November 1, 2016 5:04 am at 5:04 am #1189449
FIF I can assure you, the story is true. Why would I spend my time making up stories on a forum???
“And now all of a sudden he doesn’t have your number!!!”
I asked for HIS RABBIS number. I wanted to talk to his rabbi, but the rabbi didn’t want him to give him the number. Is it clear now?November 1, 2016 5:17 am at 5:17 am #1189450
About his issues: I think if he was really serious and really liked me as much as he said, he should have discussed these issues with me. How does he know these are things that can’t be solved if he doesn’t even tell them to me?
But I must move one. Anyone knows a good shadchan in Israel? The current one is great, but I’m not getting too many dates, maybe if I worked with an other one in addition to the current one I would have more chance.November 1, 2016 9:00 am at 9:00 am #1189451
I am sorry Lavender had this experience with dating. This in my opinion but the case as described was a classic example of someone who can’t commit. The purpose of my comment was only to inform the public that there are people that just want to date but do not want marriage.
Based on the comments of some of the posters I think if they had lived in the times of the prophets they would accuse them of Motzie Shem Ra on the Jewish People.
Please note no one has to agree with any of my opinions and likewise I don’t have to accept your opinions either. I have been accused of Motzie Shen Ra. The only ones who knows whether whether it’s true or not is the guy, who nobody knows except Lavender and Hashem. This accusation of Motzie Shem Ra is based on the interpretation that because Lavender knows him it’s Motzie Shem Ra which I don’t agree with. If this interpretation is incorrect or the guy actually does have commitment issues then my accusers are guilty of Motzie Shem Ra.November 1, 2016 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm #1189452MenoParticipant
“If this interpretation is incorrect or the guy actually does have commitment issues then my accusers are guilty of Motzie Shem Ra.”
I doubt that’s true.
I don’t know the halachos very well, but I can imagine that if you just make up a story about someone, that’s motzi shem ra, even if by chance the story turns out to be true.November 1, 2016 1:30 pm at 1:30 pm #1189453mommamia22Participant
Having issues with commitment does not mean a person does not WANT to get married.
It means a person MAY NOT be READY until they work through those issues WITH A THERAPIST. Many a well meaning person has tried to help their prospective mate to work through his/her fears. Only a competent therapist can effectively move the person forward.
Regarding the Rav, something sounds fishy. I have never heard of a rav refusing to speak to a person. The rav can say “I’m sorry, I’m not at liberty to disclose any information discussed with me” or something else. It sounds like he’s hiding behind his rav and refusing to give you his number (while stating the rav refused) because HE does not want you contacting the rav. It doesn’t matter what the reason is; him, you… what you need to know is that he shut the door. Even if it is about you, that doesn’t mean that others will have the same issue.
Most people we date are not going to be a source of information on the areas we need to improve upon. We have to be self reflecting enough to be able to recognize our shortcomings. If we lack this ability, it is our family, friends, or even a therapist who can offer some clarity.
Please, don’t spend another minute focusing on the past. It is only robbing you of your future.
You can opt to seek out and speak to his rav, but to what ending?
Nothing good can come from trying to convince someone to marry you. The rav doesn’t know you and could only share that one person’s perspective.
It sounds like the lack of other opportunities is causing you to focus on him; on the past.
Don’t let yourself get shackled by that.November 1, 2016 2:12 pm at 2:12 pm #1189454
“If this interpretation is incorrect or the guy actually does have commitment issues then my accusers are guilty of Motzie Shem Ra.”
Meno: “I doubt that’s true.
I don’t know the halachos very well, but I can imagine that if you just make up a story about someone, that’s motzi shem ra, even if by chance the story turns out to be true.”November 1, 2016 2:13 pm at 2:13 pm #1189455
This accusation of Motzie Shem Ra is based on the interpretation that because Lavender knows him it’s Motzie Shem Ra which I don’t agree with”
HuH? Interpretation? It’s not an interpretation. According to Halacha, if the people you are speaking to don’t know who you are speaking about and have no way of figuring it out, then it’s not Loshon Hora. If they do, then it is.
What are you trying to say – that something can only be Loshon Hora if the person you’re speaking to does NOT know who the person is?
In any case, even if that were the Halacha (which it’s not) there are people here who don’t know who you are talking about and there is a person here who does know who you are talking about, so either way it is assur.November 1, 2016 3:46 pm at 3:46 pm #1189456
“This may be difficult to hear but there are other opinions besides yours that we abide by. I appreciate your confidence, however I cannot rely on you for direction.”
