Page 336 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim VOL-4 11 םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Tet - Halachah 8 ח הכלה - ט ללכ

Be’er Mayim Chayim םייח םימ ראב

(RK9/7/1)-(23) .. informing someone: Meaning, that up until now we ףתתשנש ןנירייא )אל( ןאכ דעד 'יפ .תולגל ןינעל )גכ(
were discussing a partnership and that if this partnership was maintained
he would lose money, as I will illustrate in the coming examples. But ואוביש ומכ ודי לע דיספי תופתושה ןינעבו ,ומע
here we are discussing a case where someone generally stole from him or
harmed him (Plony stole from Shimon, etc.). And when I wrote “or did .םתס וקיזהו ולזגש ןנירייא אכה וליאו ,ןמקל םירויצהב
some other bad” I meant that it is something that through disclosing it, לכויש רבד הנוכה ,ב"ויכ הער םוש וא יתבתכש המו
“good” could result, similar to the case of (disclosing) theft and damages.
But if not for this (useful outcome) the report is absolute Rechilut. ,קזיהו לזגד אימוד אבהל לע תלעות יוליגה ידי לע אובל
.איה הרומג תוליכר יכה ואלב לבא

Mekor Hachayim
םייחה רוקמ
RK9/8. Understand clearly that it make no difference (24) in any
ָ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
of the laws in this Kelal that we have written if someone (“Shimon”) ןיבּ ,וּנבַתכֶּשׁ ללכּה הז לכבּ קוּלִּח םוּשׁ ןיאדּ )דכ( ,עדַו .ח
pressures him (“Reuven”) to tell him (what Plony said) or if he
ַ
ַ
ֲ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
(Reuven) volunteers the information. If there was compliance with וֹל רמוֹל ןיבוּ ,וֹל רמאֹיֶּשׁ וֹתִּאֵמ שׁרֵוֹדו לאוֹשׁ וֹרבח םִא
ְ
ֲ
ֶ
ָ
all of the rules in this Kelal (25) even if he was not asked, still וּלִּפא ,הז ללכִבֶּשׁ )הכ( םיִטרְָפַּה לָכּ וּמְלְשֻׁ י םִאְדּ .וֹמְצַעֵמ
Reuven is obligated to tell Shimon. And if he is not in compliance
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ִ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
with all of these rules, it is forbidden under any circumstances for אלֹ םִאו ,וֹל דיגּהל ךְירִצ ןכּ םגּ ,רבדּ וֹתִּאֵמ שׁרֵוֹדּ ןיא םִא
him to tell Shimon. .)םיִנָפֳאָה לָכְבּ( יֵנְוַגּ לָכְבּ רוּסָא ,םיִטרְָפַּה וּמְלְשֻׁ י
Be’er Mayim Chayim םייח םימ ראב
(RK9/8/1)-(24) .. it make no difference: This is obvious throughout ליעל ןייעו םיטרפה לכב אוה טושפ .קוליח םוש ןיאד )דכ(
th
st
all of these conditions \ rules; please refer above to the 1 Kelal, the 5
th
halacha. Apart from this, in the 4 condition, (if he can achieve that same ,עשוהימ היארה 'דה טרפב אלה הז דבלו .'ה ףיעס 'א ללכב
beneficial outcome without speaking Lashon Hara or Rechilut) the proof
comes from Yehoshua (After Israel’s army lost 36 soldiers in the battle of
Ai) when he (Yehoshua) asked HaKadosh Baruch Hu to reveal the identity And when Yehoshua asked HaKadosh Baruch Hu - “Tell me who the
of the person who was responsible and HaKadosh Baruch Hu responded- sinner is,” ostensibly there should not have been any greater mitzvah
than publicizing the identity of this man. Therefore HaKadosh Baruch Hu
“and do you think that I would speak Lashon Hara (in revealing this man’s answered Yehoshua- “And do you think I Am an informer? Go and throw
identity)” (and instead, lots were cast to determine who was the cause of lots” to determine his identity, and He did not want to directly disclose his
th
23
the loss) as we wrote above in the first part of the sefer, in the 10 Kelal, (Achan’s) identity at all (and casting lots to determine the sinner’s identity
was a very flimsy alternative since Achan could argue that throwing dice
does not prove who committed this sin, as our Chazal have explained).
23 Quoting from the Mazal Elul edition in English translation of the Chafetz It was with great guile and cunning that Yehoshua was able to pressure
th
Chayim’s Kuntres Zechor LeMiryam 25 chapter: Achan to admit his guilt.
327 326
volume 4 volume 4