Lashon Hara – Gossip and Nasty Insults

Rabbi Finkelman, in his Purity of Speech adaptation of the Chofetz Chaim’s Sefer Shmirat Halashon, teaches that the immediate physical punishment for speaking lashon hara can be seen as having benefitted the Jews back when this punishment was in effect.  Jews who spoke lashon hara were punished with Tzaraat – leprosy. How could being struck with leprosy possibly be a good thing?

Rabbi Finkelman explains that when leprosy was the consequence of speaking lashon hara, Jews were conscious of when they’d misspoken. They knew what counted as lashon hara. Today, you often hear people defend their gossiping by saying that it isn’t lashon hara. People know they should speak kindly about their fellows, but it’s difficult. To avoid feeling bad, they justify their unkind words as something that doesn’t qualify as lashon hara.

In the Bible, Miriam is struck with leprosy for speaking ill of her brother Moses. In the following Parasha, the spies are sent to scout out the land. One well-known way of interpreting the Torah is by considering juxtapositions, things placed alongside each other.

Rashi explains why these two stories, seemingly unrelated, are stuck together. The spies – who were leaders of the 12 tribes of the Children of Israel – should have learned from Miriam’s punishment. They should have seen how dangerous speaking lashon hara is.

Unfortunately, they didn’t learn the lesson. And as a result of their negative report, G’ decided that that generation would not enter the land of Israel, but die in the desert. Thus began 40 years of wandering in the desert. And during that time, the whole generation died. (They’d asked Moses to send spies into Israel.)

When in doubt as to what counts as lashon hara, it’s better to keep quiet. Lashon hara carries serious consequences, even if they’re not as immediately obvious today, as they once were.

(This continues the second story discussed in How To React To Lashon Hara. Lashon Hara is Hebrew for speaking negatively – albeit truthfully – about others.) In the same group studying Mishnah, there happened to be a younger student. He didn’t understand the full meaning of the siilence and so felt guilty regarding the unkind words (lashon hara).

Why feel guilty?

Because lashon hara destroys 3: The speaker, the hearer and the target. After Havdalah, the youth approached the Rabbi who’d only discussed the Mishnah without deviating into lashon hara, and asked to speak privately.

Once they were behind closed doors, the student said, “The course was great, so I’d like to thank you and the others for teaching us so well.” “Thankyou,” answered the Rabbi.

“There was just one little thing that bothered me, though – the other Rabbi’s comments on those he disagrees with politically,” continued the student. “I’m not sure whether it was or wasn’t lashon hara, but it certainly put me in an awkward situation. I didn’t think it would be well-received if I chided the other Rabbi, being younger and less learned than him. Perhaps you might speak to him?” he asked.

“The whole group felt that way,” responded the Rav. “That’s why there was the silence [due to the discomfort and disapproval.]”

The story has several important takeaways on offering criticism.

How To Provide Constructive Criticism And Chiding

1) Avoid embarassment and ensure effectiveness by seeking a private discussion. No one likes to hear that they’re wrong and especially not in front of others, which would cause them to lose face.

To avoid putting others on the defensive and to pre-empt a fruitless confrontation, seek a private forum after others have left. This is why the student waited until after Havdala, and went to a private room to avoid being overheard.

2) Praise before criticizing. In theory, a person may sense that praise is being given to soften upcoming criticism, and they may doubt the sincerity of the praise. But in practice, any such considerations fall by the wayside for two reasons.

First, emotionally, we all appreciate compliments and this tends to suffice to trump rational skepticism. Second, since we tend to view ourselves and our actions positively, we believe praise we receive on the grounds that it is true, even if the motive for giving it is to ease a path for constructive criticism. I’ve certainly never heard someone respond, when told they were generous and kind, “I’m a cheap jerk! What are you talking about?!”

Of course, it’s best to give praise one genuinely believes, for optimal results. This is especially true if it can be supported based on an event we’ve seen.

Often, however, even compliments that we cannot justify from our own experience with the person may suffice. The Haggadah says, “All of us are intelligent, all of us are righteous, all of us know the Torah.” (“Koulanu chachamim, koulanu tzadikkim, koulanou yod’im et haTorah.”) So praising a person’s intelligence, good deeds and/or knowledge of Torah are generally applicable type compliments that we can use in the absence of something more contextually appropriate.

