusses a situ­ation where one finds himself among people who are in the midst of speaking lashon hara. What should one do at this moment?

The language used by the Chofetz Chaim here is so powerful and incredible that we will translate, rather than adapt, his words. Bear in mind that the Chofetz Chaim was exceedingly careful with his every word. Nothing is exaggerated; everything is precise.

Says the Chofetz Chaim:

If the person is able to leave this gathering or to place his fingers in his ears, it is a great mitzvah to do so, as is stated in Masechta Kesubos. However, if it is impossible for him to leave the gathering, and he feels that it is too difficult to place his fingers in his ears because they will laugh at him, then he should gather his energy and remain steadfast during this time of distress, and wage a war for the sake of Hashem against his yetzer hara, so that he should not transgress the Torah prohibition against accepting lashon hara.

For this, he needs to be very careful with three things …

1. He must decide in his mind that he absolutely will not believe the disparaging words that are being said about others.

2. It should not please him to hear these forbid­den accounts.

3. He should be steadfast in not showing the speakers any sort of facial expression or movement that might indicate that he agrees with what they are saying. Rather, he should sit stony-faced. It would be even better for him to show an angry face so that they will realize that he does not endorse their foolish words.

In a situation where one could easily have left the group and did not, or where he joined a group knowing that a sinful conversation was in progress, or where he joined knowing that these people are prone to speaking lashon hara, he is as guilty as they are, for our Sages have instructed us to distance ourselves from forbidden talk. If someone joins such a group with the intention of listening to their evil talk, then certainly, says the Chofetz Chaim “his sin is too great to bear.”

The Chofetz Chaim concludes by quoting the ethical will of the Tanna R’ Eliezer ben Hyrkanos to his son:

My son, do not sit among groups who speak evil of others, for when these words ascend Above they are recorded in a book. Those who are present are inscribed [in that book] as a wicked group, baalei lashon hara.

Someone posed the following question to Rabbi Avraham Pam: “Every afternoon after completing my day’s work, I stand at a bus stop waiting for a bus to take me home. Very often, a certain person I know passes by in his car on his way home from work and offers me a ride. Many times during these rides, this man launches into a tirade about various people. Am I permitted to accept such a ride?”

Rav Pam responded that he should not accept a ride from this person, for by doing so, he would be entering into a nisayon (test) of possibly listening to and accepting lashon hara. Each day in Birchos HaShachar, said Rav Pam, we pray that we should not be faced with spiritual tests. How, then, can we knowingly enter a situation where we might be tested?

ְִִֵֹ

IN A NUTSHELL

When we hear lashon hara against our will, we must make sure not to believe it, and we should give every indication that we are unhappy about it.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 6:3-4

Yisrael is hurrying down the street towards his friend Rafi. “Rafi,” he exclaims, “I’m sure you know the Stein fellow who lives around the corner from us — the one who always seems to be in an

angry mood. You’ve got to hear what he’s up to!”

It certainly appears as if Yisrael is about to relate lashon hara about Mr. Stein. We have learned that it is forbidden to intentionally listen to lashon hara even if we do not intend to believe it. So it would seem that Rafi would have to tell Yisrael that he does not want to hear this bit of information.

On the other hand, the information may be important for Rafi to know; either to protect himself from harm, or so that he can help to defuse a potentially explosive situation.

What should Rafi do? He should say the following:

“Yisrael, before you say another word, please tell me the truth. Is it really important for me to know what Mr. Stein did? If not, I do not want to hear anything about it.”

If is apparent from Yisrael’s response that it is important for Rafi to know what happened, he would be permitted to listen to the report, provided that he does not believe it as fact. If, on the other hand, Yisrael is merely eager to share some “juicy information,” or wants to spread negative information about Mr. Stein because he dislikes him, it would be forbidden to listen.

The Chofetz Chaim offers some examples in which the information will not save Rafi from harm, but nevertheless, he is permitted to listen to it:

Rafi has a feeling that Mr. Stein is not as guilty as Yisrael thinks he is. By listening to the account of what supposedly happened, Rafi will be able to show Yisrael and others who are present that Mr. Stein is not such a bad fellow after all.

