Author: Acquire@pos

Hilchos Rechilus — conclusion

After completing his discussion of shidduchim, the Chofetz Chofetz concludes his masterpiece with the following:

It was my intention to offer other illustrations, regarding craftsmen, hired laborers and servants. However, because of the high cost of printing and my preoccupation with other matters at this time, I have refrained from doing so.

The general rule is: One needs to maintain a careful watch over his own behavior, especially the words that he utters. He should not become involved in matters bein adam la’chaveiro without first clarifying the facts thoroughly. His intention should be to accomplish something constructive, and he should not act out of hatred. He should ponder the results that his words will cause, so that nothing will occur that is contrary to halachah, G-d forbid. If he does so, Hashem will assist him so that he will not be ensnared in the yetzer hara’s trap.

May the Rock of Israel save us from any errors and show us the wonders of His Torah. Blessed is Hashem forever, amen v’amen.

The Chofetz Chaim mentions the high cost of printing. In Rabbi Moshe Yoshor’s biography of the Chofetz Chaim, he writes that the Chofetz Chaim borrowed 1,000 rubles for the printing of the first edition of Sefer Chofetz Chaim. To ensure that he would be able to repay these loans, he traveled to towns in the vicinity of his hometown, Radin, and obtained signatures of 1,000 subscribers who would purchase the sefer upon its publication.

Thus, we see that it was with great mesiras nefesh that the Chofetz Chaim published this work.

Yet, he took no credit for Sefer Chofetz Chaim and its companion work, Sefer Shemiras HaLashon, publishing them anonymously. In his memoirs, the Chofetz Chaim’s son, R’ Aryeh Leib, wrote:

I once asked my father why he published Sefer Chofetz Chaim anony­mously. He replied, “It was not in my merit that these works came to be published; it was in the collective merit of the Jewish people. For per­haps through the study of these works, we will see a diminishing of the sin of lashon hara, which caused the death of the Dor HaMidbar, the destruction of the second Beis HaMikdash, and our dispersion among the gentiles. Thus, the honor for publishing this work is not mine.”

R’ Aryeh Leib also wrote of his father’s personal caution in matters of speech:

With regard to shemiras halashon, it is my feeling that my father sur­passed his entire generation. Most incredible was the fact that he was not a man who refrained from talking, and he was the main speaker at every gathering. No one ever claimed to have heard my father say something improper or derogatory.

Let us resolve to remain talmidim of the Chofetz Chaim all our lives by reviewing his teachings again and again, and striving to live by them. In this way, we will live happier and more spiritual lives, and will play an important role in ending this galus through the coming of Mashiach, speedily and in our times.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

Hilchos Rechilus — Closing Illustrations (continued)

The Chofetz Chaim continues his discussion of shidduchim. In this segment, he discusses financial arrangements. As in any other agreement between two sides, both the chasan’s and kallah’s

families must honor any financial commitments that were made prior to the engagement.

What if someone knows that one side cannot or will not honor his commitment? If the engagement has not yet taken place, one would be allowed to reveal this information, if the five conditions listed in Day 107 have been met. If the couple is already engaged, then one can only reveal the information if the result will not be contrary to halachah. If the party will react by immediately breaking the shidduch without having someone speak to the other side or without consulting a rav, then the information should not be provided.

Too many partnerships have been destroyed and friendships ruined by well-meaning people who incited one side against the other.

The firm of Stellman and Stone had been in business for thirty years, and was one of the most solid, successful businesses of its kind. Then, one day, Chaim Stellman was approached by a good friend, Arnie Manfeld.

“Chaim, someone told me that the profits in your business are divided 55-45 with Norman (Stone) taking the larger share. Is that correct?”

“Well, yes, that was our agreement when we first started the business. You see, we started the firm with Norman’s money and he is the smarter businessman. We agreed

from the start that I would be a junior partner.”

“Chaim, what’s the matter with you? That was thirty years ago! By now, you should be an equal partner. Don’t let Stone cheat you out of what’s rightfully yours.”

Until that day, the two partners had been close friends and their business relationship was one of mutual respect. From that day on, things changed. Incited by his friend Arnie, Chaim demanded to be an equal partner. Norman turned down the request, though he felt bad and tried his best to explain his position. After two months of haggling, the two partners were no longer on speaking terms. Six months later, the partnership was dissolved.

While the above story is fiction, similar stories have actually happened. It is crucial that Jews be well versed in the laws of lashon hara and rechilus and make sure that their conversation is guided by these laws.

IN A NUTSHELL
Extreme caution must be exercised when offering negative information to a party in a partnership.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

Hilchos Rechilus — Closing Illustrations (continued)

It is remarkable that the verse which begins “Do not go as a gossipmonger among your people” concludes with “Do not stand by as your brother’s blood is being shed.”

