We learned (Arachin 15a) that for the sin of lashon hara one is afflicted with plague-spots. And the Gemara asks: "But did R. Anani bar Sasson not say that the robe atones for lashon hara? …Let that which produces a sound [(the bells on the robe)] atone for the sound of the voice [i.e., lashon hara]?" And it answers: "There is no contradiction: In one instance, his deeds avail; in the other, his deeds do not avail. If his deeds avail, plague-spots come upon him; if his deeds do not avail, the robe atones." And the Gemara asks: "But did not R. Shimon say in the name of R. Yehoshua ben Levi that lashon hara is atoned for by the incense? For R. Chanina taught: We learned that the incense atones, it being written (Bamidbar 17:12): 'And he [Aaron] put on the incense and he atoned for the people.' And the school of R. Yishmael taught: 'For what does the incense atone? For lashon hara. Let what is done in secrecy [(the offering of the incense on the silver altar)] come and atone for an act [lashon hara] committed in secrecy.'" And the Gemara answers: "There is no contradiction: Here [(the incense atones)] when it [the lashon hara] is spoken secretly; there, [(the robe atones)] when it is spoken in public." What emerges from this is that when his deeds avail, he is afflicted with leprosy, even if it were spoken secretly, and when they do not avail, a distinction must be made, viz.: If it were spoken secretly, the incense, (which was also offered secretly, all men having to remove themselves) atoned; and if it were spoken in public, the robe atones [(the sound of its bells being heard when he left the sanctuary)].
This seems to contradict "And he put on the incense and he atoned for the people." For there the lashon hara was in public, it being written (Ibid. 6): "And the entire congregation of the children of Israel railed on the morrow against Moses and against Aaron, saying: 'You have put to death the people of the L-rd.'" It may be that for this reason Aaron had to bring the incense to the people, in public, and to atone there for them, the daily incense offering brought in secret not sufficing, since the lashon hara was in public.
As to the atonement not sufficing through the robe, in which Aaron was clothed, it is possible that since the lashon hara was directed to Aaron himself, he could not be atoned for by his robe.
[It seems more apt to say that here, where they said: "You have put to death the people of the L-rd," their act is "of avail." For Rashi explains "of avail" as "leading to quarreling," so that "not of avail" would refer to lashon hara which does not lead to quarreling. And this obtains only with lashon hara where one shamed a man not in his presence and no harm was caused the man because of this. But in an instance of verbal wronging, where he shames and hurts one [(for this, too, is in the category of lashon hara, as we see from the episode of Avdan (which shall be adduced below) and from Rashi (Yoma 44a — "al lashon hara")], it is not possible to say that his act does not avail, for this [the verbal wronging] itself avails, for he shames and hurts him. This is proved by the instance of Avdan (Yevamoth 105b), who shamed R. Yishmael b. R. Yossi, saying to him: "Are you worthy of learning Torah from Rabbi?" We are told there that at that moment Avdan became a metzora, and Rashi explains there that the punishment for "lashon hara" is plague-spots.
As it applies to our instance, Moses and Aaron were told to their faces "You have put to death the people of the L-rd." This is [obviously] an instance of their act "availing," and for this the robe is certainly of no avail, as we see in the Gemara (Arachin 15a), nor the merit of the daily incense offering. Why did the Holy One Blessed be He say (Ibid. 10): "And I will consume them [(who spoke lashon hara against Moses and Aaron)] this instant"? Would it not have been sufficient to punish them with plague-spots? It is possible that this may be because they spoke lashon hara so audaciously against Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him [(who was "trusted in the whole house of the L-rd," and did nothing without being told to do so by the L-rd)], and against Aaron, the "holy one" of the L-rd, saying that they had killed the people of the L-rd. If so, they deserved to be put to death by the hands of Heaven, G-d forbid. Therefore, it was decreed against the speakers that they die in the plague, which is much more severe than the punishment of plague-spots. And only after many people were killed in the plague, the rest were protected (against their lashon hara) by the merit of the incense that Aaron offered up in public, as mentioned above. In this vein we can understand what is written in the Torah, that Miriam was afflicted with leprosy because she spoke wrongly against Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him. Did she not speak privately with Aaron, and not in public, in which instance she should have been protected in the merit of the incense, which atones for lashon hara spoken in secret? Perforce, we must say, as in the above instance, that lashon hara spoken against the "lord of the prophets" is far graver, and is not atoned for by the incense but only by plague-spots. But, in any event, her punishment was attenuated by the prayer of Moses. For it is known that the punishment of plague-spots for lashon hara is to be a confirmed leper, as explained in the Gemara, but her punishment was attenuated, only to be quarantined for seven days (see end of Chapter XVIII).]
פָּרָשַׁת קרֹח
Korach
גָּרְסִינַן בַּעֲרָכִין (דף ט"ו.) דְּבַעֲוֹן שֶׁל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע נְגָעִים בָּאִים עַל הָאָדָם, וּמַקְשָׁה הַגְּמָרָא: וְהָאָמַר ר' עֲנָנִי בַּר שָׂשׂוֹן, דִּמְעִיל מְכַפֵּר עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע. יָבוֹא דָּבָר שֶׁבְּקּוֹל [דְּפַעֲמוֹנֵי זָהָב שֶׁל הַמְּעִיל נִשְׁמָעִין], וִיכַפֵּר עַל מַעֲשֵׂה הַקּוֹל. וּמְשַׁנֵּי לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא דְּאַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, הָא דְּלָא אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו. אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו [שֶׁנִּתְקוֹטְטוּ עַל יָדוֹ] אָתוּ נְגָעִים עֲלֵהּ. לָא אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו מְעִיל מְכַפֵּר. וּמַקְשָׁה הַגְּמָרָא: וְהָאָמַר רַב סִימוֹן מִשְּׁמֵהּ דְּר' יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, דְּלָשׁוֹן הָרָע מִתְכַּפֵּר עַל יְדֵי קְּטֹרֶת, דְּתָנֵי ר' חֲנִינָא: לָמַדְנוּ לַקְּטֹרֶת שֶׁמְכַפֶּרֶת, דִּכְתִיב (במדבר י"ז י"ב): "וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַקְּטֹרֶת וַיְכַפֵּר עַל הָעָם". וְתָנָא ר' יִשְׁמָעֵאל: עַל מַה קְּטֹרֶת מְכַפֶּרֶת? עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, יָבוֹא דָּבָר שֶׁבַּחֲשַׁאי וִיכַפֵּר עַל מַעֲשֶׂה חֲשָׁאִי, וּמְשַׁנֵּי לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא בְּצִנְעָא הָא בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא. הַיּוֹצֵא מִזֶּה, דִּבְאַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, אָתוּ נְגָעִים עֲלֵהּ, אֲפִלּוּ אִם הַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע הָיָה בְּצִנְעָא. וּבְלֹא אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו יֵשׁ חִלּוּק, דְּאִם הַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע הָיָה בְּצִנְעָא, הַקְטֹרֶת, שֶׁהָיְתָה גַּם כֵּן בַּחֲשַׁאי, שֶׁהָיָה צָרִיךְ כָּל אָדָם לִפְרֹש אָז, מְכַפֶּרֶת, וְאִם הַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע הָיְתָה בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא, מְכַפֵּר עַל זֶה הַמְּעִיל, שֶׁהָיָה נִשְׁמָע קוֹלוֹ בְּבוֹאוֹ אֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ.
We learned (Arachin 15a) that for the sin of lashon hara one is afflicted with plague-spots. And the Gemara asks: "But did R. Anani bar Sasson not say that the robe atones for lashon hara? …Let that which produces a sound [(the bells on the robe)] atone for the sound of the voice [i.e., lashon hara]?" And it answers: "There is no contradiction: In one instance, his deeds avail; in the other, his deeds do not avail. If his deeds avail, plague-spots come upon him; if his deeds do not avail, the robe atones." And the Gemara asks: "But did not R. Shimon say in the name of R. Yehoshua ben Levi that lashon hara is atoned for by the incense? For R. Chanina taught: We learned that the incense atones, it being written (Bamidbar 17:12): 'And he [Aaron] put on the incense and he atoned for the people.' And the school of R. Yishmael taught: 'For what does the incense atone? For lashon hara. Let what is done in secrecy [(the offering of the incense on the silver altar)] come and atone for an act [lashon hara] committed in secrecy.'" And the Gemara answers: "There is no contradiction: Here [(the incense atones)] when it [the lashon hara] is spoken secretly; there, [(the robe atones)] when it is spoken in public." What emerges from this is that when his deeds avail, he is afflicted with leprosy, even if it were spoken secretly, and when they do not avail, a distinction must be made, viz.: If it were spoken secretly, the incense, (which was also offered secretly, all men having to remove themselves) atoned; and if it were spoken in public, the robe atones [(the sound of its bells being heard when he left the sanctuary)].
וְקָשֶׁה הָא הַקְּרָא (שם) דְּ"וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַקְּטֹרֶת וַיְכַפֵּר עַל הָעָם". שָׁם הָיְתָה הַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא, דְּהָא כְּתִיב (שם ו'): "וַיִּלֹּנוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמָּחֳרָת עַל מֹשֶה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן לֵאמֹר: אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם ה"'. וְאֶפְשָׁר, דְּמִשּׁוּם זֶה הֻצְרַךְ אַהֲרֹן לְהוֹלִיךְ הַקְּטֹרֶת אֶל הָעָם בְּפִרְסוּם וּלְכַפֵּר שָׁם עֲלֵיהֶם, וְלֹא הָיָה סַגִּי לֵהּ בַּקִּטֹרֶת, שֶׁבְּכָל יוֹם שֶׁהָיָה בַּחֲשַׁאי, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע הָיָה בְּפִרְסוּם.
This seems to contradict "And he put on the incense and he atoned for the people." For there the lashon hara was in public, it being written (Ibid. 6): "And the entire congregation of the children of Israel railed on the morrow against Moses and against Aaron, saying: 'You have put to death the people of the L-rd.'" It may be that for this reason Aaron had to bring the incense to the people, in public, and to atone there for them, the daily incense offering brought in secret not sufficing, since the lashon hara was in public.
וְהָא דְּלָא הָיָה סַגִּי לֵהּ הַכַּפָּרָה בַּמְּעִיל, שֶׁהָיָה לָבוּשׁ בּוֹ אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן, אֶפְשָׁר מִשּׁוּם דְּהַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע הָיָה עַל אַהֲרֹן גּוּפָא, כְּדִכְתִיב בַּקְּרָא, לֹא אֶפְשָׁר לְהִתְכַּפֵּר עַל יְדֵי מְעִילוֹ.
As to the atonement not sufficing through the robe, in which Aaron was clothed, it is possible that since the lashon hara was directed to Aaron himself, he could not be atoned for by his robe.
[וְיוֹתֵר נִרְאֶה לִי לוֹמַר, דְּהָכָא שֶׁאָמְרוּ (שם): "אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם ה' " מִקְרֵי אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, דְּהָא רַשִּׁ"י פֵּרֵשׁ אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, שֶׁנִּתְקוֹטְטוּ עַל יָדוֹ, וּמִמֵּילָא מַה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ: לֹא אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, הַיְנוּ שֶׁלֹּא בָּאָה מְרִיבָה עַל יְדֵי זֶה. וְזֶהוּ שַׁיָּךְ רַק לְעִנְיַן לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, שֶׁדִבֵּר עַל אֵיזֶה אִישׁ, שֶׁבִּזָּהוּ שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו, וְלֹא בָּא לְאוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ שׁוּם רֵעוּתָא עַל יְדֵי זֶה. אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן אוֹנָאַת דְּבָרִים, שֶׁמְּבַזֶּה אוֹתוֹ וּמַקנִיטוֹ, [שֶׁגַּם זֶה נִכְנָס בִּכְלַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, כִּדְמוּכָח בְּמַעֲשֵׂה דְּאַבְדָן, הַמְבֹאָר לְקַמֵּה, וְכֵן בְּיוֹמָא (דף מ"ד.) בְּרַשִּׁ"י דִבּוּר הַמַּתְחִיל "עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע". עַיֵּן שָׁם], לֹא שַׁיָּךְ לוֹמַר לֹא אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, שֶׁזֶּה גּוּפָא אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו, שֶׁמְּבַזֶּה אוֹתוֹ וּמַקְנִיטוֹ. וּרְאָיָה לַדָּבָר מִמַּה דְּאִיתָא בִּיבָמוֹת (דף ק"ה:) בְּמַעֲשֵׂה דְּאַבְדָן, שֶׁבִּזָּה לְר' יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן ר' יוֹסִי, וְאָמַר לוֹ: וְכִי הָגוּן אַתָּה לִלְמֹד תּוֹרָה מֵרַבִּי? אִיתָא שָׁם, שֶׁבְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה נִצְטָרַע אַבְדָּן, וּפֵרֵשׁ רַשִׁ"י שָׁם, שֶׁעָנְשׁוֹ שֶׁל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע נְגָעִים. נַחֲזֹר לְעִנְיָנֵנוּ, דְּהָכָא שֶׁאָמְרוּ לְמֹשֶה וְאַהֲרֹן בִּפְנֵיהֶם: "אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם ה"', מִקְרֵי אַהֲנוּ מַעֲשָׂיו. וְלָזֶה בְּוַדַּאי לֹא מְהַנֵּי מְעִיל, כִּדְאִיתָא בַּגְּמָרָא (ערכין ט"ו.), וְלֹא זְכוּת הַקְּטֹרֶת שֶׁמַּקְרִיבִין בְּכָל יוֹם.
[It seems more apt to say that here, where they said: "You have put to death the people of the L-rd," their act is "of avail." For Rashi explains "of avail" as "leading to quarreling," so that "not of avail" would refer to lashon hara which does not lead to quarreling. And this obtains only with lashon hara where one shamed a man not in his presence and no harm was caused the man because of this. But in an instance of verbal wronging, where he shames and hurts one [(for this, too, is in the category of lashon hara, as we see from the episode of Avdan (which shall be adduced below) and from Rashi (Yoma 44a — "al lashon hara")], it is not possible to say that his act does not avail, for this [the verbal wronging] itself avails, for he shames and hurts him. This is proved by the instance of Avdan (Yevamoth 105b), who shamed R. Yishmael b. R. Yossi, saying to him: "Are you worthy of learning Torah from Rabbi?" We are told there that at that moment Avdan became a metzora, and Rashi explains there that the punishment for "lashon hara" is plague-spots.