3) Let the right person for the situation offer the constructive criticism. Age, perceived expertise, pre-existing friendship and other factors affect who is the “right” critic.

Ultimately, it is someone who the target of the constructive criticism will heed and not feel ashamed to receive criticism from.

Again, protecting dignity is key. Often, a close friend or family member is best, or at least a trusted peer, because they are known to mean well [in the target's mind],

How Abraham Would Give Constructive Criticism

In the story of Soddom, Abraham questions G’ as to whether He will really destory the city despite the possibility that some righteous people may reside there. Onkelos’ translation/interpretation adds the words, “Too True Are Your Judgments,” to Abraham’s chiding of G’. It’s unclear what the source of Onkelos’ addition is, but either way, the story sets an excellent example.

First, Abraham begins with praise.

Second, the text explicitly says that Abraham waited until the other members of his group had already travelled onwards. He was addressing G’ privately.

And we know that Abraham smashed his father’s idols and brought people to monotheism. The former demonstrates a love and respect for both G’ (similar to seeking the wellbeing of the object of the constructive criticism) and the latter point shows love for his fellow men (e.g. expertise in the subject of monotheism and appreciation of G’). So Abraham was the right person to plead Soddom’s case.

A Story of Reacting to Lashon Hara at Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva

Rav Nir ? of Machon Meir Yeshiva once shared with us a story of Rav Aviner’s experience at Merkaz HaRav Yeshiva.

On Rav Aviner’s first day there, he happened to sit near the advanced students (avrechim). As they were discussing, one of the avrechim suddenly leapt backwards as if he were about to be stung by a scorpion! “Lashon Hara!” he shouted, interrupting another of the avrechim in mid sentence, in anticipation of the point about to be made. The avrech who’d been speaking didn’t finish the sentence.

(The avrech who leapt backwards was Rav Dov Bigon, Chief Rabbi of Machon Meir (Rosh Yeshiva). )

Obviously, this was an extraordinary reaction of a unique individual (in the positive sense) in the company of a particular, learned group. Our reaction in a similar situation must be appropriate to the circumstances. The following anecdote further illustrates the idea.

It happened once upon a time that a group of men were studying the Mishna during the third Shabbat meal (seuda shlishit). One Rav, in commenting and explaining a passage, went off on a tangent. The Rav who spoke after him expounded further, then went on to speak harshly of those whose political views were opposed to his own. (It was somewhat related to the discussion.)

The others in the group met the political aside with an uncomfortable silence, whereupon the Rav who’d made the comment and the first Rav returned to the topic of the Mishna. The meaning of the silence – i.e. disapproval – was clear to the Rav who spoke lashon hara, which explains why he immediately dropped the topic.

Two More Ways To React To Lashon Hara

In addition to the possible reaction presented in the first story, another two ways of reacting to lashon hara are presented by this parable. One reaction is silence. The other reaction is to change the topic.

1) Silence. In the context of lashon hara, silence indicates a few things. First, it is the opposite action to joining in with the lashon hara and piling on the unfortunate target. Second, silence – to those attuned to non-verbal communication – expresses disapproval and/or disagreement without saying so explicitly. Thus, there is an instant reaction - which prevents sinking further into the muckraking – without risking embarasshing the person who spoke ill of his fellow.

Note: This is dependent on the speaker being attuned to non-verbal communication and not just being oblivious, thinking perhaps that the silence is just rapt attention.

2) Changing the topic. This is another time-honoured tactic for avoiding uncomfortable discussiong and cutting them short once begun. In the above anecdote, the speaker himself changed the topic along with the other Rav.

Avoiding Lashon Hara, aka Gossip About Others’ Bad Behaviour

Lashon Hara is based in a feeling of superiority

To be able to speak unkindly about another person, you have to consider yourself superior to that person. Specifically, you need to consider yourself superior in that field in which you’re attacking the other person. If you were at the same level, it would be pretty foolish to attack others – the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.

Yet, even if it’s true that we do such or such a mitzva that someone else doesn’t do, or otherwise do really behave in a way that is superior to another person’s behaviour, that mitzva must be put in its proper context.