In its plain meaning, this second prohibition forbids us to stand by idly when we see that a Jew’s life is in danger.

Obviously if the Torah placed this prohibition in the very same verse as the primary prohibition against speaking lashon hara and rechilus, there must be some connection between them. Earlier in this sefer, the Chofetz Chaim explained that rechilus can “kill” three: the speaker, the listener, and the subject. The Torah is telling us: “Don’t cause your brother’s blood to be spilled by speaking evil of him.”

We know that a single verse of the Torah can be interpreted in a variety of ways. In today’s segment, the Chofetz Chaim sees a completely different connection between “Do not go as a gossipmonger among your people” and “Do not stand by as your brother’s blood is being shed.” The Torah is telling us that although speaking lashon hara is usually a terrible, destructive sin, there are times when one must speak lashon hara, in order to prevent someone from being harmed. In these situations, if one chooses to remain silent, he will have transgressed the sin of standing by idly while his fellow Jew’s blood is being spilled.

For example: A couple is engaged or on the verge of becoming engaged, and one knows that the chasan has a serious internal illness of which the kallah’s family is unaware; or, one knows firsthand that the chasan, who gives the appearance of being a G-d-fearing Jew, is actually an apikores (non-believer). In these cases, one is obligated to relate the information. If one chooses to remain silent so that the marriage takes place and the kallah’s life is ruined, then he is guilty of “Do not stand by as your brother’s blood is being shed.”

Of course, the same would apply if one knows such information about the kallah.

If someone is seeking a shidduch for his daughter and inquires about a certain young man’s level of learning, then those who are asked are required to respond honestly. However, if the family did not make any inquiries, one should not offer such information. If it was really important that their daughter marry a talmid chacham, the parents would have investigated the matter properly on their own.

The following actually happened:

A few teenage classmates were engaged in light conversation. One of them said, “You know, I heard that our rebbi’s sister has a heart condition.” Later, that sister was suggested as a possible shidduch for a brother of one of those boys. The boy told his parents, “I don’t think you should consider this suggestion. I heard she has a heart condition.” The parents accepted their son’s report as fact and called off the shidduch.

Later, it was discovered that this young woman did not have a heart condition. She had been congested one day, and was panting for breath. Someone assumed that her shortness of breath indicated a

heart problem and that person carelessly “spread the word.”

Yes, lashon hara can be very destructive, especially in sensitive matters such as shidduchim.

IN A NUTSHELL

There are times when one should offer negative information about a shidduch without being asked, and there are times when one should remain silent.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

Hilchos Rechilus — Closing Illustrations (continued)

The Chofetz Chaim now moves on to the important and sensitive topic of shidduchim. He states what, on the surface, seems a simple halachah:

The Radomers are considering Yossi Gerdman as a match for their daughter. They are very excited by the information they have heard and are on the verge of arranging a meeting. Mr. Radomer’s close friend, Mr. Backston, is aware of this and is concerned. He knows something that the Radomers don’t know — Yossi is very hot-tempered, which, of course, can be very detrimental to the success of a marriage. He knows with certainty that if the Radomers would know this information, they would never consider Yossi for their daughter.

Mr. Backston is obligated to share this information with the Radomers.

However, the Chofetz Chaim cautions that sometimes, what some consider glaring faults are, in fact, qualities to be admired. In his words:

One must be very careful not to act shamefully by speaking negatively about a shidduch prospect when there is no basis for this. For example, sometimes the young man is a sincere, innocent type, who is not sharp enough to recognize the shrewdness and sneakiness of others; or, he does not want to sit with others his age and ridicule people as some are wont to do. Therefore, they speak of him in town as a total fool, and as a result, people do not want to consider him for their daughters; if he is engaged, his future in-laws might consider breaking the shidduch …

May Hashem cut off all lips of smooth talk! Not only are these people baalei lashon hara, they are also baalei motzi shem ra (slanderers), since their criticisms are false.

The Chofetz Chaim labels such slanderers machti’ei harabbim, those who cause many to sin. No one wants to be ridiculed, so good, sincere people often feel compelled to adopt this loud, mocking style so that they will be treated with honor, not scorn. Initially they do this out of fear, but eventually they become used to this type of behavior and it becomes part of their very nature.

The Chofetz Chaim advises us to keep far away from the coarse individuals who are the cause of such behavior. He cites a verse in Mishlei: “My child, if sinners entice you, do not consent … do not walk on the road with them; restrain your foot from their pathway.” He also cites a mishnah: “Better to be called a fool all one’s life, rather than be consid­ered wicked for a moment before Hashem.”

In the opening chapter of Mesilas Yesharim, Rabbi Moshe ChaimLuzzato tells us what this world is really all about.

Hashem has placed man in a world where there are many factors thatcan distance a person from Him … Man is truly placed in the midst ofa raging battle, for all things in this world, whether for good or for bad,are tests for a person.

One of the greatest tests a person can face is peer pressure. Whenpeople who are popular and influential are behaving in a certain way,the temptation to act like them can be exceedingly strong. “I want to be liked and respected. I want to belong and to be part of the crowd. And Icertainly do not want to be looked down upon or, worse yet, ridiculed.”

It is at such times that one must take to heart the mishnah the Chofetz Chaim cites: “Better to be called a fool all one’s life, rather than be considered wicked for one moment before Hashem.”

IN A NUTSHELL

Faults that are clearly relevant should be revealed, but beware of revealing “faults” which, in fact, are not faults at all.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

Hilchos Rechilus — Closing Illustrations

The Chofetz Chaim concludes his sefer with a number of illustrations of the laws of rechilus.

The first is where someone you know contemplates a business partnership with a person whom he considers honest and capable. However, you know that the person is dishonest and is careless when he is investing other people’s money. In this case, you would be correct — and, in fact, obligated — to advise your friend not to enter into this partnership, provided that the five conditions in Day 107 have been met.

However, the Chofetz Chaim points out that sometimes it would be a serious mistake to interfere.

Hershel is troubled. His good friend Danny is on the verge of opening a business with Noach as his partner. But Danny does not know that Noach had been partners in a different business until six months ago, when the stock market crash brought his business crashing down as well.

“Noach’s fortunes have taken a downward turn,” Hershel is thinking. “I wouldn’t join him in a busi­ness venture right now — and I don’t think Danny should either. I’d better warn him.”

In such a case, says the Chofetz Chaim, it would be a great sin to reveal the information to Danny. The fact that Noach’s business has collapsed through no fault of his own does not indicate in any way that he will not be successful in the future. To the contrary, perhaps now Hashem will have mercy upon him and he will succeed. The Chofetz Chaim also notes that the highest form of tzedakah is to help a person be self-supporting;1 going into partnership with Noach can grant him the livelihood he des­perately needs. And, as stated in Shulchan Aruch, one cannot lose from fulfilling the mitzvah of tzedakah.

If the partnership is already a reality, then, as mentioned above, even if Hershel knows that Noach is dishonest or reckless, he would only be allowed to reveal this if Danny will take the matter before a beis din and not dissolve the partnership on his own.

The Chofetz Chaim then offers a scenario where Hershel has other intentions.

Hershel’s friend Danny is desperate. In the past five years, he has tried his hand at five different businesses, and all of them failed miserably

— for good reason. Danny simply does not have good business sense. He buys poor merchandise at inflated prices, and he misses countless opportunities to buy top-quality items at rock-bottom prices.

Now, Danny wants to try his hand at a new business, but he needs a partner who will supply the capital for this venture. Anyone who knows of Danny and his business career would never consider such a partnership.

But Noach does not know Danny at all. Hershel, who feels very bad for Danny, decides to convince Noach, who has plenty of money, to become Danny’s partner.

It is forbidden for Hershel to suggest the partnership to Noach. If he does, then he has transgressed “And before a blind person do not place a stumbling block” which prohibits us from misleading others.

IN A NUTSHELL

We must be extremely careful before suggesting that someone enter or not enter into a partnership with others.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:14-15

The Chofetz Chaim begins this segment with the following case:

Reuven was wronged in some way, and he does not know the culprit’s identity. He asks Shimon, “Who did this to me?” Though Shimon knows that Reuven suspects him, he is not allowed to reveal the cul­prit’s identity even if he witnessed the act. All he can respond is, “I didn’t do it.”

Of course, in a case where the five conditions of Day 107 have been met, Shimon would be permitted to reveal the person’s identity.

The Chofetz Chaim cautions: If the leaders of a community vote on a certain issue and someone in the community is upset with the outcome, it is forbidden for any of the leaders to tell him, “Don’t blame me — I voted against it, but majority rules.” This is rechilus, for it may allow the person to deduce who voted in favor, and he will feel anger towards them.

Such votes should be kept confidential.

The Chofetz Chaim then bemoans a tragic situation that should never happen:

A peddler brings merchandise to town and many are interested in purchasing his wares. One man picks out an item he wishes to buy and tells the peddler, “I don’t have any money with me. Please put this aside and don’t sell it to anyone. I’m going home to get money.” The peddler agrees to hold the merchandise for him.

The customer returns with his money later that day. The peddler tells him, “So-and-so came along and begged me to sell him that item. I didn’t want to, but he was so insistent; he threw the money on the counter, and practically forced me to sell it to him. I didn’t want to get into a fight with him so I gave in and let him buy it.”

Assuming the peddler’s account is true, he would still have been guilty of speaking rechilus. The sale was a valid sale and nothing is to be gained from telling the original customer the name of the person who wrongfully took the merchandise.