וְהִנֵּה לִכְאוֹרָה לָמָּה אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא (שם י'): "וַאֲכַלֶּה אוֹתָם כְּרָגַע", הֲלֹא הָיָה דַּי בְּעֹנֶשׁ נְגָעִים? וְאֶפְשָׁר, מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהֵם הוֹצִיאוּ דִּבָּה עַל מֹשֶה רַבֵּנוּ עָלָיו הַשָּׁלוֹם, [שֶׁהוּא הַנֶּאֱמָן בְּכָל בֵּית ה', וְלֹא עָשָׂה דָּבָר שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֱמַר לוֹ מִפִּי ה'], וְעַל אַהֲרֹן קְדוֹשׁ ה', בְּבִזָּיוֹן גָּדוֹל כָּזֶה, שֶׁהֵם הֵמִיתוּ אֶת עַם ה'. וְאִם כֵּן לְדִבְרֵיהֶם נִתְחַיְּבוּ מִיתָה בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם, חַס וְשָׁלוֹם, וְעַל כֵּן נִגְזַר עַל הַמְדַבְּרִים, שֶׁהֵם יָמוּתוּ בַּמַּגֵּפָה, שֶׁהוּא חָמוּר הַרְבֵּה מֵעֹנֶשׁ נְגָעִים, וְרַק אַחַר שֶׁכָּלוּ הַרְבֵּה אֲנָשִׁים עַל יְדֵי הַמַּגֵּפָה, עַל הָאֲנָשִׁים הַנִּשְׁאָרִים הֵגֵן עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע שֶׁלָּהֶם זְכוּת הַקְּטֹרֶת שֶׁהִקְטִיר אַהֲרֹן בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא, וְכַנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל, וּבָזֶה נִיחָא לִי, מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה, שֶׁמִּרְיָם נֶעֶנְשָׁה בְּעֹנֶשׁ הַצָּרַעַת, בַּעֲבוּר שֶׁדִּבְּרָה שֶׁלֹּא כַּהֹגֶן עַל מֹשֶה רַבֵּנוּ עָלָיו הַשָּׁלוֹם, וַהֲלֹא הִיא דִּבְּרָה עִם אַהֲרֹן רַק בֵּינָהּ לְבֵין עַצְמָהּ, וְלֹא בָּרַבִּים, וְהָיָה עֲלֵיהֶם לְהָגֵן זְכוּת הַקְּטֹרֶת, שֶׁמְּכַפֵּר עַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע שֶׁבַּחֲשַׁאי. וְעַל כֵּן כַּנִּזְכָּר לְעֵיל, שֶׁהַלָּשׁוֹן הָרָע, שֶׁהוּא עַל אֲדוֹן הַנְּבִיאִים, חָמוּר טְפֵי וְלֹא מִתְכַּפֵּר בַּקְּטֹרֶת כִּי אִם בִּנְגָעִים. וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם הֵקֵל הַכָּתוּב עָלֶיהָ עַל יְדֵי תְּפִלָּתוֹ שֶׁל מֹשֶה, שֶׁיָּדוּעַ, שֶׁעַל לָשׁוֹן הָרָע בָּא עֹנֶשׁ נְגָעִים לִהְיוֹת מְצֹרָע מֻחְלָט, כִּדְאִיתָא בַּגְּמָרָא, וְעָלֶיהָ הֵקֵל הַכָּתוּב לִהְיוֹת רַק מְסֻגֶּרֶת עַל שִׁבְעָה יָמִים].
As it applies to our instance, Moses and Aaron were told to their faces "You have put to death the people of the L-rd." This is [obviously] an instance of their act "availing," and for this the robe is certainly of no avail, as we see in the Gemara (Arachin 15a), nor the merit of the daily incense offering. Why did the Holy One Blessed be He say (Ibid. 10): "And I will consume them [(who spoke lashon hara against Moses and Aaron)] this instant"? Would it not have been sufficient to punish them with plague-spots? It is possible that this may be because they spoke lashon hara so audaciously against Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him [(who was "trusted in the whole house of the L-rd," and did nothing without being told to do so by the L-rd)], and against Aaron, the "holy one" of the L-rd, saying that they had killed the people of the L-rd. If so, they deserved to be put to death by the hands of Heaven, G-d forbid. Therefore, it was decreed against the speakers that they die in the plague, which is much more severe than the punishment of plague-spots. And only after many people were killed in the plague, the rest were protected (against their lashon hara) by the merit of the incense that Aaron offered up in public, as mentioned above. In this vein we can understand what is written in the Torah, that Miriam was afflicted with leprosy because she spoke wrongly against Moses our teacher, may peace be upon him. Did she not speak privately with Aaron, and not in public, in which instance she should have been protected in the merit of the incense, which atones for lashon hara spoken in secret? Perforce, we must say, as in the above instance, that lashon hara spoken against the "lord of the prophets" is far graver, and is not atoned for by the incense but only by plague-spots. But, in any event, her punishment was attenuated by the prayer of Moses. For it is known that the punishment of plague-spots for lashon hara is to be a confirmed leper, as explained in the Gemara, but her punishment was attenuated, only to be quarantined for seven days (see end of Chapter XVIII).]