According to Halacha, Motzi Shem Ra refers to saying something about someone that is: 1. not true (or not known to be true) and 2. negative.
The statement that this guy does not date to get married is 1. not true (since we do not know it to be so) and 2. negative.
It is assur to say Motzi Shem Ra even for Toeles.
You (the moderators) seem to be very confident that the statement was not Motzi Shem Ra. I am very interested in hearing why you think so. I would respectfully like to ask that you share your reasoning. Thank you very much in advance.November 1, 2016 4:23 pm at 4:23 pm #1189457
Abba_S: I would like to apologize if I came across too harshly. It is just that I get very upset when people spread Motzi Shem Ra or Loshon Hora about others, but I should express myself less harshly, and I am working on that.
I would also like to clarify the issue. Motzi Shem Ra refers to saying something that is both untrue (which includes anything that is not definitely known to be true) and negative. It is assur to say Motzi Shem Ra even for a toeles.
Saying that this guy is not dating for marriage is a negative statement and untrue (since you have no way of knowing if it is true or not). Therefore it is Motzi Shem Ra and it is assur to say it even for toeles.November 1, 2016 4:39 pm at 4:39 pm #1189458
Very plain. Because the people wagging their tongues here have no idea who and what they’re talking about. They don’t know any of the subjects here. So obviously THEY are not talking about anyone specific. And the only one who does know, Lavender, knows that anyone else cannot know anything here, so of course she rejects any hogwash offered here!!! Because she’s the only one who DOES know anything.
Suppose I told you “The man you waited with at the bus stop this morning slipped a thirty dollar bill out of you purse while you weren’t looking”. Is that motzi shem ra? (well the mere fact I chose to do so…)
Thank youNovember 1, 2016 4:54 pm at 4:54 pm #1189459AgantzyoorpeerimParticipant
It is all about the CASHNovember 1, 2016 8:46 pm at 8:46 pm #1189460
LF- Lavender knows who the guy is, and you can’t assume that she is not being “mekabel” at all. The whole danger of LH and Motzi Shem Ra is that people are very affected by EVERYTHING they hear. Many people in her situation would start to have a negative attitude towards the boy and it would affect how they think about him, even if only a minuscule level.
In regards to your saying that she knows that what is being said is not true, that would only be the case if we were talking about something clear-cut. If someone said that he has purple hair, you could say it’s not Motzi Shem Ra because she KNOWS it’s not true. However, we are talking about something that she DOES NOT KNOW one way or another. It might be that he has commitment issues or it might be something else.
She has a chiyuv to try to assume that his breaking up with her does NOT reflect on him negatively (to the extent that she can do so w/o feeling bad about herself), and we are not allowed to say things that will make it harder for her to do and put negative ideas about him in her head.November 1, 2016 8:51 pm at 8:51 pm #1189461
On a personal level, it has happened to me that I vented to a friend about something that someone had said or done to me that I was upset about (which is permitted under certain circumstances). The friend’s reaction was to criticize the person and make negative assumptions about them. It was fairly similar to what was done here. Her comments did affect the way I thought about the person as well as how I related to her.
I realized after that that this friend is probably not someone whom I am allowed to vent to according to Halacha. You are supposed to choose someone who will not be “mekabel” what you say and certainly won’t add to it!November 1, 2016 9:37 pm at 9:37 pm #1189462
“She has a chiyuv to..”
In my humble opinion: She has a chiyuv to forget about him. That’s it.
Actually so very true. If they parted ways, both have a chiyuv to forget about each other. Sometimes it’s not easy, it takes time, but that’s what ultimately must be done.November 1, 2016 9:46 pm at 9:46 pm #1189463B1g B0yParticipant
Shadchanim in Israel
Abramowitz… She is a travel agent and her husband is a rebbi in a very good yeshiva in yerushalayim.November 1, 2016 10:24 pm at 10:24 pm #1189464
LF: “In my humble opinion: She has a chiyuv to forget about him. That’s it.”
True, but like you said, not easy and it takes time. Meanwhile, she at least has to try to not think badly of him, and others have a chiyuv not to speak badly of him.November 1, 2016 10:25 pm at 10:25 pm #1189465
Shadchan in EY – Raizy Kuperwasser in Beit Shemesh. Very sweet and she also organizes singles’ events.November 1, 2016 11:06 pm at 11:06 pm #1189467
“In my humble opinion: She has a chiyuv to forget about him.”
