Page 217 - VOL-2

Sefer Chafetz Chayim
Hilchot Esurei Lashon Hara

Kelal Dalet - Halachah 8

time) his Yetzer Hara got the better of him at that moment, but now he has
done Teshuvah and his heart is saddened and embittered by what he had
done. But the cases cited in Gemara Yoma were very different than this.
(In that citation) Chachamim certainly warned those families that what
they were doing was sinful because they refused to teach these skills to
others and their behavior was causing a disgrace to Hashem’s Holy Name,
as the gemara there related. And regarding the excuse that perhaps his
Yetzer Hara overwhelmed him and that he subsequently did Teshuvah, that
defense can only be used once.

But in an instance where the crime is repeated, and (it is obvious) this
person refuses to abide by the Torah, his (evil) actions speak for themselves
and the only acceptable response from this person is that he will comply
with the instruction of the Beit Din. And even after the craftsmen from
Alexandria, Egypt could not duplicate the incense made by the family of
Avtinas, still that family did not repent from their evil behavior.33 In a
comparable way, the Gemara Berachot (19a) teaches that if one sees a
Chacham who once committed a crime, we can be certain that the Chacham
did Teshuvah. But if the incident involves money, then one can assume
he did Teshuvah only after the money was returned to its owner. Based on
these teachings, regarding these people (who have not done Teshuvah and
repeat their sins), unquestionably it is a mitzvah to denigrate them and to
publicize and disclose their crime in order to humiliate these criminals in
the eyes of society. Rabbeinu Yonah wrote a similar interpretation of this
subject in (Shaare Teshuvah, 3rd sha’ar) section #218.

Apart from this, the Tosafot in Gemara Babba Metziah (62a) commented
on this in the citation beginning with the words “If he did Teshuvah,”34
that since he demonstrated his indifference to society’s critically derisive
opinion of himself, it is not necessary for us to be concerned with his sense
of honor and society’s defamatory opinion of him. However, it is possible
to refute this (comparison in the case of this Tosafot), since here we are
following a proactive approach in publicizing and recording this person’s
degradation, this approach might in fact be forbidden. Notwithstanding
this argument, our first approach, that it is permitted to degrade this person,
is fundamental and correct, and I expressed this entire law based on this
first approach.

33 Chazal have taught in Gemara Yoma (38a) that the priestly family of Avtinas
was expert in preparing the Ketoret \ incense used in the Beit HaMikdash but
refused to teach the secret of its preparation to others. The sages sent for

207

volume 2