Balancing the terror of Lashon Harah with Obligation to help others with negative information

This is a continuation of previous posts  Lashon harah revisited and Lashon harah and to'eles
Today we have a strong fear of the evil of speaking lashon harah - largely due to the efforts of the Chofetz Chaim. It is unfortunately true that in many common situations this fear does not stop us from speaking lashon harah - as the Chofetz Chaim himself points out. Nevertheless in many important situations this fear does prevent us from conveying negative information even though the Torah requires it.  There are people who marry when it is known the marriage can't work- because of personality, mental health issues or control issues. There are dishonest people given position of trust. There are child molesters who continue teaching. There are incompetent doctors and therapists who continue ruining their client's lives. There are rabbis and teachers who molest women and children. There are "investment specialists" who destroy the financial welfare of communities. No one speaks up to stop these negative consequences - either because the fear of saying lashon harah overwhelms the awareness of the obligation to say helpful negative information or it is used as a pious excuse to justify avoiding unpleasant and difficult situations..


My concern is not- chas v'shalom - to deny the reality that lashon harah is terrible but to provide a corrective balance in which the reality of the Torah requirement to convey negative information is reinforced and becomes possible. Not speaking lashon harah is as important as speaking negative information when the Torah requires it. They both are Torah requirements - and they are contained in the same Torah verse (Vayikra 19:16), Do not spread spread gossip amongst your people. Do not stand idly by the blood of your fellow. I am G-d. The first part is the prohibition of lashon harah. The second part is the obligation to help people even if it involves negative information.

To understand the fear, one needs to simply read the powerful introduction to the sefer Chofetz Chaim - translated in part below. It is clear that the Chofetz Chaim's goal is for people to stop talking about others. Therefore not only does he present the universally agreed upon sin of lashon harah, but he minimizes the permissibility of speaking negatively about others even when it is beneficial by placing additional conditions on speaking negative information. (This will be more fully discussed in future posts).

Additionally, while he reports the statements of Chazal without exaggeration -  one needs to understand the rabbinic style of dealing with sin. As the Rivash (171) and Rambam (Commentary to Mishna Sanhedrin Chapter 7) clearly state - the severity of sin is exaggerated by rabbis in order to get people to obey. In addition legitimate alternative lenient readings  are not presented or they are dismissed as minority views. So while this approach is typically helpful in normal situations, it causes problems when it prevents keeping the Torah obligation communicating negative information when appropriate. In short, it reinforces refraining from speaking at the expense of speaking up. More detailed discussion will be provided in future posts.

================================

Chofetz Chaim (Introduction):... However at the end of the era of the Second Temple, there was significant increase in the amount of baseless hatred and lashon harah amongst us due to our many sins. Because of this the Temple was destroyed and we were exiled from our land as is stated in Yoma (9b) and Yerushalmi Yoma ( 1:5). Even though the gemora only mentions baseless hatred – it means also lashon harah which is a consequence of baseless hatred. Because if the gemora only meant baseless hatred - that would not have been reason for such severe punishment. We can also deduce that lashon harah was meant in addition to baseless hatred from the fact that the gemora concludes that we learn from the destruction of the Second Temple that baseless hatred is as severe as the combined punishments for idolatry, illicit sexual relations and murder. Such an equation is  explicitly stated in Arachin (15b) regarding lashon harah.[The School of R. Ishmael taught: Whoever speaks lashon harah increases his sins even up to [the degree of] the three [cardinal] sins: idolatry, incest, and the shedding of blood.]Furthermore a careful analysis of Yoma (9b) also demonstrates that lashon harah caused the destruction of the Second Temple. It first discusses the reasons for the destruction of the First Temple and then compares them to the reasons for the destruction of the Second Temple. It asks, "And didn't baseless hatred also exist in the era of the First Temple since it states that people would eat and drink together and then stab each other with their tongues?" [The gemora answers that in the First Temple it was done only by the princes but in the Second Temple it was done by all the people.] [Thus we see that the term baseless hatred is also used to describe lashon harah]. ... However the only reason for the continue exile is because of our many sins that prevent the Shechinah dwelling amongst us. When we carefully examine our ways to determine which sins are the basis for the extended exile we find there are many. However the misuse of language is by far the worst for many reasons. 1) Since it was the cause of exile in the first place as we saw from Yoma (9b) – as long as this sin isn't correct is is not possible for the Redemption to come. ...