Yisrael comes towards Rafi with a somewhat different outburst: “Yisrael, you know that Stein fellow from around the corner? You know what he just did to me? Just wait until I get even with him!”

In this case, Rafi may feel that he will be able to calm Yisrael and defuse the situation. By doing this, says the Chofetz Chaim, Rafi will be “increasing peace among the Jewish people.” This is in fact a mitzvah and warrants Rafi’s listening to what happened.

The Chofetz Chaim cautions, however, that Rafi should be extremely careful not to believe the report as fact “so that he will not be trapped in the net of kabbalas lashon hara.”

Sometimes we fall into this “net” quite innocently.

Tzippy is sitting at a wedding enjoying the company when someone at her table tells a very unflattering story about Malka, whom they all know. Tzippy is distressed that she inadvertently heard lashon hara.

The Chofetz Chaim says that the best thing to do in this situation is to try to immediately right the wrong. If at all possible, Tzippy should try to show everyone how in that story, Malka had really done nothing wrong, or that whatever she did was totally accidental and out of char­acter for her. If Tzippy knows that the woman who told the story dislikes Malka and will probably try to defend her version of the story, then she should wait until the woman is out of earshot before attempting to set the record straight.

IN A NUTSHELL

One is permitted to listen to lashon hara when he is reasonably cer­tain that there is a constructive purpose to such listening. Even then, he should not believe it as fact.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 6:1-2

The Chofetz Chaim now turns his attention to the sin of kabbalas lashon hara, listening to and accepting lashon hara.

The Torah states: “Do not accept a false report.” This, says Mechilta, is the prohibition against accepting lashon hara. There are two aspects to this sin:

It is forbidden to intentionally listen to lashon hara even if we have no intention of believing it.

If we hear lashon hara, whether intentionally or unintentionally, we are not allowed to believe it.

The Chofetz Chaim points out that when a person believes lashon hara, his respect for the person about whom it was spoken is lowered. The mitzvah of ahavas Yisrael requires us to think well of other Jews, not to think less of them because of something that was said about them.

If someone is told lashon hara and responds by nodding in agreement, then he has been guilty both of accepting lashon hara and of speaking lashon hara.

Amazingly, Rambam states that the punishment of one who accepts lashon hara is greater than that of the speaker. Perhaps the reason is that if people would not accept lashon hara, then the evil report would be “D.O.A.” (Dead on Arrival). It would be harmless, and perhaps the speaker, seeing that his words were ignored, would not repeat this evil practice. The fact that the listener accepts the report as fact encourages the speaker to spread more lashon hara in the future.

There are times when it is permissible to listen to lashon hara. If a person feels that he must listen to lashon hara in order to save himself or someone else from physical or financial harm, he is permitted to do so. He may take the necessary steps on the possibility that the report is true, but he may not accept it as fact.

Raphael is on the verge of entering into a partnership with Naftali. The night before they are supposed to sign a contract to make it official, someone approaches Raphael and says, “I feel that I must warn you: if you enter into a partnership with Naftali, you will regret it.”

Raphael is permitted to ask the person, “On what basis do you make your statement?” He would then be permitted to listen to the person’s explanation as to why such a partnership would be harmful to him. Raphael would not be permitted to believe as fact whatever negative information he heard about Naftali. However, he would be permitted to — and he should — investigate the matter to the best of his ability. If his investigation indicates that the report is true, it would be perfectly correct for him to cancel plans for a partnership.

There are other reasons why a person would be permitted to listen to lashon hara without believing it. He may listen to it so that he can disprove it, or so that he can help make peace between Jews embroiled in a dispute, or so that he can be of help in correcting a wrong. As long as there is a beneficial reason for him to listen to the report, he may do so, provided that he does not believe it as fact.

IN A NUTSHELL

We are forbidden to intentionally listen to lashon hara. If we hear lashon hara, we are not permitted to believe that it is true.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 5:7-8

The legendary founder of the Mussar Movement, Rabbi Yisrael Salanter, once met a man who had served as a shochet for some time. “Rebbi,” the man said, “I am giving up shechitah and instead plan to become a businessman. I found shechitah too nerve-wracking. There are so many halachos to know, and it is so easy to make a mistake and ‘mess up.’”

