Page 127 - VOL-2

Sefer Chafetz Chayim
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara

Kelal Gimal - Halachah 6

she initiated the conversation. She already knew that her brother Moshe
separated himself from his wife because Tziporah told her so (although she
did not know the separation was instructed by Hashem) as Rashi explains
there. Her remarks to her brother Aharon caused him to accept what she
said and to begin talking the same way as she, as the pasuk relates in
(12:2). Therefore Miryam was punished.

(3/6/2)-(7)..Even if the speaker assesses beforehand: Even though

the previously cited gemara answers, “Here, there was a consequence to
his actions and there, there was no consequence to his actions” (seemingly
implying that even if the speaker had no intent for an ensuing consequence,
the remarks are nevertheless forbidden), that is not a conclusive proof!
(There is no clear indication or proof from the previously cited Gemara
Arachin (16a) that Miryam did a positive action in speaking to Aharon
and that his involvement was only passive). Perhaps that gemara was
referring to a case where the speaker actually intended that his comments
would result in an outcome, but in the end he was unsuccessful (but there
is no proof as to what would be the case if the speaker had no intent for his
comments to cause an outcome). (Please see the following Hagahah).

But in the 7th chapter of Hilchot De’Aut in the 2nd halacha the Rambam
writes “There is an even greater sin than this which is included in this
Lav, that it is Lashon Hara when someone denigrates another person
even if the comment is true.” The Se’Mag is also of this same opinion,
and neither the Rambam nor the Se’Mag qualifies their opinion with any
conditions. The clear implication is that the Torah does not want any Jew
to put down or denigrate another Jew (even if there is no outcome to those
remarks). Rabbeinu Yonah in Sha’are Teshuvah (3rd sha’ar, section #217)
holds of this same opinion and uses the following language: One who
speaks Lashon Hara has perpetrated two acts: He has brought damage and
humiliation upon his friend and he has used his free will to incriminate and
vilify his friend and rejoice at his downfall.”

And among all of the matters that have been discussed here, one common evil
theme occurs throughout. Rabbeinu Yonah (Sha’are Teshuvah, 3rd sha’ar,
section # 216) described it in the following language: Shelomo HaMelech
A”H taught in Mishle (14:9) “a guilt offering will serve for foolish ones
(as they pay compensation to those against whom they sinned) but the
speech of those who are righteous is favorable (to Hashem),” meaning,
the evil person looks for ways to indict his fellow Jew and searches for
people’s character faults and their sins and then slanders them. They will
never praise them or say anything good about them. Referring to these

117

volume 2