Rabbi David Cohen of Hatzala Linked to Kickback Scheme at Met Council

NY Times  [also see Forward]  In August, the board of one of New York City’s most respected social services organizations drew widespread attention when it fired its executive director, William E. Rapfogel, because it believed he had been taking large kickbacks from its insurance broker. 

But the board of the organization, the Metropolitan New York Council on Jewish Poverty, took another action at the same time that was not widely noticed. It ended a longstanding consulting relationship with Mr. Rapfogel’s predecessor, Rabbi David Cohen, who led the organization, which is widely known as Met Council, before Mr. Rapfogel took over in 1992.  [...]

The other co-conspirator is Joseph Ross, the owner of Century Coverage, according to the two people briefed on the investigation. 

Neither Mr. Ross nor Mr. Cohen has been charged in the case. Mr. Cohen’s lawyer, Alan M. Abramson, and Mr. Ross’s lawyer, Benjamin Brafman, declined to comment.[...]

Christian love: Buying their way into Jerusalem

Times of Israel   A few years ago, a group of several dozen elderly Russian-speaking immigrants in Jerusalem organized by Dr. Lila Glazer was looking for a place to meet. Lacking resources, Dr. Glazer turned to the municipality, who by chance, had just been approached by American evangelist Mike Evans, who happened to be looking for an opportunity to initiate a project in the holy city. 

Evans and his Jerusalem Prayer Team went to work, and after a $400,000 investment, Glazer’s group is now the proud beneficiary of the most deluxe shelter in the city. Kitted out with spacious meeting rooms, the underground shelter has a renovated bathroom, air conditioning and heat, a well-equipped kitchen, large-screen TV, wi-fi and a chair-lift. 

Earlier this week, at a hastily-erected sukka in front of the entrance to the shelter on Azza Street in Rehavia, Evans was feted by the grateful immigrants in front of a smattering of Russian Israeli and English-speaking journalists.

No one cared to bring up Evans’ agenda or his lengthy history of missionary activity. Who could blame the elderly immigrants, many of whom are Holocaust survivors, and who now have a beautiful place for their much-needed social and religious activities.  Dr. Glazer told me she wished more Christians would be made aware of their stories. [...]

Eruv Tavshilin by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

FiveTowns Jewish Times   In the Hebrew the numbers 5774 are expressed as Tof shin ayin dalet.  One could understand these letters as an abbreviation for the expression, “Tehye Shnas Dalet Eiruvin” it will be a year in which four Eruv Tavshilins will be made.”

What is an Eruv Tavshilin?

Whenever Yom Tov comes immediately before Shabbos, in other words, on a Friday – an Eruv Tavshilin must be made. An Eruv Tavshilim is a Rabbinic device that allows one to “continue preparing and cooking” for Shabbos on Yom Tov. In other words, through the Eruv Tavshilin, one actually begins the Shabbos preparations on the day before Yom Tov.  The Malachos performed on the Yom Tov for Shabbos are considered to be a continuation of these preparations. (Rema O.C. 527:1)

We learned, however, that performing Malacha on a Yom Tov for another day other than the Yom Tov itself is, in fact, a Torah prohibition.  If this is the case, then how could it be that a Rabbinical enactment allows one to get around a Biblical prohibition?

The answer is that, technically, it was permitted by the Torah to cook on Yom Tov for Shabbos.[...]

Rapfogel: Former Chief of Jewish Charity arraigned

NY Times    On Tuesday, Mr. Rapfogel, dressed in a blue suit with a white shirt and no tie, was arraigned in a brief proceeding before Judge Kevin McGrath in Manhattan Criminal Court. He did not enter a plea and waived his right to a speedy trial, a move suggesting that he was or would be involved in plea negotiations. Judge McGrath released him on $100,000 bail.[...]

The charges, which the complaint said were in some measure based on investigators’ interviews with Mr. Rapfogel and the two people referred to as co-conspirators, stem from an inquiry by the state attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, and the state comptroller, Thomas P. DiNapoli. They began to look into Mr. Rapfogel’s stewardship of Met Council after the organization detected the improprieties and alerted state authorities. 