R’ Yisrael told the man, “I assure you that to be an honest businessman and adhere to all the Torah’s business laws is more difficult than shechitah.”

One of the areas of business that can be a major test for a Jew is how to deal with competition.

Consider the following:

“Snazzy Suits” has been doing a brisk business for years. Three months ago, a new suit store, “Perfect Fit,” opened a few blocks away. The store was rap­idly becoming popular, and Mr. Krandler, owner of Snazzy Suits, felt certain that the new store was hurting his business. He turned to his friend, Mr. Kornish, an advertising executive, for advice.

“What you need,” his friend said, “are some pow­erful ads, ads that will highlight the quality of your suits as opposed to the shoddy merchandise the new store is offering.

“How about this one: ‘Don’t be fooled by what’s “perfectly unfit”! Snazzy Suit’s salesmen, whose experience and expertise is unparalleled, will give you the suit that truly is tailor-made.’ ”

Mr. Krandler is ecstatic and immediately hires his friend to produce the ad.

It is forbidden to disparage someone’s merchandise; one who does so has spoken lashon hara. The Chofetz Chaim bemoans the fact that it is all too common for businessmen to speak badly of their competitors’ merchandise.

Our Sages teach that our earnings for the coming year are decreed in Heaven on Rosh Hashanah. Our competitors cannot take away our earnings, and maligning their merchandise will not gain us additional earnings.

Sometimes, it might appear that dishonest business practices do result in more income. But Hashem has infinite ways of “evening the score.” Perhaps that person’s house will need major repairs and all his dishonest earnings will have to be used for that purpose. Whatever the case, a believing Jew knows that one cannot gain from going against Hashem’s will, and one cannot lose from living according to halachah.

Once, a young man who was suffering with a difficult personal problem came to Rabbi Moshe Feinstein to ask if, to help his situation, he was permitted to do something which halachah normally does not permit. R’ Moshe replied that he could not permit such a thing. The young man began to cry because he felt that this was his only hope. R’ Moshe took the young man’s hand in his own and, in a voice filled with compassion, said, “What do people do when they have a serious problem? They ask a tzaddik for a berachah. I assure you that following the halachah is greater than a berachah.”

The young man heeded R’ Moshe’s advice and eventually his problem was resolved.

This segment concludes with the following scenario:

Avi relates lashon hara to three of his friends. The next day, Peretz tells the three friends, “I know for a fact that whatever Avi told you yesterday is true.”

Peretz is guilty of speaking lashon hara, though he has added nothing to Avi’s words. His vouching for Avi’s statement makes it more likely that the three friends will believe it. Strengthening lashon hara is also a sin.

IN A NUTSHELL

Never malign a competitors’ merchandise.  Never endorse someone else’s lashon hara.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 5:5-6

He is such a weakling!”

Someone unfamiliar with the laws of lashon hara might consider this a perfectly proper statement. “What did I say wrong? He is the nicest person I know — but he is a weakling!”

Such a statement is lashon hara if it could harm the person’s chances to earn a livelihood. The Chofetz Chaim offers two examples when this is possible: where the subject is a hired laborer or a rebbi.

No one would want to hire a laborer who is a weakling. And many principals would not want to hire a rebbi who is a weakling. It is often hard to find a good substitute for a rebbi and a principal might think that “a weakling” is more likely to miss school because of illness.

“He doesn’t earn a living — I know that for a fact.”

When word spreads that someone “is not earning a living,” others will be reluctant to loan him money. In both these cases, “If this will be publicized in the city,” says the Chofetz Chaim, “no one will want to extend credit to him, and this will cause him great harm and aggravation. This will affect his very existence — literally.”

As we have noted previously, if such information needs to be told l’to’eles (for a constructive purpose), then seven conditions, which will be discussed later, must be met.

“On the average day, he studies Torah for about three hours.”

“You can expect a $36 donation from him — that’s what he usually gives.”

Are such statements lashon hara? It depends about whom they are spoken.

