RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: When all depends on the intention

We have explained the prohibition of genebat da’at, i.e., when I falsely pretend that I care or I want to help, just to benefit from leaving a positive impression in somebody else mind. Our Rabbis classified these actions as “stealing peoples’ mind”. 
A typical example: If one of my friends is preparing a party or an event for which manpower is required, and my help is definitely needed.  And, for whatever the reason might be, I don’t come to help. But when I estimate that everything is done and ready and my help is not needed anymore, I come to my friend’s house to offer my help.  And when my friend tells me that everything is already done, I pretend as if I’m sorry and regret that I can not be of help…   For me, it might look like a win/win situation: I have not helped, and I still enjoy the benefit of having left a positive impression on my friend as if I had really helped him! 
The Tora condemns this type of cynical attitude and considers it a form of  “stealing”. 
There are some cases, however, in which one can sincerely be offering his or her help, even though one knows that his offer will be refused. If for example, I come to my friend’s house and I see that he has an unexpected guest or event, etc. and then I sincerely offer my help, not to cause a false impression, but to show that I care, knowing that my empathy will make my friend feeling good, then it is absolutely valid.  
In other words, the issue of genebat da’at depends on one’s intention and cannot be judged by a third party based just on the facts at sight. genebat da’at pertains to a category of actions that are judged only between oneself and God.  






ZERO POINT THREE PERCENT, 
a film about Jewish unity. 




RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Leaving involuntarily a false positive impression

The Rabbis defined geneabt da’at  (stealing other people mind) as a situation in which I mislead other people to think favorably about me or about an action I did (see here). 
Some times however, there are borderline circumstances, in which a positive but misleading impression is leftinvoluntarily. The Rabbis argued about the merits of this matter. 
A real example: It was customary that when a Rabbi would come to town his students or colleagues would go to welcome him before he reached the city. It happened that two rabbis, Raba and Rab Safra, left their city to take care of some personal matters and to their surprise on the way they met a distinguished rabbi, Mor Zutra, who was coming into their city. Mor Zutra thought that they came to welcome him, and with a deep sense of gratitude he said: “I’m so honored that such distinguished Rabbis like you have come all the way to welcome me!”. Rab Safra, which was famous for being extremely straightforward and truthful said: “Well, the truth is that we did not know that you were coming. We were in our way for a different matter and we happened to meet you. However, if we would have known of your coming, we would have received you with more honors”. Later on Raba questioned Rab Safra’s attitude and said to him: “Why did you have to hurt Mor Zutra who thought that we were coming to honor him?”. Raba added “In this case we did not initiate anything proactively with the intention of leaving a false big impression on him! We did not want to mislead him. But now we have actually hurt him and embarrass him!”.   
When the other Rabbis heard and analyzed this case they thought that Raba was right and they asserted that the prohibition of causing a positive false impression on someone applies when we initiate the misleading action, but if the other person brings himself to that impression, and especially in this type of situations bordering with embarrassment, then we do not need to rectify the false positive impression we left.    





WATCH   Is Israel an apartheid state?   by Dennis Prager 


                           



RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Fictitious invitations

Last week we explained the prohibition of genebat da’at, to steal people’s mind. Which means among other things, to make someone feel that we care about him, when we really don’t (seehere).   
For example: we should not invite to our party someone that we had no intention to invite since now we found out that he is not going to be in town that day. That is genebat da’at. 
But what if I really wanted to invite that person to my party, and now I find out that he is going to be out of town. Could I still insist to him to come to my party anyways, knowing that he will not be able to come? Is that also considered genebat da’at because I know he will not be coming. Rabbi Melamed (penine halakha 3:71) indicates that in this last case, although it is a fictitious invitation, since I had the intention to invite him, there is no harm in inviting him anyways. On the contrary, it is possible that if I don’t invite him he might get offended. In this case there is nogenebat da’at because the host really loves that person and he had sincerely wished for him to be in his party.   
But when I had no intentions to invite someone and then, when I know that she is going to be out of town I pretend as if I’m sorry that she cannot come to my party, that is genebat da’at.  Because all the purpose of my fictitious invitation is just a big act to gain some points to my favor from this relationship, and my invitation is based on false pretenses, i.e., an insincere demonstration of interest and love for that person. 
The German ban on Circumcision 
√ Click here to read and excellent article by Spangler
√ Click here to read a view from a non-Jewish
    perspective 


RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Stealing people’s mind

Last week we explained the nature of the prohibition of genebat da’at (see here). We defined genebat da’at as stealing people’s minds. genebat da’at takes place when we do or hide something or say something which is not true, with the intention that people will have a good or better impression about us or about an item we want to sell. 
Some examples of genebat da’at: 
√ A seller should be sincere with a customer. If a woman is trying on a dress and the seller sees that the dress is not a good fit for her, the seller should not tell the woman that the dress looks amazing on her or anything of that sort. 
√ Similarly, a seller must tell the buyer the pros and the cons of the product he tries to sell.  And if the product has any defect he should not hide it from the buyer.  Misleading deliberately a buyer is defined in the Shulchan ‘arukh as genebat da’at (choshen mishpat 228:6). 
√ The Talmud (Cholin 94a) brings a different category of examples: If I have an unexpected guess at my house and I already had the intention of opening an expensive wine that evening I should not say to my guest: “We are opening this wine in your honor”  to make a good impression on him. Or, the Gemara says, if the wine is a simple wine I should not overpraise it to impress my guest and make him feeling that he owes me or he should be extra grateful to me. 
√ Similarly, if I know that someone is not going to come to my wedding party because in that particular day he is going to be out of town, and I had not intention to invite him anyways, I should not give him an invitation or tell him: “I wish you could have come to my wedding”,  to make a good impression on him.



“Heroes of Israel”, Click here to Watch Buchenwald’s youngest survivor, Chief Rabbi Lau.



RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Stealing people’s mind

In the previous weeks we explained the prohibition of lying. Today we will start to explore a similar concept which is called in Hebrew genebat da’at. genebat da’at could be understood as a form of “stealing” (stealing one’s mind).As such, this prohibition is learn from the pasuq in Vayqra lo tignobu (19:11) “You shall not steal”.

It is important to clarify that this prohibition is different from the Eighth of the Ten Commandments. The Eighth Commandment is understood in Judaism in the context of “stealing another human being”, in other words “kidnapping”, while the Pasuq in Vayiqra applies to stealing valuables.

In any case, some Rabbis (Ritba) explained that the pasuq of Vaiqra also extends to other forms of stealing, among them genebat da’at, stealing people’s mind. Other Rabbis asserted that the source of genebat da’at is a different Mitzva (Vayqra 19:18) “And you shall love your fellowman as yourself”, which means, do not do to others what you would not want others to do to you. Stealing one’s mind is different from stealing, because the intention is not to steal money from the victim. Stealing people’s minds is when I pretend that I care about someone and I do everything as if I’m trying to help that person, but after all, I just care about my own interest, which I will do every possible effort to conceal.

A common example of the transgression of genebat da’at is if a politician disguises his own personal interest and agendas, and acts as if he would care just for the poor or the weak, etc. concealing his intention for advancing his own private agenda. To achieve that, such a politician would hire professionals to teach him techniques to create a convenient perception in the public’s opinion and to build a image of himself as champion of somebody else’s cause. Obviously, genebat da’at does not occur solely in the world of politics, it could also take place in the world of business, in dating, in our social life, and much more. (to be continued…) From the book Penine Halakha



RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Can we lie to avoid embarrasment?

The Tora instructed us to stick to the truth and stay away from lies. We have already seen, however, that in some exceptional cases the Rabbis acknowledged that it was permitted or even recommended to withhold the true facts (see here).
The Rabbis also considered that when a person is faced with an embarrassing situation, he is also allowed to change the story. For example, if a person goes to an hospital to see a doctor or a therapist and he does not want people to know about his or her specific problem, and he meets his neighbor in the hospital, he is allowed to withhold the truth and conceal the real reason for his visit to the hospital.
It is important to remember that all the exceptions we have mentioned so far, i.e., all the cases in which we can depart from the truth, refer to situations where our narrative does not affect, damages or hurts somebody else. If there are two partners, in a business, for example, and one of them made a mistake that somehow affects the company, he can not conceal his mistake from his partner adducing embarrassment.
Similarly, a son or a daughter should not lie to his or her parents (or teachers) in an attempt to avoid embarrassment. Adults are supposed to know (and accept!) that a son or a student might fail or make a mistake. And adults are there to guide and teach him or her to learn from mistakes.
By the way, we see how important is for parents to praise our children when, despite the embarrassment, they dare to tell us the truth. When children find a mature, confident and empathetic adult that helps the child processing his embarrassment in a positive way, learning for the future, in all likelihood, that child will have no reason to hide his mistakes from his parents, and he will be in a better position to avoid repeating them in the future.  


RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Three Kosher Lies (Part 2 of 2)

Last week we examined two of three cases in which the Rabbis said that one can deviate from the truth.  The first one was masekhta, when out of humbleness, one can pretend that he does not know some material so well, even though, one knows it very well. The second case, has to do with tzeni’ut: discretion. In some circumstances, particularly in the field of intimacy, one is authorized (or expected) to hide the whole truth, since talking or discussing openly certain intimate subjects with the wrong people is not viewed as appropriate (see here)
  
3. USHPIZA: This third category literally means ‘guest’.

Most people think when they hear this exception, that when I’m a guest in someone’s house I’m authorized to lie to my host and praise her food and hospitality, even though it was not that great. However, and without judging the merits of this last interpretation, the case the Talmud was referring to, was explained by Ba’ale haTosafot in a different way.   

  
In the past, people did not have so much food and comfort as we all have today.  There were no hotels, and travelers would often look for generous hosts for bed, breakfast and more. Our case means that if I were a guest in someone’s house, and they treated me exceptionally well, if I suspect that by my public praise of their hospitality other travelers–some of whom might not be honest or might behave in an abusive manner–would now try to be hosted in that house, I’m allowed to deviate from the truth and hide the praise for their exceptional treatment, because otherwise everyone will want to come to that house. And I might cause involuntarily a financial damage to them or generate a possible situation of abuse to my generous host. In this and similar circumstances, I’m allowed to hide the identity of my benefactors or belittle their generosity.  
  
As we see, although the truth is a very high and esteemed value in Judaism and the Tora warned us to stay away from lies, sometimes, for humbleness, morality or in order to avoid damage or to save generous people from abuse, the Rabbis permitted us to deviate from the truth.  


Our Soldiers Speak
Click here to hear Sgt. Benjamin Anthony ‘s interview in WABC Radio
For more, visit http://www.oursoldiersspeak.org/


RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Three Kosher Lies (Part 1 of 2)

Previously, we explained the value the Tora gives to saying the truth  (see  here). We also discussed  one exception:  shalom, peace which is above the truth  (see here ).
  
We will see now three other cases in which the Rabbis admitted that the truth could be modified (leshanot min ha-emet) when it clashes with other important values.
  
1. Masekhta (Talmudic tractate). According to Rashi this means that if a person, for example,  knows perfectly one Tractate of the Talmud and someone asks him how well he knows this Talmudic tractate, he can conceal the truth and say that he does not know it very well.  Jews value immensely the habit of behaving with humbleness and since in this case by modifying the truth there is no damage involved, he is permitted to do so. Other Rabbis (Magen Abraham) add that in the same way one can conceal his vast knowledge to behave with humbleness, one can also behave with humbleness in other religious or spiritual areas. For example: if someone is doing an act of Chesed or an extra stringency he can (should!) conceal it from others.  On this note I remember that Rabbi Ytzchaq Shehebar, z”l from the Syrian community in Buenos Aires, use to wear his Tefilin of Rabbenu Tam at home, due to his great humbleness. 
  