“It’s always sad and shocking when we discover that someone used a charity as their own personal piggy bank — but even more so when that scheme involves someone well respected in government and his community,” Mr. Schneiderman said in a news release announcing the charges. 

Mr. DiNapoli said, “The scale and duration of this scheme are breathtaking.”[...]

Lashon Harah - revisited: Daas Torah on Lashon HaRah

[See  Balancing terror of lashon harah]
Having spent much time on the issue of abuse, one of the main difficulties in dealing with abuse is the fear of lashon harah. It is right up there with the fear of mesira. In our days it is believed that the Chofetz Chaim compiled the Shulchan Aruch on lashon harah and that there is nothing more to discuss because he simply nailed down every issue and halacha. In other words, it is believed that if you want to understand the issur of lashon harah all you need to do is master the sefer Chofetz Chaim without going back to the original sources.

In fact, the Chofetz Chaim did more than simply compile halachos - he made major decision and interpretations which in fact involve significant disputes amongst poskim. Consequently there are not only legitimate alternative psakim dealing with many issues but there are even alternative definitions of what constitutes lashon harah and rechilus.

The issue of lashon harah is not simply a theoretical issue such are the study of korbonos - there are major differences in action which result if you use the alternative views that were rejected by the Chofetz Chaim.

Of course many people assume that one can not disagree with the Chofetz Chaim. When I compiled my index to the Mishna Berura and wanted to write an introduction regarding the nature of the Mishna Berura, Rav Sternbuch advised me against it. He said even though in previous years there was no [problem] disputing the Mishna Berura or even acknowledge that it wasn't entirely written by him, but  "in our times the Mishna Berura has become kodesh kedashim." However just as there was no official canonization of the Mishna Berura there was no canonization of the sefer Chofetz Chaim.

Because of my concern getting a viable balance between the concern for lashon harah with that of a functioning society, I have decided to write a Daas Torah volume on the sources and issues on Lashon HaRah.  A clear expression of the need to balance the concern for lashon harah with the needs of a viable society is expressed in the following Pischei Tshuva.

Pischei Tshuva(O.C. 156): I want to note here that while all the books of mussar are greatly concerned about the sin of lashon harah, I am greatly concerned about the opposite problem. I want to protest about the even greater and more common sin of refraining from speaking negatively when it is necessary to save someone from being harmed. For example if you saw a person waiting in ambush to kill someone or breaking into someone’s house or store at night. Is it conceivable that you would refrain from notifying the intended victim to protect himself from the assailant - because of the prohibition of speaking lashon harah?  By not saying anything you commit the unbearable sin of transgressing the prohibition of Vayikra (19:16): Do not speak lashon harah [but] do not stand idly by when the blood of your fellow man is threatened? By not speaking up, you violate the mitzva of returning that which is lost to its owner Devarim (22:2). Now if you can understand the obvious necessity of speaking up in these cases then what is the difference between a robber breaking into someone’s house or store or seeing that his servants are secretly stealing from him or that his partner is deceiving him in their business or that another person is cheating him in commerce or that he is lending money to someone that you know doesn’t repay? How is this different from stopping a proposed marriage to someone you know is a wicked person who would be a horrible husband. Saving a person from these situations is clearly included in the command (Devarim 22:2) to return to the person himself or his money. From where do we get the mistaken idea that in the case of murder, I will speak up but that it is prohibited to say anything in other situations where someone is being harmed? The general principle is that these are matters which depend upon the speaker’s motivation. If the informant’s intent in relating these matters is entirely to cause harm that is lashon harah. However if his intent is to bring about benefit to the other person and to save him and to protect him – then it is a great mitzva. In my opinion this is the underlying intent of the Yerushalmi which the Magen Avraham brings which says that it is permitted to speak lashon harah about people who cause disputes. … It is obvious that even concerning those who cause disputes it is not permitted to speak lashon harah gratuitously about them in all matters. It is only permitted for those things directly related to the particular dispute. It is only permitted concerning that which they are trying to harm others. In such a case it is permitted to reveal degrading things about them in order to save others. … Unfortunately I have seen many times where someone witnesses another person trying to cause harm to someone – and he suppresses the information and says, “Why should I get involved in a matter which isn’t my business…However one needs to be very careful about these and similar matters. Our Sages have said – when the permissibility depends on motivation - it says, “And you should be afraid of your G‑d.”

