'Distance yourself from a false word"
From our childhood, we indulge in a world of imagining, until that which we imagine becomes our reality….
Our Parasha this coming Shabbat is replete with Mitzvot, amongst them the commandment: (23:7)’ Distance yourself from a false word’.
Rav Elya Lopian comments: It is written’ in our Parasha, ‘distance yourself from a false word’: we think that ‘a false word’ alludes to someone who speaks the opposite of truth - but this is not what it means.
See what our Sages say (Shavuot 31.): ‘From where do we learn that when two come to be judged, one dressed in rags, and the other dressed in expensive finery, the latter is told: dress like your adversary, or dress him like yourself?
We learn this from:’Distance yourself from a false word - the Gemara relates a case which came before Rabba Bar Rav Huna, who so ordered the well-dressed litigant.
We wonder at this: does this mean that the Bet Din is not permitted to adjudicate between a rich man and a poor man? Have we not already been adjured - in the immediately preceding passuk, in our Parasha (23:6): ’Do not pervert the judgement of your destitute person in his grievance’ ?
So clearly there is a right - indeed a Mitzvah -to adjudicate between litigants.
What, therefore, is all the tumult here, if the rich man wears his customary fancy attire, in the Bet Din? further, how does the situation change when, momentarily, they go out of the Bet Din - and re-enter clothed in the same attire - either both in finery, or both in rags? Will the dayanim forget that this one is rich, and the other one is poor?
We are therefore compelled to say - that their knowledge, has not altered, and from that which they know, there is no fear that they will favor one over the other, as they were chosen as dayanim - and were adjured then not to pervert judgement - but, that they are influenced by what their eye sees - one like this, and the other, like that - and if they are both dressed identically, the eye will no longer see ‘a rich man’, and ‘a poor man’ - but only two ‘equals.
From here we learn an awesome foundation: that that which our mind knows with clarity, is not as the eye sees, and, because of this, the main cause of concern for favoritism in judgement, depends on what the eye sees - and not what our mind perceives, the Torah teaching us how great is our nature, even against our intellect!
Further, even though the dayan is a true judge, and kasher - nevertheless, his eye can mislead hin, as it sees a ‘rich man’, and a ‘poor man’- and this, despite he having been adjured - and being fearful of the admonition not to pervert judgement - he still may err, and think that he is not perverting judgement - when the truth is the opposite.
This is what Rashi expounds - on the Gemara - ‘do not cause us to favor you’.
If the dayanim do not do so - they have fallen into falsehood, and transgressed the Mitzvah: ’Distance yourself from a false word’, should their eyes see these two litigants - so powerful is the nature of all men.
Rav Moshe Sternbuch - on this same gemara - adds: From it, we learn that the prohibition is not limited to uttering falsehood, or the like, from one’s mouth, as the affluent litigant has not committed any falsehood - but, as by the nature of things, his affluent finery makes a greater impression than the poor man clothed in rags, and, because of this, the dayan is liable to err, and to transgress the commandment: ‘Distance yourself from a false word’.’
Rav Yehuda Leib Chasman, elucidates on the mussar of this gemara, commenting: The prohibition of our passuk, is not only from actual falsehood, but also from falsehood which comes from our ‘deceitful’ eyes, which mislead man in his path in life.
Knowing this should cause every one of us, to tremble - on the one hand - from the great danger in which it places us, yet - on the other hand - instill in us great joy, from having merited that the Torah has ‘given us eyes’, to warn us from this peril. This admonition is not only pertinent to dayanim, but to each of us - that we not judge others, and honor them, according to their attire or standing, but relate to each person according to their true merits.
Sforno comments succintly:’Distance yourself from a false word:’From anything which falsehood can devolve, as our Sages say: (Avot 1:9)’Be careful in your words, lest through them others will learn to lie'.
Haktav VeHakabala notes: The Torah here chose its words - and did not say:’ Do not speak falsehood’ - because there is no transgression more prevalent than speaking untruth; indeed, there is no man who always speaks truth - therefore the Torah chose this language, so that we additionally distance ourselves from all falsehood.
Rav Chaim Friedlander brings the exposition of Sforno, and comments: He emphasizes that the Torah warns ‘from a matter’ of falsehood, ‘distance’, meaning: even from something which has a זיקה: a link to falsehood - even if there is no falsehood in it, in itself - ‘distance’ yourself.
We do not find a warning like this - to ‘distance’, with regard to other transgressions in the Torah (except regarding forbidden relationships ).
From this, we need to understand the severity of falsehood, that it is a dangerous attribute as it attracts the heart of man, and which, therefore the Torah warns is to distance from - and from anything that has a link to it - and to make truth the basis of our Avodat Hashem.
Rabbeinu Yona - in ‘Sha’arei Teshuva’ - refers to those who adopt falsehood, and to whom ‘it is a foundation of their soul’ - not merely one of the prohibitions in the Torah, but one of ‘the foundations of the soul’.
To us, the matter of ‘truth’ and ‘falsehood’ may appear to relate only to true or false words, but - as we shall learn - they are deep matters, as words are the outpouring of the innermost part of man.
The Rav refers, not only to falsehood uttered for benefit, but also to falsehood uttered without intent of benefit or advantage, and even when no damage to others results from the falsehood.
