Page 87 - V4

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Rechilut תוליכר ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Tet 'ח ללכ - םייחה רוקמ

and take matters into his own hands (17), for example, to renege on
his deal with Plony or cause some other harm \ loss to Plony based
on Reuven’s report, even though he would not do anything worse
ָ
ְ
than a Beit Din would have done based on what the law demanded 'ח ללכּ
if two witnesses had given their testimony in court. Still, conveying
that report is forbidden since his (Reuven’s) report will be the cause
of his (Plony’s) loss and that loss would not have occurred even if
ָ
ִ
ֵ
ִ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
he would have given single-witness testimony in court. No loss 'ה וֹבוּ ,וינינִע לכבּ קבָאָה ינידּ רַאֹבי הז ללכבּ
would have occurred because the court could not have compelled a .םיפיִעס
ְ
ִ
monetary penalty based on the testimony of a solitary witness. Yet
now he (Reuven) is causing real damages to Plony because of the
report he made. Therefore, if two people (18) themselves saw the
incident (19) seemingly it would be permitted to convey that report
ַ
ָ
ֲ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ֲ
ֵ
in a case where their only motivation (20) is to prevent a loss from .תוּליִכרְ קבא םעטִּמ ןירִוּסאֶשׁ ,םירִבדּ הבּרְה שׁי .א
occurring (to Shimon). Nor should any more happen to Plony than לכל ליִכְּשׂמּה שׁיקִי םהֵמוּ ,םינינִע הזיא רוּצּקִבּ ראבאו
ַ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
ְ
ֶ
ָ
ֲ
ֵ
ֶ
ַ
ִ
the law requires (and if they realized that in giving their testimony
ֵ
ֵ
ֶ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֶ
ֲ
ֲ
ַ
ָ
the result would be something more severe happening to Plony than דחאֵמ וּלאָשֶּׁשׁ ךְיא ,וֹרבחל רפּסְמה )א( ,ןוֹגכּ ,הזבּ אצוֹיּכּ
the Beit Din would have imposed, then they have no more basis המ עידִוֹהל הצוֹר יניא ,וּקְתִשׁ :הז לע ביִשׁהו ,ויָתוֹדוֹא
ִ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
ַ
for giving their testimony than the testimony of a solitary witness
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ִ
ְ
ְ
ֶ
ֶ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ִ
ַ
and most certainly it is forbidden for the two of them to make their ירֵבדִּמֶּשׁ ךְיא ,וֹל רפּסְמֶּשׁ ,הזבּ אצוֹיּכּ לכו ,היהיּ המוּ ,ערַא
report \ gossip). Furthermore, these two witnesses must not fail to .אוּה תוּליִכרְ קבא ללכִבּ ,ןגֹהכּ אלֶֹּשׁ וילע זמרְנ ינוֹלְפּ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ִ
ַ
ִ
ַ
ֲ
ַ
ְ
ַ
Mekor Hachayim Be'er Mayim Chayim on page 325 ידֵי לעֶשׁ םוֹקמבּ )ב( ,וֹרבח ינְפִבּ דחא תא חבַּשְׁמה ןכו .ב
nd
comply with any of the other details (21) listed above in the
halacha.
ֶ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֲ
ֵ
ַ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ידֵי לעו ,וילע תוֹמוֹערְַתּ וֹרבח בלבּ תוֹלֲעהל לכוּי הז
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ֲ
ְ
ֵ
ַ
ָ
ַ
RK9/6. This entire leniency of allowing two people to convey
a report \ gossip in a case where Shimon, the person receiving that
ֶ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ֲ
ַ
ְ
ַ
לע .אוּה תוּליִכרְ קבא ללכִבּ ,הערָ וֹל בבסִּהל לכוּי הז
ַ
ָ
gossip has the kind of a personality who takes matters into his own
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ִ
ַ
ֶ
ֵ
ֵ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ֶ
ֵ
hands, only helps to make them immune from the essential sin of
speaking Lashon Hara or Rechilut however they are not immune ןוֹעְמִשׁ ינְפִבּ ןבוּארְ תא חבַּשׁלִּמ רהזִּל שׁידּ ,יִל הארְנ ןכּ
ַ
,)וֹתְּשִׁא ינְפִבּ לעבלוּ ,הּלְעבּ ינְפִבּ הָשִּׁאל וֹא( וֹפָתּשׁ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ֵ
ֻ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
from the esur of assisting someone in committing a sin (22) since
ָ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ֵ
the esur, the conveying of their report \ gossip, was the impetus רכְשׂ םוּלִּשׁבוּ הקָדצ תניִתנִבּ וֹא האולהבּ וֹמִּע ביִטיהֶשׁ
for Shimon’s (illegal) reaction. The law is that it is forbidden (for לע אוּה יוּצמ יִכּ ,הזבּ אצוֹיּכּ לכו ,יוּארָכּ וֹל םלִּשֶּׁשׁ ,ריִכָשׂ
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ָ
Shimon) to believe them and then to go and do something that
ְ
ְ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֶ
ֻ
ַ
results in a loss to Plony as long as that report was not made in Beit ,ןבוּארְ וֹפָתּשׁ לע ןוֹעְמִשׁ בלבּ תוֹמוֹערְַתּ תוֹלֲעהל הז ידֵי
6
volume 4 volume 4