Page 141 - V3

Sefer Chafetz Chayim 5 VOL-3 םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara ערה ןושל ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Zayin - Halachah 7 ט הכלה - ז ללכ

some of the elements of the story are circumstantially known to טושפ הזו התבותכ הדיספהל ידכ דעה ותואל ןימאהל הינימכ
be true. Even though the bulk of the law is comparable in these
cases, still, I have divided them into individual categories because .ק"ירהמ ל"כע אחתוכב אתעיבמ רתוי רשיו
there are certain details that are unique to each case which give
rise to a different halachic outcome. I have also done this in order
that people should not become confused because there are so many .זומת ב"כ ,'ב רדא ב"י ,ולסכ 'ג - תרבועמ הנש .בא 'א ,ןסינ 'א ,ולסכ 'א - הטושפ הנש :ימוי חול
consequences that evolve from each case. This task I have begun
with the help of The One Who Bestows Knowledge On Man. םייחה רוקמ

ָ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
It is forbidden to accept as truth the Lashon Hara one hears even חיִסֵמ )זט( היה דחא לע ערָה ןוֹשׁלּה וֹל רפִּסֶּשׁ יִמ םִאו .ט
from someone who he believes with the same authority as two ראבִבּ ראבְּתי ,וֹמּתּ יִפל ארָקְנּ המוּ( הז רבדבּ וֹמּתּ יִפל
ֻ
ֻ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ִ
ֶ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ִ
ֵ
th
th
witnesses. What I wrote above in the 4 Kelal, the 5 halacha,
ַ
ֲ
ֶ
ַ
ָ
ִ
ִ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ִ
ְ
ַ
ָ
that it is permissible to privately relate the victim’s denigration to וּלִּפא ,הזּה ןינִעבּ שׁי םִא ,)ךְכּ ןידּה( יִכה אנידּ )םייּח םימ
ִ
ַ
ָ
one’s rav or to someone known to be discrete (if he knows that
ְ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ֱ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ֶ
this discrete person will believe him just as he would believe two אוּה הז ןינִעֶשׁ וֹא ,תוּכזּה דצל וֹטְפָשׁל ,תמא אוּה םִא
witnesses), and that the rav is permitted to believe the speaker, to וּנרְאבֶּשׁ ,םיִטרְָפּ ראְשִׁמ דחא וֹא תוֹלֲעמּה תליִלְשׁ ינינִעבּ
ֵ
ֶ
ַ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
hate the victim (because of his actions) and to distance himself
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ָ
from the victim until it becomes evident that the victim repented, הז רבדּ הארָ אלֹ )זי( רֵפַּסְמַה הֶזֶּשׁ וֹא ,'ז ףיִעָסְבּ ליֵעְל
this is because there in that reference the context was such that וּנּמיה לבּקַל רוּסא יאדּובּ ,םירִחא יִפִּמ עמָשׁ קרַ ,וֹמצעבּ
ַ
ֲ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
ֶ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
it is permissible to demean the victim if he did not repent since
ֵ
ֲ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
ַ
ֲ
ֶ
the victim purposefully committed an action which is well known דחא וֹבּ ןיא םִא וּלִּפאו ,וֹרבח לע יאנגִל וֹבִּלבּ טיִלחהלוּ
throughout Jewish society to be sinful with no possible justification אלֶֹּשׁ ,רהזִּל שׁי ןכּ םגּ ,םוֹקמ לכִּמ )חי( ,םיִטרְָפַּה וּלֵּאֵמ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
(for example, the incident regarding Tuvia (12) related in Gemara
ֲ
ֵ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ֻ
ֶ
ֵ
ַ
ְ
ִ
Pesachim (113b) which involved adultery). However, if the incident ,וֹרבח לע תוּנגּ ירֵבדּ ,וֹמּתּ יִפל חיִסֵמּה ,הז שׁיִאֵמ לבּקַל
related is equivocal and it is possible to judge the “victim” favorably רפּסלוּ )טי( ךְָכּ רַחַא ךְֵליֵל הֶז לַע ךְֹמְסִל רוּסָאֶשׁ ןֵכֶּשׁ לָכְו
ַ
ְ
ֵ
(13), for example, the victim did not know that he was committing
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ְ
a sin (or something comparable) or he did something mistakenly לקַו ,הז רוּבֲע םירִבדְִבּ וֹתוֹזּבל )כ( וֹא םירִֵחֲאַל הֶז רָבָדּ
\ unintentionally; or to speak shamefully and slanderously about הז רוּבֲע וֹדיִסְפהל )אכ( ןַיְנִעְל רֶמֹחָו לקַ לֶשׁ וֹנְבּ ןֶבּ רֶמֹחָו
ֶ
ַ
ְ
the victim or to degrade him or talk about his personality flaws
ְ
ַ
(or something comparable), as I wrote in the 5 Kelal, in the 2 .הרָוֹתּה ןִמ רוּסא יאדּודּ ,םוֹלָשׁו סח ,וֹתוֹכּהל וֹא ןוֹממבּ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ָ
nd
th
ַ
ַ
ְ
halacha; or to disclose something wrong that his fathers or family
did in the past, or something wrong he himself did in his earlier
life. In all of these instances, the leniency of believing someone
whom he trusts with the same authority as one would believe two םייח םימ ראב
witnesses is most certainly not relevant. What difference does it
make if the remarks were not lies, still the Torah forbids the speaker יפל ארקנ והמ ןאכ ראבל הארא .ומות יפל חיסמ )זט(
from saying anything that demeans the victim and requires people to ןניקסמד ןויכ הז ראבל ןיכירצ ונא ןיא תמאבש ףאו ,ומות
131 138
volume 3 volume 3