Page 201 - 1new

7
VOL-1
Introduction to החיתפ
Sefer Chafetz Chayim םייח ץפח רפסל
Laveen - L10
די ואל - ןיואל

העבראב ונייה אשת אלב רבועד םינפב ש"מו
Daily Halacha: 14 Tishri, 13 Shevat, 13 Sivan; Leap Year- 14 Tishri, 23 Shevat, 3 Sivan
.וינפבו רפסמה קרו םינושארה םינפוא
Mekor Hachayim

L10. If a solitary witness stepped forward and gave testimony
(10) in a court regarding someone who committed an esur, since :ה"הגה
no judicial outcome based on single-witness testimony is valid in
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֶ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
monetary matters, in matters concerning one who must take an oath המ ידֵי לע ,הז ואל דֹאְמ יוּצמ ליִכרָ יכלוֹה לצאדּ ,עדַו *
or in removing the presumption of his innocence (his Kashrut), then ןוֹשׁלִבּ הז ךָל ריִבּסאו ."ןירִיִפ סיוֹא" זנכְּשׁא ןוֹשׁלִבּ ןירִוֹקֶּשּׁ
ֶ
ְ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ַ
the witness’ testimony is nothing other than Lashon Hara. Therefore העוּרגּ הדִּמ ידֵי לע ןיִאבּ אָתירָוֹאדּ ןיואל המּכּ עדַיל ידֵכּ שׁדֶֹקּה
ַ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ִ
ְ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
this witness is also in violation of the Lav of (Devarim 19:15) “One
ַ
solitary witness cannot stand up and give testimony against any .וֹזּה
person regarding a sin that he may have committed” and the Beit
ְ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
ֶ
ִ
ֵ
ִ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ַ
Din is obligated to punish this witness with lashes. ךְכּ ינפל ךָילע רבּדּ יול :ןוֹעְמִשׁל ןבוּארְ וֹל רפּסיֶּשׁכּ ,אוּהו
ְ
ֶ
ֵ
ֶ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
ְ
"ךָמּעבּ ליִכרָ ךְלֵת אלֹ"דּ ואל לע הזבּ ןבוּארְ רבוֹע ףכֵתו( ,ךְכו ְ
ָ
ַ
ֶ
ָ
ַ
ָ
רבוֹע אוּהו( וירָבדְִל ןיִמאמ ןוֹעְמִשׁו ,)ל"נּכו ןיִשֲׂעו ןיואל ראְשׁוּ
ְ
ֲ
ֵ
ִ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ְ
Be’er Mayim Chayim
ַ
ַ
ָ
ִ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ְ
,)ל"נּכו ןיִשֲׂעו ןיואל ראְשׁוּ "אוָשׁ עמֵשׁ אָשִּׂת אלֹ"דּ ואל לע
ַ
(L10) If a solitary witness stepped forward and gave testimony:
ְ
ַ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ְ
ַ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ִ
ֵ
The Gemara Pesachim (113b) illustrated this concept with the example וֹתוֹזּבלוּ וֹפרְחל ליִחְתמ אוּה ,יולבּ ןוֹעְמִשׁ עגוֹפֶּשׁכּ ךְכּ רַחַאו
of Tuvia, who sinned. Zeegood came forward as a solitary witness and יִכדּ ,"וֹתיִמֲע תא שׁיִא וּנוֹת אלֹו" ואל לע הזבּ רבוֹע אוּהו(
ָ
ְ
ְ
ֵ
ֶ
ְ
ֶ
ַ
ָ
testified against Tuvia in front of Rav Pappa. Rav Pappa punished Zeegood
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ִ
ָ
ָ
ֵ
ָ
ְ
ָ