Why does this person lie? Because he simply loves to utter falsehood, as we shall explain.
Expounds the Rav:’even though he gains no benefit, nor causes harm to others, you might think that his punishment will be light, yet great is his punishment because of his love of falsehood.
A person who lies for material benefit or advantage, if only to find favor in the eyes of others, has nevertheless committed a serious misdeed; on the other hand, we cannot describe him as ‘loving untruth’, but that he is not constrained from lying for benefit to himself; great is his punishment, because he loves untruth.‘What is the enjoyment in loving untruth, when it is not a means to an end, but is, as it were, an end in itself?
The answer is, that from our childhood, we indulge in a world of imagining, until that which we imagine becomes our reality.
Whilst most adults ‘leave’ this childish world, there are those who never leave this world, and their whole enjoyment is to continue to ‘live’ in their imaginary world, and to make it to their reality - reinforced by the plethora of outside forces, such as movies and fictional books.
Most people are embarrassed to relate their imagined thoughts, but there are some who are not so constrained, and relish in relating their imagined false illusions, without any thought of benefit - solely for their own amusement out of their love of falsehood, their pleasure being that, thereby, they escape from the real world, to the world of untruth and imagination.
Rabbeinu Yona adds, that those who, at the outset, tell untruths without gaining any benefit, or causing damage to others, but solely out of the pleasure they derive from their his love of untruth, in the end, will come to worse deeds - even to giving false testimony against his fellows:
In general, people do not dare to give false testimony in a Bet Din, out of fear and shame of doing so; but one who, because of his love of falsehood is not constrained from uttering lies - indulging in his imagination - has no halter on his mouth, to only utter truth, and, his destiny is that even before a Bet Din he will not restrain himself from false testimony, and not feel any pangs of conscience from so doing.
People inadvertenfly utter falsehoods, because they are not careful to ensure that what they relate that they heard, is as was told to them.
This is not intentional, nor due to a desire to inaccurately relate what was said to them, but a person who is not accustomed to distance himself from falsehood, is also likely to be careless in what he hears - and in what he sees - as he only hears - or sees - things in a general sense - בערך: approximately.
Proof of this - as to how we are not careful as to what we see - can be seen from a test, where several people were tested on what they had ‘seen’, and each recalled the scene differently, yet each one was adamant that that was what he saw.
Clearly none of them wanted to lie but their ‘general’ attention to what they had seen, prevented them from accurately ‘seeing’ in detail.
This - we can conclude - is the nature of man - even when they do not knowingly tell untruths, they are nevertheless liable to distort details, if they are not careful to distance themselves from untruth, and do not cleave to truth.
To them, ‘a half truth’ is sufficient, though if it be untrue, it is false - though the utterer may be unaware of how far he is from being ‘a man of truth’.
A man of truth’ is one who is careful to delve and seeks to know all the details of things; and, if he does not know clearly, he says: ‘ I don’t know’.
Not for nothing did the Torah adjure against falsehood, in the language:’Distance yourself from falsehood’, as falsehood is a communal disease - most of our conversations are as to mundane matters, each person feeling the need to ‘contribute’ his piece, lest he be thought a fool; and each one adds his penny’s worth, to what has been said, not always being careful as to the veracity of his words.
Thereby, opinions and hypotheses are easily ‘transformed’ into facts.
This is why the Torah warns us: ‘From falsehood, distance yourself’, as the Sforno expounds: ’From anything that can lead to falsehood’ - not to come near to anything which has an זיקה: affinity, to falsehood.
‘Just as there is a concept of ‘love of falsehood’ - as we have said, not out of an intention to harm others - so too, as against it, there is ‘love of truth’.
‘We are to love truth, and we should have an innate aversion to all falsehood, be it in as to what we see, hear or utters, as we will thereby merit to be a ‘man of truth’.’
A parting gem from Rav Avigdor Nebenzahl: A wise man asked a beautiful question’: Why was it that specifically as a result of transgression - that of Adam HaRishon - man became one who ‘knew good and bad’?
Could it be that Hashem created man, as stupid, and wished that he remain in that state, and only because he transgressed was he ‘rewarded’, and gained understanding between ‘good’ and ‘bad’?
Rambam answers: there is no doubt that man ‘lost’ by his transgression, as clearly before it, he was at a higher level, as he instinctively understood the concepts of ‘truth’ and ‘falsehood’ - after his transgression, these concepts were replaced , in his eyes, by ‘good’ and ‘bad’.
In the sublime state in which he was created, man could perceive what was absolutely true, and what was absolutely false.
His sinful eating, caused these concepts to become blurred. As a result, in his lower state, his intellect can differentiate only between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ - between what is ‘worth’ doing, and what is not worth doing.
This is what Kohelet laments: (7:29) ’See, only this one have I found, for G-d made man straight’- able to distinguish between absolute ‘truth’ and ‘falsehood’, ‘,but they sought many intrigues’ - man replaced these, for considerations of what is ‘worthwhile’ to do, and what is ‘not worthwhile to do’.
The difference is enormous, because not always what appears ‘worthwhile’ to do, is also the absolute truth; what appears ‘worthwhile’ turns out often, as ‘false’, in the end of the matter.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/404170
No comments:
Post a Comment