Mishlei 12:19 - The Temporary Nature of Lies

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Mishlei 12:19 - The Temporary Nature of Lies

משלי יב:יט

שְׂפַת אֱמֶת תִּכּוֹן לָעַד וְעַד אַרְגִּיעָה לְשׁוֹן שָׁקֶר:

Mishlei 12:19

True lips are established forever, but a false tongue is only for moment.

The questions on this pasuk are as follows:

(1) In what sense are true lips "established forever"? Is this actually true? Truths are certainly not automatically "established"; there can be tremendous resistance to the truth, and it is often neglected and not established at all. And even when it is established, it doesn't necessarily last forever. 

(2) What does it mean that a false tongue is "only for a moment"? It would seem that this false. Lies can persist for a lifetime - or even beyond a lifetime. Consider, for instance, all of the anti-Semitic lies that have been spread about Jews throughout the ages; they've certainly lasted for longer than "a moment." 

(3) Why does the pasuk use "lips" in reference to the truth and "tongue" in reference to falsehood? In our pasuk good speech is associated with the lips and bad speech with the tongue, but in other pesukim the association is flipped. For example: "There is one who speaks like the piercings of a sword, but the tongue of the wise heals" (Mishlei 12:19), "The tongue of the righteous is like choice silver, but the heart of the wicked is minute" (ibid. 10:20) "Lips of falsehood are an abomination to Hashem, but He favors those who act with integrity" (ibid. 12:22), "The lawless man contemplates evil, and it is as if there is a burning coal on his lips" (ibid. 16:27).

(4) What practical decision-making idea does this pasuk teach us? As I have mentioned before, this question ought to be asked about every pasuk. Like Shlomo ha'Melech, the best way to make this question into a habit is through repetition. 

[Okay, it's time to stop and think! Continue reading when you're ready for the main idea.]

Here is my four-sentence (with liberal use of semi-colons) summary of the main idea:

Whereas truth, by its very nature, is stable and exists independently of what human beings say, think, or do, lies are intrinsically unstable and exist on a tenuous and contingent basis. 

Since lies are cover-ups of reality, liars – unlike truth-tellers – constantly face the threat of exposure; lies can only continue to exist as long as they are maintained by the people who espouse them, perpetuate them, and believe in them, whereas the truth is anchored in reality itself. 

Moreover, since liars know the truth, they carry with them the potential to topple their own lies; in this sense, the liar is his own greatest enemy, since the slightest slip-up can bring down his entire web of falsehood. 

Thus, by telling the truth, a person endows his words with the same quality of permanence as reality itself, and doesn’t have to worry about “being found out,” since truth is not a cover-up operation; in contrast, one who tells a lie must continually manage the upkeep of his lies, and take strenuous and stressful efforts to prevent them from being exposed by reality, by other people, and by his own carelessness.

This idea is a good example of Mishlei's general approach to the subject of falsehood, lies, and deceit: it's not a good idea (a) because of the risk that you'll be caught, and (b) because it is simply not worthwhile to commit yourself to the responsibility of keeping tabs on your lies. 

This pasuk is also a good example of the power of mashal (metaphor). Notice that the emphasis of this pasuk is not on the consequences of lying or the benefits of truth-telling. Rather, Shlomo ha'Melech's aim is to convey a sense of the permanent nature of true speech and the transient nature of false speech. When the student of Mishlei internalizes this idea, and is subsequently faced with an opportunity to solve a problem or obtain an advantage by telling a lie, he will naturally dismiss this option because he will view the lie as nothing more than a temporary band-aid which is destined to fall off, and cost him dearly - both before and after his lie is exposed. 

In other words, the ideas I wrote about in my summary are there to provide rational support for the emotional attitude that Shlomo ha'Melech intended to impart - namely, the feeling that "lies are temporary" and "truth is permanent." The goal is to get to the point where you've reviewed these ideas so many times and have thought about so many examples that you can relate to the emotional affect of this pasuk without consciously reasoning through all of the steps. 

One last methodology point: you'll notice that my explanation didn't answer Question #3. That's totally fine. On every pasuk there are major and minor questions. Minor questions tend to stem from the specific wording of the pasuk. The only one of the meforshim I know who cares about explaining every subtlety of the text is the Malbim. Everyone seems content to just get the main idea. If you can bring out a nuance in the main idea from a nuance in the text, that's great. If not, it doesn't matter. As long as you get the main idea.