Hoshana Rabbah, Shmini Atzeres, and Simchas Torah by Rabbi Yair Hoffman

Five Towns Jewish Times  

HOSHANA RABBAH    Hoshanah Rabbah is a very holy and special day. It means the “great salvation” and is celebrated on the seventh day of Sukkos. The judgment which was written on Rosh Hashanah and sealed on Yom Kippur is handed down on this day.

The Yalkut Shimoni explains that it is on the 21^st of the month because Hashem’s Name of “I shall be” is equivalent to this in Gematria.

The davening for Shacharis is like Shabbos morning and the baal tefillah wears a kittel. We circle the bimah seven times on Hoshana Rabbah; during the regular days of Sukkos we circle the bimah only once. We also take a bundle of aravos and hit them on the ground until the leaves fall off.

There is also a custom to stay up all night on Hoshana Rabbah and study Torah.  Chassidim have the custom to read from Sefer Dvarim on the night of Hoshana Rabbah.  This is done without a bracha.  There is a debate between Rav Elyashiv and Dayan Yitzchok Weiss (Minchas Yitzchak VIII #84) as to whether someone from Minhag Ashkenaz may participate in this unique nighttime Torah reading. 

SHEMINI ATZERES

Shemini Atzeres is the culmination of Elul, the Yamim Nora’im, and Sukkos, times and holidays where we have developed an intense closeness with Hashem. But Shemini Atzeres is actually a new and independent Yom Tov, where Hashem says to us, “Stop. Don’t go. Stay with Me one last day.” This is the explanation of the word “Atzeres — stop.” [...]

SIMCHAS TORAH

While in Eretz Yisrael Simchas Torah and Shmini Atzeres are celebrated on the same day, in chutz laAretz Simchas Torah is on the second day of Yom Tov. The completion of the cycle of Torah reading is celebrated. [...]

Alleged English pedophile - escaped to Israel: Law of Return trumps International Law

YNET     Does the Law of Return trump international law? This question will have to be ruled on by the High Court of Justice, following an attempt by an ultra-Orthodox Jew from England, who was convicted of sexual abuse of children, to find asylum in Israel.

The man has been detained already for over a half year. In a rare instance, the Interior Ministry decided not to grant him standing under the Law of Return, due to the heavy suspicions against him in the UK.


Now the issue comes before the High Court, which is expected to rule soon, in an unusual case – is it possible to grant standing under the Law of Return to a Jew accused of pedophilia who has fled his home country in order to escape prosecution?

An indictment was filed gainst T., 48, for indecent assault on a minor. After charges were announced, T. fled to Israel together with his family. But when he landed, he was arrested for using a fake passport.

The Immigration Authority refused to grant him standing under the Law of Return due to the charges against him in the UK, and even sought to deport him back to his homeland.[...]

New Brooklyn Messianic center set to missionize Orthodox neighbors

Times of Israel  As Sukkot arrived in Flatbush Wednesday, the many ultra-Orthodox Jewish residents of the Brooklyn neighborhood were completing their temporary dwellings and preparing to welcome their physical –- and metaphysical — guests, in the best festival tradition.

But during the week-long holiday, another guest was set to appear in the neighborhood: A multi-million dollar Messianic Jewish center will open its doors to target members of the religious community. 

The Chosen People Ministries has been putting the final touches on a new seminary in the heart of this highly Jewish section of Brooklyn. The price tag for the building, the former Yablokoff Kingsway Memorial Chapel at 1978 Coney Island Avenue, was $2.1 million, and some additional $900,000 has been spent on renovating it.

The prominent missionary organization, which describes itself as “Messianic Jewish,” has long operated in what might initially seem to be hostile environments. Encouraging Jews to accept the Gospel, the organization has opened summer camps in Israel and a guest house targeting young Israeli backpackers in South America. According to anti-missionary activists, members of the ministry sometimes even don traditional Jewish garb like yarmulkes and ritual fringes before going out on recruiting missions.

Neighborhood anti-missionary activists have called in nationally prominent experts to figure out how to confront the Chosen People Ministries’ flagship Brooklyn Messianic Center and the Charles Feinberg Center for Messianic Jewish Studies in their neighborhood. [...]