  
2. Puraya (Sexual intimacy): In issues of intimacy, it is also permitted not to disclose all the truth or even modify the truth. (This is the reason why it is permitted to hide the news of pregnancy during the first months). If someone inappropriately asks a private question (For example: is your wife going to the Mikve tonight? etc.) one could withhold the truth for reasons of Tzeni’ut (=discretion).  Tzeni’ut is not just revealed by the way we dress. Discretion is also manifested by our speech: knowing what words we use, what subjects we discuss and with whom we discuss these subjects. 
  
(to be continued…)
  

WATCH
Simon Sinek: How great leaders inspire action
  
from TED


RELIGIOUS INTEGRITY: Truth and Peace

We already spoke about the value of saying the truth in Judaism. And how, the closer we bring ourselves to hold the truth, the closer we become to God Almighty, Whose seal (=signature) is EMET the truth; the ultimate reality (see here).
In the tractate of Yebamot (65b) the Rabbis explained that in certain circumstances PEACE (shalom) should be considered above the TRUTH.   Now, this is an extremely delicate issue and this principle cannot be applied indiscriminately.  The Rabbis then, gave a restrictive illustration from which we learn the dynamics between “truth” and “peace”. Aharon haKohen, the brother of Moshe Rabbenu, was the champion of peace-making  in the Jewish people.  When two people would fight, he would go to each one of them separately and he would tell him, from his own mind, how much the other one regrets and feels bad about the fight.  When they would meet, they would embrace and kiss each other, and go back to their friendship. 
Aharon was so loved for his work in promoting peace that when he died, the Tora says that “KOL” Israel cried for him: every single individual felt indebted to him for his work in the promotion of peace. 
It is important to mention that this mediation technique should be applied ONLY if there is no harm for any of the parties. However, if by modifying the truth, one of the parties will be harmed or would have his rights violated, then it is forbidden not to say the truth.  If I know, beyond a  doubt, that Mr. A is going to harm (physically, financially, etc.) Mr B, I cannot lie or even remain silent “to promote the peace.” it is a Mitzva to save a fellow man from any kind of harm (lo ta’amod al dam re’ekha. Vayiqra 19:16).
READ

Muslim, Zionist and Proud. 
How I went from hating to loving Israel,  
by Kasim Hafeez, from Aish. 


Lending Money and Tzedaqa

One of the 613 Mitzvot of the Tora is lending money, without interest, to a fellow Jew who needs it (Shemot 22:24). Helping a needy person through a free loan is a form of Tzedaqa. However, harassing a needy person into paying back the loan when one knows he/she lacks the money at the moment, is a very grave transgression which is explicitly forbidden in the Tora.
  
ILLUSTRATION: David, knowing that Josh’s business is in the verge of insolvency, offers to lend him the $10k needed to keep afloat. “You’ll pay me when things get better again” said David to Josh. David has just fulfilled a great Mitzva. Not only did David help a fellow Jew financially, but he did this without affecting Josh’s dignity. In fact, he prevented Josh from getting to the point that he would need to ask for financial help.
As long as David knows that Josh cannot yet repay the loan, he is forbidden from harassing Josh. The Halakha is that David cannot even “inadvertently” pass by Josh’s place in order to remind him of the loan, if David knows that Josh doesn’t yet have the money. 
On the other hand, Josh is forbidden from withholding payment longer than necessary. In other words, if Josh does have the money, it is forbidden for him to unduly delay paying back David.
Another thing. “Lending money” without expecting to get the money back is indeed the highest way to perform tzedaqa. A friend of mine borrowed a good amount of money from Mr A. “You pay me whenever you can “, Mr A. said. My friend was very grateful and a couple of years later he collected the money to pay his debt. When he returned the money, Mr. A. said: “I want you to keep this money and find somebody else who needs it. And when he gives you the money back, do as I’m doing now”.