Page 291 - V3

Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפס
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara ערה ןושל ירוסיא תוכלה
Kelal Yud - Halachah 2 ד הכלה - י ללכ

writes there “for example, where it is known that the sinner would not ,וילע תוכז דצ ןיא םא קר םישנא ןיב רבדה םסרפל
4
accept a rebuke.” Therefore (to avoid this contradiction) the law most
certainly must be as I stated it. וניא אוהש ןוגכ ,תוכז דצ וילע בושחל שי םא לבא
And even if you attempt to refute what we have said by arguing that the רסאי ,ב"יכו קזיה וא לזג ללכב אוה הז רבדש עדוי
Shetah Mekubetzet was only placing Rabbeinu Yonah’s statement in the םגש ול ורמא םידיחי הזיא םא וליפאו ,וילע רפסל
framework of “doing something nice” (something optional, not something
dictated by the law, but) just a general mitzvah, or alternatively, that the םנימאהל הצור וניא ילוא ,קזיהו לזג ללכב אוה הז
Shetah Mekubetzet was placing Rabbeinu Yonah’s words in the context עמשמ ןכו ,ןיד תיב יפמ עמש אלש ןמז לכ הזב
of the speaker’s intention being that his public remarks would filter back
to this sinner who would then correct his actions (and do good). And that והער לע דיזה רשא רבד לע בתכש הנוי 'רב תצק
is why the Shetah Mekubetzet quoted Rabbeinu Yonah as “for example, ,דיזה אקוד עמשמ 'וכו
where it is known that the sinner would not accept a rebuke,” because if
that was not so (if the sinner could be rebuked), being that the speaker’s
intentions were only to do good to this sinner, then a better approach ,אקודב הנוי 'ר תנווכ ןיא כ"עד תוחדל שי ךא
would have been to go directly to the sinner and rebuke him personally,
perhaps he would have accepted the reprimand and it would not have been שיש םוקמב ירייא הבושת ירעשב הנוי 'ר ירהד
necessary at all to publicly defame him . ש"מכ ול םשא רשאל רוזעל רופיסהב תלעות
But this approach was never considered by the Shaare Teshuvah at all. לש וילכ רבש וליפא יאדוב הז ןפואבו ,אידהב
47
Rather he writes that the speaker’s remarks were made out of a sense
of striving to reach the truth of the matter and to assist his fellow Jew רפסיש י"עש עדוי רפסמהש ןויכ ,גגושב וריבח
who was “wronged.” However, the speaker must be careful not to give ,םלשל כ"חא חרכומ היהי םדא ינבל םירבדה תא
4
the appearance of a flatterer or someone who is lying or someone with
some other ulterior motive as listed by the Shetah Mekubetzet in quoting ,דחא דעד אימוד הנוי 'ר םעטכ רפסל רתומ יאדוב
Rabbeinu Yonah. והער לע דיזה רשא ללכב אוה הז םגד כ"ע אלא

However it is possible that the Torah does not require rebuking this sinner קזיהה וא הליזגה תא םלשל כ"חא הצור וניאש המב
prior to publicly disclosing his sin but that this prior notice is only advice – ,הנוי 'ר ןושלמ וננינעל היאר ןיא כ"או .וילעבל
something optional, a “good suggestion” that should be done as a common
courtesy (but not required by the law). Still, in any event, based on what .ןויע ךירצו
I wrote above quoting the Rambam at the end of the first notation in this
Kelal, the Rambam explicitly says it is forbidden to publicly disclose this
sinner’s actions unless he is first approached and reprimanded (and he היהי אלש רעשמ אוהש שוריפ .'וכו הז ןפואבו )זי(
rd
refuses to accept the rebuke). Please reference above, in the 3 Kelal, the
st
Be’er Mayim Chayim at the end of the 1 notation, that based on what I .ןוממב ןודינהל תלעות
wrote there I hold that one must first rebuke the sinner (before publicly

6 Only then may the information be disclosed. But if there is a chance that the
rebuke will be accepted, then the speaker must first approach the sinner to
reprimand him before publicizing his sinful actions.

281 308
volume 3 volume 3