פרק ה' הלכה ז'. תלמיד חכם לא יהא צועק וצובח בשעת דבורו כבהמה וכחיה.
What's the difference between צועק and צובח? So צועק לכאורה translates as to yell, where the it's basically sort of manifest in the decibel level. Just how how loud the the person is. צובח is is more of of a function of the איכות. I don't know, to scream, to shriek, to, it's not purely sort of the כמות of the of the speech, it's more of the more of an איכות. To to give a a shrill scream or something, לאו דווקא that that means that a person's yelling at the at the top of the top of his lungs. ולא יגביה קולו ביותר. So לכאורה what the רמב"ם means is as follows: the רמב"ם can't tell us that the חכם לא יגביה קולו. Let's say the חכם is is speaking in a large auditorium and in order to make himself audible, so he has to project his voice. So he has to be מגביה קולו. Let's say he's he's a כהן, he's דוכנ'ינג, and so אמור להם is is that the כהן when he says it is supposed to be audible. So what does it mean to be audible? It depends on how big the room is. If it's a little little שטיבל, right, he can say יברכך ever so softly. If it's a cavernous שול, then he's going to have to say it very loudly. So the same thing with the חכם, if the setting requires that he project his voice, he'll be מגביה קולו, but he will never do it ביותר. He's not going to be מגביה קולו unnecessarily. That's that's the לשון. אלא בדבורו בנחת עם כל הבריות. וכשידבר בנחת, when he speaks softly, יזהר שלא יתרחק עד שיראה כדברי גסי הרוח. That can also be overdone. The speaking בנחת can be overdone also. If he speaks so softly that that it's on the verge of being inaudible, so then that seems כגסי הרוח. גסי הרוח, so let's just maybe get a sense of what it means. Take a look in הלכה ח'. We have it we have it a few more times in this פרק, but if you take a look in הלכה ח'. לא יהלך תלמיד חכם בקומה זקופה וגרון נטוי כענין שנאמר ותלכנה נטויות גרון ומשקרות בעינים, בעינים. ולא יהלך עקב בצד גודל בנחת כמו הנשים וגסי הרוח כענין שנאמר הלוך וטפוף תלכנה וברגליהם תעכסנה.
So here the רמב"ם says that the חכם shouldn't walk too slowly. Right? He shouldn't be putting, you know, just put the the heel in front of the in front of the toes when when he walks. He shouldn't be walking shouldn't be walking like this. And if he does, so that's גסי, that's also, he uses the same phrase of גסי הרוח. גסי הרוח is is when a person acts in an overly refined manner, in an overly delicate manner. A person should be delicate, a person should be refined. But but if a person is overly acts in a in a manner which where he overdoes it, where it's overdone, so then that it ceases to be delicacy, it ceases to be refinement, and and it it crosses the line into the into the area of גסות הרוח. So again וכשידע בנפשו כשיזהר שלא יסרח עד שיורא כדבגסות רוח ומקדים לשלום כל אדם.
He greets people before they greet him. He takes the initiative כדי שתהיה רוחם נוחה הימנו ודן את כל האדם לכף זכות.
So here just a couple of questions to just try to get pshat here. So is this also an example of a din which applies to everyone, the Lechem Mishneh's he'arah that we saw yesterday, that some of the dinim here in Perek Hey are not restricted to a Chacham? And and that's what this is. So it could be yes, or it could be the Rambam in Peirush Hamishnayot has that there's sort of the chiyuv of being dan lechaf zechut is if you have you have someone whom you don't know. You don't know or you know him to be a beinoni. Either way. Someone you don't know and he does something which is ambiguous. So then there's the chiyuv to be dan lechaf zechut. What if what he does is not entirely ambiguous? It's like more noteh le-tzad chovah but on the other hand it's not unequivocal. You wouldn't say that it's shakul, that the ambiguity is shakul, but to me that means it's not unequivocal. So then it's a middat chasidut to reserve judgment, right? In the first case where you have either a person you don't know or you know him to be a beinoni and he does something which is ambiguous. Which is ambiguous, so the mitzvah is to be dan lechaf zechut. The mitzvah is to interpret it positively and that's a chiyuv. The Rambam quotes it even in Sefer Hamitzvot on the mitzvah of betzedek tishpot amitecha. The Rambam says that's bikhlal the mitzvot aseh. The Gemara in Shevuot on betzedek tishpot amitecha is to be dan lechaf zechut and that's a chiyuv. But then the Rambam in Peirush Hamishnayot in Avot says there's also a middat chasidut element to this mitzvah which is it's not entirely ambiguous. It's more noteh that the action is more... insinuates chovah more than zechut. But if the person again is a beinoni or someone you don't know, so then the middat chasidut is to reserve judgment and not to sort of follow that insinuation. So if the Rambam means דן את כל האדם לכף זכות if he has in mind the second element as well, so then im ken maybe ein hachi nami saying that this is a standard something you must do mitzad hamitzvah it's only a middat chasidut but maybe mitzad hachokhmah it's something that he must do. The Rambam continues, we'll circle back bli neder and im yirtzeh Hashem in a minute to this דן את כל האדם לכף זכות. mesaper bishvach chavero and he's not mesaper bignuto klal, ohev shalom and rodef shalom. So the hanhagah until we get to being dan lechaf zechut is sort of about how the Talmud Chacham speaks. Then the Rambam seems to take a sharp turn and is talking about totally different hanhagot, right? He seems to segue from hanhagot of dibbur, dan lechaf zechut, mesaper bishvach chavero actually comes back to dibbur, which is kind of funny, but ela mai the pshat is. So practically what the mitzvah being dan lechaf zechus entails is as we just said, if you have a person who's either he's a beinnoni or he's unknown and he does something ambiguous, so then the mitzvah is to be dan lechaf zechus. Let's say he's a tzaddik. So if he's a tzaddik, even if he does something which you have to advance a far-fetched interpretation that it should be lechaf zechus, so you're mechuyav to do so. Let's say he's a rasha. So then even if it requires a far-fetched interpretation to interpret it lechaf chov, you're supposed to do so. And the mitzvah is by the person who's a beinnoni. What's pshat in the mitzvah? Again, so the pshat is very compelling. The pshat is that a person is always supposed to interpret based on context. Once when talking about this I gave this moshal to try to illustrate it and a friend of mine told me the following story that he heard from a shamash of Rav Pinchas Hirschprung, zichrono livracha. That someone once came over to Rav Hirschprung and asked him a kashya. And Rav Hirschprung said, I don't know. And it was nikar as the person walked away that he was very pleased that his question sort of that he had stumped Rav Hirschprung. So after the person walks away, so Rav Hirschprung says to his shamash, he thinks that his I don't know and my I don't know are the same. Let's say you're working on a shverer Yerushalmi and you can't figure out pshat. So you go over to a first grader and you ask him what's pshat in the Yerushalmi. So the first grader says I don't know. What does he mean? He means I'm only up to hey in the alef beis and there's some letters here I don't recognize, so I don't know. So then you go over to the Beis Medrash and you go ask Rav Shach, what's pshat in the Yerushalmi? He says I don't know. So what does he mean? He means that Tosafos already asks somewhere that this Yerushalmi seems to contradict what the Bavli says and it seems to contradict this, it seems to contradict that. But they both said I don't know. Ela mai, so you always interpret things based on context and that's the omek of the pshat. What out of context seems like far-fetched and strange and dochak, adaraba, in context is compelling, is the correct and the natural pshat. And that's what's evident in this din of being dan lechaf zechus. Dan lechaf zechus, so if the person's a beinnoni, beinnoni means sometimes he does mitzvos, sometimes he does aveiros, or he's unknown. So then there's no context. There's no context and the maaseh itself is ambiguous. So there's no context and there's a mitzvah to be dan lechaf zechus. If the person's a tzaddik or the other extreme he's a rasha, there's a context. So you interpret based on context. And what seems out of context to be a very forced interpretation, but in context is very very compelling. And the emes is that this same yesod which is embodied in the pirkei hadinim of being dan lechaf zechus, it's a yesod in parshanus altogether. So for instance what was this passuk in Toldos, what was the passuk that ויבא עשו מן השדה והוא עיף. Was it in Toldos? What was that passuk? ויבא עשו מן השדה והוא עיף. So Chazal say he was ayef b'retzicha. So it seems to us like I don't know, maybe ayef just means the Middle Eastern heat in the summer and in the Middle Eastern sun kechom hayom, you're gonna be exhausted when you come in. So the teretz is no, it's the same yesod. That in context of who Esav is, in context the passuk v'halacha says it, Hakadosh Baruch Hu says יעקב אהבתי ועשו שנאתי. Hakadosh Baruch Hu says he hates Esav, so vaistochst that Esav is not some innocent... that that is a rasha merusha. You have a rasha merusha and he says oy, so then the context is that a rasha merusha is not is not innocently tired, he’s tired from shfichas dam. Okay, so generally we understand that that the mitzvah being dan l'kaf zechus, again let’s go back to the ikker place, which is again you have a person who’s a beinoni or totally unknown, so you should be dan l'kaf zechus. You should interpret it favorably. You should interpret it favorably. So so we understand that again the the emes is that that’s not the yesod v'shoresh hadavar. What does that mean? So the Gemara in Shabbos towards the end towards the end of Shabbos tells a few stories of of where the Tanna'im did something which easily could have been interpreted l'chovah and the talmidim interpreted it l'kaf zechus and maybe it’s even Rabbi Akiva, one of the stories is of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Akiva gives them a bracha and says כשם שדנתוני לכף זכות, so Hakadosh Baruch Hu, HaMakom, ידון אתכם לכף זכות. So someone says what does it mean for Hakadosh Baruch Hu to be dan l'kaf zechus? To be dan l'kaf zechus is when there’s ambiguity. That’s when you’re dan l'kaf zechus, right? To be dan l'kaf zechus means there’s ambiguity. This person is either totally unknown to me or he’s a beinoni and what he did is ambiguous. So so so when it’s unknown you're dan l'kaf zechus. There’s no ambiguity by Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So what does it mean to say that Hakadosh Baruch Hu should act in a way that he’s being dan l'kaf zechus? So it's clear that what the what emerges from the Gemara is as follows. משל למה הדבר דומה. Let’s say you have a 17-year-old, an 18-year-old who’s convicted in court of selling drugs. But drugs that not just gateway drugs, drugs that kill tomorrow, drugs that kill today. And he’s convicted. And now it’s the it’s at the sentencing stage. So the prosecutor addresses the court and asks the judge and says, you know, he points to the the guilty party and said he’s an agent of death. People are dying every day across the country from from overdose and and he’s an agent of death and he asks for the maximum possible sentence according to according to law. Then the defense attorney addresses the court and the defense attorney says, your honor, he’s 18 years old, he’s he’s young and foolish and and immature. This is the first thing he’s ever ever been convicted of, first thing he’s ever done wrong. He made a mistake. He’s never going to do it again. So he asks the court to to impose the most lenient sentence possible according to law. So which perspective is is correct? They both could be true, right? They both they both could be true. So when we ask, when Rabbi Akiva gives that bracha that Hakadosh Baruch Hu should be dan you l'kaf zechus, right, from which