Page 366 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Tet - Halachah 15 וט הכלה - ט ללכ

this is an extremely profound sin since he is slandering him. All of םייח םימ ראב
the Laveen and Aseen brought down in the Introduction are relevant
to this speaker (relevant to this merchant). ז"י ףיעסב 'י ללכב 'א קלחב ליעל 'יע .רבד השענ )טל(

One must be extremely careful in these kinds of matters not to יכ ,ויטרפ לכב ורוקמו הזה ןידה תא עדתו םייח םימ ראבב
disclose the identity of this second buyer even if this merchant takes םג ךייש ר"השל ןינעל ןנירייאד םש םיכיישש תורבסה לכ
the blame himself, saying: “I am the one who made a mistake in this
matter since he (the second buyer) did not know anything about the .תוליכר ןינעל וננינעב
deal that you and I agreed to,” because it is very possible that this
admission will still provoke a sense of hatred in the heart of this first
buyer for the second buyer. He will think that this second buyer is :ה"הגה
stealing his livelihood. The most the merchant should say to the
second buyer is: “I mistakenly sold it to someone else.” ןכּ םגּ אוּה היה םִא ןינִעל ןידּה הזִּמ אלּקֻ תוֹרוֹהל אלֶֹּשׁ ,רהזִּל שׁי ךְא *
ְ
ַ
ִ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ָ
םיניּעְמוּ םיִבְשׁוֹיֶּשׁ ,ריִעה יבוֹט ןינִעבּ יוּצמֶּשּׁ המ יִפל ,ןוֹגכּ ,ןייוּנְמה ןִמ
ַ
ְ
ִ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
ִ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ֶ
ָ
ֲ
Be’er Mayim Chayim ,הז ןינִעבּ םהמִּע םיִכּסִה אלֹ אוּה םִא וּלִּפא ,ריִעה יֵשׁנא תגהנה רבדְִבּ
ְ
ֶ
ַ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ֶ
ךְא ,ןבוּארְ דגנ אוּהה ןינִעבּ וּמיִכּסִהֶשּׁ המ אוּה ןגֹהכּ אלֶֹּשׁ וֹתְּעדּ יִפלוּ
ַ
ֵ
(RK9/15/1)-(41) .. a serious sin: Please reference the Choshen
ֶ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ֲ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ְ
ֵ
Mishpat, section #237 regarding the law pertaining to someone who steals םגּ םִא ,וֹלאוֹשׁו ןבוּארְ אבּ ךְכּ רחאו .וֹתְּעדּ תא וּלְטִּבוּ וילע וּבּרַ םה
away another person’s livelihood. רוּסא )מ( ןכ יִפּ לע ףא ,הזבּ וֹדְשׁוֹח ןבוּארְֶשׁ ףא ,הז ןינִעבּ הָתיה וֹדי
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
(RK9/15/2)-(42) .. since the merchant did sell it to this second לכו ,הזּה רבדּה תא יִתיִשׂע אלֹ ינא :ןוֹשׁלבּ וּלִּפא ,ביִשׁהל ןידּה ןִמ וֹל
ֲ
ֲ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ִ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ֶ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ִ
ֶ
buyer and received money for the purchase: I chose this example וּנרְאבֶּשׁ וֹמכוּ ,הז רוּבע ירֵקְִמ לכוֹרו ,םמְשׁ תא שׁוּרפבּ תוֹלּגל ןכֶּשׁ
ֲ
ָ
ְ
ֵ
ֶ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֶ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
because it happens often. This same law applies even if it was legally sold
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ֵ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
to the second buyer, even without having received payment for it. .בֵטיה םָשׁ ןיּע ,א"י ףיִעס 'ב ללכּ 'א קלחבּ ליֵעל
More than this, it seems obvious that even if the seller (went and came)
was trying to get the money and the second buyer went to get the money,
still he should not disclose his identity to the first buyer since if this םייח םימ ראב
second buyer brings this money within the time he specified, he would
retroactively have acquired that merchandise since he acquired it before א"יס 'ב ללכ 'א קלחב ליעל ןייע הזל רוקמ .ול רוסא )מ(
when he symbolically took it into his house, as the Choshen Mishpat
(section # 190, paragraph #16) lists this as a valid means of ownership .ח"מבב
acquisition. Therefore necessarily at this moment nothing useful can
come from disclosing to him the name of the second buyer; only senseless
gossip.
םייחה רוקמ
(RK9/15/3)-(43) .. whatever reasons that he had (43): Sometimes
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ִ
ָ
ֲ
because this second buyer is an acquaintance or friend and sometimes ,םיִשׁנא הבּרְה הזבּ ןיִלָשׁכנֶּשּׁ המ ראבל אוֹבנ הָתּעו .וט
ֵ
because this second buyer wants to buy from him a lot more other
ָ
ָ
ַ
ֲ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ֶ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
ְ
merchandise together with this merchandise or because he paid the seller .הזבּ אצוֹיּכּ לכל ליִכְּשׂמּה שׁיקִי וּנּמִּמוּ ,דחא רוּיִּצ ריּצאו
361 356
volume 4 volume 4