LEV582 At times, one who listens to lashon hara or rechilus transgresses the positive commandment of הֹוכֵ֤חַ תֹּוכִ֙יחַ֙, “You shall surely rebuke” (Vayikra 19:17). For example, if one sees that someone is starting to speak disparagingly about another person, and he knows that his words will have an influence on the speaker--or even if he thinks that there is a chance that his rebuke may be effective—then halachah requires him to rebuke the speaker so that he will not carry on with his sin. Accordingly, if he allows the speaker to finish his derogatory account about the other person, he certainly violates his positive commandment. (Even if one resolves while listening, to rebuke the speaker after he finishes his story, he is still violating halacha. Would a person watch his fellow Jew eat pork, Heaven forbid, and allow him to finish eating, while resolving to rebuke him afterward? According to halachah, one is certainly obligated to reprove the person immediately, for perhaps he will listen to him and stop eating. By doing so he can spare the person from several transgressions, for each and every k’zayis he eats is considered a separate transgression. The same is true with regard to speaking lashon hara, because each derogatory statement that a person makes is considered a separate transgression. An exception can be made, however, in the following cases. If one realizes that if he allows the speaker to finish his story, he will then be able to use the story itself to show the other listeners that the speaker was merely propagating false rumors; or if halachah a requires one to allow the speaker to finish because he is relating information that may be relevant to the listener; then the listener may allow the speaker to finish … but if one realizes that the speaker is just mocking or ridiculing the other person, then it is definitely a great mitzvah for the listener to swiftly rebuke the speaker and stop him from continuing his disparaging remarks.)

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV586 If one sees that a person has habituated himself to these bad middos, then rather than disparage him before others, he should rebuke him directly and explain to him the severity of the prohibitions involved. In doing so, he would fulfill the positive commandment of as it says הֹוכֵ֤חַ תֹּוכִ֙יחַ֙ אֶת־עֲמִיתֶ֔ךָ וְלֹא־תִשָּׂ֥א עָלָ֖יו חֵֽטְא׃, “You shall surely rebuke your fellow, but do not bear a sin because of him [by shaming him]” (Vayikra 19:17) and might cause the person to admit that his behavior is wrong. Until then, however, the person presumably believes that his contact is correct, as that pasuk says כָּֽל־דֶּרֶךְ־אִ֭ישׁ יָשָׁ֣ר בְּעֵינָ֑יו, “Every person's conduct is straight in his eyes” (Mishlei 21:2). Therefore, it is forbidden to classify him as a rasha because of his behavior and go around disparaging him. Nevertheless, if one sees that a particular person displays a bad middah such as arrogance, anger, or the like; or if the person neglects Torah study, or engages in similarly inappropriate behavior; then it is proper to inform one's child or students of this and caution them not to associate with that person, so that they should not learn from his ways. This is permitted because the Torah’s prohibition of speaking lashon hora even when the information is true applies only if one's intent is to disparage the other person and derive pleasure from disgracing him. But if one's intent in speaking is to prevent another person from emulating the person's behavior, then it is obviously permitted to share the information, and doing so is also considered a mitzvah. However, it would seem that in such a case or in any similar scenario it is a mitzvah for the speaker to explain the reason that he is speaking negatively about the other person, so that his words do not cause the listener to mistakenly extend this heter and permit lashon hara that is unwarranted. By explaining the reason for his negative words, the speaker would also prevent the listener from being puzzled by the speaker's seemingly contradictory behavior. At times, the speaker tells him that it is forbidden to speak lashon hara even if the information is true--as we explain in section 9 that it is a great mitzvah to prevent one’s young children from violating this transgression--yet now he himself is speaking with lashon hara!

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV591 See [[LEV456]] Leviticus 19:15 judge SEFER 106-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV618 However, if one realizes that the person who sinned is a deliberate scoffer who hates those who reproach him--as it says: אַל־תֹּ֣וכַח לֵ֭ץ פֶּן־יִשְׂנָאֶ֑ךָּ, “Do not rebuke a scoffer, lest he hate you” (Mishlei 9:8)--and he knows his rebuke will definitely have no effect on the person, the halakhah is different. Since people like these are likely to repeat their wrongdoings, it is possible that this person may sin again. Therefore, it is preferable to inform the dayanim of the city of the incident so that they can reprimand him for his sin and prevent him from transgressing in the future. This halachah would seem to apply to informing the sinner’s relatives, as well, if their words will have an influence on the sinner. However, the speaker’s intent in conveying the information must be entirely l’shem Shamayim, to uphold Hashem’s honor, and must not stem from hatred that he harbors toward the sinner for other reasons. Likewise, those who reprimand the sinner should make sure to do so discreetly and not embarrass him publicly, as it says הֹוכֵ֤חַ תֹּוכִ֙יחַ֙ אֶת־עֲמִיתֶ֔ךָ וְלֹא־תִשָּׂ֥א עָלָ֖יו חֵֽטְא׃, “You shall surely rebuke your fellow, but do not bear a sin because of him [by shaming him]" (Vayikra 19:17). All this applies only if two people saw the transgression. However, if there was only one witness, he should not testify in beis din about the person’s wrongdoing. In such a case, his testimony is pointless, for beis din cannot rely on what he says, as it says: לֹֽא־יָקוּם֩ עֵ֨ד אֶחָ֜ד בְּאִ֗ישׁ לְכָל־עָוֹן֙ וּלְכָל־חַטָּ֔את “A single witness shall not testify about a person regarding any sin or wrongdoing” (Devarim 19:15). Therefore, if he does testify about the other person, he will be labeled a motzi shem ra (slanderer). Our Sages said that one who testifies as a single witness about his fellow who has sinned [is subject to the punishment of lashes on a Rabbinical level]. Moreover, as all say (Pesachim 113b) that there are three people whom Hashem hates, one of whom is someone who sees his fellow commit an immoral act and testifies as a single witness against him. One may, however, inform his own rebbe or confidant about the matter privately if he knows that the rebbe or confident will believe him as though he heard the information from two people. It is then permissible for the rebbe to hate the offender and refrain from associating with him until he learns that the person mended his wrongful ways. Nevertheless, it is forbidden for the rebbe to inform others about the matter, just as it would be forbidden for him to inform others of what he saw had he witnessed the incident himself, as we explained in halakhah four.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV621 One who disparages another person before others to the extent that he causes the person’s face to change color from shame also violate the prohibition of לֹא־תִשָּׂ֥א עָלָ֖יו חֵֽטְא׃, “Do not bear a sin because of him" (Vayikra 19:17). With this prohibition, the Torah forbids one to humiliate another Jew even when he is rebuking him privately, meaning that one should not rebuke another person in a harsh manner that will cause him to be embarrassed. It is forbidden all the more to shame another person when one is not fulfilling the mitzvah of giving rebuke, or to embarrass him before others. The prohibition to embarrass someone applies even in private. However, if one humiliates another person publicly, then [his sin is far more severe. Indeed,] Chazal excised such a person from the World to Come, as they said, “One who humiliates his friend in public has no share in the World to Come.”

