Do not hear Lashon Ha’ra
A judge is forbidden from hearing the claims of a litigant until both parties are in court.[1]
[1] This verse is associated with רב ששת as noted by the SMG. In the world of רמז, perhaps we can say that his connection to the verse is because his name ששת forms the abbreviation of תשא שמע שוא in reverse – which when the verse is read that way, in reverse – שוא שמע תשא, the verse means ‘equal Hearings you shall hold’, as in both litigants must have equal time to speak. Nevertheless, Rav Sheshes learned from Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya that the verse is associated with the negative Mitzva against hearing Lashon Ha’ra. Had he not listened, he might have interpreted the verse differently.
Verse: לא תשא שמע שוא
Command: Do not hear Lashon Ha’ra.
Shemos 23:1
SMG
[it is forbidden] for a person to accept Lashon Ha’ra, as it says in the verse[i] לא תשא שמע שוא וגו’ and we learnt in the Gemara[ii] Rav Sheshes said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya[1], ‘anyone who speaks Lashon Ha’ra, or accepts it, or testifies falsely about his friend, should be thrown to the dogs. As it says in the prior verse לכלב תשליחון אותו.’ The word לא תשא can be read as spelled, or it can be read with a missing letter Yud – לא תשיא.[2] We also derive from this verse in the Gemara[iii] it is forbidden for a judge to listen to the claims of a litigant before the other party is brought to court.
We learnt in the Gemara[iv] – Rava said, this evil tongue, even though we do not accept [what is said as truth] we should still be concerned [it might be true][3] which we learn from the verse[v] והבור אשר השליך שם ישמעאל את כל פגרי האנשים אשר הכה ביד גדליהו בן אחיקם – did Gedalia ben Aĉi’kum kill them [as is implied by the verse], didn’t Yishmael kill them? [The reason the verse ascribes their death to Gedalia is] because he should have paid attention to the advice of Yoĉanan ben Keraĉ, [α] and he didn’t. Therefore, the verse considers it as if he [Gedalia] killed them [with his negligence].
And if a person sees [in what he is being told] a side of his friend [in other words, he recognizes this as something his friend would do], and things which appear to be true, he is allowed to believe and accept the Lashon Ha’ra[4], as was said in the Gemara[vi] that Dovid did not [violate the prohibition against] accepting Lashon Ha’ra because he recognized [β] what was being said about Mefi’Boshes.[5] [γ]
We’ve also learnt in the Yerushalmi[vii] Rabbi Shmuel son of Rabbi Naĉmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonasan it is permitted to speak Lashon Ha’ra about people who cause strife, as it says in the verse[viii] ואני אבוא אחריך ומלאתי את דבריך.[6]
[1] Perhaps he was the one who felt the need to issue this statement, as he was appointed Nasi due to the controversy surrounding Rabban Gamliel’s treatment of Rabbi Yehoshua. He didn’t want anyone saying anything bad about either of the sages. – the story goes: Rabban Gamliel, when he was the leader, would only allow students in the study hall whose ‘insides were like their outsides’, i.e. those who had 100% integrity. After the destruction wrought by the Romans who were able to do so thanks to the disunity among the Jewish people – Rabban Gamliel set about imbuing the Rabbinical leadership with absolute authority over the people, and cracked down on any whisper of dissent, even when such differing of opinions were legitimate and / or not intending to cause discord. Once there was a disagreement as to when the new month of Tishrei should begin. Rabban Gamliel and the court voted it should start based on the witness testimony, while Rabbi Yehoshua felt the testimony must have been false because it didn’t correspond with the astronomical facts. Rabban Gamliel ordered him to comply with the court and show up to the Beis Midrash with his walking stick and purse, wearing his leather shoes, on the day he felt would have been Yom Kippur. The people were incensed by his treatment of the sage and voted to appoint Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya leader in his place. One of the enactments the young sage made was to open the halls to anyone, even those without integrity. With such a history, it is understandable that people would talk and relate or make up tales about what caused him to be appointed, and Rabban Gamliel ousted. To counter this, Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya made the statement quoted above.
[2] The word לא תשא is addressed to the judges hearing the claim from one litigant absent the other. But if read לא תשיא it would be addressed to the litigant or witnesses. This is as expounded on by Rav Kahana in the Gem. Shevuos 31a. See also Gem. Pesaĉim 118a, Makos 23a and Sanhedrin 7b.
I am unclear why the addition of the letter Yud would change the meaning, nor why it would mean as the Gemara clarifies, nor why it was necessary to state there is a missing Yud. I was unable to locate the word תשיא in Tanach. Furthermore, the statement by Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya lumped together those who speak and hear Lashon Ha’ra – so why would there be a need to note the missing letter Yud since all agree that תשא applies to those who listen. If those who listen are thrown to the dogs, certainly those who speak what they are listening to would be.
