-->

Question in Hilchos Loshon Hora

Home Coffeeroom Bais Medrash Question in Hilchos Loshon Hora

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1333410

    yekke2
    Participant

    There is a heter (under very specific circumstances; see CC 2.1-3) to speak Loshon Hora which was said b’apei t’loso – in front of three people. If it was publicly declared, it is considered ‘soifo l’gluyei’ (something that will eventually be revealed) and there is no issur to retell the information.

    If someone tells me a story that he heard in front of three people, the Chofetz Chaim (2.4) rules that I am not allowed to retell it. Although if I would know that it was said in front of three I would be allowed to, he classifies this as עד אחד נגד איתחזק – this is something you were not allowed to say, and you may not believe an עד אחד who comes to מתיר something that was until now forbidden.

    I have numerous problems with this psak:

    1) When it is בידו, the עד אחד is believed. This is explicitly paskened in Gittin 54. The Chofetz Chaim explains that here בידו won’t help, because it is בידו באיסור – there is no legitimate way for him to create the hetter. The problem is, the Gemara there talks about cases where it is בידו באיסור and says you are נאמן, like a Kohen Godol testifying that his Korbon is Piggul, or someone testifying that wine is Yayin Nesech. And it is mefurash that in both cases, he is believed.

    2) If the listener is not allowed to believe the informer that he [the informer] heard it in front of three, he should not be allowed to listen. By extension, the informer should not be allowed to tell him, because of לפני עור. So to say that it is muttar to repeat a story heard in front of three but it is assur for one who hears it from him to repeat it is paradoxical.

    3) The Chofetz Chaim in Klal 4.11 writes that when asking for information which l’toieles, you must inform the person you are speaking to that it is l’toieles. It is pretty clear that the person you are asking is allowed to believe you that it is l’toieles and therefore impart the necessary information to you. Why is this not subject to the same problem? Why isn’t this עד אחד נגד איתחזק, and you should not be allowed to ever say loshon horo unless you know the toieles first hand?! (This doesn’t even have the advantage of בידו; this would prove that this isn’t considered איתחזק at all – I can think of at least two reasons why this should be so). I can think of a distinction between the l’toieles case and the apei t’losah case, but I wonder if anyone can help me answer this.

    Your thoughts on the subject would be appreciated.

    #1333758

    5ish

    Regarding issue #2: the examples given of biyado are not b’chezkas issur, unlike your case which is b’chezkas issur.

    #1333777

    yekke2
    Participant

    5ish — Those cases are b’chezkas heter, if there is such a thing. Either way, I don’t see this as a chiluk – you see the ne’emonus of byodoi is indiscriminate between whether the action under my control is muttar or assur.

    #1333842

    Sam2
    Participant

    To answer 2 (and by extension 3), In Hachi Nami. It’s a combination of Chumros that creates a Stirah. We do that sometimes. Better safe than sorry. Similarly, to answer 3, we created a situation that breaks a Halachic rule via Chumra. The CC didn’t seem to extend the Chumra even further, so as not to wipe out the Gemara’s Heter entirely.

    #1334002

    yekke2
    Participant

    Sam2 – Thank you for replying; I’m sorry, I didn’t understand what you wrote.

    Let me rephrase the points:

    Question 2: Why is it muttar to repeat loshon hora that was heard be’apei te’lasa if the person I am telling it to is not allowed to hear it? It should be assur because of lifnei iver. It sounds like you are answering that it is actually forbidden – but that just isn’t true. Did I misunderstand you?

    Question 3: Why is an eid echad believed that loshon hora is l’toieles, but not believed that it avida ligluye? Both appear equally נגד אתחזק. I really don’t understand what you said to this one.

    #1334348

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    2) If the listener is not allowed to believe the informer that he [the informer] heard it in front of three, he should not be allowed to listen. By extension, the informer should not be allowed to tell him, because of לפני עור. So to say that it is muttar to repeat a story heard in front of three but it is assur for one who hears it from him to repeat it is paradoxical.

    It’s not lifnei iver, because although the listener has to be choshesh that it wasn’t actually said b’apei t’lasa, the informer knows that it in fact was, and that the listener was not actually oiver on anything.

    #1334392

    yekke2
    Participant

    DY: It’s not lifnei iver, because although the listener has to be choshesh that it wasn’t actually said b’apei t’lasa, the informer knows that it in fact was, and that the listener was not actually oiver on anything.

    This doesn’t actually work. It is assur to be machshil someone to do something that he thinks is assur even if you know it to be muttar. Tosfos in Kiddushim (32?) explains this because נתכוון לאכול בשר חזיר ועלה בידו בשר טלה צריך כפרה, and to be machshil someone in this is Lifnei Iver. The Ritv”a there seemingly argues with Tosfos, but the C”C paskens like Tosfos in a few places, both in Mishne Berura and in Chofetz Chaim in regards to Loshon Horo.

    #1334429

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    Where in hilchos loshon hora?

    #1334548

    Avi K
    Participant

    1. Where there is a תועלת not stating the facts would be a violation of
    אל תעמוד על דם רעך. However, the listener must inform the person as to how he came by the info.

    2. Being מכשיל someone is not necessarily לפני עיוור. If someone else can tell him it is מסעיה לדבר עבירה. As this is a rabbinic prohibition the rules are easier.

    #1334581

    yekke2
    Participant

    DY – Be’er Mayim Chaim, Klal 6.42

    #1334596

    yekke2
    Participant

    @avi K:
    Three points —
    1) Not every case of toieles involves לא תעמוד על דם רעך.

    2) Even in cases where there is this issur, the klalim of l’toieles still apply. If you don’t fulfil the conditions, you are forbidden to say. The Chofetz Chaim writes that if you have something against the person you’re talking about, even when it is l’toieles you may not say. I asked a Rav (not l’maisah) – if somebody asks you shidduch information about someone who has all sorts of issues, and you have something against them – what should you do? You are not allowed to say Loshon Hora, but they’re going to get married! He told me that he asked R’ Elyashiv zt”l this shailah, and R’ Elyashiv told him that “you dance at the Chasuna”. If you are not allowed to say, there is nothing you can do about it.

    3) You only know that it a situation of לא תעמוד על דם רעך if you believe him. What ne’emanus does he have?

    #1334618

    yekke2
    Participant

    DY – I’m mistaken; he brings Tos Kiddushin 32 in Be’er Mayim Chaim Klal 4.46.

    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=47570&st=%D7%A7%D7%99%D7%93%D7%95%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9F&pgnum=189

    #1335525

    DaasYochid
    Participant

    He’s talking about where the person is saying lashon hora (because you asked him) thinking he’s just gossiping about him.

    We’re talking about telling him lashon hora, where he doesn’t know what you are going to say until he says it.

    Do you have a case of listening where there’s lifnei iver without any actual issur?

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending