As to our sometimes finding a heter in the words of Chazal [for him to speak as he does] if he would not prevent himself from speaking thus before him, this applies only in an instance of the "dust" of lashon hara, and when he says something which may be understood in two ways, so that if we explained his words in one way, there would be nothing demeaning about them. And this is known to depend upon the intent of the speaker and upon what is said at the time. For if he wishes, he can express himself by voice and movement in a very low- keyed mode, so that nothing demeaning against his friend can be detected in his words. And if he wishes, he can express himself in such a way that the listener understands his intent, in a different sense, as demeaning. And it is very difficult to determine [the dividing line] exactly. Therefore, Chazal have said that if in the mode of movement by which he utters these words, no one would be ashamed to speak thus before his friend, it is clear that his intent is not to demean him, and it is permitted. But if it is evident from his movements that his intent is to demean him (and if so, a man, in general, would be ashamed to speak thus before his friend), even though the entire affair in itself, even if it be perceived as demeaning, is only the "dust" of lashon hara, and true, and he knows that he himself would speak thus even before him, it is nevertheless forbidden.
וּמַה שֶּׁנִּמְצָּא לִפְעָמִים הֶתֵּר בְּדִבְרֵי חֲזַ"ל, בְּאִם לֹא הָיָה מוֹנֵעַ אֶת עַצְּמוֹ מִלּוֹמַר זֶה בְּפָנָיו, הַיְנוּ דַּוְקָא בַּאֲבַק לָשׁוֹן הָרָע, וְדִבֵּר עָלָיו לִישָׁנָא דְּמִשְׁתַּמַּע לִתְרֵי אַפֵּי {שמשתמע לשני אופנים}, וְאִם נְבָאֵר דְּבָרָיו בְּאֹפֶן אֶחָד, לֹא יִהְיֶה עָלָיו שׁוּם גְּנַאי, וְעִנְיָן כָּזֶה יָדוּעַ שֶׁתָּלוּי לְפִי רְצוֹן הָאוֹמֵר וּלְפִי הָאֲמִירָה בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה, שֶׁאִם הוּא רוֹצֶּה מוֹצִיאוֹ בְּקוֹלוֹ וּבִתְנוּעוֹתָיו בְּלָשׁוֹן קַל מְאֹד, דְּלֹא יִהְיֶה מִנְכָּר מִלְּשׁוֹנוֹ שׁוּם גְּנַאי עַל חֲבֵרוֹ וְאִם רוֹצֶּה מוֹצִּיאוֹ מִפִּיו, בְּאֹפֶן שֶׁהַשּׁוֹמֵעַ מֵבִין שֶׁכַּוָּנָתוֹ בְּבֵאוּר אַחֵר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בִּדְבָרָיו לִגְנַאי, וְעִנְיָן זֶה קָשֶׁה מְאֹד לְצַּמְצֵּם, לָכֵן אָמְרוּ חְז"ל, דְּאִם בְּאָפְנִי תְּנוּעוֹתָיו, שֶׁהוּא מוֹצִּיא עַתָּה דָּבָר זֶה מִפִּיו, אֵין אָדָם מִתְבַּיֵּשׁ לוֹמַר אֲפִלּוּ בִּפְנִי חֲבֵרוֹ, אִם כֵּן מוּכָח שֶׁאֵין כַּוָּנָתוֹ לְגַנּוֹתוֹ, וְעַל כֵּן מֻתָּר, אֲבָל אִם מִנְכָּר מִתְּנוּעוֹתָיו שֶׁכַּוָּנָתוֹ לְגַנּוֹתוֹ, וְאִם כֵּן טֶבַע הָאָדָם לִהְיוֹת מִתְבַּיֵּשׁ לוֹמַר בְּאֹפֶן זֶה בִּפְנִי חֲבֵרוֹ, אַף שֶׁכָּל הָעִנְיָן בְּעַצְּמוּתוֹ, אֲפִלּוּ אִם נְפָרְשׁוֹ לִגְנַאי, הוּא רַק אֲבַק לָשׁוֹן הָרָע וְהוּא אֱמֶת וְהוּא יוֹדֵעַ בְּעַצְּמוֹ, שֶׁהוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר דָּבָר זֶה אַף בְּפָנָיו, אֲפִלּוּ הָכֵי אָסוּר.
As to our sometimes finding a heter in the words of Chazal [for him to speak as he does] if he would not prevent himself from speaking thus before him, this applies only in an instance of the "dust" of lashon hara, and when he says something which may be understood in two ways, so that if we explained his words in one way, there would be nothing demeaning about them. And this is known to depend upon the intent of the speaker and upon what is said at the time. For if he wishes, he can express himself by voice and movement in a very low- keyed mode, so that nothing demeaning against his friend can be detected in his words. And if he wishes, he can express himself in such a way that the listener understands his intent, in a different sense, as demeaning. And it is very difficult to determine [the dividing line] exactly. Therefore, Chazal have said that if in the mode of movement by which he utters these words, no one would be ashamed to speak thus before his friend, it is clear that his intent is not to demean him, and it is permitted. But if it is evident from his movements that his intent is to demean him (and if so, a man, in general, would be ashamed to speak thus before his friend), even though the entire affair in itself, even if it be perceived as demeaning, is only the "dust" of lashon hara, and true, and he knows that he himself would speak thus even before him, it is nevertheless forbidden.