Page 135 - V3

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara ערה ןושל ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Zayin - Halachah 5 ט הכלה - ז ללכ

citywide rumoring does not come from only a single violation of an esur הזב רקשל םדאל דאמ השקו היה רקשש ףוסבל ייולגיאל
but rather comes repeatedly from multiple violations of esurim; disgusting
behavior repeatedly observed. That being so, then the Rambam does not האנשה ינפמ יכה וליפאו )ב"ע ג"צ( תומביב אתיאדכו
disagree with Rashi, as we explained Rashi above. םירעהל ןכ םגו לכה תא תושעל םדאה לכויש ןנישייח
If this is so, then we can also resolve the apparent contradiction in the אוביו רומג תמאל ןהירבד ולבקיש ידכ ןמות יפל חיסהלו
Rambam regarding “rebuking,” that since there were so many rumors
constantly circulating about this man, that he did things that were .וננינעב ח"וק ןודינהל הער הזמ
detestable to the point where he acquired for himself a reputation for being
an established Rasha, at that point he no longer is considered to be within ןנילזא ומות יפל חיסמ אוה םא קפס אוה םאד דוע עדו
the category of “your fellow Jew” and we have no obligation to rebuke ו"טסב םש ראובמ ןכ ארמוחל אתיירואד אקיפסד ארמוחל
him, because the Torah’s imperative to rebuke (Vayikrah 19:17) applies
th
only to “your fellow Jew. (Please see further on [in the 10 Kelal, the 7 םינורחאב ש"יע םש םיקלוחה תעד יפל וליפאו ה"הגהב
th
notation] an elaboration of this subject in my explanation of the words וננינעב ןכ ןיאש המ והיימעטב ש"יע םש אקוד ונייה
of Rabbeinu Yonah that appear in the Shetah Mekubetzet which resolves
an apparent contradiction to what he himself wrote in Shaare Teshuvah). אקיפס ומות יפל חיסמ אוהש ררבתנ אלש לכ יאדוב
Consequently it is also permitted to humiliate this man because the Torah’s .בלב וליפא ןימאהל ןידה ןמ רוסאו אוה אתיירואד
admonition against using hurtful language (Vayikrah 25:17) applies only
to “your fellow Jew.” But regarding this man who repudiated Hashem’s
Torah, it is permitted to utterly disgrace him and publicize his detestable השק טעמכש ןיבי הלא ונירבד תא ארוקה הארי רשאכו
behavior and to heap insults on him and thoroughly disgrace him, as אוה ןיד יפ לעש טרפבו ,אנידל ומות יפל חיסמ אצמהל
Rabbeinu Yonah writes in Shaare Teshuvah section #219 (please see that
reference) and the Hagahah of Choshen Mishpat section #228 also rules בלב ןימאהל ןינעל וליפא ללכ ינהמ םא םוצעו לודג קפס
that the prohibition against the use of hurtful and insulting language applies .הזמ קחרי ושפנ רמושה ןכ לע ןמקלדכו
only to those people who are G‑d fearing, meaning average Jews.
ול חיסה ןושארהש עדוי ימד .'וכו הז רבד האר אל )זי(
There is yet another reason why we are not required to rebuke this kind of
person. That because society is constantly rumoring about this man, and .ש"יע ז"סב ליעל ומכ ארבסה ראשה לכבו ,ומות יפל
he repeatedly violates the mitzvot with impugnity, he is within the category
of people who mock the Torah and we have no obligation to rebuke these אמק אבבב ש"ממ .'וכו רהזיל שי ןכ םג םוקמ לכמ )חי(
kinds of people. As Mishle teaches (9:8) “Do not rebuke a scoffer because
he will come to hate you.” Therefore the Rambam allowed us to humiliate אתיירואד ןינע לכב רשכ ומות יפל חיסמ ןיא )ב"ע ד"יק(
him and to insult the one who bore him to his face until he changes his ונא ןיא אתיירואד לכבד אמלא דבלב השא תודעל אלא
th
ways to do good. This is similar to what the Rambam wrote in the 6
perek of Hilchot De’Aut. ימנ אכהו ומות יפל חיסמ ידי לע תמאל רבדה ןיטילחמ
th
The reason the Maharik in Source #188 [cited in the 6 Kelal in the 30 .אוה אתיירואד ןינע וננינע
th
notation of the Be’er Mayim Chayim] did not criticize and reproach
members of his community who were oppressing Reb Aharon, who רב ןועמש 'ר )א"ע ז"ט ףד( ק"ומב ש"ממ תושקהל ןיאו
was suspected by them of committing an immoral act, by saying they אתתעמש והל אישקו יסרגקו יבתי ווה ארפק רבו יבר
were wrong because the suspicion was only about a single event, which
according to what we have said would not be called a “persistent rumor,” ל"א יבר ךירצ הז רבד ארפק רבל יבר רב ןועמש 'ר ל"א

125 144
volume 3 volume 3