with lashes. Zeegood said to Rav Pappa “Tuvia sinned and I got lashes?” וילע רבּדּ אוּהֶשׁ בֵשׁוֹחו וילע ערָה ןוֹשׁל לבּקְַמ אוּהֶשׁ םוּשִּׁמ
Rav Papa answered, “Yes! The Torah teaches ‘A single witness may not המ לע :האָתְּשִׁמוּ דֵמוֹע יולו )?וֹתוֹא תוֹנוֹהל וֹל רַתּה ,ערָה ןוֹשׁל
ָ
ֻ
ְ
ָ
ֶ
ַ
ֵ
ִ
ָ
ְ
give testimony against another man’s sins’ and your solitary testimony
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ָ
ִ
ִ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ִ
was Lashon Hara.” The Rashbam, though, comments on the gemara in the ָתינּגּ המּל :וֹל רפּסְמ וֹסֲעכבּ ןוֹעְמִשֶּׁשׁ דע ?ינפרְחְמ הָתּא המּלו ְ
ַ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֲ
ָ
ְ
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
ִ
citation beginning “A bad name” that Zeegood violated the Lav of “Do not ןבוּארְ אלֹהו ,עדֵוֹי יניאֶשׁ הָתּא רוּבס יִכו ?ןבוּארְ ינְפִל יִתוֹא
peddle gossip among your people” and (from the Rashbam’s commentary) ,'וֹגו "ליִכרָ ךְלֵת אלֹ"דּ ואל לע ןכּ םגּ אוּה רבוֹעו( .יִל רפִּס
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
in the citation beginning with “A single witness may not come forward”
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ֶ
ֱ
ַ
ְ
ֵ
ֶ
ְ
etc., the implication there is that the Lav of “A single witness may not” תא ץרֵָתְמ אוּהו ,)תמא לע יאקָדּ םיקִסוֹפּה לכבּ שׁרָֹפְמֶּשׁ וֹמכּ
teaches that any single witness is not to be believed and the court may not .ינַתְּפרַח םנִּחו ,ךָינפל ןבוּארְ יִבּ הנע רקֶֶשׁ יִכּ :רמוֹל וירָבדּ
ֵ
ַ
ִ
ְ
ָ
ֶ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ֵ
ְ
ָ
ָ
accept his testimony. That is also the implication of the Rambam in Sefer
HaMitzvot (mitzvah #288), that the essential teaching of this Lav is that דוֹע רֹמגִל וֹתיִסְמ רציּה ,ןבוּארְִבּ ןוֹעְמִשׁ עגוֹפֶּשׁכּ ךְכּ רַחַאו
ְ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
ֵ
ֵ
ַ
ֵ
ַ
ְ
the court may not accept the testimony of a solitary witness. Nevertheless,
ָ
ַ
ֵ
ִ
ָ
ְ
ַ
ָ
ְ
ְ
I included this Lav because of the Se’Mag’s opinion (in his listing of ינַתיִסִּה ךְָתוּנרָקְַשׁ ינְפִּמ :וֹל רֵמוֹאו בוֹט יִכבּ ל"נּה ערַה ןינִעה
mitzvah #213) and the opinion of the Sefer Ye’re’im (mitzvah # 244) who ,םלוֹעֵמ םירִבדּ וּיה אלֹ :רֵמוֹא אוּה אלֹהו ,םנִּח יול תא עלֹבִל
ַ
ָ
ֶ
ַ
ֲ
ְ
ֵ
ָ
ָ
ְ
ָ
ִ
write; “A single witness may not come forward and give testimony on
ֵ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
ְ
ֵ
any individual.” The Sifri says the following: We only know that this יִמִּע ךְל :ןוֹעְמִשׁל ןבוּארְ וֹל רֵמוֹאו ,הרָבֲע דוֹע תרֶרֶוֹגּ הרָבֲעו ַ
ֵ
ָ
ְ
ְ
ָ
ָ
ָ
ַ
ַ
ֲ
ָ
ִ
ַ
ָ
ֶ
ְ
admonition applies to monetary matters. Where do we learn that it also אבּה אמָתסִּמוּ ,שׁמּמ וינפבּ םירִבדּה וּלּא רֵמוֹא ינאֶשׁ הארְִתו ְ
171 186
volume 1 volume 1