To say that a man who works from 9:00 to 5:00 studies Torah for three hours a day is a great compliment. But if we are speaking about someone who is supposedly a full-time yeshivah student, then this statement indicates that something is amiss.

For a person who earns a modest living, a $36 donation is nice. But for a billionaire, it indicates stinginess.

When deciding whether or not a statement is lashon hara, we should follow Rambam’s rule: Any statement that can cause a person physical or financial harm; frighten him, or distress him, is lashon hara.

“What’s wrong with saying that he never gives a donation larger than $36? Neither do I!”

This is flawed logic, says the Chofetz Chaim. Perhaps the speaker is not ashamed to say this, because everyone knows that this is the most he can afford. The person of whom he is speaking, on the other hand, might be expected to give more.

Even if everyone knows that both men have identical jobs and earn the same amount of money, this does not necessarily permit such a statement, if people would expect them to give more. The fact that a person is not embarrassed by something does not grant him a license to say it about someone else.

IN A NUTSHELL

Never refer to someone as a “weakling” or say that he does less than would be expected of someone of his status. Being unashamed of your own faults does not give you the right to say that others possess these same faults.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Lashon Hara 5:2-4

“He’s a nice person, but he’s not that bright.”

“I’ve seen better contractors than him.”

“The rav knows what he needs to know for everyday she’eilos (halachic questions), but when it comes to a difficult piece of Gemara, he runs into problems.”

The Chofetz Chaim informs us that many people, out of sheer ignorance, are apt to make such comments, not realizing that such statements are pure lashon hara.

Lashon hara is any statement that either is derogatory or can cause the person harm is lashon hara. Can anyone honestly say that the statement “He’s not that bright” is not derogatory? In the Chofetz Chaim’s words:

I ask you, my brother: If you would discover, beyond any doubt, that someone announced publicly that you are not bright, wouldn’t you have a grievance against him? You would think to yourself, “What sign of foolishness did he see in me [that caused him to say this about me]? His statement is nothing more than an expression of his wickedness, and an indication that he is a baal lashon hara.”

All three examples above can cause the person irreparable damage. To say that someone is “not so bright” can hurt his shidduch opportunities. If he is married, it can lower his esteem in the eyes of his wife and in-laws. It can hurt his chances to find a job.

What if you are asked information about someone who applied for a teaching job and in your opinion, that person is “not so bright”? Such a situation has to be handled with great sensitivity; perhaps a halachic authority should be consulted. This is because your personal opinion about the person’s intelligence may not necessarily be correct. If it is correct, it does not guarantee that the person is not qualified for the teaching position. Perhaps he has many other great qualities, and with proper lesson-planning he will make a fine teacher.

“I’ve seen better contractors than him.” This statement can cause the contractor a loss of business, and could conceivably destroy his business. The only situation that might warrant such a statement is when someone who is considering hiring the contractor asks information about him. Even then, the “seven rules of to’eles (constructive speech),” which will be discussed in a later chapter, must be met.

“The rav knows what he needs to know for everyday she’eilos (halachic questions), but when it comes to a difficult piece of Gemara, he runs into problems.” This statement, even if true, is terrible. If the rav is fulfilling his role as spiritual leader of his community and teaching them how to live a life of Torah, then there is no reason to criticize him. Ridiculing the rav’s level of knowledge will serve only to lower his esteem in the people’s eyes. Then, when the rav instructs the people in the ways of the Torah, some of them might say, “Why should I listen to him? He’s not much of a talmid chacham, you know.”

The Chofetz Chaim writes:

Because the rav’s esteem was lowered in the eyes of the local populace, he might be removed from his position entirely. The speaker will have been responsible for [spilling] his blood and the blood of his offspring, for through his lashon hara, he has deprived him of his livelihood.

The speaker has also lowered the honor of Torah and its students very much; he has disgraced a talmid chacham, and for this, our Sages say, there is no remedy for his injury.

It does not take much to damage a person’s reputation. However, once it is damaged, it is often impossible to restore the reputation to what it once was.

IN A NUTSHELL

Criticism of a person’s intelligence or skills can do irreparable harm to his reputation.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –