We have been discussing that we don’t always have all the facts , and we also interpret the facts in a certain way. This is connected to Lashon Hara . The Torah , in Sh emot (23,1) tells us a negative commandment, one of the 613: לֹ֥א תִשָּׂ֖א שֵׁ֣מַע שָׁ֑וְא Do not accept false news. Rashi says that this refers to the prohibition not to accept Lashon Hara. Interestingly, there is a second prohibition that comes from this, that a judge may not hear one side of the story before the other. Both litigants must be present at the same time. They are a few questions here. Firstly, Lashon Hara is regarding things that are true, so why does it say false here. It’s false because you don’t have all the information, or because you don’t know how to interpret the information. So even though it might seem true, it’s really false. S econdly, why are there two seemingly different laws (not to accept La shon Hara , and that a judge can not hear one side before the other) coming from the same pasuk about not hearing false news? And furthermore, why shouldn’t the judge hear one side before the other? He will eventually hear both sides , so w hat’s the difference? The answer is that who m ever he hears first will paint a picture of truth , and the onus is on the second person to undo it. But if they are sitting there together, they may have a certain fear, the other person can interject, so it’s not a one-sided opinion. Both sides come together in a package. This is very important. The Rambam, in sefer Moreh Nevuchim ( sec 1, chap 31) quotes three reasons for arguments and communication breakdowns, from a seemingly secular source, Alexander Aphrodisi, a Greek philosopher. The first reason he gives is that people like to win a fight. They think they are right , and therefore they are not able to hear anything else. Reason number two is that the topic is complex. There are a lot of factors to account for. Thirdly, a person may lack the mind or intellect to understand a certain topic. Whether a person doesn’t understand the topic, or the topic is complex is the reason for an argument. This is what happens with Gemara- it’s a deep topic. We’ll argue either because the Gemara is complex or we don’t have the brains understand it. Those are the three reasons that Alexander Aphrodisi brings down. But the Rambam adds a fourth reason-we become habituated and we already learned things- and once you understand something one way, it’s difficult to undo that understanding. If you understand something one way and I understand it in another way, that is a breeding ground for argument s . That is why, as we said, a judge cannot hear one opinion before the other. It’s also partially the reason for La shon Hara . I have a certain way that I see things, which may lead me to look at some thing in a negative way. B’Ezrat Hashem we will further develop this point tomorrow.