The Laws Governing Unfair Gain and Deception

The Rules Governing Unfair Gain and Deception. (1-32)

1 It is forbidden to take unfair advantage1 of another person,2 neither when purchasing from him — to purchase at a lower price than [the article’s]3 worth, even a p’rutah’s4 worth5 — nor when selling to him — to sell it at even a p’rutah more than its worth. If one takes unfair advantage, he violates a negative commandment,6 as it is written:7 “When you make a sale to your colleague or make a purchase from your colleague, one person should not take unfair advantage of his brother.”

One should not [try to justify himself], saying: “Maybe it is worth that [price] in this-and-this place” or “[It will be worth that price]... at this-and-this future time.” For [the value of] an article is [calculated] solely at the time and place8 of [the transaction].

2 If one transgressed or erred and took unfair advantage [of a colleague],9 he is obligated to return the unfair gain10 if it is one sixth of the value of the article purchased,11 e.g., one sold an article worth six for seven or purchased an article worth six for five, or one sixth of the money involved, e.g., he sold an article worth five for six or purchased an article worth seven for six.12 If, however, the unfair gain does not involve one sixth of the value of the article, nor a sixth of the funds, there is no need to return the difference, for this is ordinary business practice.13 For a purchaser and a seller cannot determine the worth of the article with exact precision and it is common practice for people to forgo an error up to one sixth [the value of an article], provided the error involved the article’s worth, not its dimensions or weight, the number of items involved,14 or the amount of money [paid], as will be explained.15

3 As an initial preference,16 however, one is obligated to make known the error — even if only a p’rutah — and not take unfair advantage of [a colleague]. There is room for doubt [concerning such a matter], for one might say that as long as [the discrepancy] is less than a sixth [of the funds or the value of the article], there is no question of unfair gain. Instead, this is the ordinary pattern of business transactions. For sometimes a purchaser desires the article and is willing to add more money than its worth and, on other occasions, a seller marks down his merchandise, because this particular article has no attraction to him or because he is pressed for cash. Therefore the concept of “unfair gain” does not apply when [the deviation] is less than one sixth of the transaction. Instead, it is considered as part of the selling price. Nevertheless, a G‑d-fearing person should be stringent with regard to his personal conduct and refrain from entering a situation in which the possibility of [the violation of] a Scriptural prohibition17 is involved.

Even if the person from whom the unfair gain is being taken is a trader who is very knowledgeable and unlikely to err, we consider the unfair gain to be solely a result of his oversight. He must be informed of his error18 and he should be explicitly told: “Even though [the article] is worth such-and-such, I desire to sell it — or buy it — only at such-and-such and therefore you may have no complaints against me.”19

4 When one makes such an explicit stipulation, [the transaction] is permitted even if the unfair gain is a sixth or more.20

If the unfair advantage that is being taken of the seller is so great that one could not make such a mistake,21 there is no need to make explicit mention [of the unfair gain], for it is obvious that [the seller] is lowering the price of his merchandise22 because he is pressed for cash.23

Similarly, when a private person sells his personal possessions at a high price, he does not need to explicitly [mention the unfair gain], for it is apparent to the purchaser that if he would not pay a higher price, [the seller] would not sell his personal possessions.24 [This applies] provided the purchaser knows that the seller is a private person and not a merchant. If, however, he is not aware of this, an explicit statement must be made.25 Other opinions maintain that even if it is known that he is a private person, an explicit statement must be made if the unfair gain is more than a sixth, for it is not common for a private person to sell his personal possessions for more than a sixth beyond their value. Deference should be given to this view.