The Chofetz Chaim notes that in many such situations, the peddler is not telling the truth. He sold the item willingly for a better price, but rather than admit it, he places the blame upon the customer.

It would even be forbidden for the peddler to say, “I sold it to So-and­so, and it’s my fault. I knew he would give me more money, so I didn’t tell him that I already agreed to sell it to you.” The Chofetz Chaim says that even in this case, the original customer may feel ill will towards the man who bought what rightfully should have been his.

IN A NUTSHELL

Secrets ballots should remain secret.

When someone is upset over losing a purchase, do not tell him the purchaser’s name.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:13

In Day 109 we learned that one is permitted to tell someone he was cheated only if that person will not react by doing something contrary to halachah. In the case of Shaya and “Shakran’s Clothing,” (Days 111-112), one can inform Shaya that he was cheated only if he knows Shaya to be a G-d-fearing Jew, who would take a disagreement over money to beis din and not take the law into his own hands.

The Chofetz Chaim bemoans the fact that some do not follow the above guidelines.

Ezra is driving a 2005 Honda out of the “Incredible Used Cars” lot. “I don’t believe it,” Aaron thinks to himself. “He bought a used car from that thief, Moe Sandal? I have no doubt that Moe cheated him. He probably picked up the car in some junk yard and painted it to make it look good.”

That night after Maariv, Aaron approaches Ezra and says, “So how much did you pay for that Honda?”

“$9,000.”

“I was afraid you’d say something like that,” Aaron replied. “I doubt the car is worth more than $5,000. Did you already pay in full?”

“No, only half. I’m supposed to pay the rest over the next few months.”

“Well then, you’re in good shape. Give Moe another $500 and tell him that you heard from an expert that the car is only worth $5,000. If he doesn’t like that — well, too bad.”

The Chofetz Chaim mentions that in many instances, people give such advice purely out of hatred. Aaron may have had some previous dispute with Moe and is eager to “even the score.” He has no right to assume that the car is not worth the price, and he certainly is wrong for suggesting that Ezra withhold payment without taking the matter before a beis din.

The Chofetz Chaim enumerates Aaron’s “accomplishments”:

• He has spoken rechilus.

• He has transgressed “And before a blind person do not place a stumbling block.” With these words, the Torah cautions us not to cause others to sin. Aaron has caused Ezra to sin by inciting him to act in a way that is contrary to halachah.

• He has caused a machlokes which undoubtedly will lead to transgression of “And you shall not aggrieve one another, “which is the sin of “Ona’as Devarim” causing pain through hurtful words; and a host of other sins that machlokes brings about.

The Chofetz Chaim concludes:

How careful one must be not to become involved in such matters with­out first carefully considering all that we have written above. If he will act accordingly, Hashem will assist him so that no mishap will come about through him.

IN A NUTSHELL

Those who advise others to break agreements without going to beis din are guilty of numerous sins.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:11-12

Returning to the case of “Shakran’s Clothing”:

What if Shaya has already purchased the suit? Would Nachi be allowed to tell him that he was cheated?

The Chofetz Chaim explains:

If he [Shaya] already purchased the merchandise and the other person [Nachi] knows that he was cheated, either in the price or some defect in the merchandise, then it depends:

If according to halachah, the buyer is not entitled to any refund … then surely, whoever incites the buyer by showing how he was cheated has been guilty of speaking rechilus. [The reason is simple:] Since, according to halachah, he has no claim, informing the buyer that he has been cheated is mere prattling, like a typical gossiper who goes from place to place bringing information from one person to another.

Even if the buyer asks someone if he thinks he was cheated, the person should not tell him the truth. Surely it would be a great sin to convey such information, if he knows that the buyer will react by causing the seller a loss (either by seizing one of his possessions, or by withholding some of the money that he still owes).

However, if the person [Nachi] understands that halachah would grant the buyer either a partial or complete refund, and the buyer would want to claim this refund, then he must be told the truth, provided that:

• The person does not exaggerate the facts at all.

• His primary intention is to correct the wrong and get the buyer his money, and not to rejoice over the seller’s shame. On this note, it is important that the buyer be the kind of person who would actually take the seller to beis din to claim his money. If the buyer would not go to beis din and would just be angry at the seller, then he should not be told the truth even if he inquiries about it.

In a case where the buyer cannot claim anything in beis din, it is a mitzvah to praise the purchase in his presence. This is not a transgression of “Distance yourself from falsehood,” for, as our Sages state clear­ly, it is a mitzvah to make someone feel good and praise his purchase.

If it seems that he [Nachi] can convince the seller to refund the money; or, if there is any other way for him to get the buyer his refund without resorting to rechilus, he is required to do so.