In the Gemara Shavuos, the opinion of Rav Kahana is actually the second opinion, the base line of the Gemara actually derives the prohibition from [Shemos 23:7] מדבר שקר תרחק. There, Tosefos notes that in Gem. Sanhedrin 7b [Rav Ĉanina] derives his statement from a different verse [Devarim 1:16] שמוע בין אחיכם – except that instead of stating who said that, Tosefos writes his comment as if that is the accepted opinion of the Gemara, without Rav Kahana’s addition.
And finally, Rashbam in Pesaĉim 118a states that this statement by Rav Kahana is not part of the correct versions of the Gemara as the entirety of the Mitzva [and the statement by Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya] is derived from the words לא תשא שמע שוא as written.
With the Rashbam saying outright that the statement by Rav Kahana is not part of the Gemara, we are still left with why Rashi doesn’t comment that it doesn’t belong in the Gemara – and if Rashi felt it does belong, we need to understand why the Rashbam decided in Gem. Pesaĉim that it doesn’t. Also, we are left with Tosefos’s strange way of phrasing his comment as if to imply that the Gemara in Sanhedrin had a different version of Rav Kahana’s statement than the one in Shevuos. And with all this we are left with why the SMG chose to present this statement as an accepted fact.
Perhaps we can answer with a Ĉassidic twist on the statement. The verse לא תשא שמע שוא can indeed be read as לא תשיא, but in that case, why does the Torah add the letter ע to שמע, it should read as לא תשיא שם שוא… The addition of the letter ע to שמע could render this verse as referring to the classic statement of belief in G‑d, שמע ישראל. Except, without the Yud (Yid) in תשיא, without the ישראל, the recitation of that verse is שוא – in vain. G‑d cannot be testified to being אחד by a person who seeks to sow discord and disunity. Tosefos perhaps also hints at this by noting that the Gemara elsewhere seeks to derive the lesson from שמוע בין אחיכם – when the word שמוע is between the ‘brothers’, i.e. when rumors are spread between Jews themselves or between the Jews and Hashem, then ושפטתם צדק – adjudicate this righteously.
[3] The opposite of the famous Russian proverb statement доверяй, но проверяй – ‘trust; but verify’.
[4] We are discussing here whether one is allowed to believe what he is being told about his friend, but the prohibition against speaking Lashon Ha’ra still exists and the person telling this, what appears to be a truthful story, is violating that prohibition.
[5] The royal family of Shaul had a servant named Tziva. Initially, Dovid granted Mefi’Boshesh son of Prince Yehonasan the entire estate of the royal family of Shaul, as he was the only survivor. Later, when a civil war occurred in which Dovid’s son Avshalom rebelled against Dovid, Dovid seemed to accept that Mefi’Boshesh had turned against him (Mefi’Boshesh was lame and could not make the journey to support Dovid when he was fleeing. Instead, he sent the servant Tziva, who implied that Mefi’Boshesh was taking advantage of the civil war and did not support Dovid. Dovid appeared to accept this statement, whether he believed it or not), and later decreed [Shmuel II 19:30] that half the estate would go to Tziva.
Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav, when King Dovid made that [unjust] statement, a divine voice responded that David’s Kingdom would also be split and half would rebel.
[6] This was being said by the prophet when the succession wasn’t clear, and one of the princes took it upon himself to crown himself king instead of the child Shlomo. As this prince could have caused a civil war, the prophet was justified in speaking Lashon Ha’ra about his actions and instructing Bat Sheva to do so as well, for without such statements, Dovid would not have roused himself to crown Shlomo in his lifetime and to ensure that Shlomo became king afterward.
[i] Shemos 23:1
[ii] Gem. Pesaĉim 118a
[iii] Gem. Shavuos 31a and Sanhedrin 7b
[iv] Gem. Nida 61a
[v] Yirmiyahu 41:9
[vi] Gem. Shabbos 56a
[vii] Yer. Pay’uh 1:1
[viii] Melaĉim I 1:14
AMUDAY SHLOMO
[α] He [Yoĉanan ben Keraĉ] warned him [Gedalia – that Yishmael planned to kill him], and said, ‘I will kill him [Yishma’el] [preemptively].’ But Gedalia refused to allow this, and did not want to believe him saying, ‘you are lying about him.’ And he [Gedalia] [accordingly refused] to protect himself against attack. He [Gedalia] should have told them, ‘Do not kill him [Yishma’el], but be on guard against [any attacks] by him.’
[β] recognizable things – he did not make his feet as further on in the text.
[γ] as for what was said, had Dovid not accepted Lashon Ha’ra, his kingdom would not have been divided forever, that is an argument between the two opinions[1] in the Gemara as is stated there clearly.
[1] As noted by the Maharashal, the Gemara does not state this as its conclusion, but in fact presents this as an argument between Rav and Shmuel. Rav said that Dovid did accept Lashon Ha’ra and Shmuel said he did not. Why then does the SMG present it as if this is the Gemara’s undisputed position.