5 The entire discussion of the measure of one sixth applies only when there is an error in evaluating the worth of merchandise, for not everyone can make an exact evaluation and it is common practice to waive [a complaint for] up to one sixth of an article’s value.26 If, however, the error involved the measure, the weight, or the amount of the merchandise, then even if [the error] involves one extra p’rutah, one is always obligated to return it,27 regardless of the situation.28

[There are, however, exceptions:] situations in which [one] would not err at all,29 e.g., in a place where it is customary to count the money [paid] in pairs, rather than one by one, and [the seller] discovered an extra one, three, or five coins, or the like. [Since the extra amount] is an odd number, it is impossible to say that [the extra money was given] because of a counting error. Instead, [we assume that the purchaser] gave the entire difference as a present. Alternatively, [the purchaser] had stolen or robbed such a sum from [the seller previously], but was embarrassed to return it to him.30 Hence, he included it in the money he was paying him now. Or someone else had stolen or robbed from [the seller] and gave [the sum] to the purchaser to include in the money he was paying him. [This applies] whether the money paid was for a sale, the repayment of a debt, or a loan which the lender was giving the borrower and the borrower found this extra money.

If, however, it was customary to count the money individually as is the practice today, we can assume that all the extra money was paid because of counting errors, i.e., he erred several times in counting, [erring] as many times as was the error in funds.31 Hence, [the recipient] is obligated to return it to him at all times.

6 When one buys and sells in good faith, he does not have to be concerned about the issue of unfair gain.32 What is implied? [The seller says:] “I purchased this article at this-and-this price.33 I want to make this-and-this much profit.”

Even though unfair advantage was taken of [the seller] when he purchased [the article] and [although generally,] whenever unfair advantage is taken of a person, he is not allowed to take unfair advantage of others for that reason,34 in this instance, permission is granted [the seller. The rationale is] that it is as if he is telling [the purchaser] not to rely on the market value of the article, but rather to focus on the price that [he, the seller,] paid.

7 When one buys and sells in good faith, he should not resell [the merchandise] that he purchased at a disadvantage in good faith and that which he purchased at an advantage at its value.35

For example, one made a [single] purchase of ten lengths of fabric at ten dinarim. Among them, were some that were worth less than a dinar and others that were worth more than a dinar. He should not price the inferior [fabrics] at a dinar each [and sell them “in good faith”] and price the superior [ones] at their value and thus receive the profit that he will negotiate [with the purchaser].36 For this is not “acting in good faith.” On the contrary, he is taking unfair advantage of the purchaser.37 Instead, if he sells them all together, he should price the entire quantity “in good faith,” just as he bought them all together. If, however, he sells those of inferior quality separately and those of superior quality separately, he should sell [each one] at its [true] value plus the profit he receives after negotiating with [the purchaser].

8 When one buys and sells in good faith, he may add to the purchase price the porter’s fee for taking it from his house to his store and his transportation and lodging fees if he brings it from another city.38 Similarly, he may include all of his other expenses in the cost of the article39 and in addition take whatever profit he will negotiate [with the purchasers]. He should not, however, include the fee for his efforts as part of the merchandise’s purchase price (for in people’s minds, this is included in the profit margin, which [the seller] receives according to their negotiations. It should not be included as part of the price of the merchandise since he did not spend money on this; [he only expended effort]. Thus if he would include this [fee] as part of the price, without explicitly explaining this to the purchaser, he would be misleading him and taking unfair advantage of him.)40

9 Just as the prohibition against unfair gain applies with regard to purchases and sales, so too, it applies with regard to hiring out [an article],41 contracting [for a task],42 and exchanging money.43

Similarly, if a sela44 is lacking one sixth of its weight, the prohibition against unfair gain applies45 if one attempts to pass it as a good sela if the local practice is to exchange coins by number and not by weight. If, however, [the local practice is] to exchange coins according to weight, [if one passes an underweight coin], even one lacking the slightest amount,46 he violates a negative commandment, as it is written:47 “You shall not act deceitfully in judgment, in measures, or in weights.”

