Deception in Genesis

We all know that "the seal of the Holy One Blessed Be He is Truth (Shabbos 55 a)".  Chazal held falsehood to be abhorrent and the Talmudic sages spoke strongly against dissembling and cheating. On the other hand, there are situations when carefully designed misstatement is permitted (sources here). In Tanach a  similar situation exists. On one hand, Hashem abhorrs a liar (Psalms 5:5-6) and  "The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth" (Zephania 3:13); on the other hand, Genesis is full of deceit. Take as an example Abraham and Pharaoh and Abimelech, Yitzhak and Avimelech, Yaakov and Yitzhak, Rachel and Lavan, brothers and Yakov, Tamar and Yehuda, Yosef and the brothers and on and on and on. Let's not forget Moshe and Pharaoh either. How does one explain this?

There are, of course, "local" explanation for each case. However, I venture to say that in Tanach, dissembling or what we call now "geneivas daas" is seen as justified when it is used by the weak against the strong. After all, the weak cannot match the power of the strong, and each one can legitimately use the means and weapons in their disposal. Let the strong give up their power and then the weak will give up their deceits. The weak, as is believed in every culture and every time and place, have a right to protect themselves as best as they can. Deceit is often the only weapon they have against an opponent that they cannot otherwise match. To this day, that lying is appropriate on the part of the weak but repugnant when utilized by the strong to augment their already existing advantage, is a prominent feature of the Mediterranean culture. The idea that lying is always wrong made its way into Western culture from the age of chivalry and the spirit of Eisav. Later Kant enshrined it as an ethical principle basd in his absolutist system of ethics.

The case of Abraham adn Paroh is clear. In regard to Pharaoh and Moshe, Rashbam explains that Pharaoh could never accept teh demand to let Jews go forever. He was simply psychologically incapable of acceding to such a demand. I would say it is as if an Indian Chief showed up on the front lawn of the White House demanding the state of Arizona because the Great Eagle sent him. Moshe had to proceed step by step; there was simply no otehr way.

I believe that every apparently tolerated, excused and accepted occurrence of deceit in Tanach is in a situation of weak defending themselves against the strong. Every ocurrence that is explicitly or implicitly tagged with opporbrium (like Lavan's use of falsehood against Yakov), is when the strong use it to opress the weak.

In other words, injustice is worse than falsehood.

Why then will the remnant of Israel not speak falsehood? Because they will rule the nations and that is the implied context to this verse.

“The remnant of Israel will do no wrong  And tell no lies,  Nor will a deceitful tongue  Be found in their mouths;  For they will feed and lie down  With no one to make them tremble.” 

 

Comments

[Daniel]

Fascinating. I think that you should add, that when used by the weak against the strong it is only acceptable when the weak are trying to protect themselves from an injustice, but it is not acceptable for the weak to use deceit just to get ahead.
If so, then the strong should also be permitted to use deceit if necessary to protect himself from an injustice committed by the weak. However, since they are strong, generally they won't need to.

[avakesh]

Add:
the sons of Jacob answered Shechem and his father Hamor with guile, because he had defiled their sister Dinah
Rashi - the verse explains that it was not deceitful because, "he had defiled their sister Dinah".