Did the Apostle Paul Commit Lashon Hara?

Shalom, everyone!

I’ve been delving a lot into halachah lately, in particular the laws of the blessings (to make sure I am guarding G-d’s Name with the proper reverence and also approach Him in prayer properly throughout the day for even the seemingly smallest things) and the laws of speech, which I will mention again below.

In addition to this, I’ve been focusing a lot on textual criticism and in particular Paul’s letters which seem to cause so many problems for Christians and Jews alike. I won’t go into all of the startling information I’ve discovered here, but I will share an example of something that my eyes have been open to due to what I believe is an objective look at some writings that were previously “above reproach” in my eyes. I am referring to the “New” Testament in general, and the Letters of Paul in particular.

I’ve already caught a lot of flak for my stance on the Christian’s Testament in certain circles in that I view them as somewhat edifying and useful for today’s Christian or scholar to gleam some info from, but they should not be considered equal to the Tanach (Hebrew Bible) in inspiration or application even for Christians/Non-Jews for several reasons. One of the reasons is the pushing of Gnostic and/or Hellenistic morals and understanding as if they are Jewish or pro-Torah by many people today—one of these examples I will be discussing below. I would be willing to go into these other reasons elsewhere if asked, but for now I’m continuing with this post’s point.

Before I go into my examples, I want to first cover several aspects of the laws of speech that define lashon hara (evil tongue/speech):

The main derivative of these laws is the verse from the Torah, “You shall not go around as a slanderer among your people, and you shall not stand up against the life of your neighbor: I am the L-RD” (ESV Lev. 19:16).

The definition of lashon hara (as defined by the modern master of the laws of speech, R’ Israel Meir HaKohen Kagan, zt”l, a.k.a. the Chofetz Chaim) is information which is either derogatory or potentially harmful to another individual. A derogatory statement about someone is lashon hara, even it if will definitely not cause that person any harm. To focus on the shortcomings of another person is in itself wrong. A statement that could potentially bring harm to someone–be it financial, physical, psychological or otherwise–is lashon hara, even if the information is not negative. (It should be noted that the term “lashon hara” refers even to true statements which are derogatory or harmful. Negative statements that are untrue or inaccurate are termed hatza’as shem ra [slander]).

In addition to this is the prohibition against accepting a false report (Ex. 23:1), which is interpreted to also mean we should not accept, and thereby act, on any negative report given of someone from a secondhand source. Everything must be witnessed via one’s own eyes before passing judgment (if one is in the position to do so). There are numerous other aspects of these laws but this will suffice for now. Now I will give my examples from Paul’s letters:

In the opening to the first letter to the Corinthians (v. 11) we see that Paul has been told some information about the community there “For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you.”

Paul then continues by giving a criticism regarding this community’s practice of sectarianism and continues to write an extremely long (an unbelievably long letter per Ancient standards by far) letter citing all of this community’s failings with his often scathing judgments close behind. As demonstrated above, this would be a direct violation of the laws of evil speech in that he acted (i.e. issued judgment) without investigating the case for himself. According to the laws of evil speech, the correct course of action would be to not even mention these supposed sins he was informed of to the community, and to wait until he was there to personally investigate and address the issues as applicable. This “airing of the dirty laundry” unfortunately seems to be a recurring theme in Paul’s letters and is generally the focus of his writing as opposed to a solely more edifying or encouraging letter, or better yet, more practical direction for everyday life (and their reasonings—such as one would find in later rabbinic letters in Judaism [i.e. Iggeros]).

We see this again in 1 Cor. 5 where not only does Paul state that sexual sin has been reported to him (v.1), but that he has already judged these people as guilty and determined their punishment without having been there (v.3-5)! This is completely contrary to the laws of evil speech which have a list of procedures necessary for such an action to include verifying this information personally and then establishing a beis din (council) to decide a proper punishment if the guilty person is unwilling to repent. These people in Corinth get no such treatment.

One could argue that most of these laws of speech weren’t created until hundreds of years after Paul. However, it doesn’t require much of an understanding of ethics to see the problem of judging others before personal verification, or instantly believing a negative report will have on a society and its spiritual status. This kind of treatment is the basis for the plot of any day time soap opera–which if anything, are an example of what not to do. We should instead strive for the goal of the laws of lashon hara, “Judge your fellow favorably” (Avos 1:6).

There is further evidence that Paul may actually have been seriously guilty of such a sin. In Gal. 4:14 and 2 Cor. 12:7 we get a clue that there’s something physically puzzling about Paul. The “thorn in his flesh” may very well have been tzaraas (Biblical leprosy), which is the Divine punishment for lashon hara (Deut. 24:9). The evidence we have is based on the Greek wording in 2 Cor. 12 versus that of the Hebrew in Lev. 13:44 as both mean “stricken” as well as pseudepigraphical works as discussed below.

One only has to compare “Simon the Leper” who is the personification of the Anti-Christ in the “Apocalypse of Elijah” (an early Christian work) as:

“He has skinny legs; at the front of his (bald?) head there is a tuft of white hair; his eyebrows reach to his ears, while leprous scabs cover his hands. He transforms himself before those that see him; he becomes a child; he becomes an old man. He will transform himself in every sign; but he cannot transform the signs of his head. By this you will recognize him, that he is the son of anomie (i.e. Torah-lessness).”

Versus that of the physical description of Paul given in “Paul and Thecla” (Another early Christian pseudegraphical work) Ch. 3:

“A man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good state of body with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked, full of friendliness; for now he appeared like a man, and now he had the face of an angel.”

The similarities are startling. In fact, some scholars believe that they are literally one in the same person but what became the Catholic Church gave Paul a more universal appeal in their attempts to solidify control of the Christian world. So we see that potentially the real Paul was stricken by tzaraas for possible lashon hara as demonstrated in letters attributed to him as well as somewhat contemporary (for the time) Christian sources.

Lashon hara is so egregious in Judaism that it is considered equal to all sins combined (Yerushalmi Peah 1:1) so I don’t take this inquiry lightly. I was also careful to make sure my motives were just in sharing this information–because I personally never met Paul, nor carry a grudge against him, and I consider what I am writing and studying here to be of a scholastic nature, then I feel it is appropriate to share this info to those who are interested. I don’t present this information as a “definitive answer” of what really happened, nor of a bashing session against someone I’ve never met, but merely the piecing together of several sources that seem to form an interesting picture of who Paul may have really been.