Page 141 - VOL-2

Sefer Chafetz Chayim
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara

Kelal Gimal - Halachah 8

the 20th notation of the Be’er Mayim Chayim where I brought other clear,
explicit proofs to this concept from the incident involving Doeg Edomi.
When one rigorously studies this subject he will discover that nearly all
of the stories described in the Torah (teach this lesson), for example the
stories of the spies sent to scout Eretz Yisrael, please see the Ramban’s
commentary on the Torah (Bamidbar 13:14) and also the story of Yosef.
Please also see the commentary of the Shelah (Shneh LuChaut HaBrit,
perashat VaYeshev), all of these references deal with this issue. Please
see what we wrote further on in the second half of this sefer (dealing
with the laws of Rechilut) in the 5th Kelal, in the 8th notation of the B’eer
Mayim Chayim. With these examples you will come to understand what
we’ve written when we said “the situation tilted more towards the side of
innocence”

Mekor Hachayim

K3/8. And even if the incident tilts more towards the side of

culpability and that from the perspective of law it would not be
forbidden if this person was judged unfavorably, meaning the
observer \ speaker decided for himself that this person violated the
law (12), still one may not rush to publicly denigrate this person
because of what he did unless this speaker complies with all of the
conditions that will be described further on in the 4th, 5th and 10th
Kelalim since there are many circumstances where this person can
behave in a way that is contrary to the law and still it would be
forbidden to defame him because of his behavior as it will become
apparent to the person who carefully reads through these rules.

Be’er Mayim Chayim

(3/8/1)-(12).. the observer \ speaker decided for himself that
this person violated the law: Most certainly one should not say that

the intent of Rabbeinu Yonah in Sha’are Teshuvah section #218 (cited
above) was to permit this person’s (the “victim’s”) doings to be publicly
disclosed, because if that was so he would be contradicting himself, since
in section #215 he writes “and understand clearly that if one sees (someone
committing an esur and reports it publicly)…it is a serious sin” and here

131
volume 2