Page 149 - V3

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס 5 VOL-3
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara ערה ןושל ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Zayin - Halachah 9 ז הכלה - ז ללכ

witness’ “testimony” with the same authority as two witnesses. It is crystal ,םיִפנֲעה יבּרֻ ינְפִּמ ארֵוֹקּה יניֵע וּבבּרְעְתי אלֶֹּשׁ םגו
ֵ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ִ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ֵ
clear to us that we do not believe this witness to the point of depriving this
ָ
ֶ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
woman of her Ketubah. (The Maharik is quoted up until this point). ןנוֹחה תרַזעבּ יִלחה הזו .דחאו דחא לכִּמ םיִטְשּׁפְּתִמֶּשׁ
ַ
.תעדּ םדאל
ַ
ָ
ְ
ָ
Daily Halacha: 1 Kislev, 1 Nissan, 1 Av; Leap Year-3 Kislev, 12 Adar II, 22Tammuz
Mekor Hachayim
אוּהֶשׁ ,שׁיִאֵמ עמָשׁ םִא וּלִּפא אוּה ערָה ןוֹשׁל תלבּקַ רוּסִּא
ַ
ַ
ָ
ָ
ֲ
ָ
K7/9. If the person who spoke Lashon Hara made his remarks
in casual passing while discussing an unrelated subject (an 'ד ללכִבּ ליֵעל וּנבַתכֶּשּׁ המוּ ,םידִֵע ינְשׁ ירֵבדִכּ הּל ןמיהְמ
ֵ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
“incidental” remark”)(16) (I will define “incidental remark” below
ָ
ַ
ְ
ֻ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ְ
in the Be’er Mayim Chayim), then the law is as follows: If within ,וֹדוֹס שׁיִאלוּ וֹבּרַל ענצהבּ ןינִעה תוֹלּגל רָתּמדּ ,'ה ףיִעס
these (“incidental”) remarks it is possible to judge the “victim” רָתּמוּ ,םידִֵע ינְשׁ ירֵבדִכּ וירָבדּ ןיִמאי רֶשׁא ,עדַי םִא
ֲ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ְ
ֲ
ֵ
ְ
ֻ
ַ
favorably even if the remarks are true, or if the remarks reflect on the
ְ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ֵ
ֶ
ֵ
ְ
victim’s personality flaws or one of the other examples I mentioned דע ,וֹתרָבחֵמ קחרְַתִהלוּ וֹתוֹא אֹנְשִׂלו הז רבדּ לבּקַל וֹבּרַל
th
above in the 7 halacha, or if this speaker did not see the event first- רבדּ אוּהֶשׁ ,םָשׁ וּניה ,הערָה וֹכּרְדִּמ בָשֶּׁשׁ ,וֹל עדַוּי רֶשׁא
ָ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ִ
ֲ
ַ
ַ
hand (17) but only repeated what someone told him, it is absolutely
ֱ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ֶ
ֵ
ֶ
ְ
ֻ
ְ
ֲ
forbidden to accept these remarks as truth and conclude an opinion אלֹ םִא ,הז רוּבֲע וֹתוּנגִבּ רפּסל רָתּמ תמאה יִפל רֶשׁא
and degrade a fellow Jew. Even in the absence of these conditions,
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ִ
ָ
ֻ
ַ
ָ
ַ
ָ
in any event one must be careful (18) not to believe this speaker’s םסרְפְמה רבדּ ןוֲֹע לע דיזֵמבּ רבעֶשׁ ןויכּ ,הבוּשְׁתּ הָשׂע
(“incidentally”) demeaning comments about a fellow Jew. Further, םוּשׁ דוֹע וילע תוֹלְתִל ןיאֶשׁ ,רוּסא אוּהֶשׁ ,לארְָשׂיבּ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ִ
it is absolutely forbidden to give these remarks any credibility and
to repeat them to others (19) or to humiliate the victim (20) based on אוּהֶשׁ )ג"יק( ,םיִחָסְפִבּ הָיִּבוֹטְדּ הֵשֲׂעַמְבּ )בי( ,ןוֹגְכּ( תוּכְז
what was heard. Further, it is absolutely obvious that it is forbidden תוֹלְתִל שׁיֶּשׁ ,רבדבּ )גי( ןֵכ אלֹ ,)הֶזָבּ אֵצוֹיַּכְו ףוּאֵנ ןַיְנִע
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
to cause a financial loss to the victim (21) or to hurt him in any way
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ָ
(because of those remarks), G‑d forbid, which most certainly would ילוּא וֹא ,הֶשֲׂעמּה רוּסִּא תעידִי ןוֹרסחבּ ןוֹגכּ ,תוּכז וילע
be forbidden by the Torah.
ַ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ָ
,אמלעבּ יאנגוּ יִפֹדּ ירֵבדּ וילע רפּסל וֹא ,וֹדיל אבּ הגגְשִׁבּ
ְ
ָ
ֵ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ִ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ָ
וֹא ,'ב ףיִעס 'ה ללכִבּ ל"נּכו ,תוֹלֲעמּה תליִלְשׁ ןינִעבּ וֹא
ַ
ַ
ְ
ַ
Be’er Mayim Chayim
ַ
ָ
,םינוֹשׁארִה ויָשֲׂעמ וֹא ,ויבוֹרקְוּ ויָתוֹבא יֵשֲׂעמ וילע רֹכּזִל
ָ
ְ
ָ
ֲ
ָ
ַ
ִ
(K7/9/1)-(16)..in casual passing while discussing an unrelated
ְ
ַ
subject (an “incidental” remark): We will now explain the meaning יאמדּ ,)םידִֵע יֵנְשִׁכּ ןָמֱאֶנ( ירְֵתּ יֵבְכּ ןָמיֵהְמ הֶזָבּ ךְָיַּשׁ אלֹ יאַדַּוְבּ
of the expression “an incidental remark” even though truthfully it is not לע ףא ,וֹרקִּעֵמ רקֶֶשׁ וֹניא הזּה רבדּה םִא ,)הֶנַּשְׁמ הַמֶּשׁ( יֵוָה
ַ
ַ
ָ
ֶ
ֵ
ַ
ָ
ַ
ָ
th
necessary since we concluded this law (in the following 18 notation of
ֵ
ָ
ַ
ְ
ְ
the Be’er Mayim Chayim) by saying one is forbidden to even privately קרַ ,הז רוּבֲע וֹתוּנגִבּ רפּסל רפּסְמהל הרָוֹתּה הרָסא ןכ יִפּ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֶ
ְ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
believe incidental remarks although one may suspect their veracity. Still,
ָ
ְ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ֶ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
ְ
I am concerned that someone will disagree with my ruling and find a proof .'ג ףיִעס 'ד ללכִבּ ל"נּכו הזּה ןינִעבּ קדֶצל וֹנוּדל
139 130
volume 3 volume 3