The buyer should be someone who is not prone to speaking rechilus. Otherwise, we must be concerned that he will approach the seller and say, “So-and-so told me that I was cheated,” which would be rechilus. In such a case, it is questionable whether one would be allowed to inform the buyer, since by doing so he would cause him to speak rechi­lus. It would seem, says the Chofetz Chaim, that if the buyer will heed the warning, “Don’t tell him that I told you this!” then it is permitted to inform him that he was cheated.

IN A NUTSHELL

If a person has already been cheated and halachah entitles him to a refund, one is allowed to inform him, provided that he fulfills the necessary conditions.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:10

Shaya Forenberg is one of the nicest people you will ever meet; kind, honest, and utterly sincere. Shaya does not know what it means to fool someone. The problem is, he thinks that everyone is like him.

Ben Shakran of Shakran Clothing knows Shaya well. When Shaya’s son became engaged, Ben told him, “Shaya, come to me for your wedding suit. Because you’re my friend and you’re making a simchah, I’ll charge you half price.”

Shaya was overcome with gratitude. “I am short on money and I don’t know how to thank you. I’ll be at your store first thing in the morning.”

Ben did not realize that Nachi Cohen had overheard the conversation. Nachi knew the sad truth: Ben was not an honest salesman. He would say anything to convince a customer to make a purchase, including lying about the quality of his merchandise.

Nachi himself had almost been victimized by Ben. He was about to purchase a suit that was “on sale” for only $325, but something bothered him about the way the jacket looked. He decided to hold off on his purchase and stopped in at another suit store. He found the exact same suit, not on sale, with a $150 price tag. When he asked the proprietor why the price was so cheap, the man replied, “Because it’s not made well and that’s what the suit is worth.”

Nachi is certain that Shaya will believe anything Ben tells him. The “half-price special” Ben is offering is a hoax.

Nachi is obligated to warn Shaya not to shop in Ben’s store, despite the fact that Shaya has already agreed to buy his suit there.

If Nachi were to walk into Ben’s store and see that Shaya is about to buy a suit that is clearly not worth the price, he would be obligated to tell him not to buy it.

In all situations, Nachi must fulfill the five conditions listed in Day 107. One of those conditions is that the person has no other way to accomplish his goal other than to speak rechilus. In our example, Nachi might tell Shaya, “You know, Shaya, I overheard you talking to Ben about buying a suit for your daughter’s wedding. Take my advice, go to ‘Chatzkel’s’ for a suit. I’ve been buying my suits there for the past couple of years and I guarantee that you will be satisfied.” If Shaya accepts this suggestion, then Nachi will have accomplished his goal without resort­ing to speaking rechilus.

However, Shaya might naively reply: “No way! I’m not buying anywhere but ‘Ben’s.’ He’s my friend and he offered me a special half-price deal. I already told him I’m going to buy from him, and I’m not going back on my word!”

Left with no choice, Nachi would be allowed to enlighten Shaya con­cerning the truth of Ben’s “generous” offer.

IN A NUTSHELL

We are permitted to speak rechilus l’to’eles to prevent someone from being cheated, provided that we have fulfilled the five conditions.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:7-9

In this segment, the Chofetz Chaim stresses certain points relating to rechilus that seem quite obvious. Even if someone has robbed or cheated someone, it is permitted to relate this information to the victim only if the five conditions listed above have been fulfilled.

There is no difference whether the victim asks for a report of what happened, or if the witness volun­teers the information on his own. When there is true to’eles (constructive purpose) it is permitted to relate the information even if the victim has not inquired about it. If there is no to’eles, then it is forbidden to relate it even if the victim is insistent that he be told the information.

When there is no to’eles, then it is forbidden to speak rechilus even to a third party to whom the information is not relevant, as explained above in Day 91.

One may wonder why the Chofetz Chaim found it necessary to mention points that either have already been mentioned or that seem rather obvious. One reason may be that it is all too common for people to feel confident they are not saying anything forbidden when, in fact, they have not fulfilled the five conditions of to’eles and therefore are committing a sin.

There may be another factor that compelled the Chofetz Chaim to state the obvious. It is told that an elderly Jew from Radin who knew the Chofetz Chaim once remarked, “What is the difference between the Chofetz Chaim and me? I believe in Olam Haba and the Chofetz Chaim believes in Olam Haba. To me, Olam Haba is a distant reality, while to the Chofetz Chaim, Olam Haba is as real as the room next door. He sees it before his eyes.”

We know that the effects of lashon hara and rechilus in Heaven are devastating, far worse than that of other sins. This is something we believe. To the Chofetz Chaim, it was “as real as the room next door.” He saw the destructiveness before his eyes, and in his love for his fellow Jews, he cautions us about that which we might not have understood on our own.