Which does not take away from her chiyuv to try not to think badly of him. And it certainly does not take away from everyone else’s chiyuv not to speak bad of him.November 2, 2016 3:34 am at 3:34 am #1189468HespanMember
I recently heard about a guy who was dating a girl and it was also going really well and they were very close to getting engaged. The problem was that the guy had some emotional issues, which he was getting help for, however his mentor/therapist/Rabbi or whatever told him that in the emotional state he was in at the time it would not be a good idea for him to get married right then. As hard as it was he had to break it off.
In that case I believe the girl knew about the issues, but if your guy was in a similar situation it’s understandable that he wouldn’t want to tell you the reason. It could hurt his future possibilities. And I’m sure it hurt him as well to break it off since he seemed to really like you. I’m really sorry you went through this and I hope you find true bashert very soon!November 2, 2016 7:55 am at 7:55 am #1189469
I have been accused of Motzi Shem Ra for posting in this thread that the guy may have commitment issues and the YWN has censored all of my posts defending my action. The reason I believe that it’s not Motzi Shem Ra are : a) Neither I nor anyone else know who the guy is, which is a requirement for Motzi Shem Ra b) In order to be guilty of Motzi Shem Ra it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the comments are false. The mere fact that there maybe other reason for the guy actions does not prove that my comment was false. C) There has to be intent to defame the victim, in this case I was only trying to explain his actions.
Is the YWN guilty of media bias and libel? Only the courts will tell.November 2, 2016 11:14 am at 11:14 am #1189470
Thank you for all the answers. I know that all these are just speculations and we will never know the real answer, but after re-reading his last messages before breaking up and reading what you wrote here, I think he really love(d) me and only broke up because he wanted to protect me from something. So I don’t think anything bad about him.November 2, 2016 2:05 pm at 2:05 pm #1189471
1. They posted your comment despite the fact that it was Motzi Shem Ra, so you can’t claim media bias (at least not in the direction that you want to claim it.)
2. They also posted your above post even though it contains sheker about the Torah (as explained in #3).
3. Regarding point B, this is completely false. The halacha is that something is considered Motzi Shem Ra unless it is CLEARLY TRUE. You are not allowed to say anything negative about someone unless you know that it is definitely true. You had stated in your original post that the guy was not dating for marriage. You DO NOT know that; hence, it is motzi shem ra. I provided the source for this Halacha above. You do not have a source for your statement.
4. Regarding point a, I already pointed out to you that there is at least one person who knows who the guy is.
5. There is absolutely no source for point c.November 2, 2016 3:05 pm at 3:05 pm #1189472YW Moderator-💯Moderator
Abba_S: You are conflating the laws of Motzi Shem in Shmirah Halashon with the Pesukim which refer to a husband leveling specific false charges against his wife.November 2, 2016 3:18 pm at 3:18 pm #1189473dovrosenbaumParticipant
I don’t know who either of you are, but this just wasn’t meant to be. Think of it this way, as a rachmanus. There’s a lo sa’aseh of innui hager. If you fail to honor a ger and love them and be kind to them, you’re being over on an issur d’oraisa. So if you married this guy, chances are that you would have had milchamos and you would have been over on this lo sa’aseh. So it was a rachmanus for you.November 2, 2016 3:49 pm at 3:49 pm #1189474
dovrosenbaum – I have to say I laughed when I read your post! That’s a really unique way of looking at it. Well, I hope it helps in any event.November 2, 2016 4:37 pm at 4:37 pm #1189475
Just to indulge in technicalities:
Regarding point #1, he’s probably correct, since neither him nor us know who and what. And as far as the girl who does, well she KNOWS not to believe nor trust someone who cannot possibly know anything.
Point #2 he’s probably also right, technically. He’s saying HE cannot be accused of motzi shem ra if it’s not certain there’s a falsehood. (no, of course he is NOT PERMITTED, but he cannot be ACCUSED of motzi shem ra.)
