Page 321 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Tet - Halachah 5 בי הכלה - ט ללכ

(RK9/5/2)-(16) .. If he (Reuven) knows: But if he is unsure, then לכִּמוּ .תוּליִכרְ רוּסִּאבּ וֹליִשׁכמ אוּה יִכּ ,תמאה הזכּ שׁיִאל
ָ
ֱ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ָ
the matter requires more thought and analysis. Even though we do not
ְ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ֶ
ַ
ִ
ְ
ָ
perceive people as being “wicked people” still, we can see ourselves that הלּגי אלֶֹּשׁ ,וֹריִהזי םִאֶשׁ ,רֵעַשְׁמ אוּה םִאדּ ,הארְנ םוֹקמ
because of the many sins of society it is very common to find “Shimon”
ַ
ֶ
ַ
ִ
ֵ
reacting against “Plony” in a way that is completely outside of the law. .ןכ הֶשֲׂעי - וֹל עמְשׁי ,וֹמְשׁ תא
What I wrote above, that “it is proper and correct to convey that gossip
to Shimon” is because all of the proofs and opinions \ arguments that are
relevant above are also relevant here since no harm will happen to Plony
because of Reuven’s report to Shimon and the only reason the report was םייח םימ ראב
made was to alert Shimon to an impending problem in order that he protect
himself. ןיאש תונוע ראשב וליפא יכ .ןולקב חומשל אלו )גל(
(RK9/5/3)-(17) .. take matters into his own hands: Because the םימעפ המכ ליעל ונבתכ ,השועה לע תוכז דצ םוש
maxim taught by Chazal in Gemara Yomah (86b), that there is “a mitzvah הזב ש"כו ,דואמ הזב רהזיל ךירצש רפסמה יאנתב
to publicize the identities of flatterers \ manipulators,” and its purpose is
to warn people not to associate with them so that they will not suffer any הנוהש עדוי וניא ומצעב הנאמהש דואמ אוה יוצמש
loss because of them. Or even if a deal was finalized and they formed ראש וא ,הזה חקמה הוש הרוחסהש רובס אוהש ,ותוא
a relationship and this speaker (Reuven) is familiar with Shimon’s
personality (the one who formed a relationship) and knows that the most .והל אימד אריתיהכ ז"יעש תואלתמא
Shimon would do is to suspect that perhaps Reuven’s report was true and
he would take steps to protect himself, then it would be a mitzvah to tell הבוט הדמ אלו ,אוה ארוסיא הזו .ול רמול ןיא )דל(
him, but that Plony should not incur any real loss more than the Beit Din ז"י( תובותכד ארמגה ןושלמ עמשמד יאמו .אמלעב
would have penalized him had he (Reuven) appeared before the court as
a solitary witness. VOL-4 ןאכמ 'וכו קושה ןמ ער חקמ חקלש ימ ורמא ןאכמ )א"ע
A proof to this concept comes from Gemara Keri’tute (12a): “If two הז ,איה אמלעב הבוט הדמד עמשמד 'וכו םימכח ורמא
people told him-“You became ritually impure” and he responded- “I did הברה םש םיצבקתמש קושה ןמ ירייא אלה םשד ,וניא
not become ritually impure,” Rebbe Yehudah says regarding this type of
circumstance that a person is believed to testify on himself more than the האנש סינכי ימ לעד ,תוליכר הזב ךייש אלו ,םישנא
testimony of 100 witnesses, but the rabbis, his colleagues, disagree with ,הנק יממ עדי םאד( ,הנק יממ עדי אל אמתסמ יכ ,ובלב
him.” The gemara there (12b) quotes Rav Nachman that the law follows
the opinion of Rebbe Yehudah. Rav Yosef said that this is the law only in ותאנוא תא איצויש ידכ תמאה ול תולגל ךירצ היה ירה
a private situation and only when it pertains to himself. Please reference ריפש יתא יכהבו ,םינפב ש"מכו חקמה תא ריזחהל וא
Rashi there who explains that Rebbe Yehudah’s opinion is upheld as
law, that he is believed to say he is ritually pure only in regard to eating חקולהד וננינעב כ"אשמ ,)קושה ןמ ארמגה הקדקדד
22
“Taharot” in private, but in a public setting he may not eat Taharot since ,וילע ובלב האנש סינכי ורופיסבו ,רכומה תא ריכמ
it could result in their trivializing the Taharot. Rashi goes on to explain
אל םאש ,הנוקב רעשמ אוהש אל םא .ןידה ןמ רוסא
והמריו תונחה התואל םעפה דוע סנכי תמאה ול הלגי
Taharot are foods that can only be handled and eaten in a state of ritual
purity. .םיטרפה ראש ומלשנש ןויכ ול תולגל ךירצ ,ינונחה
11
311 342
volume 4 volume 4