The context of our comparison

What is it that helps us realize that the implicit comparison between our behaviour and theirs is wrong? It’s the role of G’ in our daily lives.

Rabbi Haim Moshe Luzzato’s book Mesilat Yesharim, the Path of the Just/Righteous, develops this point. The Path of the Just teaches us that the more mitzvot we accomplish, the more humble we must be.

That’s a pretty counter-intuitive statement! Normally, the better we behave, the more we can feel proud in our accomplishments, even if we recognize this should remain internal (to avoid being boastful). The explanation for this paradox is the role of G’ in our daily lives.

Mesilat Yesharim explains this by analogy us to a poor person who receives a gift. The greater the gift, the greater the poor person’s embarassment relative to his mediocre financial status. In our largely middle class society, we might understand this better by thinking of the last time we tried to give a gift to the “friend who has everything.” The difficulty finding him a gift is because he already has everything. Inversely, the poor person has very little.

Likewise, we all start as babies with no knowledge of the Torah, mitzvot etc. It’s only by divine generosity that we have the opportunity to accomplish mitzvot. It’s the old question of nature / nurture. While our own efforts are not to be belittled, G’ is responsible for giving us the chance to accomplish the mitzvot. We can’t ignore “nature” [read: G'].

For example, a Bar Mitzvah boy who puts on tefillin thanks his parents for buying them for him. Sure he’s putting them on, but he was lucky to have parents who put him in that situation. And while they worked to afford those tefillin, obviously G’ had a role to play in making their efforts at earning a living successful.

It’s not for nothing that we refer to G’ as Avinu Shebashamayim, Our Father In Heaven.

This teaches us 2 lessons.

1. The greater one’s achievements in the Torah, the less merit one must have had to start with! What is amazing about the marathon runner who crosses the finish line isn’t that he’s now completed the race (his current state), but that he came from 42 km distance away! Therefore, it’s better to avoid speaking Lashon Hara about others, lest others bring up our the distant point from which we began our own marathon.

2. Our good deeds are only partially attributable to us. While it’s true that we chose to make an effort and do them, G’ put us in a fertile environment and gave us the opportunity to accomplish those mitzvot.

This leads to another piece of advice given by Rav Luzzato in mesilat Yesharim. In our moments of pride, we should recall all the times where we’ve made stumbled along the way. Even King David, of whom some comment that he never erred, said of himself “And I am but a worm and ashes.” (The anecdote with Bat-Sheva and Uri the Hittite is in dispute as to whether it constitutes a mistake on the part of David.)

In sum:

a) Lashon hara is based on feelign superior relative to others.

b) That feeling is vain because

(i) whoever has improved themselves was imperfect to begin with and

(ii) their improvement is largely attributable to G’.

Just as we don’t boast about our hair colour, which we didn’t choose, we shouldn’t speak badly about others whose conditions have been different and thus lacked the opportunity to improve themselves.

Lashon Hara As Blasphemy – Desecrating G’s Name

Other people’s circumstances are largely influenced by G’, just like our own circumstances. If we speak badly about someone else who doesn’t accomplish X or Y mitzva, what we’re saying indirectly is that G’ is unjust. Why? Because He didn’t give them as favourable circumstances as our own.

The problem with that is that we can’t understand G’ to a sufficient degree in order to be able to judge him. We can have recognition towards him – hakarat hatov – which is the basis for loving – ahavat – G’ .

But when He acts in a way that appears difficult to us to understand – e.g. our difficulties understanding the Shoah (Holocaust) – we’re better off reserving our judgement to avoid desecrating G’s Name (chilloul H’), even if it’s only an unintentional desecration.

(The book Sichot HaRav Tzvi Yehuda sheds some light on the question of the Holocaust. It’s translated into English as Torat Eretz Israel by Rabbi David Samson.)

Finally, I’d like to return to that idea of humility based on a retrospective view of the long way we’ve come. As we continue to make progress, we realize that there’s still a long road ahead of us. Thankfully, “the Eternal Nation isn’t intimidated by the long road.” (Am Hanetzach Lo Mephached MeDerech Arucka.)