Rabbi Aryeh Levin, famed tzaddik of Jerusalem a generation ago, related the following:

When I was young boy growing up in Lithuania, our town was visited one day by the holy Chofetz Chaim. I was in the town shul when the Chofetz Chaim was escorted inside for the first time. He noticed that the sign at the chazzan’s amud with the verse “Shvisi L’Hashem l’negdi tamid” (I set Hashem before me always) was charred at the edges from the smoke of the candles that burned at the amud. The Chofetz Chaim asked why the sign was not protected by glass. Someone responded, “For a long time we’ve wanted to put glass there, but the stubborn shamas refuses to listen to us!”

“Lashon hara!” the Chofetz Chaim exclaimed — and he ran out of the shul as if from a fire.

To the Chofetz Chaim, the damage caused by lashon hara and rechi­lus was no less than that caused by a raging fire.

IN A NUTSHELL

When there is no to’eles, we may not speak rechilus to anyone, for any reason.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:5-6

In Day 107, we discussed the case of Mr. Stein who was on the verge of hiring Kregler Construction to build an extension onto his home. Mr. Willenstein was permitted to warn Mr. Stein of Mr. Kregler’s dishonest business practices, provided that he fulfilled the five conditions of rechilus l’to’eles.

What if the contract has already been signed and work has already begun? Can Mr. Willenstein now inform Mr. Stein that Mr. Kregler is going to ask him for the balance of the money and then disappear for months without finishing the job? On the surface, it would seem so. Why not warn someone that he is dealing with a dishonest person so that he can take the necessary steps to protect himself?

Once again, the Chofetz Chaim advises us to proceed cautiously. Mr. Stein might react to the news by saying, “Thank you for warning me. If Mr. Kregler does ask me for the balance before he finishes the job, then I am going to have witnesses there when I make the payment and have him sign a document that the work will be completed within ten days from when the payment was made.” This would be an excellent strategy, and Mr. Willenstein would have done a mitzvah by forewarning Mr. Stein.

However, Mr. Stein’s reaction might be altogether different. “Thanks for the tip. As soon as Kregler asks me for the balance, I’ll fire him and find someone else to finish the job. No one’s gonna play games with me!”

This would be contrary to halachah. If a contract has already been signed for the entire job, neither party would have a right to break the contract without going before a beis din and presenting his arguments to them. Beis din would hear the claims of both parties and then determine who is right.

If Mr. Willenstein knows that Mr. Stein may act against halachah and break the contract without going to beis din, then he should not inform him of Mr. Kregler’s past history.

The Chofetz Chaim makes a very interesting point. Even if two valid witnesses know of Mr. Kregler’s dishonesty and know that beis din would allow Mr. Stein to break the contract, they would not be allowed to inform Mr. Stein if they know that he will break the contract without going to beis din. Since breaking the contract without beis din’s authorization is a sin, to inform Mr. Stein would be to aid a sinner.

There is a well-known story of a famous talmid chacham, whom we will call “R’ Dovid,” who became involved in a disagreement over money. The two sides agreed to go to a beis din to resolve the matter. Upon hearing the arguments of both sides, the av beis din arose, went to a bookcase, and withdrew a sefer written by none other than R’ Dovid. He turned to a certain page and showed R’ Dovid that in an identical case, R’ Dovid had ruled that the argument he himself had just put forth was incorrect!

R’ Dovid was honest and G-d-fearing. The problem is that when someone is personally involved in something, it is virtually impossible for him to see matters clearly; his reasoning will automatically bend in his own favor.

No one who signs a contract should ever break it without speaking to a rav or going to a beis din. Even if the person considers himself a talmid chacham, he should realize that his reasoning may be influenced by his personal interests. When it comes to money matters, there is simply too much room for error.

IN A NUTSHELL

One should not relate rechilus l’to’eles to someone who will act contrary to halachah and not take his case to beis din.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:3-4

In this segment, we learn of a situation where it should be permissible to speak rechilus.

Dov delivers meat for a local butcher. One day, he was carrying a heavy box of meat down the path to the Steinwaters’ door when their automatic sprinkler system went on at the wrong time and drenched Dov from head to toe. Dov, who is known for his temper, told Mendy later that day, “I don’t care if it was a mistake. Such things should never happen. I’m going back there after midnight when every­one’s asleep and I’m going to break those sprinklers so that they never get anyone wet ever again.”

Can Mendy inform Mr. Steinwater about Dov’s plans? The Chofetz Chaim states:

If the person making the threat has a reputation for such things, meaning, he has done similar things to others previously; or, if the listener can tell that the person is not merely “letting off steam” but that he means what he says and will surely carry out his threat, then he should inform the other person in the hope that he will be able to protect himself so that he will not suffer damage. However, before relating the information, he must be careful to fulfill the five conditions listed above [in the preceding segment].

This is true only if, to Mendy’s mind, Mr. Steinwater will respond merely by protecting his property from being damaged. However, if his reaction would be “I’ll teach that guy a lesson” by drenching him a second time, which will surely enrage him even more and lead to an all-out feud, then he should not inform him of Dov’s plans.

This will mean that Dov will probably carry out his plot. Mr. Steinwater will awaken to discover that his sprinkler system has been badly damaged and might require major, costly repairs. This would be terrible, and Dov would surely owe Mr. Steinwater the cost of the dam­age, in addition to having to engage in teshuvah towards Hashem and ask forgiveness of Mr. Steinwater. And this might never happen.

Nevertheless, the damage caused is surely preferable to a fight between two hot-tempered individuals, which might lead to severe monetary damage on both sides, the possibility of a full-scale feud that will involve others, and even physical attacks.

This is why the Chofetz Chaim cautions: “Therefore, one must ponder the matter well at the outset, to determine the best way to deal with the situation.” In other words, never rush to relate rechilus or lashon hara for a constructive purpose without first determining that something constructive will really be accomplished.

Many times we do things with good intentions but the results are not good. Because speech is powerful and requires little effort, we need to be on guard at all times to ensure that we speak only words that will help, and not words that will harm.

IN A NUTSHELL

One may warn his fellow Jew about an impending attack by another Jew, provided that his warning will not bring about a full-scale feud or other negative results.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 9:1-2

In this, the concluding chapter of Sefer Chofetz Chaim, we will learn when halachah permits us to speak rechilus l’to’eles, for a constructive purpose.

Consider the following example:

The Steins are considering building an extension onto the back of their house. They have met with Yosef Kregler of Kregler Construction, and are on the verge of signing a contract with him. Mr. Stein’s good friend Henoch Willenstein is dismayed. He had a terrible experience with Mr. Kregler when he made extensive renovations on his new home. When the job was eighty-percent done, Mr. Kregler requested that the balance be paid in full. Mr. Willenstein complied, and after receiving his money, Mr. Kregler vanished for six months. When he finally reappeared, he offered no explanation, other than to say, “I couldn’t get to this job until now, but now I’ll finish it fast.” It took another two months until he finished the week’s work that remained.

The Chofetz Chaim lists five conditions that need to be fulfilled for Mr. Willenstein to be allowed to share this information with his friend, Mr. Stein.

1. He must be certain that Mr. Kregler actually was at fault. If, for example, Kregler had taken ill and this was why the work dragged on for an additional two months, it would be wrong to mention this at all.

2. He must not exaggerate.

3. His intention must be to protect Mr. Stein from harm, not to “get even” with Mr. Kregler.

4. If there is a way to protect Mr. Stein without speaking badly of Mr. Kregler, then he must take that course of action. For example, he might recommend another contractor with a sterling reputation and make no mention of Mr. Kregler.

5. He must be certain that the only result will be that Mr. Stein will not hire Mr. Kregler for the job. In other words, Mr. Kregler will not suffer any loss other than this particular job which he had been hoping to get. However, if Mr. Stein is known to have a temper and will publicly humiliate Mr. Kregler the next time they meet, then Mr. Willenstein should not provide any information.

Now, let us consider the following scenario:

Mr. Willenstein decides that his opinion of Mr. Kregler is absolutely correct and he must warn Mr. Stein. However, Mr. Stein’s reaction is, “I refuse to believe such rechilus. I have known Mr. Kregler for twenty years. I can’t believe that he wouldn’t honor his commitment. Most probably you did something to really get him upset and that’s why he was slow in finishing the job.”

Mr. Kregler was hired, and sure enough, after collecting the balance of payment, he disappeared for six weeks without completing the job. Mr. Stein finally contacted him, lost his temper, and said, “I see that Willenstein was right when he said that you would vanish once you got your money. I never should have trusted you!”

If Mr. Willenstein knows that it is unlikely that Mr. Stein will take his warning seriously, with the result being that Mr. Stein will later speak rechilus, then he should not warn him.

IN A NUTSHELL

Rechilus may be spoken l’to’eles only if all necessary conditions are met.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 8:4-5

The Torah relates that Avraham Avinu and Sarah Imeinu were visited by three angels disguised as wayfarers. During their visit, one of the angels informed Avraham that in one year, Sarah, at age 90, would give birth to her first and only child. Sarah heard the angel’s pronouncement and she found it difficult to believe. “And Sarah laughed to herself saying: ‘After I have become old, my youth will be restored — and my master [Avraham] is old!’ ”

Hashem was not pleased by Sarah’s reaction. “And Hashem said to Avraham: ‘Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Can it be true that I will give birth after I have grown old?’ ”

Hashem told Avraham only that Sarah had spoken of her own old age, but He made no mention of her having said that Avraham was old. Rashi explains that Hashem omitted this for the sake of shalom, peace, between husband and wife. Avraham might have felt bad to hear that his wife had spoken of him as an “old man.”

