Shimon, son fils, dit: Tous mes jours, j'ai grandi parmi les sages, et je n'ai rien trouvé de meilleur pour (mon) corps que le silence [c'est-à-dire, m'entendre honteux et rester silencieux.] Et ce n'est pas l'explication qui est primaire mais l'acte [c'est-à-dire, et sachez que le silence est bon, car même pour exposer et parler dans la Torah, qu'il n'y a rien de plus grand, la récompense principale est pour l'acte (qui en découle); et si quelqu'un expose et n'agit pas (d'après ce qu'il dit), il vaudrait mieux qu'il se taise et n'explique pas.] Et tous ceux qui multiplient les mots amènent le péché. [Car c'est ainsi que nous trouvons avec Eve, qui "augmenta les mots" en disant (Genèse 3: 3): "D.ieu dit:" Tu n'en mangeras pas et tu ne le toucheras pas. "" Elle ajouta "touchant", ce qui ne lui avait pas été interdit, et le serpent la poussa jusqu'à ce qu'elle le touche. Et il lui dit: "De même qu'il n'y a pas de mort à le toucher, il n'y a pas de mort à le manger." Et cela a conduit à son péché de manger du fruit. Comme le dit Salomon (Proverbes 20: 6): "N'ajoutez pas à ses paroles, de peur qu'il ne vous réprouve et que vous ne soyez prouvé faux."]
Chofetz Chaim
And I shall begin by saying that it is forbidden to shame one's friend for an insufficiency in what he possesses — whether in wisdom, strength, wealth, or the like. I shall explain my meaning in all of its details: "wisdom" — telling people that Ploni is not wise. And there is no difference here as to whether it is false or partially true and he exaggerates the actuality. — This is certainly a great sin, in the order of "spreading an evil report." For he demeans his friend by his falsehoods. — But even if it is the absolute truth, have not all the Rishonim "rooted it within us" that lashon hara [is forbidden] even if true! (See Principle I.) And this thing, negating one's possession of a certain eminence, is certainly also in the category of lashon hara. For did the Rambam not write (Avoth 1:17): "Lashon hara is relating one's evils and his blemishes and demeaning a Jew in any way, even if the demeaned one were [indeed] deficient, etc." As he expatiates there, it is called lashon hara if what he says about him is true. (See also what the Rambam has written in Hilchoth Deoth 7:5 to the effect that lashon hara is something, which when it becomes known to men, causes someone to be harmed in his body or in his money or to aggrieve him or to frighten him.) It seems clear, then, that negating one's possession of a certain eminence is absolute lashon hara according to the Torah. For upon reflection we find that this can result in monetary loss or grief, etc.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Gray Matter III
A much stronger justification for the common practice might be derived from Rashi (ad. loc. s.v. Hakorei). He explains that the Gemara censures one who “while drinking wine, derives his amusement from words of Torah and reads pesukim aloud to amuse those at the party.” Rashi seems to imply that the prohibition applies only when Torah verses are used in a degrading manner, as the language of the Gemara (ad. loc.) seems to suggest. This gives the impression (unlike Rav Moshe) that as long as the music does not degrade the Torah, there is no prohibition, even if one is not listening to the music in the context of performing a mitzvah (such as rejoicing with a chatan and kallah). This limitation of the prohibition also is implied by the comments of the Rambam (Avot 1:17), wherein he writes, “The Torah forbade turning words of prophecy into songs of baseness and inappropriate things.” This indicates that the prohibition exists only if the pesukim are sung in a degrading manner. If, on the other hand, the songs are not of “baseness and inappropriate things,” it would be permissible.