Other authorities [are more stringent and] maintain that the measure of one sixth applies only with regard to merchandise.48 Coins, by contrast, were made to be used as a medium of commerce and if they lack weight, they cannot be easily used. Hence, people at large will only be willing forgo a lack lesser than a twelfth [in a coin’s weight], but when the lack is greater than a twelfth — or even a twelfth — people will object to [the coin’s] use. [Hence, using such a coin] violates the prohibition against unfair gain. One should be stringent [and follow] their view.49

If, however, [a coin] is diminished by less than a twelfth, it is permitted to use it as if it were a proper coin [even] as an initial preference. [The rationale is that] the recipient will not suffer any loss by accepting it, for he will also use it in place of a proper coin. In contrast, merchandise that is worth a sixth less [than its price cannot easily be sold to others at that price].50 Anyone who does not desire to accept a coin whose [weight] is diminished by less than a twelfth is merely a difficult person.51

[The above52 applies] provided [the recipient] can use the coin, albeit with difficulty. If, however, [a recipient] cannot use it even with difficulty, it is forbidden to use it instead of a good one even if it is only lacking a small amount. If he made use of it and it was returned to him, even after twelve months,53 there is an authority who maintains that he is obligated to accept it if he recognizes it.

10 It is forbidden54 to keep in one’s home any coin whose size was reduced to the extent that it is a more than a twelfth less than its proper weight,55 for it can easily be used to deceive a person56 and exchanged for a coin of proper weight. ([To cite a parallel,] the Torah forbids a person from keeping an inaccurate measure in his home, as it is written:57 “You shall not have in your home [two sets of] dry measures,” so that one will not use it for deception, as will be explained.)58

He should not give59 it to a man of force or a merchant, for they will use it to trick others. He should not use it as a weight, nor should he discard it among his broken pieces of silver,60 for it is forbidden to maintain possession of it lest someone come and use it to deceive others, exchanging it for a coin of proper weight. Instead, he should melt it down or make a hole in its center so that it can be hung around his daughter’s neck.61 He should not, however, make a hole at its side lest another person come and cut away the place of the hole.62

If its weight was reduced by half of its value, e.g., a sela was reduced to the weight of a shekel, a shekel was reduced to the weight of a dinar, or a dinar was reduced to half its weight, one may keep it [in his domain], for in this instance, it is impossible to deceive others with it, since its reduction in weight is obvious to all. If, however, it was reduced by more than half its weight, it is forbidden to keep it,63 because it can be used for deception, i.e., [misleadingly] passing it for half [its original value], i.e., as a shekel, a dinar, or a half a dinar, for these are coins in circulation.

When a coin is always weighed when received, it is permitted to maintain it in all circumstances, for all recipients will weigh it.

11 All of the laws concerning [the return of] unfair gain apply only to the Jewish people. When, by contrast, a gentile64 errs concerning the value of merchandise or the value of a coin, it is not necessary to notify him of his error. [This is derived from] the verse:65 “A man should not take unfair advantage of his brother,” i.e., [the prohibition applies to] “one’s brother,” [a fellow Jew,] but not a gentile.

It is, however, forbidden to mislead [a gentile], either with regard to the value of merchandise or the reckoning of accounts,66 as will be explained in Hilchos Gezeilah.67 Similarly, any type of deception in business dealings is forbidden, even when a gentile is involved.68 For example, if one’s merchandise has a defect, he must notify the purchaser, even if he is a gentile. Were he not to do so, it would be deceiving him and that is equivalent to stealing money from him, which is forbidden by Scriptural Law, as will be explained in Hilchos Gezeilah.67

12 According to Rabbinic Law, it is forbidden to deceive a gentile even with regard to a matter that will not cause him a loss, e.g., to sell him meat from an animal that was not ritually slaughtered with the assumption that it was ritually slaughtered.69 It is even forbidden to deceive people with words — even one word of guile or deception — or with deed, creating an impression that one is doing a favor for him when he is not doing so,70 for then his gratitude toward him is without foundation.

13 What is implied? One should not open a barrel of wine that would be opened in the near future [in any case], because he already sold it to a merchant,71 [while creating the impression] that he is opening it for a friend in order to give him strong wine.72 [It will appear that the host] will be suffering a great loss because of [the guest], for the barrel that was opened will remain lacking and the wine will spoil.73 Thus [the guest] will be grateful to [his host] without cause. ([This applies] unless [the guest] was so dear to [the host] that he would have opened [the barrel] for him [regardless].) [In the first instance, the host] must inform [the guest] that he is not opening [the barrel] in his [honor], for ordinarily one would not think that [his host] already sold the wine to a merchant.

