출애굽기 23:7의 Halakhah

A disciple who sits before his master and sees a point in favour of a poor man and the master wishes to pronounce him guilty, must plead in his [the poor man's] favour, and if he keeps silent he commits a sin on account of 'From a false matter keep far.'³¹Sheb. 31a: ‘Whence do we know that a disciple sitting before his master who sees a point in favour of a poor man or against a wealthy man should not remain silent? (upon noticing that his master has reached an erroneous decision). For it is said, From a false matter keep far’ (Ex. XXIII, 7). In San. 6b this is derived from, Ye shall not be afraid of the face of any man (Deut. I, 17). , Tosaf. Sheb. ibid., s.v. ורואה. Similarly, if both litigants are either poor or rich. The Talmud is stating ‘a point in favour of a poor man or against a wealthy man’ contains a remarkable feature (רבותא), viz., that the disciple should not think that although legally the poor man has a point in his favour, nevertheless, ‘My master must feel that a wealthy man is right, for how is it possible that a wealthy man should make a false claim against a poor man.’ Notwithstanding this line of reasoning, the disciple is dutibound to speak up — RaShaL, Tummim. For other opinions, cf. BaḤ and TaZ.

b) His prime intent must be to be zealous for the truth and to help him that has been wronged (i.e., the cheated one). And he must not rejoice in the shame of the cheater, even though he knows clearly that he cheated him. And in this connection we shall include yet another detail, that is almost the same as the original. That is, [in order to tell] he must assume that benefit will result — as opposed to an instance where he knows the nature of the cheated one not to be a man of words who would go to judgment and ask people to help him in this matter, but would only grieve in his heart at the story and harbor hatred in his heart against the merchant. [In such an instance] he should not tell him. Even more, if he asks him [to tell] in this instance and in the previous instance that we described — that is, in an instance where, according to the din, it is forbidden to back out of the transaction, it is a mitzvah to praise the purchase before him, and he does not thereby transgress (Shemoth 23:7): "From a thing of falsehood shall you keep far," (as Chazal have said [Kethuvoth 17a]: "If one made a bad purchase in the marketplace — he should praise it in his eyes.")

(13) And all this that we have discussed until now applies even when he speaks [lashon hara] about his friend that is true; but if within his lashon hara or rechiluth there becomes intermixed something which is partially false, he also transgresses a positive commandment of the Torah, viz. (Shemoth 23:7): "From a thing of falsehood keep far." And his name [i.e., his classification] also changes for the worse thereby, his now being called "motzi shem ra" ("the spreader of a bad name"). And his punishment is far more severe than that for the speaker of lashon hara and rechiluth in general.