Prior to noting the argument between Rav and Shmuel, the Gemara notes an unresolved contradiction between Rav’s statements in themselves, where one time Rav stated that Dovid did not accept Lashon Ha’ra, and one time Rav stated he did accept Lashon Ha’ra. The Gemara does not answer this contradiction.
Possibly this allows the SMG to present the single conclusion that Dovid did not accept Lashon Ha’ra by discounting the contradictory opinion of Rav, as that opinion had been countered by Rav himself, resulting in both Rav and Shmuel stating that Dovid did not accept Lashon Ha’ra.
RASHI
Rashi on the verse לא תשא שמע שוא notes that it means as the Targum renders it ‘do not accept a false report’. And he continues this is an admonishment against accepting Lashon Ha’ra and also against a judge accepting a claim from one litigant without the other.
It seems that Rashi is defining the prohibition narrowly as being related to false statements.
Discussion by SMS
The Mitzva is presented with the verse לא תשא שמע שוא, which is addressed to the one hearing the Lashon Ha’ra. And indeed, that is the one to whom the prohibition is addressed, as the SMG notes in starting his discussion on the Mitzva ‘[it is forbidden] for a person to accept Lashon Ha’ra’.
People often comment to me along the lines of ‘it seems impossible not to hear something. Unlike looking or touch, the sense of hearing is not directional, and we have no control over the soundwaves reaching our ears.
How could the Torah forbid this by placing the burden on the ‘innocent’ person to whom the Lashon Ha’ra is being related’.
There are several answers to this:
- Circumstance
Obviously, the reason the person was placed in a position where Lashon Ha’ra is being related to him is not so that he might hear such comments, but that he would be in a position to influence the speaker to refrain from violating negative Mitzva 9. Failure to utilize this opportunity to help the other is what results in the violation of this negative Mitzva – not to hear Lashon Ha’ra.
- Earlobe and fingertips
In addition to that which even children know; that one can hum loudly to prevent the hearing of that which one does not wish to hear, the Gemara discusses the following.
Bar Kapara taught in the Gemara[i] what can be learned from the verse[ii] ויתד תהיה לך על אזנך, do not read the word as אַזֵנֶךָ – your weapons, but rather as אָזְנֶךָ – your ears. If a person hears something inappropriate, put his fingers in his ears. This explains what Rabbi Elazar said, why are human fingers similar to a peg… [see negative Mitzva 13 for the full quote] so that if a person hears something inappropriate, he should place his fingers in his ear.
The Yeshiva of Rabbi Yishmael taught, why is the ear made up of hard cartilage, but the lobe is soft. So that if one hears something inappropriate, he should fold his earlobe into his ear canal [to muffle the sound].
- Not listening
While true answers in that these explain how and why the Torah can place a burden on the person – I still find those unsatisfactory in that there could be circumstances in which folding the ears, or talking back to the individual relating the Lashon Ha’ra is not practical and perhaps not possible. Accordingly, I would instead present a story about the Maggid of Mezritch:
There’s a story of a man who came to the Maggid and asked him to help him learn how to control his thoughts, which were disturbing him during his prayers. Instead of answering him, the Maggid advised him to go see a student of his, Reb Zev of Zhitomer, who would be able to provide an answer to his question.
The Ĉosid set out immediately and arrived at his destination after nightfall. Instead of seeking lodging immediately, he decided to check on the house of Reb Zev on the possibility that he was awake. Indeed, the saintly man was awake, and a candle was burning by which light the Ĉosid could see that Reb Zev was learning at his table. The Ĉosid knocked on the Reb Zev’s door but was not answered. Thinking perhaps Reb Zev was old and couldn’t hear well, be knocked much louder, but still was not answered. It was a cold freezing night, as such nights are in that part of the world, but the Ĉosid would not desist. He began pounding and shouting on the door demanding that Reb Zev let him in so he could ask his question, but Reb Zev made no indication that he heard him at the door and continued learning. This lasted all night long until finally, when dawn began coloring the sky, Reb Zev got up to begin morning preparations.
At this point, Reb Zev opened the door and kindly invited the Ĉosid in to warm up and have some tea. After he was sufficiently recovered from his ordeal, the Ĉosid asked Reb Zev why he had refused to answer the door as after all he was here at the instruction of the Maggid to ask a question.
Reb Zev smiled and said he had already shown him the answer. Thoughts come and they can be loud, demanding to be let in. They can be persistent knocking all night. But the master of the house has the choice to let them in or not.
The same is true about hearing. Selective hearing is the normal state of the brain’s function in filtering out sounds the person doesn’t need to listen to. Background noises that interfere with whatever the person is focusing on, whether that is a single voice in a crowd of people, or a person coming to speak Lashon Ha’ra. Using the auditory cortex to tune out the person who is relating Lashon Ha’ra is well within the physical capacity of the brain. It’s not that the ears don’t have the sound reaching them, it is that the brain is guided by choice into processing the sounds the person wishes to listen to.
[i] Gem. Kesuvos 5a
[ii] Devarim 23:14