When, however, it is logical to assume that [a friend] is not performing an act in his honor, but the person misleads himself and thinks that this is indeed his intent, it is not necessary to inform him otherwise. For example, a person met a friend on the road and [the friend mistakenly] thought that he came out especially to greet and honor him.74 Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

14 One should not entreat a colleague to dine with him, knowing that he will not accept the invitation75 (and had he known that he would accept the invitation, he would not have made these entreaties). If, however, he does not make entreaties,76 it is permissible for him to invite him once or twice, saying, “Come, dine with me,” although he does not intend that he accept the invitation, for the very invitation to dine is a token of honor.77

Similarly, one should not send [a friend] a large gift, knowing that he will not accept it,78 (i.e., were he to know that he would accept it, he would not send such a large gift. If, however, his [friend] is so dear to him that he would give him such a large gift even if he would accept it, it is permitted to send him a large gift. Similarly, if he would entreat him to dine with him even if he would accept the invitation, it is permitted to do so, although he knows that he will not dine with him now, nor accept the gift. For he is not deceiving him, for he truly holds him dear and genuinely desires to offer him benefit. From his side, there is no obstacle. It is only his friend who does not desire [to accept his beneficence]. Thus if [his friend] is grateful to him, it is not without cause.)

One should not, however, tell [a friend]: “Daub yourself with oil from this vial,” when the vial is empty, but he knows that [his friend] does not desire to daub himself.79 (For even if he would give his friend oil if he desired to daub himself, nevertheless, at the present time, he is not genuinely offering to benefit him, for there is an obstacle from his side, since the vial is empty and does not contain oil.80 Thus [his friend] will be grateful to him without cause. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.)

Similarly, he should not go to a house of mourning with an empty container,81 knowing that it is unnecessary for him [to bring anything], (for many others have already brought him [food] for the seudas havraah, the first meal [after the burial of a close relative], for a mourner is forbidden to partake of his own [food at this first meal.82 Since] many others brought food, [there is no need for him to do so,] but [because of his deception], the mourner will think that this person also brought food and he will be grateful to him without cause, since he did not bring him anything, even though he would have brought him had it been necessary for him to have done so.) If, however, he does so to honor [the mourner] in the eyes of people at large, it is permissible. Similarly, any act performed to bring a friend honor in the eyes of people at large is not considered as an act of deception.83

15 One should not send a friend a barrel of wine with a layer of oil floating on top of it, for the recipient will think that the entire barrel contains oil.84 He [might] then invite guests to partake of it, confident that he has an abundance of oil for their needs and then he will suffer embarrassment.

16 One should not sell the hide of an animal that died without being ritually slaughtered under the presumption that it was ritually slaughtered,85 because the hide of the former is not as strong as that of the latter. Thus he is deceiving [the purchaser].

17 It is forbidden for a person to sell a colleague land or movable property over which there is a legal dispute or a pending suit by another person unless he notifies the purchaser. Even though [the seller] takes financial responsibility,86 no person desires to pay money and then be forced to enter into a legal dispute and be sued by others.

18 It is forbidden to artificially improve the appearance of a person, animal, or utensils that are being sold:87 With regard to a person, this refers to a Canaanite servant who is elderly and the seller dyes his hair and his beard so that he will look younger.88 With regard to an animal, this refers to giving it bran water to drink so that its girth would be inflated and its hair would stand straight so that it appears bulkier. Similarly, it is forbidden to comb and scrub it so that its hairs will stand straight.

With regard to utensils, it is forbidden to paint them so that they will appear new when the improvement that results from their being repainted is less than the increase to their price89 because [the purchaser] will think that they are new. Thus [the seller] is deceiving [him] and taking unfair advantage. Nevertheless, it is permitted to paint new utensils to make them appear more attractive. (Similarly, it is permitted to make new [utensils] attractive by other means, even if their price rises beyond [the fundamental value of] the added improvement, since there is no error or deception here.90 One who pays more because of the beauty of the article is consciously waiving [the additional funds].)