we learn that if we're dan l'kaf zechus, so then that’s you know the midda k'neged midda, so it means that Hakadosh Baruch Hu should adopt perspective number two vis-a-vis us when we're the Rachmana litzlan, when we're the the nimshal to the to the defendant, to the guilty defendant, so Hakadosh Baruch Hu should adopt perspective number two, not perspective number one. If you see a person, ma'asav stumun, you don’t know the person, and ma'asav stumun, so let’s say one person sees it and and he interprets things l'kaf chova. So what does that show? Me'heichi taysi, you don’t know the guy and what he does is ambiguous. So why are you interpreting l'chova? It means that there’s a he’s cynical. He’s a cynical person, maybe he’s a misanthrope. Let’s say you have another person, he sees the same... And he's dan lekaf zechus. Meheicha taisi that you dan lekaf zechus? You don't know the guy. You don't know the guy, and maaseh stum. The answer is no, he's favorably inclined towards people. He loves people, so mimmela, you love someone, so you're inclined to a favorable interpretation. That's how you have someone who observes judgment, so he has neither of those midos. He's not a cynic, but on the other hand, he clearly, he may not be a misanthrope, but he's not a philanthropist either. He's kind of neutral. He's kind of neutral with people. So what's the vort? That being dan lekaf zechus, the yesod hadavar, the shoresh hadavar is a midah. It's not just a din in what you should think. We understand but incorrectly that being dan lekaf zechus is telling us what to think. If that is true on a practical level, it's correct practically, but what the etzem hadin, the yesod hadin, and that's why the Rambam is talking about it here in Hilchos De'os. It's a Hilchos De'os-dike din because what is that flow from? That interpretation lekaf zechus interprets on being favorably inclined to people. The same way that an interpretation lekaf chovah would flow from being unfavorably inclined towards people, being cynical about people, being not liking people. Here the pashta says is that Halacha Zayin, again that the Rambam begins with dibbur. Halacha Zayin is about midos which express themselves in the talmid chacham's interaction with people. He begins with dibbur, but it's not that Halacha Zayin is about dibbur. Halacha Zayin is about the midos that express themselves and how they express themselves that are relevant to his bein adam l'chaveiro. And that's why דן את כל אדם לכף זכות belongs here, the same way אוהב שלום ורודף שלום also belongs here, the midos which again, which surface, which express themselves in his bein adam l'chaveiro. When the Rambam says מספר בשבח חברו ואינו מספר בגנותו כלל, so mesaper b'gnos chaveiro is the definition the Rambam gives later in Perek Zayin for lashon hara. Now even with the Lechem Mishneh's he'arah that there are some things in this perek which are not meyuchad to the chacham but which are noheig by all of us, but that the Rambam should have to mention, much less stress, that the chacham doesn't talk lashon hara? I don't know, what's that? It seems too basic, too elementary to be in Perek Hey. Again as the Lechem Mishneh already points out, there definitely are things here in Perek Hey which are relevant and incumbent upon all of us, but something as basic, lashon hara is such an איסור חמור עד מאוד. I don't know, the chacham, he doesn't kill people either, but hopefully, so but the Rambam doesn't mention it and lichora, it's not a hashivuta which requires too much. Lashon hara is such an issur chamur. So lulei d'mistafina, the pshat here is as follows. Take a look if you have it rabbosai, if not, hatu oznechem. תלמיד חכם לא יהיה צועק ומצויח בשעת דיבור. Okay, and this is the first phrase that's being highlighted. אלא הדיבור בנחת עם כל הבריות. Okay. Register that. וכשידבר בנחת יזהר שלא ירחיק עד שייראה כדברי גסי הרוח. ומקדים לשלום,
this is the second phrase that's being highlighted, ומקדים לשלום כל אדם כדי שתהא רוחן נוחה הימנו. Here comes the third phrase that's being highlighted: ודן את כל האדם לכף זכות. The next line, again in the manuscripts, is the concluding line of this halacha: מספר בשבח חברו ואין מספר בגנותו כלל אוהב שלום ורודף שלום.
So until we get to mesaper beshevach chaveiro, the entire halacha is unequivocally not just about the talmid chacham's interaction with the fellow Jews, but im kol habriyos, with non-Jews also. Right? That... the Rambam couldn't be more emphatic about that. הדיבור בנחת עם כל הבריות, ומקדים לשלום כל אדם, דן את כל האדם לכף זכות.