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV622 See [[DEUT1507]] Deuteronomy 27:24 secret SEFER 98

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV629 Here is another story. Rob is a Mussar student who found himself caught in one of the most primitive of situations, one that is so ancient the Torah actually warns us against it directly. "Do not bear a grudge," we are told [this verse]. But how could he not? Eighteen years ago, he and his wife were blessed with the birth of their first child, a son. They planned the circumcision ceremony for the eighth day, as Jewish law dictates, and they happily invited all their friends and family to the celebration. As it happens, Rob's father did not get along with Rob's wife's parents and so, when he called his father to invite him to the ceremony, Rob added, "And, Dad, please make an effort to be civil to Sarah's parents." Well, Rob's father took such offense at this comment that he did not attend the circumcision of his own grandson. Not only that, he stopped speaking to his son, who was only too happy to reciprocate the favor. As a result, father and son did not speak for eighteen years. In that time, Rob's father never met his own grandson. One of the soul-traits Rob worked on in his Mussar practice was forgiveness, which, one might have expected, would bring up the deep grudge he was bearing and provide an opening for healing. But that actually wasn't what happened. When he thought of forgiving, the grievance seemed, on a deep inner level, too unjust. Wasn't his father responsible, after all? While forgiveness didn't actually create illumination for Rob, when the soul-trait of generosity came into focus, a light went on. Confronted by the Mussar understanding of generosity, which entails stretching yourself to give beyond the boundaries of the comfortable or usual, a new course opened up before him. Rob wrote a letter to his father as an act of conscious generosity. And his father wrote back. Rob and his wife had been married for twenty-five years by this time and decided to celebrate with a party. Rob invited his father, who lived in a distant state. His father came and met his grandson for the first time. Mussar had opened the way to healing, inwardly and in a relationship. It had provided Rob with the tools he needed to free himself from the dictates of his primitive, grudge-bearing nature and to entrust the governance of his life to his higher self, the soul, which seeks both sh'lemut (wholeness) and shalom (peace). This was the fruit of his Mussar practice. "Seek for it like silver and search for it like hidden treasure." - Proverbs/Mishlei 2:4

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV635 See [[EXOD701]] Exodus 22:24 lend SEFER 126-7

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV658 Furthermore, I feel it necessary to write openly about the following issue, because I have noticed that many people are in the habit of acting improperly in this regard. When a person delivers a speech in the beis hamidrash, it is halachically forbidden to ridicule him by saying that his speeches have no substance and there is no point in listening to them. Unfortunately, we see that many people are careless in this area, and do not consider such ridicule to be at all forbidden. Yet the halakhah is that this is considered full-fledged lashon hara, because such remarks are liable to cause another person financial damage, as well as distress and embarrassment in some cases. Furthermore, even if what the speaker says is true, we know that lashon hara is forbidden even if the information is true [unless there is a constructive intention, but] what constructive intention could this scoffer have with his ridicule? On the contrary, if he is a sincere person, then he should approach the one who gave the speech afterward in private and advise him to use a different style of speaking, for his current style is ineffective. By giving such advice, he would also be fulfilling the mitzvah of  וְאָֽהַבְתָּ֥ לְרֵעֲךָ֖ כָּמֹ֑וךָ, “You shall love your fellow as yourself” (Vayikra 19:18). At the very least, he should not turn this public speaker into a laughingstock.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

LEV712 At times, one who speaks lashon hara also transgresses the prohibition of לֹֽא־תִקֹּ֤ם וְלֹֽא־תִטֹּר֙, “Do not take revenge, and do not bear a grudge" (Vayikra 19:18). This could happen if the speaker once asked the person he is speaking about to lend him money as a favor and he refused. As a result, the speaker developed hatred toward this person, and when he subsequently noticed something negative about him, he publicized it before others. Initially, when he harbored those negative feelings in his heart, he violated the prohibition of “Do not bear a grudge.” Afterward, when he actively took revenge by telling others about the flaw that he noticed in the other person, he violated the prohibition of “Do not take revenge.” In such a situation, one is obliged to erase the ill feelings from his heart.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT