Sparked by a discussion I had with my girls about the Shoah, they asked if it was alright if they would have lied to a Nazi guard who had entered the home asking "where the other Jews were hidden?" If they said that there aren't any Jews hidden here, would G-d still see the lying as a sin, (even if a lesser sin than saving someone).

I started researching and found a few instances where it was, in fact, proper and rewarded by G-d to lie under certain circumstances.

There was the situation with Rahab when she lie to her townsmen about the spies not being there, and she and her family were blessed and saved because of her action.

THen there was the situation with Pharaoh in Egypt who tried to force the midwives of the Hebrew people to do away with the males of the tribe. The women when re-summoned to the court claimed that the women of the children of Israel were not like the Egyptian women and they gave birth and recovered too quickly for them to intervene--an obvious lie and one that was greatly pre-meditated. Then HaSh-m dealt kindly withthose women for their act.

So I told the girls this:
Sometimes a lie is actually the best thing to do and is a sinless act. But you will always know on those rare occasions because two things will be true:

1.) Telling a lie will be the more DIFFICULT thing to do rather than telling the truth.

2.) It will always be in the protection of life that your lie will be a good thing.

3.) Your conscience will be at peace with telling the lie, even though you may be nervous about it on the outside.

Then I read the examples so that they could see the terrible situations the people were placed in.

If anyone has some midrash about this subject, I would be thrilled to hear it. I have NEVER thought that lying was alright let alone good in theeyes of G-d and it was shocked when I found the common thread!

Shalom,
Yocheved

You are exactly right Yocheved.
We see in the Torah itself that God did not reveal the entire truth, when he repeated Sarah's statement to Avraham, He left out the part where she said her husband was old,to prevent bad feelings between them.

If I may add a little something, there is apparently quite a difference between truth and the actual meaning of "Emes"...

For example, it would be rediculous to think that the "emes" of the two situations cited would be either that Jews should point evil nazi murderous guards to the location of hiding Jews, and it would be rediculous to think that the emes would be that Hashem would have wanted the midwives to comply with Pharoah's murderous plans.

By lying in these two cases, lives were saved --- the ones who lied might have been killed if they told the truth, as well as the hiding Jews, or the Jewish babies, and even the scouts in Rachav's time.

Its also not clear that the Rachav case is as applicable at that point in her life either.

Permission to bend the truth to spare feelings, and more so to spare lives, seems to be consistent with the emes of not wanting murder or embarassment.

quote:

Right now, I'm learning with my teacher Ch. 30, if I'm not mistaken, of R' Yisrael Salanter's book, Ohr Yisrael, discussing the trait of Anovah, humility. In it, he brings something very interesting to define truth: Something that you can trace directly back to its roots, is true. [i.e. has a basis]

I.e.: Truth is not necessarily cold fact. Which is why one day a person can pray well, and the next day terribly, and both days his prayer will be good! Because on one day his emotions will be great, and the next day not great, but since the quality of his prayer can be traced directly to his emotional state, and he is doing the best he can in both situations, it is a 'truthful' prayer!

Therefore, we see, that truth is not a constant, as we might have thought, but can be changed according to the cause. (Cause and effect????)

I thought that would be an interesting contribution to the discussion, the definition of truth.

The above is something I said recently, in 'its it better' in Anonymous Questions. Based on that, I would like to say the following, hoping that it is 'Emes'!: (I think this would be an extrapolation on the previous posting by Rob.)

In the scenario that a rabid anti-Semite, Heaven forbid, bursts into a Jew's home and asks a person they find there where all the other Jews are hiding, that Jew has a choice: tell the 'truth' - where all the other Jews are, or tell a 'lie'.

Now, if that person were to say the 'truth', that truth would have basis on the seeming reality of the situation. Therefore, it would seemingly be 'Emes'.

However, the fact is, is that the real reality of this world is G-d's will, which is made known to us in the Torah. In the Torah there is a verse, 'And you shall live with it' - implying, as our Rabbi's have learned, that you shall not die with it. (Except for the three cardinal sins, of which lying is not included.) Since we now know that it is G-d's will that this person should tell a 'lie', in order to save the other Jews, we see that it has a basis in reality. Therefore, it is Emes - 'truth'. However, if that person would say where the people are, what he is saying is not based in reality - because the Torah is reality, and that Torah commands us to 'lie', as it were! Therefore it would be Sheker - 'falsehood'.

Dovi

We see this concept from Kesuvos 17a and is paraphrased by Kollel Iyun Hadaf


1) DANCING IN FRONT OF THE KALAH

(a) (Beraisa): When dancing in front of the Kalah, Beis Shamai says that we praise her as she is; Beis Hilel says that we say she is pretty and has grace.

(b) Beis Shamai: If she is lame or blind, do we say that she is pretty and has grace?

1. "Stay far from a false matter"!

(c) Beis Hilel: You admit, if a person buys something, we tell him it is a good purchase!

1. From here, we learn that a person should always do as people desire.

Also we see it in BM 24a

1) WHEN A CHACHAM MAY LIE

(a) (Rav Yehudah): Chachamim may lie to cover up three things: what they know (they can deny knowing a tractate on account of modesty), when they had relations, and good treatment they received from their host (in order that unfitting people will not flock to their host).

Also we see from BM 87a

(p) Question: She said "va'Adoni Zaken", but Hash-m told Avraham that she said "Va'ani Zakanti"!

(q) Answer (Tana d'vei R. Yishmael): Shal-m is so important that Hash-m switched her words (so Avraham would not know that she called him 'old').

To add: I also saw today in Michtav Me'Eliyahu, Vol. 1, pg. 94, that he says very similiar to what I tried to say from the Ohr Yisrael.

Thankyou for those wonderful insights! I think the examples help to clarify that we should make decisions based upon the TRUTH of the matter, rather than the FACTS of a matter.

Thank you, Yocheved, for putting the idea into such good words!

I was thinking, that, unfortunately, it would often be very hard to know what the truth of the matter is.

Dovi

Yes, that is true...which further underscores the necessity of close relationship with HaSh-m. In these cases, we need WISDOM. I like a quote I read earlier this month:

Rebbe Nachman of Breslov said: there is truth, the truth of the truth, and peace. Truth is: a kid stole an apple. The truth of the truth is: the kid was hungry. Peace is: Nobody stole anything; give the kid an apple! (Heard from Reb Shlomo Carlebach)

--I think Dov quoted this, and I thought it was poignant and appropriate.

I am not like those who would have us believe that we cannot know wisdom, truth, or Hash-m's will in situations. I know that we do not ALWAYS know it, but His wisdom is clearly available to us, else He would not tell us to pray for it. We need only ask and wait until the way becomes clear, as it were, in the situation.

I have a question about lies with less serious consequences at stake, but still have purpose rooted in good. For example, my husband once missed a chasuna that he had really wanted to attend simply b/c he forgot. Now telling someone that you forgot to attend their simcha will generally hurt their feelings. Would it be permissable to make some "reason" why you did not go in order to spare the person's feelings?

Also, I have ben told that a woman can lie about her whereabouts when she is going to the Mikveh to maintain privacy. Is this true?

quote:

Originally posted by SC:
I have a question about lies with less serious consequences at stake, but still have purpose rooted in good. For example, my husband once missed a chasuna that he had really wanted to attend simply b/c he forgot. Now telling someone that you forgot to attend their simcha will generally hurt their feelings. Would it be permissable to make some "reason" why you did not go in order to spare the person's feelings?

I'm sure that this would be OK, but any lie should be as "white" as possible.

quote:

Also, I have ben told that a woman can lie about her whereabouts when she is going to the Mikveh to maintain privacy. Is this true?

Going to the Mikveh is a very private matter, so I would have to answer in the affirmative.

quote:

Now telling someone that you forgot to attend their simcha will generally hurt their feelings. Would it be permissable to make some "reason" why you did not go in order to spare the person's feelings?

Shalom SC, welcome.

The Mishna Berura, in Siman 156, Se'if Koton 4, says that it is permissible to change the truth because of peace. (Interestingly, note that he never says 'lie', just 'change the truth')

Just a side point, the above Se'if Koton is a very unique one, in that it describes how one should accustom oneself to behave. It's probably one that is not paid enough attention to!

Good Chodesh!
Dovi

unique passages are often underrated.

There is a terrible consequense in muddling terminology. In a letter the Hazon Ish reprimands a Talmid Hacham because he changed to meaning of a term in the Gemorra to solve a problem he had with the sugya. The Hazon Ish said that this attitude of redefining terms would undermine Tora.
Thus: Emes is Truth. The facts are the truth. A lie is a lie. Whenever.
In some circumstances it is a mitzva to lie, and a great aveira to tell the truth.
In all cases where telling a lie is condoned, it is a one-time lie, not one that is repeated, one upon which a life-time of deceit would follow.

I think everyone is in agreement with you.

We keep a kosher home but are somewhat confused about chicken and other poultry products. I understand that many large chicken processors slaughter the chicken quickly and humanely. If this is the case why are these chickens not kosher

THANKS FOR YOUR REPLY

Ronald

They are considered unkosher because as Orthodox Jews, we are observant to the tradition that the animals must be butchered according to our laws. That means, a specially trained SHOKET must perform the butchering and say a blessing over it. It also means stricter laws with regard to the animal's maintenance before death. Moreover, the animal's lungs, liver and other organs are inspected by the Shoket for any abnormalities or signs of poor health. There is far more to it than I am ummarizing, but it is more than just killing quickly. I live far from my community and hav eon different occasions asked my Rabbis if I could be my own shoket (as I live on a farm with kosher animals) and they all agree that I CAN but must have further training beforehand. Halachicly there ARE mandates that must be followed in order for a food to be kosher, and they are not "just some hedge laws" that many Conservatives and others choose to ignore.

I hope this is helpful to you. I am sure Chabad.org will have further informarion that can be of assistance to you.

Shalom! Yocheved

Yochebed, being that you live far from your community, what do you do to keep your commitment to Kosher dietary laws?
I understand from your post and I quote " we are observant to the tradition that the animals must be butchered according to our laws." that you are orthodox?

Shalom!

In short--we eat a vegetarian diet unless we are actually in the city where there is kosher meat for sale (which is rare), so vegetarians we are! (Worked for Esther)