לשון הרע "לא תלך רכיל בעמיך לא תעמוד על דם רעך אני ה'" – ויקרא י"ט, ט"ז – פרשת קדושים

(1) The law of evaluation is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of [dedicating one's] hereditary field is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law concerning a warned ox that has killed a slave is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of the rapist and the seducer and the defamer is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. The law of evaluation is sometimes lenient, and at others times strict. How so? Whether one has evaluated the finest-looking [person] in Israel, or the ugliest in Israel, one must pay fifty selaim. But if one said: “Behold, that person's monetary worth is upon me,” one pays only as much as that person is worth.

(2) The law of [dedicating one's] hereditary field is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether one dedicates a field in the sandy plain of Mahoz or in the orchards of Savaste, [to redeem it] one must give fifty shekalim of silver for [each section of field sufficient for] the sowing of a homer of barley. But if it was a field [acquired by] purchase, one must give what it is worth. Rabbi Eli'ezer says: it is all the same whether it is a hereditary field or a field [acquired by] purchase. What is the difference between the hereditary field and one [acquired by] purchase? [When redeeming] an hereditary field one must give the [added] fifth, whereas for a field [acquired by] purchase one need not give the added fifth.

(3) The law concerning a warned ox that has killed a slave is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether it killed the fine-looking slave or an ugly slave, one must pay thirty selaim. If it killed a free man one must pay what that person is worth. If it only wounded the person, in either case one must pay the full damage.

(4) The law of the rapist and seducer is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether he raped or seduced a girl from among the best of the priestly stock or the humblest in Israel, he must pay fifty selaim. But compensation for shaming and for blemish is [assessed] according to the [circumstances] of the one who shames and of the one who suffers the shame.

(5) The law of the defamer is sometimes lenient and sometimes strict. How so? Whether he defamed a girl from among the best of the priestly stock or the humblest in Israel, he must pay one hundred selaim. Thus it turns out that one who speaks with one's mouth [is fined] more than one that commits an act. For thus we have also found that the judgment against our ancestors in the wilderness was sealed only because of their evil tongue, as it is written: “Yet you have tested Me these ten times, and you have not listened to My voice” (Numbers 14:22).

(1) It is forbidden to speak demeaningly of one's friend, even if it be absolute truth. And this is termed everywhere by Chazal "lashon hara." (For if there were in his words an admixture of falsehood, by which his friend is demeaned even more, this is in the category of "motzi shem ra" [spreading a false report], in which his sin is far greater). And the speaker [of lashon hara] transgresses a negative commandment, viz. (Vayikra 19:16): "Do not go talebearing among your people." And this [lashon hara] is also in the category of rechiluth.

(2) This negative commandment which we adduced is what the Torah stated explicitly for this issur of lashon hara and rechiluth. But aside from this, there are many other negative and positive commandments that one transgresses by speaking lashon hara, as explained above in the preceding introduction.

(3) All this, only if one spoke demeaningly of his friend by chance. But if (Gd forbid) he is habituated to this sin, like those who customarily sit and say: "Thus and thus did Ploni (so and so) do," "Thus and thus did his fathers do," "This and this (demeaning thing) did I hear about him" — men such as these are called by Chazal "ba'alei (men of) lashon hara," and their punishment is far greater [than that of the former]. For in their perverseness of spirit and their malice of heart they transgress the Torah of the Lrd, and it becomes hefker to them, as explained above in the end of the introduction. And about them it is said in the tradition (Psalms 12:4): "Let the Lrd cut off all smooth-talking lips, the tongue that speaks haughtily."

(4) Chazal have said: For three transgressions punishment is exacted of a man in this world, and he has no share in the world to come: idolatry, illicit relations, and blood-spilling — and lashon hara over and above all. Chazal have proved this from Scripture. And the Rishonim have explained that the reference is to those who are habituated to this sin [lashon hara] and who do not take it upon themselves to guard themselves against it, the thing having become "permitted" to them.

(5) There is no difference in the issur of speaking [lashon hara], as to whether one speaks it of his own volition or whether his friend stands over him and begs him to tell him — in either case, it is forbidden. And even if his father or his Rabbi — whom he is obligated to honor and to fear and not to contradict their words — even if they importune him to speak of a certain thing, and he knows that in the midst of the account he will perforce come to speak lashon hara or even only the "dust" of lashon hara, he is forbidden to consent.

(6) Even if one sees that if he takes it upon himself never to speak demeaningly of a Jew, or to say anything else that is forbidden, his livelihood will suffer greatly, as when he is in the employ of others who have not the faintest trace of Torah about them (and it is well known that, in our many sins, such men are steeped in this sin to such an extent that if they see one whose mouth is not open [in lashon hara] as wide as theirs, they take him for a fool and a simpleton and because of this may dismiss him from his job and deprive him of a livelihood), in spite of this, it is forbidden [to transgress], as is the case with all the other negative commandments, for which one must give up all that he possesses rather than transgress (viz. Yoreh Deah 157:1).

(7) And from this we can understand that lashon hara is certainly forbidden in an instance where only one's personal honor is at stake. As when one is sitting in a company of men and has no way of avoiding them, and they are speaking of things which are forbidden according to the din. If he sits in silence and in no way abets them in their talk, he will be regarded as "crazy." Of this and all such things, Chazal have said (Eduyoth 5:6): "Better that a man be called 'a fool' all of his days rather than be wicked one moment before the L-rd." He must harness all of his powers at that moment to withstand the trial, and [if he does so], he may be completely confident that his reward for this from the Blessed Lrd will be without end. As Chazal have stated (Avoth 5:23): "According to the strain is the reward." And, in Avoth d'R. Nathan: "One time with strain for a hundred times without strain." (That is, the reward for the performance of a mitzvah or the abstention from an issur, which entails strain, is a hundredfold more than for that of the same kind, which entails no strain.) And to such a time [of trial as the above] there certainly applies the statement of Chazal in the Midrash: "For every moment that one 'muzzles' his mouth, he attains to such secreted light that no angel or [Divine] creature can conceive of." (As to how one should conduct himself in respect to reproof and listening if one is "caught" in such an evil company as this one, see below Principle VI, sections 4-6, and above, in the introduction to the negative commandments, section 16.)

(8) This issur of lashon hara obtains whether it is actually spoken by mouth or stated in a letter. There is also no difference whether he speaks it explicitly or by sign. In all modes, it is in the category of lashon hara.

(9) And know also that even if in demeaning his friend he demeaned himself with the very same slur — even if he began by railing thus against himself, he has nevertheless not left the ranks of the slanderers.