It's clear that the Rambam is talking about kol habriyos. Given that context, yitachen me'od that chaveiro here... it doesn't... again, we're used to chaver, translating chaver as friend. But in this... what chaver really means is chaver is milashon chibur. It's someone with whom you have a connection. Not necessarily a friend. So that's why the Rambam, right, famously in Perush Hamishnayos on Avos, עשה לך רב וקנה לך חבר, so the Rambam talks about different types of friendship. He elaborates, he quotes Aristotle and adds one type to Aristotle's types of friendship. Again, it's not really of chaver, it really shouldn't be translated as friendship. And the first one is is it's a chaver l'to'eles. The first example the Rambam has of the chaver is your business partner. Your business partner, you have a chibur with him that you do business. It doesn't mean that you... I don't know, it's not... it doesn't mean he's your friend. It doesn't mean that there's any kind of deep relationship here. Whatever. You went into business together for whatever reason, it was a good shidduch in terms of business. Could be you can't stand him and he can't stand you. Yitachen that that's the case. But that's the that's the first level of chaver. So chaver doesn't imply, doesn't imply friend, and for that matter it doesn't necessarily have to mean Jewish. Rei'acha, which is lashon ahava v'reius, implies Jewish. Chaver doesn't, because chaver again, in... to us it's it's somewhat foreign because it's lost this sense, this distinction has been lost in modern Hebrew where we use chaver as... mi chaveri, right? We use it as my friend, but lemayseh in terms of what the word really means, it again means someone with whom there's a connection, milashon chibur. That's the that's the etymology of the word. So yitachen what the Rambam means here is the following and again conceptually, I don't know, it's מספר בשבח חברו ואין מספר בגנותו כלל. So we ask what... the Rambam has to mention that a chacham isn't over the issur chamur? The Rambam writes in De'os Perek Zayin, lashon hara is עון גדול עד מאד, עון גדול עד מאד. So he has to mention that that the chacham doesn't engage in lashon hara? No. Maybe the pshat over here is אינו מספר בגנותו כלל, that's what the Rambam's talking about again to a ger toshav. He's talking about a ger toshav. It's not לא תלך רכיל בעמך. Issur lashon hara mitzad the pasuk of lo telech rachil is be'amecha. It's only it's only to say lashon hara about a Jew. Mitzad the pasuk of לא תלך רכיל בעמך, there's no issur to speak pejoratively if if it's not about an eino Yehudi. Yitachen, and again the whole context supports it, im kol habriyos, im kol adam, im kol adam. So why would he change the lashon here to chaveiro? If you don't know the person you can't be mesaper beshivcho. You're walking down the street, you see someone across the street, so what are you supposed to say, he's got nice shoes? I mean, what? You don't know the guy from Adam, so how you going to be mesaper... How are you going to be mesaper b'shvacho? If you have eppis a chibur with him, so then you can be mesaper and you can be, you can be mesaper b'shvacho. And then whether that's the Rambam, that's... that's why אינו מספר בנוסח כללי, that's takeh something about the chochom. It's not stam that he doesn't talk lashon hara. He's not over an עון גדול עד מאוד. No, even, even if let's say it's a ger toshav. So a ger toshav, so there's no issur presumably of the right there are three drashos of lo sachanem that the Gemara in Avodah Zarah has. Lo sachanem is by ovdei avodah zarah. So one is לא תיתן להם חניה בקרקע. He can't sell them land in Eretz Yisrael. So a ger toshav is allowed to live in Eretz Yisrael. That's what the lashon ger toshav means, right? That he's a ger, not a ger tzedek who was who became Jewish, but who's allowed to live in Eretz Yisrael. And then lo sachanem is לא תיתן להם מתנת חינם. So it's a pasuk, לגר אשר בשעריך תתננה ואכלה, right? It says by neveilah. What do you do with a neveilah? O mchor l'nochri, you can either sell it to a nochri, או לגר אשר בשעריך תתננה ואכלה. So matnas chinam you can give to a ger toshav. So the pasuk of lo sachanem doesn't apply to a ger toshav. So mistameh the third drashah from lo sachanem is לא תיתן להם חן, not to, not to compliment also, is only to an oved avodah zarah. Oved avodah zarah is לא תיתן להם חן. But a ger toshav, it is mutter. So mesaper b'shvach chaveiro, chaveiro again not doesn't mean your chavrusah. That there's no, there's no implication that we're talking davka about a Yisrael. Someone with whom you have a chibbur, your co-worker in the in the office. ואינו מספר בנוסח כללי, that's takeh a chiddush of a hanhagah of the talmid chochom that he's that the issur in the pasuk of lo seilech rachil is davka b'amecha. But mitzad Hilchos De'os, mitzad Hilchos De'os, so there's an inyan even when the lav is not applicable not to be speaking pejoratively. Now