Point #3 is wrong, as you wrote, as stated openly in the Chofetz Chaim.November 2, 2016 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm #1189476dovrosenbaumParticipant
I know a rav who told a girl on a very high madreiga that she should marry a ger because she gets extra schar for having his children, cooking and cleaning for him, etc., but that if she fails to be a good wife, than she gets onesh.November 2, 2016 11:27 pm at 11:27 pm #1189477
LF – 1. As pointed out before, you are wrong about point #1. Perhaps if one could be CERTAIN that she wouldn’t believe him, you would have a point. But in this case, there is absolutely no reason to be certain that she would not believe him. Why shouldn’t she believe him?
In any case, he obviously thinks that she could believe him – the whole reason he said this was in order to convince her that it’s true and get her to believe that it’s true!!! So he can’t then turn around and say that he doesn’t really think she will believe him anyhow!
2.You are confusing things. I think that what you are trying to say is that if I am not certain that he is speaking Motzi Shem Ra, I can’t accuse him of speaking Motzi Shem Ra. Even if that is true, that is not the case here. The doubt does not lie in whether or not he is speaking Motzi Shem Ra.
If someone says something that he does not know with certainty that it is true, he has been over on Motzi Shem Ra EVEN if we find out afterwards that it happened to have been true. The fact that he said something that he did not know was certainly true makes it Motzi Shem Ra whether or not it was in fact true.
So he is definitely over on Motzi Shem Ra and I have an OBLIGATION to tell him so (see my Shmiras Halashon thread).
I hope that was clear. I know the grammer was a bit off, but my logic wasn’t. Let me know if you understand what I wrote or not.November 2, 2016 11:47 pm at 11:47 pm #1189478
“Thank you for all the answers. I know that all these are just speculations and we will never know the real answer, but after re-reading his last messages before breaking up and reading what you wrote here, I think he really love(d) me and only broke up because he wanted to protect me from something. So I don’t think anything bad about him.”
Lavender, great attitude! Sorry that your posts got a little lost here in the off-topic disscussion.November 3, 2016 9:15 am at 9:15 am #1189479
Just to indulge in technicalities:
Regarding point #1, he’s probably correct, since neither him nor us know who and what. And as far as the girl who does, well she KNOWS not to believe nor trust someone who cannot possibly know anything. The Heading of this thread clearly states “Guys Please Explain This Behavior and because I gave a possible explanation, I am being vilified by the posters. Is it right?
Point #2 he’s probably also right, technically. He’s saying HE cannot be accused of motzi shem ra if it’s not certain there’s a falsehood. (no, of course he is NOT PERMITTED, but he cannot be ACCUSED of motzi shem ra.) If your standards for motzi shem ra are that you have to know 100% that what is being told is true. Then how are you allowed to ask Shidduch reference questions such as is the boy bipolar. As the only one who would know that is beside the patient and perhaps his guardian is is a medical professional who will lose their license to practice if they reveal any medical information to anyone else. If you asked a neighbor if the boy has mental issues by your standards you would be guilty of motzi shem ra.
Point #3 is wrong, as you wrote, as stated openly in the Chofetz Chaim. While technically you could be guilty of motzi shem ra even if you had no intent, you can not be punished in this world for a corporal or capital offense as you need to be warned to show clear intent. Since most of the prohibitions are negative commandment which are punishable offensives only if intent is shown.
If however you use my standards which is, if it is true it is Loshon Horah and if it’s false it’s Motzi Hhem Ra then intent maybe a factor. As R” Silber ZTL states in Oz Nidbaro vol 14 question 60, in a case of Loshon Horah where there is a Toeeles (reason) for Loshon Horah and would be permitted , if the intent is to embarrass or make fun of the victim them it is not permitted.November 3, 2016 1:53 pm at 1:53 pm #1189480mommamia22Participant
I think you are simplifying the rules about how to treat a convert.
Obviously, if a ger behaves poorly towards you, you don’t have to become a shmata and take it.
I believe the halacha is that a person is not allowed to remind a ger of his past and his family/religion of origin. That is what is considered Inui/suffering.
To say it is forbidden to have machlokes means that it would absolutely be impossible to be a spouse to such a person because every marriage has some machlokes. It’s the desire and willingness to work through them that maintains marriage.November 3, 2016 2:45 pm at 2:45 pm #1189481It is Time for TruthParticipant
Maybe he was interested ,but less than you wish to believe
“Love for a male, but a thing apart
for a woman it’s her whole existence”November 3, 2016 6:14 pm at 6:14 pm #1189482
That’s quite a cute “Chiddush” of yours, that someone who is not sure if it’s true or not is automatically being motzi shem ra, even if it turns out it was true. I don’t think that’s the case. If you’re so sure, kindly back it up – I’d like to know.
