Welcome back. It’s time for our Hilchot Lashon Hara (the laws of negative speech) session. Chafetz Chaim handles a very common situation, which we call To’elet, a constructive purpose. The definition of Lashon Hara, as we’ve learned so often, is negative speech about another person. True negative speech about another person—something valid that’s negative about another person or harmful. However, we have to weigh this against what we call constructive purpose. What if a person knows that someone is considering marriage with another person, and there’s something very detrimental to the marriage built in here? Or somebody wants to go into business with somebody or hire somebody? Any type of relationship could prove harmful to one of the two parties, and the information is negative, it’s true, and there are consequences to the other party not knowing that fact. Can you tell? Do you have an obligation to tell? What are you allowed to tell, and how are you allowed to tell it?
The Chafetz Chaim deals head-on with this issue, and he calls it Lashon Hara LeTo’elet. It’s Lashon Hara spoken for a constructive purpose. Now, you might say, “Constructive, but it’s Lashon Hara.” Yes, but this person is a thief, and this person wants to invest. This person is not healthy, and this person wants to marry them. There are many things that could be crucial to a second party, and don’t you have an obligation to the victim as much as to the person who could cause the damage? So he says, yes, you are permitted to speak, but before you can speak negative information for a constructive purpose without sinning, you have to fulfill seven prerequisites, seven requirements.
So I’ll go through the seven rules today, because I’ve mentioned one or two of them very often here and there, and I felt we finally reached the point that we should go through all seven in one session. This will give you a feeling for how serious it is not to speak Lashon Hara, but how crucial it is sometimes, under duress, to speak Lashon Hara for a constructive purpose. But even there, there are limitations of Pi Halacha.
The first condition, number one, is that a person has to know that the information is 100% accurate. Now, how do you determine that? Well, first of all, I witnessed it, or I was a victim of it. What this person does, or this person’s behavior that I’m trying to warn you about, is something I was a victim to, or I witnessed firsthand. I didn’t hear it as hearsay, gossip, or a rumor. So I had to witness it myself, or, when I heard about it, I did a thorough investigation to check the validity and details of this negative information. If you didn’t see it, you certainly have to tell the person you’re speaking to, the potential victim, “I want you to know I heard this, I verified it as best as I can, and I just think you should know it.”
So there are two ways. If I saw it firsthand, I can say, “This is what I saw this person do; this is what I know about this person firsthand.” But if I don’t know it firsthand, even if I checked it out and confirmed the validity and truth of the matter, I must let the person know. That’s only number one.
Number two, we jump to judgment: “Oh, what a bad thing he did. Oh, how could anybody violate propriety by doing that? How could anybody even think of this?” And we judge and rule that negative behavior may be permitted. So we have to think the matter through, number two, to make sure that this person committed a wrong. Some people may think this is wrong, and then they find out it’s not wrong. Now, you may not like it, and you might not think it’s sterling behavior, but if it’s not an aveirah (transgression), maybe your interpretation is wrong, and you have to be sure there is something wrong here before you pass it on.
Number three is a very difficult requirement. If Abraham should hear that Yitzchak did something wrong, the first thing Abraham should do is approach Yitzchak. You go to the perpetrator, the one who you believe has done wrong, and you tell that person, “Listen to me, this is not correct. You have to make amends, you have to make teshuvah (repentance), you have to restore what was taken.” But you talk directly to the person you want to relay the information about. You speak to a storekeeper who’s being accused of being dishonest; you speak to a manufacturer who may make poor-quality products; you speak to the one who is the subject of your speech, the subject of your Lashon Hara, to see if maybe you could fix it. Then you won’t have to speak, because it will be gone.
Number four. Most people today—I can’t say all, but most people today—have been exposed to many forms of entertainment, many forms of print, movies, music, novels, and books. In those books, a story is never cut and dried. It usually has a certain quantity of entertainment value. Sometimes there’s exaggeration; sometimes there’s something you may not think is so crucial but really is crucial to enhancing the story. So you add a little juice, a little salt, a little pepper, a little kamun (cumin). You want it to taste good, you want the person’s interest, and you want to be appreciated as an upstanding citizen who knows how to tell a story and keep me interested. Well, number four is that you’re not allowed to exaggerate, and this can be very, very difficult to accomplish when you’re talking about emotional situations or things that are not cut and dried, like “he stole ten dollars.”
Very often a person exaggerates. Number five: A person must have one interest and one interest only in telling over this Lashon Hara, because it is Lashon Hara. I’m never going to tell you it’s not Lashon Hara, but Lashon Hara LeTo’elet, if all seven of these conditions are covered, again, as we said in the beginning, is permissible because it’s constructive. However, a person must be sure that telling over this detail, this negative information about another person, is solely to help the victim. If there’s any ill feeling, if the person is a business competitor, if the person is somebody who has some other axe to grind or some other type of negative feeling, so that now you got him—you’re only telling it over because, besides the fact that you’re helping the victim not be harmed, you’re also getting him—no good.
It has to be solely for the purpose, the constructive purpose, of avoiding harm to an unsuspecting victim. Two more to go. Number six. Oh, this requires a little thought. The person must consider other options. Is there a way to get this person away from the danger safely by not saying Lashon Hara? You have a place where the proprietor is not honest, and you’ve been cheated a couple of times and only found out subsequently. Now you hear your friend or neighbor wants to go there. They heard it’s such a great place. You could say, “Listen, the guy’s not so honest. Be careful.” You know firsthand, et cetera. You didn’t exaggerate, okay, you did all the things, but there’s another thing you should consider. How about if I say, “I found a place that I like, and it has a parking lot, which in Brooklyn is like Olam Haba (World to Come)—there’s parking—or they have a valet or curbside, and it’s very good”? So now I’m telling him something positive about somebody else to sort of dissuade him from going to the place where the harm may take place, and he’s avoided being damaged or harmed by this person. I never told him that if he did go, he would be harmed. So I avoided speaking about it. I warned a friend not to shop in a certain place, but I didn’t tell him that the man’s dishonest. I told him I found a new place that I really like. “Why don’t we go there together? Why don’t you go there and try it? It’s really, really got the pluses.”
And the seventh and last of the seven conditions that you must fulfill before you can speak negatively about a person, even for the purpose of constructively saving another person from harm, is that you’re not allowed to convey this information if it will result in the subject suffering a greater loss than halacha (Jewish law) allows.
So the seven things basically tell us that Lashon Hara is dangerous, it’s harmful, it’s negative, and it’s forbidden. But in certain situations, you have to weigh the value of speaking and informing somebody about something you definitely know, clearly know, know without a doubt, know firsthand, or have verified as if it were firsthand: that this person’s contact with another person may cause harm. You’re able to save that person. You’re able to help in that shidduch (marriage match), help in that business partnership. Actually, sometimes by breaking it up or giving a warning, I believe minimally telling it is also part of the To’elet. If you can say, “Listen, where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” Somebody asked you to verify a rumor. “I don’t know. I don’t think so, but I never saw it. But where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” You’re warned. “Oh, whenever you get involved in business deals, I know too many people come to me after the fact. Do your homework before you make a deal. Look into everything. Don’t jump quickly because it sounds so appetizing.” That kind of advice could be as helpful, if not more so, in saving a victim from harm than all seven previously mentioned.