By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for the New Jersey Jewish Link Recently, after a long drive with no restroom in sight, a person entered a Dunkin Donuts off the highway to buy a drink and to use the restroom.  The bathroom was blocked with a sign that stated, “Restroom is broken.”  The person pushed the sigh away slightly and entered the restroom anyhow. The worker yelled out, “Hey, the restroom is broken!” The person responded, “I am really good at fixing these things, so don’t worry about it.” Afterward, the person egressed from the bathroom and said, “It’s working perfectly, now. And, like I said, don’t worry about it, there will be no charge.” There are three aspects to this story that can be scrutinized in terms of halacha. MOST OF THE TIME IT IS A LIE It is an unfortunate reality that most of the time when there is a “Restroom Broken” sign on display – it is an absolute lie. So question number one is may an employee put out such a sign if his employer asked him to do so. Question number two is which is worse?  Is lying orally worse than lying in print? Question number three is:  Was the person who said, “I am really good at fixing things..and don’t worry about, there will be no charge..” in violation of any prohibition? Tosfos in Bava Basra 94b writes clearly that the prohibition of lying exists also in the written word.  This is also found in Tosfos Megillah 9a “Vayishlach”  and the Yad Ramah in the chapter called Get Pashut “p. 172).  The Tzitz Eliezer Volume 15 Siman 12 rules likewise. Rav Yavrov zt”l in Niv Sfasayim cites a letter from Rav Meir Dan Plotzki zt”l (1866-1928), the author of the Kli Chemda (*not found in his comments on Chumash), who writes to an author that draws an implication from the words of the Maharsha in Bava Basra 15a – that there is no prohibition of lying in writing. The author of the letter to the Kli Chemda correlates this implication with the words of Rav Nachman of Breslov in his Sefer HaMidos (Emes – letter nun) that there is no prohibition of lying if it is writing. The Kli Chemda writes “Heaven forbid that one say such a thing!” He concludes that it must have been an erring student. The aforementioned Maharshah asks how it could be that Moshe Rabbeinu who wrote the Torah could write the words “And Moshe died” – when it did not happen yet. He concludes that Moshe Rabbeinu made two changes – that he did not actually say the words aloud and that it was not written in ink but rather in tears. The combination of these two factors, according to the Maharsha’s understanding – would negate the problem of mechzei k’shikra – the appearance of a lie. Rav Plotzki’s conclusion that it must have been written by an erring student clearly refers to the citation of Rav Nachman. [This author suggests that if one looks at the context of Rav Nachman’s surrounding statements – both before and after, it is quite likely that there was both a copying error and a rewording of Rav Nachman’s original words and that he actually had said that the prohibition applies even in writing.] […]

The post The Broken Restroom: A Halachic Analysis appeared first on The Yeshiva World.