19 It is forbidden for [a butcher] to inflate [an animal’s] digestive organs so that they will appear fat and broad.91 It is forbidden to soak meat in water so that it will become white and appear succulent. If, however, all the [local] butchers follow this practice and everyone knows of it, there is an authority who permits it, because everyone is aware of their practice.92 (A scrupulous individual93 should, [nevertheless,] avoid this practice, for, even so, there is reason to suspect that a purchaser will think that the meat is truly succulent,94 for after all, many succulent [cuts] do exist and, therefore all butchers carry out this practice [to have their meat resemble those cuts].)

20 It is forbidden to mix a small amount of [inferior] produce into a large amount of superior produce so that [the inferior produce] will not be recognized95 and [then] sell the entire quantity under the presumption that it is [all] of higher quality.96 [The above applies] even when both groups of produce are of fine quality, but one is superior to the other.

It is forbidden to mix fresh [grain] with aged [grain],97 neither fresh into aged, nor aged into fresh, [because each one has an advantage over the other].98 Aged grain produces much more flour than fresh grain, but fresh grain is preferable if the purchaser desires to store it away so that it may age.

21 A merchant is permitted to take some superior produce and other inferior produce from several sources and place them in one granary from which he sells, even if the inferior produce is not obvious because there is so little of it or because its appearance resembles that of the higher quality produce. [The rationale is that] since everyone knows that he purchases [produce] from [many] sources and the granary from which he sells contains a mixture of superior and inferior produce; they purchase from him under this assumption.99

[The above leniency is granted,] provided he does not intentionally purchase the majority from a superior source so that he will develop a reputation that he purchases everything from a superior source, while also purchasing some from an inferior source and mixing them together in a manner that [the inferior ones] will not be noticed.100

22 In a place where it is customary to mix water into wine during the wine-pressing season, for then the wine is fermenting [and consequently] the water blends well with it and it becomes wine, it is permitted to mix the accepted measure [of water into the wine] and sell it without notifying [the purchasers].101 [The seller] is not taking unfair advantage [of his purchasers], because everyone knows that it is customary to mix [water into the wine] in such a manner and they are purchasing it under that presumption.

When more than the usual measure of water was mixed into a person’s wine, or water was mixed in after the wine-pressing season,102 [or wine was mixed with water]103 in a place where it is not customary to mix them together, it is forbidden to sell it in one’s store104 unless he notifies the purchaser. In the latter instance, it is permitted to sell it in his store (for people to drink).105 It is, however, forbidden to sell it to a merchant even if he notifies him lest the merchant [sell it to others] and deceive them.

23 All the above applies in places where all those who purchase wine do not sample it first, but in a place where it is customary that all who purchase wine first taste it, it is always permitted to mix water into it106 in a manner that [the presence of the water] would be sensed.107

In a place where it is not customary for everyone to [first] taste the wine, after the wine-pressing season,108 it is forbidden to mix even strong wine with weaker wine. For weaker wine is preferable over stronger wine for drinking [purposes] and it is also more expensive. It is, however, permitted to mix a weaker wine into a stronger one.109 And during the wine-pressing season,106 it is permitted to mix even strong wine with weak wine, because at that stage, mixing a small amount of strong wine into weak wine improves its quality, because it acts as a preservative. However, in a place where all [purchasers] taste [the wine] first, it is always permitted to mix [different wines] provided the mixture could be detected.

24 It is forbidden to mix even the slightest amount of dregs into wine or other liquids and sell them without notifying [the purchaser].110 Nevertheless, if [a customer] purchased an entire barrel of wine, with a price being paid for each measure, when [the seller] comes to measure out [the wine], he may mix the dregs [on the bottom of the barrel] with [the wine] and sell them together [as one entity] if the local custom is not otherwise.111 He may not, however, mix in dregs from another barrel even if he sold both of them to the same purchaser,112 because dregs from one barrel [of wine] will cause the wine in another barrel to spoil.

