Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses various forms of overcharging and undercharging, and thresholds that would invalidate the sale. The Chofetz Chaim in Laws of Rechilus (9) discusses conditions under which it would be permitted to alert a purchaser who might have been taken advantage of by an unscrupulous merchant. One of the key criteria is that the disparaging information should serve a constructive and concrete purpose. Therefore, it would never be permitted to tell somebody after a purchase that he was misled or duped if it is below the threshold of invalidating the sale, or for some other reason, not enforceable in terms of seeking financial redress. In such a case, telling him just causes ill feelings with no benefit or purpose. Actually, one should do the opposite and is supposed to even stretch the truth to induce good feelings after somebody has already purchased an object. The famous example that is also used metaphorically comes from Gemara Kesuvos (17a). 

Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel argue about how to honor and compliment a bride. The conundrum is a conflict between the value of honesty versus protecting people’s feelings and promoting a happy marriage:

תנו רבנן: כיצד מרקדין לפני הכלה? בית שמאי אומרים:

The Sages taught: How does one dance before the bride, i.e., what does one recite while dancing at her wedding? Beis Shammai say:

כלה כמות שהיא. ובית הלל אומרים: ״כלה נאה וחסודה״. אמרו להן בית שמאי לבית הלל: הרי שהיתה חיגרת או סומא, אומרים לה: ״כלה נאה וחסודה״? והתורה אמרה: ״מדבר שקר תרחק״! אמרו להם בית הלל לבית שמאי: לדבריכם, מי שלקח מקח רע מן השוק, ישבחנו בעיניו, או יגננו בעיניו? הוי אומר: ישבחנו בעיניו. מכאן אמרו חכמים: לעולם תהא דעתו של אדם מעורבת עם הבריות.

One recites praise of the bride as she is, emphasizing her good qualities. And Beis Hillel say: One recites: A fair and attractive bride. Beis Shammai said to Beis Hillel: In a case where the bride was lame or blind, does one say with regard to her: A fair and attractive bride? But the Torah states: “Keep you from a false matter” (Exodus 23:7). 

Beis Hillel said to Beis Shammai: According to your statement, with regard to one who acquired an inferior acquisition from the market, should another praise it and enhance its value in his eyes or condemn it and diminish its value in his eyes? You must say that he should praise it and enhance its value in his eyes and refrain from causing him anguish. In this case too, once the groom has married his bride, one praises her as being fair and attractive.

From here the Sages said: A person’s disposition should always be gracious with others, and treat everyone courteously. 

Beis Hillel's argument seems to be that it is a given that it would be under the category of hurtful speech to denigrate something that another person purchased. Beis Hillel then draws a parallel between that, and praising a person’s choice of spouse.

The question is, why is one more obvious than the other? If it is clear that disparaging a purchased object is forbidden because it causes distress, of course it should apply to a choice of spouse. And, if this is not considered forbidden speech, perhaps because there is some rationale to think the person would still want to know that he was misled, then it offers an equal rationale for providing blunt feedback regarding the person’s spouse.

Additionally, why use this proof when it is a well known dictum, מותר לו לאדם לשנות בדבר השלום, It is permitted for a person to depart from the truth in a matter that will preserve peace, (Yevamos.65b). If so, why does Beis Hillel need to bolster their argument and compare it to the case of object acquisition?

The answer is, a person may believe that he is giving “constructive criticism and feedback.” After all, perhaps it is more comparable to the situation described by the Chofetz Chaim, that one can inform a person if he was misled if it is not too late for the purchaser to seek legal  rectification. This then is what Bais Hillel is arguing: Do NOT think that one can take their spouse back to his or her in-laws for a “full refund”. Yes, technically there is recourse, as spouses can correct themselves, and in the worst case, divorce is possible. However, it is far closer to a non-refundable purchase than a refundable one, because the pain and distress rejection causes should never be taken lightly. Furthermore, while subjectively a person might feel their spouse is defective, the so-called defect might be a reflection of your defect, or even be utterly your defect. 

If I don’t get along with my computer or my refrigerator, I do not have to “work on my middos” to learn how to deal with it. I can just junk it and buy a new one. However, defects attributed to your spouse may be indicators of what you need to work on, and not blame others or run away.

(This is loosely adapted from the Ben Yohayada on Kesuvos.)

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)