February 1999 Truth vs. Compassion By Rabbi Alvin Kass It is hard to imagine a principle more important in Judaism than emet, truth. According to Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, there are three pillars upon which the world stands: "truth, justice, and peace." Note, furthermore, that truth heads the list. The Rabbis also teach that on the final Day of Judgment, each human being will have to respond to the query: "Did you conduct yourself truthfully and honestly in your daily affairs?" The Bible likewise teaches that truth is the seal of God and the speaker of truth will dwell on God's holy mountain. But, for all its importance, is truth an absolute value that can never be overruled, or are there circumstances where it can and should be qualified or modified? What do you do, for example, when truth clashes with another moral principle? The story of Joseph provides just such a case. After the Patriarch Jacob died, Joseph's brothers sent word to Joseph that just before his demise, Jacob wrote a message urging Joseph to forgive the wrongs committed against him by his siblings. The Sages concluded from this that it is permissible to deviate from the truth for the sake of peace, since Jacob never said any such thing, having no reason to suspect Joseph. Quite similarly, Hillel taught that you may praise a bride as beautiful even if she is not, because the canons of kindness and compassion demand that a bride has a right to think of herself as pretty on her wedding say. The same considerations dictate that, while it is wrong to tell an outright lie, it would be cruel to infrom a woman who prepared an elaborate dinner that the food was inedible. It would also be heartless for a physician to tell a nervous patient that he will die shortly from a serious disease. These reflections have relevance to the plight of President Clinton, who, as of this writing, is about to be tried by the U.S. Senate as a consequence of his impeachment by the House of Representatives on perjury charges. Tom DeLay, the Republican House Whip, who is the most relentless pursuer of Clinton, has proclaimed that the discussion of the President's fate is "about relativism versus absolute truth." However, should the President be removed from office because he failed to live up to the demands of "absolute truth"? The President surely lied about his improper sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Adultery is ethically wrong and cannot be condoned. On the other hand, surely it must be conceded that the President lied at least in part out of kindness and compassion to save his family from embarrassment. Howeber misguided his behavior, it is certainly understandable. It is also what many people would do under the circumstances. Without a doubt, there is a world of difference between the actions of President Clinton and those of former President Nixon. The latter tried to cover up an illegal theft. In addition, his break-in to a psychiatrist's office as well as his use of the IRS and the FBI to intimidate political enemies constituted a direct threat to our democractic institutions. In sharp contrast, Clinton engaged in immoral but legal consensual sex which disqualifies him as a role model for American youth. But, should he be expelled for being a shoddy role model? It's clear that if you do that, he's going to have a lot of company. As Nathaniel Hawthorne pointed out in The Scarlet Letter, once you activate the deadly scythe of neo-Purtianism, it is all too easy to get people enthused about hurting others. Adultery ought to be avoided, not because of intimidation, but because it will hurt someone you love very dearly if he or she finds out about it. To prevent that requires telling many lies. Mendacity, in turn, injures your capacity to preserve a trusting and intimate relationship. Such relationships, finally, not withstanding all their problems and frustrations, are indispensable to a happy and fulfilled life. Sadly, there are people, under the guise of piety and purity, who inflict needless hurt upon others and even threaten the peace of the community. In most cases, they are hypocrites. But, even when they are not, they would do well to remember Job's observation that there is no one in this world who is so righteous that he never sins. All of us, sooner or later, are guilty of something. If we would like God to be compassionate towards us, it behooves us to be compassionate towards others.