25 It is permitted to separate the waste from beans and legumes so that [the produce] will appear attractive to a purchaser.113 It is not considered as if [the seller] is misleading him, because this is an obvious matter.114 The purchaser can look [at the produce offered for sale] and determine the degree that its value has increased because the seller removed the waste. [Indeed,] it is preferable for him to pay more [for the produce] so that he will not have to take the trouble to separate the waste. [This is permitted,] provided [the seller] does not remove the waste from the upper level [of produce] alone, while leaving it in the lower level.115

26 It is not necessary to separate the waste from any [pile of] fruit, grain, or legumes that contain waste, worm-eaten ones, dust, or even pebbles and stones. Instead, they can be sold by measure as they are,116 provided the waste became mixed in naturally. [The rationale is that the waste] is apparent to the purchaser. [The seller] may not, however, mix the waste in by himself.

For this reason, it is forbidden to remove a pebble from [a measure of] wheat belonging to another person, for [by doing so,] he is causing that person the loss of the amount of wheat equivalent to the pebble. For when [that person] sells [the wheat], he will have to measure out wheat instead of that pebble.117 Hence, if one removed it, he should pay [the owner] for his loss. He may not return the pebble to the wheat, for it is forbidden to mix even the smallest amount [of waste into grain] intentionally.

27 Just as there is a prohibition against taking unfair advantage [of a colleague] in commercial dealings, so too, there is a prohibition against abusing [a colleague] through speech,118 as it is written:119 “A person should not wrong his fellow and you shall fear your G‑d;” this refers to abusing [a colleague] through speech.120

Abusing a colleague through speech is even more severe than taking unfair advantage of him financially, for restitution can be made for [the latter], but not for the former.121 The latter affects a person financially,122 but the former affects his very self. When a person cries out [to G‑d] because someone abused him with words, he is answered immediately,123 for it involves pain within one’s heart and [brings him to] the verge of shedding tears.

28 What is meant by abusing one through speech? If donkey drivers ask a person where to buy grain, he should not tell them: “Go to so-and-so,” when he knows that the person does not possess grain and his intent is to make fun of and mock that person or the donkey drivers.124 Although he could justify his conduct [to the merchant], saying: “I thought you possessed [grain],” this is a matter that is given over to a person’s heart.125 [Therefore,] concerning this, [the verse] states: “And you shall fear your G‑d.”126

Similarly, he should not ask a colleague: “How much do want to sell this object for?” when he does not desire to buy it or he does not have the financial resources to do so, and his intent, instead, is to deceive his colleague.127 Afterwards, when he does not purchase it, his colleague will realize that he intended to deceive him and it will distress him.128

Needless to say, he should he not utter words of provocation, even though he does not mention faults and shortcomings that the person presently possesses. [Obviously,] this is forbidden, [because it is] lashon hora.129 [It is forbidden even to] mention past [faults], for example, one should not say to a person who repented: “Remember your past deeds.” [Similarly,] he should not say to the descendants of converts: “Remember the deeds of your ancestors.”130

Alternatively, [this prohibition forbids] speaking to a colleague about his present situation without mentioning his faults and shortcomings, but as a rebuke. For example, if a friend was beset by misfortune, one should not make statements like those made by Iyov’s friends:131 “Behold, was not your fear [for G‑d] your foolishness?...132 Remember, please, which innocent person ever perished?”133 They made these statements to Iyov,134 because he viewed himself as righteous and the attribute of [Divine] judgment as unfair.

Another [example of the violation of this prohibition] is saying something that indirectly leads to the recognition of a colleague’s failings. For example, if a question regarding an intellectual concept was raised, one should not ask a person who is not familiar with that field of knowledge: “How would you answer this question?” “What is your opinion about this matter?” or the like.135 Similarly, [it is prohibited to make other] statements that [generate] emotional pain even though one does not shame [the person by mentioning] his present faults and shortcomings, nor call him by a derogatory name, nor embarrass him in public.