L’toeles in itself does not make it permissible, there needs to be 5 – 7 conditions met.November 3, 2016 10:57 pm at 10:57 pm #1189483
Even if I am guilty of Motzi Shem Ra it can be atoned by Repentance and or Yom Kippur and or death and will have a portion in the next world. However those who embarrass their friends loses their portion in the next world. Accusing someone of Motzi Shem Ra surely qualifies as one who whitens his friends face (embarrassing a friend) and so loses their place in the next world. There are those who hold their portion is forfeited to the victim, while others hold that it reverts back to Hashem. In any case is accussing someone of Motzi Shem Ra worth the risk of losing you portion to the next world?
Little Froggie- L’toeles in itself does not make it permissible, there needs to be 5 – 7 conditions met. What are the conditions?
Lavender – I am happy that you are moving on and are not bitter about this. I hope and pray that you find your true love quickly.November 4, 2016 12:27 am at 12:27 am #1189484
Abba_S: I did say (write) that for the first reason nothing at all wrong was done. I still hold by that. If it would be, Mods would have deleted it!!! They know what they’re doing!!
The conditions for permissible Lashon Hara (bein adam lamakom)
2)Examine if it’s really wrong
3)Not to talk out of hatred
4)Not to exaggerate the son
5)Not to speak secretly
Conditions of Lashon Hara (bein adam lachaveiro)
2)Research thoroughly if its really wrong
3)Rebuke the aggressor first
4)Intentions for benefit – ??????
5)Have no other option
6)Know that bigger damage to aggressor won’t result
7)Don’t exaggerate the report
Ach!! those good days… I had all the halachos written up, such an orderly fashion, on one paper! One side all hilchos lashon hara, the other side hilchos rechilus. I used to know something… Oh… those were the days…November 4, 2016 2:24 am at 2:24 am #1189485
Little Froggie – Please for give me if I come across as criticizing you. it has been 30-40 years since I was in Bais Medrash and learning the laws of loshon horah. Now a days I learn the Daf and work and go to a gemarah shuir at night.
The conditions for permissible Lashon Hara (bein adam lamakom)
1)Firsthand knowledge Does this mean you actually saw or heard it, or is hearsay included.
2)Examine if it’s really wrong Does this mean you analyze the case and review the laws to insure that a sin has been committed.
3)Not to talk out of hatred This is intent which I think you wrote Point #3 is wrong, as you wrote, as stated openly in the Chofetz Chaim. It should also be noted that there shouldn’t be intent to embarrass or make fun of the person you are talking about.
4)Not to exaggerate the son Is this only regarding son but it’s okay to exaggerate about daughters? In my opinion an exaggeration that is sociable acceptable such as he is one of the best boys in the yeshiva is okay while he knows the whole perek of gemorah when he doesn’t isn’t.
5)Not to speak secretly I don’t understand. You are suppose to publicize it, that is tattletaling which is also prohibited.
Please Note I am not trying to criticize anyone but merely to learn the laws and the comments are solely my opinion and should not be viewed as Halochah Lemisah, as legal according to Jewish law.November 4, 2016 2:37 am at 2:37 am #1189486Mussar47Member
Lavender, my heart goes out to you. I know it’s hard to believe but time is a healer and the day will come when you will really feel there was a reason why this person had to enter your life and maybe there is something positive you will glean from this relationship that will help you when your true zivug comes along.
You sound like a warm and caring person and with Hashem’s help you will find the right man who will want to, and have the ability to share his life with you.November 4, 2016 3:28 am at 3:28 am #1189487
What a misspelling. #4 should read “Not to exaggerate the sin”
I apologize, I’m at times so careless at my writing…November 4, 2016 3:39 am at 3:39 am #1189488
You’re so lucky you get to learn each day. I hardly know which way to operate a Gemarah!!
#1) Must be firsthand knowledge.
#2) Exactly as you wrote
#3) Also as you wrote – that is the ????? condition
#4) Read my apology above!!
#5) The condition to do it openly – because otherwise people would suspect you’re only gossiping. People are going to suspect you, and also the objective won’t be realized – for others to take note and do what’s necessary.
