Page 144 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim VOL-4 5 םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Beit - Halachah 2 ב הכלה - ב ללכ

told this speaker could be interpreted in two different ways, if the רוּבּדּה םִא וּלִּפאו .ינוגּ לכבּ רפּסל רוּסא ןכּ םגּ )תוּליִכרְ קבא
ִ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֲ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
ַ
ָ
ַ
ֲ
ַ
speaker conveys Plony’s remarks in a framework that becomes
ַ
ִ
ָ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ַ
apparent (2) as degradation, that Plony specifically intended ינְשׁ וֹל שׁי ,וילע ינוֹלְפּ רמאֶשּׁ המ ,וֹל רפּסְמֶּשׁ וֹלֶּשׁ
to demean the “victim,” then of course it would be forbidden to ןוֹשׁארִה תנוּכֶּשׁ ,חכוּמדּ ןפֹאבּ )ב( הּרְָמוֹא אוּה םִא ,םיִנָפּ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
convey those remarks in any circumstance. Even if the speaker
ְ
ַ
ֲ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ָ
conveys Plony’s remarks in the context that they lean towards the אוּה םִא וּלִּפאו ,ינוגּ לכבּ רוּסא יאדּובּ ,וֹתוֹנּגל הָתיה
other way of understanding them (meaning, that they lean towards שׁיֶּשׁ רחאה שׁוּרפּכּ רֵתוֹי הֶטוֹנדּ ןינִעבּ ,וֹנוֹשׁלִּמ הז איִצוֹמ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ָ
ְ
ְ
an interpretation that is not denigrating) and that there was no intent
ָ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ַ
ַ
to demean the listener, nevertheless if the speaker knows the mindset יִפּ לע ףא ,וֹתוֹנּגל הָתיה אלֹ ןוֹשׁארִה תנוּכֶּשׁ ,וירָבדְִבּ
of the listener (3) (the “victim”), that he is contentious (meaning,
ֶ
ְ
ֶ
ִ
ַ
ַ
that the “victim” is constantly forming harsh opinions of people, שׁיִא אוּהֶשׁ ,ינֵשּׁה הז לֶשׁ וֹעבִט תא ריִכּמ אוּה םִא )ג( ןֵכ
never giving them the benefit of the doubt and whatever people המ לכו ,דיִמָתּ בוֹח ףכל וֹרבח תא ןדּ אוּהֶשׁ ,וּניה( ןגרְנ
ֵ
ִ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ֲ
ֶ
ְ
ָ
ַ
do or say about him, he says was done only to antagonize him,
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ֲ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
as Rabbeinu Yonah writes in the 3 sha’ar of Shaare Teshuvah in וֹל דגּנְתִהל קרַ ןוִּכֶּשׁ רֵמוֹא אוּה ,רבּדְַמ וֹא ,הֶשׂוֹע וֹרבחֶשּׁ
rd
section # 231), or if there was some slight enmity between them שׁיֶּשׁ וֹא ,)הנוֹי וּנבּרַל הבוּשְׁתּ ירֲֵעַשׁבּ בַתכֶּשׁ וֹמכּ ,הזבּ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ֵ
and this “victim” needs only the flimsiest of excuses to libel Plony,
ֵ
ֶ
ֶ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ֵ
(regarding this kind of personality, this “victim”) it is forbidden (to ךְירִצ וֹניא הזכּ שׁיִאו ,רבכִּמ םהיניבּ האנִשׂ תצקְ הז דבל
convey to him any form of gossip) in any and all circumstances. .ינוגּ לכבּ רוּסא ,וֹרבח לע הליִלֲע אֹצְמִל קרַ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ֲ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ְ
Be’er Mayim Chayim
םייח םימ ראב
(RK2/2/1)-(2)..becomes apparent: All this was explained above
in the first section of this sefer (in the Laws of Esurei Lashon Hara), in קלחב ליעל ונראיב הז לכ .'וכו חכומד ןפואב )ב(
the cited Be’er Mayim Chayim, in the second notation. Please see that
reference and the following Hagahah. .*ש"יע 'ב תואב ל"נה ח"מבב 'א
(RK2/2/2)-(3)..knows the mindset of this listener: This obviously ליעל ונבתכש הממ טושפ אוה .ריכמ אוה םא )ג(
follows from what I wrote above (in the Laws of Rechilut) in the 1 Kelal,
st
rd
the 3 halacha, that “even if the gossip himself is etc…even so since the 'וכו ומצעב לכורה םג םא וליפאד ג"ס 'א ללכב
remarks he conveyed caused the listener to hate Plony, etc.” (Please see כ"א ש"יע 'וכו האנש סנכיש םרוג הזד ןויכ ה"פא
that reference). That being so, the law here is the same as there. But
even besides this, the speaker is placing a “stumbling block ” (meaning, ינפל לושכמ ןתונ אוה אלה ה"אלבו .אכה ה"ה
he is creating a basis for the listener to also commit a sin) in front of this טפשת קדצב לע רבעיש ועייסמו הזה רועה ןגרנה
“blind,” angry, contentious person and is actually helping him to violate
the Torah’s Lav of judging a fellow Jew favorably etc., as well as a number ח"מבב 'ב ללכ 'א קלחב 'יעו .תונוע המכ דועו 'וכו
of other sins. Please reference the first section of this sefer (in the Laws of שיא ןינעל אתלת יפאד ןיד םש ונראיבש 'ב תוא
Esurei Lashon Hara), the 2 Kelal in the 2 notation of the Be’er Mayim
nd
nd
Chayim where we explained there the law of “in the presence of three .ןגרנ ונניאש
people” in the context of a fellow Jew who is not contentious.
135 134
volume 4 volume 4