again, if if if if it's not a ger toshav, so then the nochri is a rasha. So then it wouldn't apply for that reason, right? It wouldn't apply for that reason. But just the fact that he's not בכלל לא תלך רכיל doesn't mean that it isn't a midah k'shele'atzmah of why badmouth people. Why why spread, even if it's true, you know, why... there are lots of things you can say about a ger toshav which don't mean that he's violating שבע מצוות בני נוח, which may not be flattering. So the midah is relevant beyond amecha. Agam that the lav is restricted to לא תלך רכיל בעמך, but the midah is relevant beyond amecha. Now l'chora, so I'm not sure how many geirei toshav one bumps into walking down the street. So I guess on that level it's conceptually very important, but maybe not practically so important. But the emes is l'chora it has very, very far-reaching practical implications. Dehainu as follows: Hashta d'asinu l'hachi, that mitzad middos, mitzad Hilchos De'os, there's a concern for being mesaper b'gnus even if it's not b'amecha. Now let's say as follows, let's say you have a nochri, a nochri rasha. A nochri rasha, oved avodah zarah, shofech damim, etc. Abortion is shofech damim, it's included in שבע מצוות בני נח. Ben Noach as a Ben Noach is neherag alav as the Gemara says. A Yisrael is not neherag, it's assur for Yisrael, assur, assur, assur for Yisrael, but there wouldn't be missas beis din, but for Ben Noach the Gemara says there's even missas beis din. So he certainly does not conform to שבע מצוות בני נח to be considered a Ben Noach, to have qualified בזמן שהיובל נוהג as a Ger Toshav. So is it mutar lesaper begnuso? Yes, definitely. However, itachen, itachen that once we become aware of the fact that there is a concern that fundamentally to be mesaper begnus is not a mida tova. And that's why אין מספר בגנות כלל means chaveiro, even chaveiro who's not beamecha. Itachen that if a person is going to be mesaper begnus, it has to be very mindfully mitoch because he's reacting to and because he's mindful of the rishus, not stam because it's not governed by לא תלך רכיל בעמך. And the nafkamina is huge. Did you hear that? Should we go through it again? Without this Rambam, right? If you go back ten minutes, go back to the way the world was ten minutes ago before we looked up this Rambam. A different world, mamash a different world. So the way the world was ten minutes ago, so the pasuk says לא תלך רכיל בעמך. There's an issur. The issur is only beamecha. There's no issur shelo beamecha. So as long as the person you're talking about is not beamecha, you can say whatever you want. Okay, midas sheker is sheker, so don't say lies, but as long as it's true, you can say whatever you want, right? That's where we were holding ten minutes ago. What are we saying now? We're suggesting that the pshat in אין מספר בגנותו כלל is even shelo beamecha. Why? It doesn't come from the pasuk, the pasuk is לא תלך רכיל בעמך. The teretz is no, but ein hacha nami, does it qualify for the lav? Absolutely not. But is it a mida ra'a? Yeah, it's a mida ra'a. Why stam, even if it's true, why are you badmouthing decent people? Again, he's a Ger Toshav, he's a good, decent person. Why are you badmouthing him even if it's true? It's a mida ra'a. A chacham would not do that. אין מספר בגנותו כלל. Now, hashta de'asina lehachi, hear this, it's I don't know you have to think long and hard about what exactly the implications would be now. Hashta de'asina lehachi that there's a concern for the mida ra'a of being mesaper begnus beyond the lav of לא תלך רכיל בעמך. So when there's an exception to that, so that exception shouldn't be molid the mida ra'a, it has to be very consciously as to why I'm doing it, not stam it's mutar. No, if it's stam because it's mutar and I enjoy the gossip shebo or I enjoy the bashing shebo, so then that's also molid the same mida ra'a. And that's what we've been sensitized as an issue. But ela mai, no, if a person is conscious of the rishus shebo and that's what motivates the mesaper begnus, so then that's got nothing to do with the mida ra'a. You hear that? So it potentially has again, the crucial, crucial question here is: is this hanhaga here only because it's only relevant to the chacham? Okay, in which case again, I don't know that that means it's a terrible midas chasidus for us to aspire to. I don't know that that makes it totally irrelevant. But obviously it does put it in a different class. Or no, maybe this is one of those things that the Lechem Mishneh we had yesterday highlights is here not because... Because it's limited to the talmid chacham, but because again, the way Rav Meir Simcha tried to interpret, because it's me'akev in the shem chacham, but it's really hanhaga which is which is expected of everyone, then it certainly has far, far-reaching implications, the peshat we're saying. Okay, we'll stop here with the Halachos, we'll switch to the Iyun Tefilla for a little bit.