Musar su Salmi 10:15

Why does G–d make a point of making these three announcements personally? We understand that the provision of a good harvest is something that G–d announces personally, because He did not entrust the key to rain to an intermediary, [it is one of three keys that G–d did not hand over to an intermediary Taanit 2 Ed.] The reason is that providing a livelihood for all creatures is as difficult a task as that of splitting the sea of reeds, something that could not be entrusted to an intermediary. Why did G–d reserve the right for Himself not to entrust such announcements as who would be leader, or that there would be a famine to an intermediary such as a prophet? I believe the reason is that if such events were to be announced by an intermediary the people would have such difficulty in justifying these choices that they would be deprived of their moral value. We find something analogous in Sanhedrin 26 where public announcements are to be made about who is unfit as a witness according to Rabbinic strictures, though according to Mosaic law such a person's testimony would be acceptable. Rabbi Alexandri in Megillah 17 interprets Psalms 10,15: שבור זרוע רשע, "break the arm of the wicked," as a reference to the price gouging that occurs during famine. G–d personally announced that the world's sustenance was due to the merit of Chanina who personally lived on the most frugal diet possible. People do not always understand why certain persons have achieved economic distinction and others have not. It is therefore necessary for G–d to announce that those persons who have achieved such wealth have done so because of G–d's own considerations and not because of their own innate ability.

And let one not think: "Do I not say every day: 'Forgive us, our Father, for we have sinned'?" This would avail if one considered this [lashon hara] a sin and took it upon himself to guard himself against it. For penance requires, at least, absolute regret [for the past] and also acceptance [for the future]. And, in our many sins, one who is habituated to lashon hara does not consider it a sin at all. And even on Yom Kippur, when one says: [Forgive us] "for the sin that we have sinned before you with lashon hara," he does not accept upon himself 'guarding' for the future. And even if we say that he does, is this not among the sins between man and his neighbor, for which Yom Kippur does not atone until he conciliates his neighbor? (see Yoma 85b). And, a man like this — has he not certainly harmed several tens of men with his tongue? He has hurt this man by verbal wronging, and that one with lashon hara, and the other, with "whitening of the face" and the like. About such a one our sages of blessed memory have rightly said that a man by his lashon hara magnifies sin until the heavens. Therefore, a man must set his heart and his mind to this, that he not be "entrapped" above in this sin. They have also said "If one speaks lashon hara, he and I cannot live [together] in the world, as it is written (Psalms 10:15): 'He who slanders his neighbor in secret, him will I cut down… him will I not abide.' Read it not: 'him will I not abide,' but 'with him' will I not abide."