Page 251 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Vav - Halachah 9 ד הכלה - ו ללכ

(RK6/9/2)-(19) ..but not as a basis for repeating the gossip to םגּ אוּה היה יאדּובּ ,הז רוּבֲע האנִשׂ וֹל רֵטוֹנ וֹניאו תוּכז ףכל
ַ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
other people: This is no better than if he heard someone belittling him, ,אצוֹי היה אלֹו ,רבדּ םוּשׁבּ וֹדיִסְפהלִּמ אבּהלוּ ןאכִּמ רהזנ ןכּ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ִ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
that it is forbidden for him to go and tell other people what happened, as I
ְ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ֵ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ְ
have already written above in several places, unless some future benefit can תדַרָוֹהו תוּניִשׁלמ ידֵי לע םהינְשִׁל לוּקלקִ םוּשׁ ,םוֹלָשׁו סח
be had by repeating the Lashon Hara, that Plony will not be able to repeat הזּה םלוֹעבּ ןהינְשִׁל בוֹט היה הז ידֵי לעו ,המוֹדּכו םיִחקִּמּה
ֶ
ֶ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ֵ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
what he did or he will stop denigrating him. In this type of circumstance,
ָ
ַ
ָ
ֱ
ַ
ֶ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ֵ
ֶ
ָ
it is possible that it would also be permitted in our case. ץפחה שׁיִאה יִמ" :רמאנ הזבּ אצוֹיּכו הז לעו ,אבּה םלוֹעבוּ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
ִ
ֵ
שׁוּרפּ( בוֹט תוֹארְִל םיִמי בהֹא )אבּה םלוֹעבּ שׁוּרפּ( םייּח
ַ
ָ
ָ
(RK6/9/3)-(20).. In all circumstances: Meaning, that even if his ,ןכּ םגּ לבּקַל אלֶֹּשׁ יאדּובוּ ,"ערֵָמ ךָנוֹשׁל רֹצנ )הזּה םלוֹעבּ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
ְ
ֶ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
intention is to achieve some future benefit, that Plony will not repeat what
ָ
ַ
ְ
ִ
ָ
he did or he will not denigrate him again, and even if the incident was such .וּנרְֵמְשׁי 'ה ,וֹרְמוֹאהֵמ רֵתוֹי וֹלבּקְַמה ןוֲֹע לוֹדגּ יִכּ
that if it was true, that if Plony had done this to him, it would have been
permitted to cause a loss to him, as I illustrated below in the 10 halacha.
th
Even so, since the incident was not disclosed by two witnesses testifying םייחה רוקמ
in Beit Din but rather only by circumstantial evidence, it is forbidden for
the victim to cause any monetary loss to Plony. And it makes no difference עמָשׁ םִא וּלִּפא אוּה תוּליִכרְ תלבּקַ רוּסִּאדּ ,דוֹע עדַו .ד
ָ
ַ
ֲ
ְ
ְ
ַ
if this loss caused to Plony results in no monetary benefit to the victim or
ַ
ִ
ֵ
ִ
if the victim wants to seize Plony’s money even without witnesses present רבּדּ ינוֹלְפֶּשׁ ,ריִעבּ לוֹק אציֶּשׁ וֹא ,רֵתוֹיו םינְשִּׁמ )ז(
ְ
ִ
ָ
ָ
ָ
because of what Plony had done to him; either way it is all forbidden.
ָ
ָ
ָ
ָ
רוּסא )ןכ יִפּ לע ףא( יִכה וּלִּפא ,ךְכו ךְכּ וֹל הָשׂע וֹא ,וילע
ָ
ֲ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
A proof to this concept comes from the text of Gemara Babba Batra (93a)- תנוּכּ םִא וּלִּפא ,תמא אוּהֶשׁ וֹבִּלבּ רבדּה טיִלחהלוּ לבּקַל
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ֵ
ֲ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ֱ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ַ
An ox that was gored and an ox that had repeatedly gored (and was known
to have gored three times) are standing together in a field. One cannot ,אבּהל לע הז לֶשׁ וֹתבוֹטל םה םהירֵבדּ יִפל םירְִפּסְמה
ְ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
ֶ
ִ
say with certainty this is the ox that gored. This law is expressed in
ֵ
ַ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
Choshen Mishpat, section #408, paragraphs 1 and 2, that we do not allow .'ב ףיִעסבּ ל"נּכו ,םרָוּפִּס ידֵי לע םיִעָשׁרְ ןיִשֲׂענ ןיאֶשׁ
compensation to an injured party unless the evidence is clear.
The Maharik writes in Source # 129 that even in a quite apparent
incriminating circumstance, like the one brought in Gemara Sanhedrin םייח םימ ראב
(37b), where someone was running after someone else with a knife in his
hand to kill him and I found him with his knife in his hand standing over .'וכו לוק וילע אציש וא 'וכו רתויו םינשמ )ז(
the stabbed man and the stabbed man was lying on the floor writhing in his קלחב ליעל ןייע ,םירבדה שרוש עדיל הצרת םא
last death throes with blood pouring out of his dying body. The gemara
holds that (in the absence of witnesses) we do not judge him to die just אצמתו םש ח"מבבו 'דו 'ג ףיעסב 'ז ללכב 'א
because of that apparently incriminating circumstance. Similarly in cases ר"השל לע םישרופמ םיקוספו ל"זח תורמימ םהש
of monetary issues, even in a very apparently incriminating circumstance,
such as the one in Gemara Sanhedrin, we do not make Plony culpable (to םש םירכזנש םינידה לכו .ש"יע תוליכר לעו
compensate the “victim”) because The Merciful One has commanded us in ןינעל כ"ג םיכייש ר"השל ןינעל םיפיעסה ולאב
His Torah (Devarim 19:15) “on the basis of the testimony of two witnesses
(testifying in court)” can punishment be administered. .תוליכר
241 220
volume 4 volume 4