Good morning. Pesach 5782. Welcome. We had a problem in the first session this morning. I hope you weren't disappointed, or among the members who thought we weren't having it today. But here we are, and we'll have the balance of the schedule.
Every week at this time, 1145, we study Shemirat HaLashon. I don't call it Lashon Hara. I saw some of the advertisements. It's called guarding your tongue or the laws of proper speech. Today I want to speak about a situation that's a continuation of something we've learned in the past.
When a person sees somebody doing something wrong, it's important for that person to take corrective action. The number one best way to do it, to avoid trapping yourself into an aveira (sin), is to approach the person, speak to the person, explain that you're only well-intentioned, and try to get them to take corrective action. They're doing something wrong. They shouldn't do it anymore. They're not doing something right. They should do it. Come to class. Come to Minyan (prayer quorum). Don't eat this. Don't say that.
However, in many cases, a person feels it won't work. Well, have you tried it? “It didn't work.” He doesn't want to try it because he's afraid of animosity. He's afraid of the reaction. But he thinks maybe somebody else can get through to this person. And so he wants to tell this other go-between what the person is doing wrong, so that that person can deliver the message to the perpetrator.
The problem is that if I make a derogatory statement to somebody about somebody else, it's Lashon Hara. If it happens to be true, it's Lashon Hara. If it's not true, it's called Motzi Shem Ra (slander). So what am I supposed to do? How am I supposed to transfer my information if I feel he'll either ignore me or not listen to me and maybe even create animosity? I know he has to find out.
A person who does not rebuke personally has an obligation to get the message to the person through others. And that's where the Chafetz Chaim says in Klal Yud, the 10th chapter, paragraph Zayin (seven), that you have to try and rebuke the person personally. But if he knows, with a certain degree of certainty—nobody knows anything with certainty—that the person is not going to take corrective action, he's not even going to accept the rebuke, that sounds good. Now I don't have to tell him. I'm afraid to tell him. I think it's going to be ineffective, so I don't have to tell him. He has to do what? Try and tell it to others and let others get the message to him, with a proviso: at least three.
At the beginning of the sefer, the Chafetz Chaim took a great amount of space and a lot of drops of ink to explain the heter (halachic permission) of Apei Telata. When you say something over in front of three, it's like making a public statement on Instagram in front of 3,000. So he says, when you make this tochacha (rebuke), you have to be careful that this rebuke is said in front of three people—not “the less, the better”; the more, the merrier.
Now, why is that? Well, if the matter is being related for the sake of that wrongdoer, saying it secretly in front of one or two people, rather than telling the person directly or saying it in front of three, creates an aura about the situation. It makes the people listening say, “Why is he telling me this in this way? Why is he keeping it secret and limited? Perhaps it's not true.” And their doubt will prevent them or deter them from actually delivering the message.
It's true, the listener will still be his friend because he'll never find out. But they'll suspect him of perhaps even lying. “Why would he tell me something in a way that it won't get out and won't get back to the person? Maybe he's lying. Maybe the person never did that. Maybe the perpetrator is not guilty of what he's saying he's guilty of.”
So when he comes and reveals it before three, says the Chafetz Chaim, that changes the situation. Because once you say it in front of three, you have a principle: Chavrach chavra it lei. Every person knows one person. So here's a person who's lying, and once you tell him, “What is this?” You say, “The person doesn't know anything. Nobody knows. I know I can trust you.” And of course, the person you tell says, “Promise me you won't tell.” “No, no, no, no, you can trust me.” But there's one person, at least, that a person confides in.
Some people come home at night. They don't realize they're spraying Lashon Hara to their wife over the dinner table. “Guess what happened? Guess what I heard?” Lashon Hara. That's only my wife. It's like me. to myself. Not true.
Now, the fact that it has to say it in front of three builds in certain insurance policies. Number one, the people listening now believe that he knows it's going to get out. He knows it's going to be public. And therefore, it must be true. And he knows it's going to get back to the person. So he must be doing it for good cause because he's not hiding it. He's revealing it. He's revealing it in a manner that it will get back to that person. And if he wants it to get back to that person, it's only probably because he wants that person to stop violating whatever it is that's wrong in the tale that he tells over.
So that sets up a situation where a person can deliver a message, say, secondhand, without delivering it himself, to protect the situation and maybe even be more effective. But wait, the listeners, just like you're not allowed to speak Lashon Hara, you're not allowed to accept Lashon Hara. He tells me that this man is doing this on Shabbat, or he's doing this in his business, or he's violating a different type of aveira, bein adam laMakom (between a person and God), bein adam lechaveiro (between one person and another). He's doing it pretty regularly. And he's telling me about it. I got to go get this guy. This is one of the worst things I ever heard. And if it's not the worst thing I heard, it's bad enough that I should take action. I should tell. That's the way he feels.
Wait a minute. The listener is accepting the Lashon Hara. And remember, Lashon Hara is true. It's a derogatory statement that could be harmful or not, but it's a derogatory statement about another Jew that could be, is true. And remember, Lashon Hara is true. And now he's accepting it as true. That's Lashon Hara.
Under these circumstances, there's a critical point when party A tells party B what party C did. And party A tells party B, “It's important that this person knows what needs to be corrected. I wish I could tell him, but he'll never listen to me. He has no respect for me. He doesn't like me. We're too close.” Whatever the reason is why he feels the person won't listen, he tells. Now these people who are listening have an obligation to try and correct the person's error. However, they also have a duty not to accept what they haven't verified as 100% true, because that's accepting Lashon Hara.
So therefore the Chafetz Chaim says it's forbidden for the listeners to lower their opinion of the perpetrator accused because of the report that they heard. Instead, they should try and verify the report. Now, it's a difficult approach to take, but Hashem requires it. Why did I say that? Because there's a rule of mitzvot (commandments). Hashem didn't make a mitzvah that, if you come to a place that's a river, you should flap your arms and fly over it. Because you can't do that. So it can't be a mitzvah. Every mitzvah, simple or difficult, is doable.
So Hashem tells us you can reject while correcting. Rejecting and correcting are not a contradiction in terms. I reject the veracity, but I could in some way approach the person without actually believing that it's 100% true. “What a bad guy! And I have to do something.” Rather, I can approach him in a manner that delivers the message that there's something wrong here, or potentially something wrong here. If it's true, it should stop. And if it's true you're not doing something, you should start to do it.
Stopping and starting without verification is not so good. So you have to try to verify before you talk. But at the same time, if you don't accept and you just deliver the message without truly believing, it's possible that—or, “I heard that. I can't accept that you would do such a thing. Maybe you don't realize you're doing it. It's not like you.” You can deliver the message if in your heart you don't believe the message.
The speaker, the perpetrator, and the deliverer all have to comply. Those were the laws of proper speech.