The ninth of the Ten Commandments is the prohibition of “Lo Ta’aneh Be’re’acha Ed Shaker,” which forbids testifying falsely against one’s fellow in court. This includes both presenting information which one knows is false, and testifying about something which one had heard about but did not actually witness. The Sefer Ha’hinuch explains that maintaining law and order among the nation requires a functioning legal system, and one who falsely testifies in court undermines the integrity of the system, thereby threatening the stability of our society. Giving false testimony is thus regarded as an especially grievous sin, and for this reason it is included among the Aseret Ha’dibberot which G-d pronounced to our ancestors at Mount Sinai. This command is relevant in all places and in all times. It applies only to men, as women do not serve as witnesses. One who violates this command and testifies falsely in Bet Din is liable to Malkut. This prohibition is one of the exceptional instances where a transgressor can receive Malkut even though he violated a command by simply uttering words, without performing a concrete action. The Torah formulates this command as a prohibition against testifying falsely “Be’re’acha” – “against your friend.” At first glance, this formulation might lead us to conclude that the prohibition applies only when a witness testifies about a fellow Jew, but not when testifying about a gentile. It goes without saying that lying is always wrong, but the question arises as to whether this particular command applies only when one testifies about a fellow Jew, or even when testifying about a non-Jew. The Minhat Hinuch presents two arguments to prove that one violates the prohibition of “Lo Ta’aneh Be’re’acha Ed Shaker” even when testifying falsely about a gentile. Firstly, if we insist on the narrow, literal meaning of the word “Re’acha,” then we must conclude that it is forbidden to falsely testify about one’s friend, but not about somebody who is not his friend – a conclusion which is clearly untenable. Secondly, if this prohibition applies only to false testimony given about a Jew, then Bet Din would never be able to adjudicate a case between a Jew and a gentile, because the witnesses are not bound by this prohibition to testify truthfully. Necessarily, then, the prohibition of “Lo Ta’aneh” is relevant regardless of whether or not the litigant is Jewish. As for the word “Re’acha,” the Minhat Hinuch proposes a novel reading of this term, explaining that it refers to G-d. When somebody testifies falsely, he effectively betrays his most important “friend” – the Almighty Himself. G-d granted us a sacred soul which gives us the unique ability to speak, a quality that sets us fundamentally apart from all other creatures on earth. When we misuse this sacred soul to speak falsehood, this is a betrayal of G-d, and thus the Torah formulates this command as forbidding us from speaking against G-d Himself. The Poskim note that this prohibition is limited to those with the formal, halachic status of “Edim” (witnesses). Certain groups of people – such as relatives of the litigants – are disqualified from serving as witnesses, but if both litigants agree to accept these people’s testimony, then they may testify and Bet Din may rule on the basis of their testimony. In such cases, the person who testifies is not formally considered an “Ed,” since he is disqualified, and therefore the command of “Lo Ta’aneh” does not apply. The Gemara teaches that liars are among the groups of people who will be unworthy of beholding the Shechina (divine presence) in the next world. Clearly, then, speaking dishonestly is forbidden and a morally repugnant practice which we must avoid. However, while lying is always forbidden, the Rabbis addressed the question of whether the command of “Lo Ta’aneh” forbids all kinds of dishonest speech, or refers only to the specific case of giving false testimony. The Samag (Rav Moshe of Coucy, France, 13 th century)