Note – these are all for sins of bein adam lamakom, as explained earlier.November 4, 2016 4:11 am at 4:11 am #1189489
Abba_S & Little Froggie – as Little Froggie pointed out, it has to be first-hand knowledge. You have to KNOW that it is true. That is why the fact that it might turn out to be true does not make it permissible. The fact is that you still said something that you did not KNOW to be true, and certainly did not have first-hand knowledge of.
Abba_S: I’m sorry that you feel hurt that I accused you of Motzi Shem Ra. I did so only because according to halacha, on is REQUIRED to tell someone if they are speaking Loshon Hora or Motzi Shem Ra and to try to stop them. One does not lose his cheilik in Olam Haba for doing so, and in fact I would have gone to gehinnom if I didn’t do so. I also was trying to spare you from gehinnom.
Again, I apologize if I didn’t express myself the best way possible. But I did have a chiyuv to say something.November 4, 2016 4:18 am at 4:18 am #1189490
Based on the previous rules, it is clear that upon hearing loshon hora, one should promptly interrupt the speaker and reprimand him for his words. In a case where doing so would casue the speaker embarrassment (i.e. others are present), it is preferable that one tactfully change the subject, thus preventing the further speaking of loshon hora, and offer reproof later (in private).” (“Chofetz Chaim, A Lesson A Day” by Rav Shimon Finkelman and Rav Yitzchak Berkowitz, Day 95).
As seen from the above quote, if someone is speaking LH, you are obligated to reprimand him, and if it’s impossible to do it privately, it must be done publicly.November 4, 2016 4:28 am at 4:28 am #1189491
The fact that a situation falls under one of the previously listed categories does not necessarily mean that discussing it constitutes constructive speech. Several conditions must be met.
The first set of conditions deals with verification of facts. It is absolutely forbidden to make any critical statement about a person on the basis of informations obtained through hearsay. Only through first-hand information may one assume tht a Jew’s character or behavior is wanting.
Even if one has witnessed seemingly unacceptable behavior, he must not hastily pass judgment on has occurred. An incident taken out of context can be terrible misleading, both as a reflection on an individual’s character as well as in determining who is right in a dispute between parties. Circumstances must be carefully investigated before one can be sure that he understands a situation correctly.”
(ibid, Day 43).November 4, 2016 4:30 am at 4:30 am #1189492
A Last Resort (continuation of pre-conditions for Loshon Hora for toeles)
“If, in addition to personal reproof, any other option exists that could preclude the necessity to speak negatively of someone, it must be pursued. Negative speech, even for a constructive purpose, is lowly, if it can be avoided.” (ibid, Day 46).November 4, 2016 4:44 am at 4:44 am #1189493
Abba, I understand that you were trying to help Lavendar. The basic idea that you were trying to convey was a good and constructive one. But I
think that according to Halacha (as per the above sources) it should have been phrased slightly differently:
1. You stated it as a fact (that he had commitment problems). This is not a fact; it is merely a possibility and should have been stated as a possibility (if mentioned at all).
2. You concluded that he must have been dating not for marriage. There was no basis for such an assumption whatsoever. While the fact that he broke up with her could possibly demostrate commitment issues, there is no basis for assuming that he was dating not for marriage purposes, and that is a very bad thing to assume or say about someone.
3. Even when L”H is allowed for constructive purposes, one of the conditions (as stated above) is that there is NO other way to accomplish the same thing. In this case, there were other ways to do so. In my post to Lavender, I mentioned many possibilities for his actions while attempting to paint the least negative picture of the boy possible.
While I mentioned that his breaking up with her was probably about him and not about her, I made sure to: a) make it clear that I don’t know & b) make it clear that this doesn’t necessarily reflect negatively on him either, as there can be many reasons for his behavior.November 4, 2016 5:18 am at 5:18 am #1189494
LF- I just figured out what you meant when you said that it’s my own chiddush that if MSR turns out to be true, it’s still MSR. I wasn’t being medayek in my loshon – what I really meant was that it still doesn’t fullfill the prerequisite for Loshon Hora l’toeles if the person speaking didn’t know that it was definitely true.
One of the prerequisites for Loshon Hora l’toeles is that you have to know that it’s true. That means that Motzi Shem Ra can never be l’toeles, so I was using the term Motzi Shem Ra instead of “loshon hora that you don’t know is defintely true”. But technically, they may not necessarily be the same thing.
