Page 135 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Alef - Halachah 8 א הכלה - ג ללכ

And do not challenge what I wrote above “if you have a practical way of
answering him” what was the proof of the cited Gemara Yevamot “peace is
so great that even HaKadosh Baruch Hu changed the details of the incident
that happened.” Meaning, that at first Sarah said (Beresheet 18:12) “and
ָ
ְ
my master (my husband, Abraham Aveinu) is old.” But when Hashem 'ג ללכּ
questioned Abraham about Sarah’s reaction, He changed her words to
“and I (meaning, Sarah) am old.” Why can’t we say that the intent of the
pasuk was only to quote what she said (18:12) “now that I am old (past
ְ
ִ
ָ
ָ
ְ
child-bearing age) will I regain a menstrual period? (Rashi)” and not to re- אלֶֹּשׁ ןיֵבוּ וינפבּ ןיֵבּ אוּה תוּליכרְ רוּסִּאֶשׁ ,רַאֹבי וֹבּ
phrase “and my master is old” as “and I am old.” This approach is better as .םיפיִעס 'ד וֹבוּ ,וינפבּ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ִ
ָ
we can now say that He did not lie since ultimately HaKadosh Baruch Hu
only mentioned one “crime,” that she committed- that she laughed about
herself (when she heard the news that she would give birth to a child) and
He did not tell Abraham about the second “crime” she committed- that
she marveled at how Abraham could father a child, that he was too old. .בא ז"כ ,ןסינ ז"י ,תבט 'ז - תרבועמ הנש .בא 'ל ,ןסינ 'ל ,ולסכ 'ל - הטושפ הנש :ימוי חול
(Do not ask this question!) It is possible to answer that you are right, this
was the intent of the pasuk, and I have seen this idea expressed by the
Ramban in his commentary on Chumash. (Please see that reference). But םייחה רוקמ
the gemara still calls this a change in the way Hashem Yitbarach reported
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ְ
ֱ
ֶ
ָ
Sarahh’s words in that only half of the conversation was reported by Him וֹבּ ןיאֶשׁ ,רוּמגּ תמא אוּהֶשׁ ףא ,תוּליִכרְ רפּסל רוּסא .א
and He did not report the part that she said “and my master is old.” This
ָ
ָ
ֲ
ֲ
ַ
ְ
is what our intent was when I wrote above “and the response is neither אוּה םִא וּלִּפאו ,וינפבּ אלֶֹּשׁ וּלִּפא ,רקֶֶשׁ תוֹבוֹרֲעַתּ םוּשׁ
untruthful.” Meaning, that often we can report back to the listener what ןכּ םגּ ,וינפבּ ףא הז רבדּ רֵמוֹא היהֶשׁ )א( ,וֹמצעבּ עדֵוֹי
ָ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
someone said about him but omit those things that he would not want to
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ַ
hear, like this incident involving Abraham Aveinu. רמוֹל וינפּ זיִעֵמ אוּה םִא ןכֶּשׁ לכו .ירְֵקִּמ תוּליִכרְוּ ,רוּסא
ָ
ִ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ךְכּ וֹל ָתיִשׂע וֹא ,וילע ָתּרְבּדּ הָתּא :שׁמּמ וינפבּ )ב( וֹל
(RK1/8/2)-(15)..one may not swear: Because most times he can push
ַ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ֶ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ָ
off the questioner even if he is standing over this speaker and pressuring אוּה הזבֶּשׁ ,דחא .רֵתוֹי הבּרְה לוֹדגּ וֹנוֲֹעו ,רוּסאדּ ,ךְכו
him to swear. That is to say, that he does not swear even to the truth. And
ָ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ִ
ָ
ֲ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ִ
ַ
even if the speaker is unable to push off this listener, that the listener will הָתּעֵמ יִכּ ,הז לע ןוֹדּנּה לֶשׁ וֹבִּלבּ הקָזח האנִשׂ סינכמ
not believe him unless he swears and the speaker believes that if he does אלוּלִּא :רמאֹי יאדּובֶּשׁ ,רוּמגּ תמאל וֹלצא רבדּה לבּקְַתי
ָ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ֱ
ִ
ֶ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ָ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
swear the listener will be satisfied and the listener’s anger will subside.
ָ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ֱ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
Then if this speaker does not see a clear loss accruing to Plony, it seems to וינפבּ וֹל רמוֹל וינפּ זיִעֵמ הז היה אלֹ ,רוּמגּ תמא רבדּהֶשׁ
me based on my grasp of this subject that this swear is absolutely forbidden.
ַ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ֵ
ֶ
ַ
ִ
ַ
ִ
ֶ
ָ
Because necessarily the only leniency is to change the details of a story םינְשּׁה וּלּא תאו וֹמצע תא סינכמ אוּה הז דבל ,דוֹעו .שׁמּמ
to promote peace but this leniency never extended to include swearing to ןיִשׁרָֹפְמה ןיִשֲׂעו ןיואל המּכּ לע וֹזכּ תוּליִכרְ ידֵי לע רֹבֲעל
ַ
ַ
ַ
ִ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ְ
something that is a lie, G-d forbid. Please see the responsa of RaMah,
ָ
ָ
ַ
section #33 (revised edition “Zeev” \ “Splendor,” section #100, notation תוֹא ןיואלּבּ החיִתְפּבּ בֵטיה הז לכּ יִתּרְאבּ רֶשׁאכו ,הרָוֹתּבּ
ֵ
ֵ
ִ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ֲ
ַ
ֶ
#10, paragraph #11) and even if the speaker does see that Plony will suffer
ַ
ַ
ַ
ִ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
a certain financial loss unless he swears, then this specific case requires .םָשׁ ןיּע ,ההגּהבּ םייּחה רוֹקְמִבּ םָשׁ ד"י
125 144
volume 4 volume 4