Lashon HaRa Caused The Destruction
Question: Did lashon ha’ra play a role in the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash?
Short Answer: The Chofetz Chaim writes that lashon ha’ra caused the second (and first!) destruction of the Beis HaMikdash.
Explanation:
I. Destruction
The Gemara (Yoma 9b) explains that the first Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because the B’nei Yisrael violated the three cardinal sins: (i) gilui arayos (immorality); (ii) avodah zarah (idolatry) and (iii) sh’fichas damim (murder). The Gemara cites p’sukim to support its explanation. The Gemara then questions why the Second Beis HaMikdash was destroyed if the B’nei Yisrael were steeped in Torah, mitzvos, and g’milas chasadim (good deeds). It answers that the Second Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because of the B’nei Yisrael’s “sin’as chinam” (baseless hatred) for each other. This is as egregious as violating the three cardinal sins.
The Gemara further wonders whether the First Beis HaMikdash was also destroyed because of sin’as chinam. It cites a pasuk in Yechezkel (21:17) in which the navi discusses the terrible cries of the “n’si’ei Yisrael” (princes) who gather together and hurt each other with “swords.” The Gemara explains that this pasuk refers to people who ate and drank together but hurt each other with their words. The Gemara concludes by limiting this pasuk to the “n’si’ei Yisrael” who hurt each other with their words; everyone else violated the three cardinal sins, which caused the destruction of the First Beis HaMikdash.
II. The Chofetz Chaim’s Chidush
The Chofetz Chaim (Hakdamah to Hilchos Lashon HaRa) suggests a novel idea. When discussing the severity of speaking lashon ha’ra, the Chofetz Chaim writes that towards the end of the Second Beis HaMikdash, there was an increase in sin’as chinam and lashon ha’ra, and he cites the above Gemara in Yoma (as well as the Yerushalmi, Yoma). Notably, however, the Gemara never says that the Second Beis HaMikdash was destroyed because of lashon ha’ra; it only mentioned sin’as chinam.
The Chofetz Chaim himself addresses this problem. He explains that sin’as chinam must include lashon ha’ra, as well, because sin’as chinam alone would have been insufficiently egregious to cause the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash. Lashon ha’ra stems from baseless hatred between people. Indeed, the Gemara in Yoma proved that sin’as chinam was equal to the three cardinal sins. Such sin’as chinam, which was obviously very egregious like the three cardinal sins, must have included lashon ha’ra.
The Chofetz Chaim further bolsters his explanation with two proofs. First, the Chofetz Chaim says that the Gemara in Eiruchin (15b) supports his thesis. Presumably the Chofetz Chaim means that the Gemara, which states that lashon ha’ra is equal to the three cardinal sins, thereby proves that the sin’as chinam in Yoma must have been referring to lashon ha’ra. Second, the conclusion of the Gemara in Yoma, where the Gemara explains that the n’si’ei Yisrael would hurt each other during the First Beis HaMikdash shows that the sin’as chinam being discussed in the Gemara is sin’as chinam through words, i.e., lashon ha’ra.
III. A Strong Proof
The Dirshu edition of the Chofetz Chaim (Hakdamah, p. 5, n. 8) shows that Rashi agrees with the Chofetz Chaim’s chidush. The Gemara (Gittin 57b), after discussing the terrible tragedies and stories that occurred during the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash, including the famous story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza, quotes Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Eliezer remarks that the story of Bar Kamtza is hinted to in the pasuk in Iyov which discusses hiding from dangerous “lashon.”
Rashi explains Rabbi Eliezer’s remark. The dangerous “lashon” was the lashon ha’ra spoken by Bar Kamtza to the Roman emperor, which caused the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash. Thus, it was actually lashon ha’ra that was the cause of the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash.
The Ben Yehoyada (Gittin 56b) adds another proof from the same Gemaros in Gittin regarding the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash. The Gemara discusses at length the terrible famine that ravaged Yerushalayim for three years during the Roman siege led by Vespasian. This highlights the punishment via the mouth, i.e. extreme hunger, for the sin of lashon ha’ra, performed through the mouth.
Rav Moshe Levi (Kuntres MiBeis HaVaad, Devarim 5774) notes another proof to the Chofetz Chaim. The piyut that we recite on Shiv’ah Asar B’Tamuz notes that we are required to say these kinos/S’lichos due to the fact that we misused our mouths in the time of the Second Beis HaMikdash.
IV. Even The First Beis Hamikdash
The Chofetz Chaim (sefer Chovas HaShmirah, Maalas HaShmirah 15) makes another amazing comment. He suggests that even the First Beis HaMikdash was destroyed partly because of lashon ha’ra, as is clear from a “careful study” of the haftarah that we read on Tish’ah B’Av morning. Presumably, the Chofetz Chaim is referring to the p’sukim in Yirmiyahu (perek 9) which discuss the horrible slander and r’chilus that existed in B’nei Yisrael during the Second Beis HaMikdash.
V. Parshas D’varim
A final thought cited by numerous Acharonim (including the Chida) on why lashon ha’ra is connected to the destruction of the Second Beis HaMikdash. Parshas D’varim, which starts with the words “Eileh ha’d’varim” (“These are the words”) is always read on Shabbos Chazon. This signifies that we caused the destruction through our words. Indeed, the word “eileh” is an acronym for “avak lashon ha’ra.”
Rabbi Ephraim Glatt, Esq. is Associate Rabbi at the Young Israel of Kew Gardens Hills and a practicing litigation attorney. Questions? Comments? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