Was Sex With Children Ever Okay?

Time Magazine  In an interview with TIME this week, biologist Richard Dawkins talks about being molested as a child, which he says was not a particularly big deal. “What’s happened now is that society has developed a horror of it, and rightly so. But I do think it’s important to not be too judgmental of past ages by the standards of ourselves,” he says. “You have to look at history through contemporary eyes rather than through today’s eyes.” [...]

Dawkins was molested by a master at his primary school while he watched a squash match. True to his scientific bent, he describes it pretty clinically in his book An Appetite for Wonder: “He did no more than have a little feel, but it was extremely disagreeable (the cremasteric reflex is not painful, but in a skin-crawling creepy way it is almost worse than painful) as well as embarrassing.”

After it was over, young Dawkins ran off to tell his friends. Many of them had had the same unfortunate experience. In his telling, it seems to have been more or less regarded as bad luck, rather like having been bowled for a duck (having scored no runs) in cricket. “I don’t think he did any of us lasting damage,” he notes.

But Dawkins has not put that last hypothesis through rigorous scientific testing. The studies on any child-adult sexual contact are pretty clear, whether it is so- called “consensual” or not. It can be toxic for the child. There are thousands of sexual abuse survivors who struggle with what happened to them decades after the event.

Dawkins seems to be suggesting that in making a huge deal of sex offenses against minors that happened long ago, we may be overreacting.  And perhaps making things worse for the victims. Indeed, Geimer has claimed that the media victimized her by constantly invading her privacy every time Polanski popped back into the news.

Certainly, things have changed since the Pill first unshackled sex and pregnancy and folks threw sexual caution to the winds. What had once been regarded as an unfortunate moral failing—a penchant for young children—is now universally seen as predatory and dangerous to others. But the degree of damage sexual abuse causes may have less to do with the public attitude towards it, as Dawkins seems to suggest, and more to do with the personality, life experience and relative health of the abused. Whenever humans are wounded they heal differently, even if the injuries appears similar. Some need rest, others exercise; some respond better to therapy, while others benefit from something more invasive. [...]

How Iran Uses Terror Threats To Successfully Deter U.S. Military Action

Tablet Magazine   President Barack Obama thinks that the deal with Russia over Syria’s chemical weapons was possible only because of his credible threat of force. The way he sees it, Iran’s gotten the message, too. As the president told George Stephanopoulos over the weekend, “My suspicion is that the Iranians recognize they shouldn’t draw a lesson that we haven’t struck [Syria], to think we won’t strike Iran.”

However, the essential feature of a credible threat of force is to have previously employed actual force against the adversary you’re threatening. Shortly before Obama announced he would seek congressional authorization for the use of military force against Syria, the White House briefed House and Senate staffers on the possible ramifications of U.S. action. Perhaps unintentionally, the briefings seemed only to have dampened congressional appetite for attacking Iran’s man in Damascus. “They showed them Iran retaliation scenarios,” a senior official at a Washington, D.C.-based pro-Israel organization told me. “They highlighted the fact that Hezbollah has a global reach. The staffers left those briefings with the blood drained from their faces.”

Iran and its allies have proven their willingness to use force against America—as witnessed by the April 1983 bombing of the American Embassy in Beirut; the October 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut; the 1998 bombing of Khobar Towers, which housed U.S. servicemen in Saudi Arabia; and Iran’s war against American troops in Iraq, which lasted until Obama’s 2011 withdrawal.[...]


It is easy to frame some of Iran’s recent terror plots as evidence that they are the gang who couldn’t shoot straight. For every operation that, say, kills five Israeli tourists in a Bulgarian resort town, there are a dozen botched plots, like the operation in Thailand where an Iranian agent blew off his own legs with a hand grenade.

But from another perspective, it doesn’t matter that the vast majority of Iranian projects come up empty, like the plan to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States, which might also have killed hundreds of Americans in the nation’s capital if it had succeeded. Taken together, what these operations show is an obvious, and alarming, inclination to employ violence against America—even in the absence of any direct American military action against Iran. Carried out by second-string operatives, yet backed by arms of the Iranian government and the global terror infrastructure it has put in place, these attempts are generally interpreted by policymakers as warning shots—a reminder of what will happen if America really gets the Iranians mad.[...]