[Avodah] Halachic Analysis: The Hillary Photo Controversy

[Micha Berger]

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:11:11AM -0400, Micha Berger wrote:
: So, here is something from R' Yehoshua Pfeffer's discussion
: of the permissability of hiring a performer to do a magic show
: <http://www.dinonline.org/2010/06/24/a-halachic-glance-at-magic>:
...

which I had hoped would prove that we worry lemaaseh about creating
a misimpression that has no impact on the person being mislead. It's
neither leading to hezeq nor geneivas mamon.

depends how you define non-consequential. If we speaking of
non-consequential changes like enhancing the lighting or contrast on a
photo, I would agree that there is no issur. Anything that creates no
impression at all can't create a false one.

But if it's something like a magic show, there the person in question is
fooled but it doesn't cost him anything, I did bring sources that say it's
assur. I brought the Bach, the Shach, the Chayei Adam, the CC and Diberos
Moshe on the gemara, as well as the original gemaros which list cases
where bending the truth is mutar (and "it makes no difference to them"
isn't there)... I also pointed you to mar'eh meqomos for further research.

Tosafos say that if someone was late and is asked why, and the real reason
happens to be that he was having relations, he may lie. Why require the
heter of puria, since the person asking has no financial or other stake
in the answer anyway?

Studying the sugya, too many rishonim are like this Tosafos -- they make
no sense if we assume midevar sheqer tirchaq is "merely" another form
of prohibited hezeq or geneivas mamon.



Aside from the cases of shinui (not outright saying something false)
already listed in the gemara, there is another case I would like to
exclude because it's not even geneivas daas. Se the Ran on the mishnah
on Nedarim 24b. If everyone involved understands that the norm is to
exagerate, exageration is mutar -- because it's like they have their
own commonly agreed upon language. I would think the same is true in any
situation where the person would not assume the statement was meant as
literal fact -- no different than story telling or a joke.

But in our case, while the buyers of the paper know that pictures are
edited, it is not so frequently done that most people, looking at a
picture (even one with an empty seat) even start to contemplate that
particular picture's truth. It's not like having a private language,
unlike the Ran's case.



Here are some more sources on the general topic:

 From Linas Tzedeq:
http://www.jewishvalues.us/uploads/101_Emess_vSheker.pdf
http://www.jewishvalues.us/uploads/102_Anochi_Esav.pdf
(The first veers in and out of court-specific situations.) And also to
some extent (althose these focus more on monetary loss):
http://www.jewishvalues.us/uploads/103_Hen_Tzedek.pdf
http://www.jewishvalues.us/uploads/104_Genevas_Daas.PDF

(I was in a chaburah that used those booklets for mar'eh meqomos. We
found at times that reading the longer quote inside rather than relying
on their snippet led us to different conclusions than the author. Good
stuff, very AishDas-y. See <http://www.jewishvalues.us/Sugyos.html>.)

Also, a summary by someone working anonymously out of Lakewood:
<http://halachafortoday.com/ArchivesHilchosMidvarShekerTirchak.aspx>.

RAZZivitofsky's treatment of the topic from Judaism, Summer 1993:
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/faxes/1993-Truthfullness-Judaism.pdf
posted as part of the thread
<http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=M#MIDVAR%20SHEKER%20TIRCHAK>

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             A pious Jew is not one who worries about his fellow
micha at aishdas.org        man's soul and his own stomach; a pious Jew worries
http://www.aishdas.org   about his own soul and his fellow man's stomach.
Fax: (270) 514-1507                       - Rav Yisrael Salanter