A close cousin of “white lies” are “lies of omission.” In navigating this world, one encounters people with “false impressions” based on judgments made quickly with incomplete information, or biases where contrary evidence is simply ignored. In these situations, allowing a person to continue believing and acting in a way that is contrary to the actual truth of a situation is often characterized as “lying by omission.” There can be countless motivations for doing this, from greed to sympathy to personal safety. Some would argue that lies of omission are just as dishonest as overt lies. What is Creator’s perspective?

The situation is very much a close parallel to the complications of using white lies because lies of omission, in effect, are a kind of manipulation to not own up to the reality of the situation, in some respect, in order to maintain the assumptions of others as a way of gaining something for the self, in being accepted more readily, when if one were more truthful it might bring up something to invite criticism or being seen in a prejudiced way. And so, in such a position one might feel pressure to mislead using a lie of omission to avoid being probed more thoroughly, and risk being called into question for misrepresenting oneself. But, of course, to continue maintaining that omission perpetuates the misrepresentation and adds to the potential consequences. After all, a lie of omission might simply be a temporary circumstance for any number of reasons, but made up for later with full disclosure, perhaps when in private or to make a special outreach to correct a possible misinterpretation. In other words, to come clean at the risk of even being rejected. That would certainly be taking the high ground in being scrupulous to not misrepresent oneself and take advantage of others, who might falsely assume too much of you, and to let that stand is a misrepresentation involving moral imperatives and karmic consequences. So we agree with the characterization that, as a general rule, lies of omission are often just as dishonest as overt lies. They might seem more acceptable because they happen due to the false assumptions of others and not a deliberate falsehood being proffered, but to not speak up and correct a false assumption that puts you in a better light that is not deserved is comparable in every way to having told a lie to make yourself look good. Such situations are what the conscience is for and normally people will feel troubled if something happens and they are given credit where it is not really due and, rather than let it stand, will go and confess there was a misunderstanding and they want to set the record straight. That is a good demonstration of character and, in most cases, will be much appreciated as a witness to honest action when someone could easily perpetuate and benefit from flattering opinion of them as a kind of cheating. The fact there is not a referee present to call them out in falsely accepting undue recognition or praise does not mean they are following the rules—the Law of Karma is always watching and will have the final say.