Needless to say, [this prohibition is violated] when one shames a person by stating his faults and shortcomings, even by allusion, [and] even when the matter is true, but it does not involve a transgression or sin for which [he is] worthy of being shamed, as will be explained.136 [In such situations, the prohibition of] abusing a colleague through speech applies in addition to the prohibition of lashon hora which applies even when such statements are made outside the person’s presence.137

Similarly, cursing a person in his presence violates [the prohibition of] abusing one through speech in addition to the prohibition against cursing any fellow Jew138 which applies even outside his presence, as [indicated by] the verse:139 “You shall not curse a deaf-mute.”140

29 Similarly, a person who calls a colleague an unfavorable name141 with the intent of embarrassing him142 [violates] the prohibition against abusing a colleague through speech.143 [This applies] even if he is used to being called by that name and it does not cause him embarrassment. And if one embarrasses him in public, he forfeits his portion in the World to Come.144 Even if the person being [mocked] is not present, it is forbidden [to make such statements] because [of the prohibition against] lashon hora if he intends to shame him and deride him.

One must be extremely careful not to embarrass any Jewish person whether through speech or deed. [This applies] even if one performs a good deed, but it causes embarrassment to another person. [In that vein, our Sages relate]145 that one of the Sages was accustomed to cast money daily behind the door of a poor person of distinguished lineage, early in the morning, so that he would find it when he opened his door. Once the poor person sought to discover who was placing the money there and so he went [out] to see. The Sage fled from him and [hid] in a burning furnace so that the poor man would not be embarrassed.146 For it is better for a person to cast himself into a burning furnace rather than embarrass his colleague in public. [This is derived from the narrative concerning Tamar, whose father-in-law, Yehudah, had her sentenced to death by burning for infidelity. Instead of publicizing the fact that she had in fact been intimate with him, she alluded to the matter, as the Torah] states:147 “And as she was being led out [to be executed], she sent [certain articles] to her father-in-law, saying: ‘I was impregnated by the owner of these.’” She did not [identify him] explicitly, only by allusion. [Her intent was]: “If he will confess the matter, so be it, but if not I will not make it public knowledge.”148

30 Even a person who rebukes a transgressor149 must rebuke him privately,150 not in public, so that he will not be shamed. Even in private,151 he should speak to him patiently and gently and refrain from speaking [so] harshly to him [that] he becomes shamed,152 as it is written:153 “You shall certainly rebuke your colleague.” You might think that you are to chastise him [even] until his face changes color [in shame]? [To reject this notion, our Sages note154 that the verse therefore continues:] “You shall not bear sin because of him.”155

[Nevertheless,] if he does not repent [after being rebuked] in private, he may be shamed publicly, embarrassed in person, and he and his ancestors can be cursed in his presence until he repents and corrects [his conduct].156 Similarly, it is permissible to call a person who transgresses the edicts of the Sages and does not repent, “a transgressor”.157 This does not violate the prohibition against abusing a colleague through speech, for the verse:119 “A person should not wrong his fellow,” is interpreted by our Sages158 as referring to “one who [joins] with you in [the observance of] the Torah and its mitzvos.”159 The Torah warns against the abuse of such a person, but not of a person who transgresses them and does not repent after being rebuked privately and gently.

It is permitted to call him “a wicked person, the son of a wicked person,” even though his father is righteous.160

31 When a person abuses a convert through speech, he violates three transgressions:161 “And you shall not wrong a convert,”162 “And you shall not wrong him,”163 and “A person should not wrong his fellow,”119 for a convert is included among “his fellow[s].” Hence, one must be exceedingly careful not to abuse him.

When a person applies pressure to [a convert] and coerces him when demanding payment for a debt and [the debtor] lacks [the means to repay him],164 he also violates three transgressions:165 “You shall not pressure him,”166 “Do not pressure a convert,”167 and “Do not act like a creditor toward him.”168 Hence, one must also be exceedingly careful concerning this.

32 One must be exceedingly careful about [verbally] abusing one’s wife, refraining from causing her discomfort through words.169 Since she is prone to tears, retribution for [such] abuse comes speedily. A person should always be careful with regard to his wife’s honor, for blessing is found in a man’s house only because of his wife.170 Our Sages169 told the people of their generation: “Honor your wives so that you will become wealthy.”