My point was that if you say something that you do not know is definitely true, then even if it turns out to be true, you still did an aveira. Technically, it’s possible that the aveira is not called Motzi Shem Ra but rather Loshon Hora not l’toeles. So I may have used the wrong term (although I’m still not sure about that), but my point remains.
Thank you for pointing out my (possible) error in loshon.November 4, 2016 5:20 am at 5:20 am #1189495
In general, I do make a point of trying to refer to loshon hora as motzi shem ra. This was based on a chiddush from my friend’s younger brother (who was around 14 at the time). I never heard this from anyone else, but it makes sense to me. He pointed out that you should always refer to LH as MSR, since you are not allowed to be “mekabel” it, so that means that you must think of it as MSR.
Not being “mekabel” LH is probably the hardest aspect of shmiras halashon, so it seemed to me to be a good aitza as a way of ensuring that you are not mekabel it.November 4, 2016 10:16 am at 10:16 am #1189496
“Regarding point #1, he’s probably correct, since neither him nor us know who and what. And as far as the girl who does, well she KNOWS not to believe nor trust someone who cannot possibly know anything. The Heading of this thread clearly states “Guys Please Explain This Behavior and because I gave a possible explanation, I am being vilified by the posters. Is it right?”
1. The fact that someone asked a question doesn’t necessarily mean that you are allowed to answer it if the answer will contain Motzi Sheim Ra or Loshon Hora. For example, if Reuven asks Shimon if his teacher is nice, it is assur for Shimon to say, “no”, and the fact that Reuven asked him does not make it okay.
2. As I pointed out above, there were ways to answer the question without saying anything negative about the person.November 4, 2016 10:22 am at 10:22 am #1189497
“Point #2 he’s probably also right, technically. He’s saying HE cannot be accused of motzi shem ra if it’s not certain there’s a falsehood. (no, of course he is NOT PERMITTED, but he cannot be ACCUSED of motzi shem ra.) If your standards for motzi shem ra are that you have to know 100% that what is being told is true. Then how are you allowed to ask Shidduch reference questions such as is the boy bipolar. As the only one who would know that is beside the patient and perhaps his guardian is is a medical professional who will lose their license to practice if they reveal any medical information to anyone else. If you asked a neighbor if the boy has mental issues by your standards you would be guilty of motzi shem ra.”
Answer: A similar case to ours would be the following: Reuven asks Shimon to tell him about Levi. Shimon never met Levi, but Reuven knows Levi very well. The only thing that Shimon knows about Levi is what Reuven has told Shimon about Levi. The only thing that Reuven has ever told Shimon about Levi is that one day he was in a bad mood and another day he was in a good mood. So Reuven tells Shimon that Levi definitely has bipolar.
Yes, that is completely assur.November 4, 2016 10:48 am at 10:48 am #1189498Shopping613 🌠Participant
Hi Lavender I was just thinking of something I heard recently that I really took to heart.
“If I understood everything Hashem did, than he would have a brain of 18 year old girl”
It is somewhat comforting. Just insert your age and gender.November 4, 2016 2:23 pm at 2:23 pm #1189499
OK, I’m going to try this once more (and then once more..)
I can’t possibly be saying Lashon Hara (or motzi shem ra, whatever you choose to call it) if I don’t know who I’m talking about. As long as I’m not saying anything derogatory “those people are crazy”, there’s no forbidden speech on saying possible theories why someone did what SOMEONE ELSE said he did. And there’s ABSOLUTELY NOTHING NOT to be mekabel.
The one who knows anything, knows what she knows. She knows the facts. And he’s offering possible reasons. Yes, she’s allowed to believe that Abba_s wrote it. And she’s of course allowed to think along those lines. Is she allowed to take it for certain? a) Why in the world would she? b) What’s the difference to her, she’s moving on in life.
And, in your case too, it’s probably permitted. For the same reasons I stated.
and about your friend’s 14 yr old chiddush – no, your not allowed to think it’s motzi shem ra, because you’re suspecting another Jew. Not being Mekabel means just that. Don’t believe (for certain). Nothing more – noting less. Don’t take it for granted.
(which by rote, these aforementioned cases are ALREADY excluded, as explained)
To sum: There is NO ISSUR on offering theories to the report of another anonymous persons actions, whatsoever.
- The topic ‘He broke up and I don't understand why? Guys, can you explain this behavior?’ is closed to new replies.