Shouldn't we speak about the bad things done by the dead?

Q: People say we should not talk bad about dead individuals. What is wrong in discussing the wrongs they did? Should we sweep everything under the carpet and suffer as a result?

Krishna: I too hear the same very frequently.
But I have a specific view on this. Let me explain.

The idea that we shouldn't speak ill of the dead stems from ancient Greece and the Latin maxim de mortuis nil nisi bonum ("of the dead, [say] nothing but good"). People follow this social convention to show basic respect, protect the feelings of grieving family members, and acknowledge that the deceased cannot defend themselves.

While this is a common social norm, the reasons for avoiding negative speech vary:
Protecting the Bereaved: Speaking poorly of someone recently deceased can cause immense emotional pain to their friends and family. It is generally seen as a matter of basic manners and empathy to let the living mourn in peace.

Defenselessness: Because the person is no longer alive, they are unable to defend themselves against accusations or provide their side of the story.

Karmic and Spiritual Beliefs: In some traditions, like Hinduism, criticizing the dead is discouraged because it perpetuates negativity, harms your own emotional energy, and is thought to interfere with the soul's karmic journey.

Futile Criticism: From a practical standpoint, the dead cannot change their behaviour. Some philosophies suggest that focusing on the wrongs of the past only traps the living in bitterness.

This is somewhat old thinking. And it is changing taking a new direction. We should consider that too.

The Changing Modern Perspective

In modern times, however, this strict rule is frequently debated.
Many psychologists, trauma survivors, and social commentators argue that "never speaking ill of the dead" can be harmful. It is often used to silence people who were abused, traumatized, or neglected by the deceased, forcing them to hide their lived experiences and emotional pain in the name of politeness.

Ultimately, while many people agree that avoiding petty gossip out of respect for the grieving is good practice, modern discussions emphasize that survivors are allowed to process their complex, messy feelings and speak the truth about the harm they endured.

Let me ask this question: Why do we study History?
To differentiate good from bad and learn not to repeat or endure the bad things again.
Likewise, discussing the discomfort one endured because of a dead person's behaviour without criticizing him or her very much in a neutral tone and moderate manner to offset such behaviour is essential for the well being of living individual's psychology.

The dead person cannot change his behaviour but the living can learn lessons from it. History repeats itself if no one tries to counter the negative things in it.

When the facts are quite obvious and everybody knows the truth, there is no need to see and hear the twisted 'other side of it' too.

So speak, if you want about the dead person's 'bad behaviour', but don't critisize the 'human being'.

Don't gossip and add things that are not there in the story or not relevant to it, just state facts. That will do.