This is truly amazing. Avraham was 99 years old at the time — certainly not a “young man” by any standard! And Avraham was one of the greatest human beings ever to walk this earth. Yet, Hashem knew that even someone so great might feel a bit hurt that his wife spoke of him in this way.

The Chofetz Chaim states:

There are other statements that are forbidden because of avak rechilus. For example, if one relates a statement in someone’s name that is not actually derogatory, but people tend to get a bit upset when it is said in their presence.

In Be’er Mayim Chaim, the Chofetz Chaim says that the story of Avraham and Sarah is the source for this halachah. Hashem would not repeat to Avraham the words of Sarah that could have upset him a bit.

The Chofetz Chaim concludes this chapter by cautioning us not to reveal secrets that others tell us in confidence. Revealing another person’s secrets often causes him harm, and is simply bad midos. The word tznius, modesty, usually refers to the way people dress, but it has a much broader meaning. The Chofetz Chaim states that to reveal some­one else’s secrets is to deviate from the way of tznius which demands that a Jew live a modest, low-key life. One aspect of tznius is to speak when appropriate and to remain silent when that is what is required.

Rabbeinu Yonah cites two verses in Sefer Mishlei. The first is:”Holech Rochel Megaleh Sod” He who reveals a secret is a gossiper. He explains, “Do not confide your secrets to someone who is a gossiper. Since he does not guard his mouth from speaking rechilus, you cannot trust him to keep your secret confidential.”

The other verse states the converse “Goleh Sod Holech Rochel” One who reveals secrets is a gossiper. Rabbeinu Yonah explains: “If you see someone who does not exercise self-control to guard his tongue and refrain from revealing others’ secrets … this will lead him to speak rechilus … for his lips are not under his control.”

IN A NUTSHELL

Never repeat a statement to someone that is not derogatory, but may offend him a bit.

Never reveal a secret told to you in confidence.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 8:1-3

Avak rechilus (lit. the dust of rechilus) are state­ments that are not actually rechilus, but contain some aspect of rechilus. In this segment, the Chofetz Chaim offers three examples.

1) Implied rechilus

Nesanel tells Menachem, “You know, I asked Ezzy about that incident you were involved in at recess the other day. But he wouldn’t talk about it. He said, ‘I’ve decided that I’m not going to tell anyone what Menachem did. If there will be any repercussions, you’ll hear about it.’“

Ezzy’s words, as reported by Nesanel, do not contain anything negative about Menachem — but they certainly imply that Menachem did something wrong. Therefore, such a report is liable to cause Menachem to have bad feelings towards Ezzy. Nesanel should not have repeated Ezzy’s words.

2) Seemingly innocuous statements that will irritate someone

Shaya Grobler of “Grobler and Mannis Insurance” walked into shul for Shacharis after being away on a two-week vacation. The first person he met was R’ Yankel, a friendly Jerusalem fund-raiser who was on his yearly visit to the city.

“R’ Shaya, so good to see you! You and your partner, Yechezkel Mannis, are my two best friends in this city. You know, while you were away, R’ Yechezkel gave me a check for $2,500 from your firm’s charity fund! It’s the largest donation your firm has ever given us, and the largest one to date that we’ve received in this city. Thank you, and may you be blessed!”

Quite possibly, the two partners have an arrangement where each may issue charity checks without consulting the other. However, there is the possibility that Mr. Grobler will be upset to learn that his partner gave such a large donation to a single cause. The fund-raiser should not have revealed such information.

3) Revealing knowledge of a favor done privately

Ephraim Stein needed to borrow money to pay for the wedding of his daughter. One night, he visited the well-to-do Zanvil Holtzman and got straight to the point. “My daughter’s wedding is in six weeks. Right now, I’m twenty thousand dollars short of what I need. I came to you to request a $10,000 loan.”

Mr. Holtzman replied softly, “Ephraim, you’re a good man and I want to help you. But right now, the most I can offer you is $5,000.”

Ephraim was extremely disappointed. Without thinking, he blurted out, “But Yanki Sterber told me that for his daughter’s wedding, you lent him $15,000!”

Mr. Holtzman fought to control his anger over this remark. “I don’t understand Yanki,” he thought. “I went out of my way to extend so much money to him, and then he goes and tells others about it — and now I’m having trouble because of it! Talk about gratitude!”

Yanki was wrong for revealing the details of Mr. Holtzman’s loan to him, and Ephraim was guilty of speaking rechilus by relating to Mr. Holtzman what Yanki had said.

IN A NUTSHELL
We must avoid all forms of avak rechilus.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

Mrs. Atlas cannot wait for her husband to come home from work. As soon as he walks through the door, she exclaims: “You’ll never believe what I overheard today!

“I was in the supermarket and the store was quite empty and unusually quiet. That’s how I was able to stand in aisle 3 and overhear a conversa­tion between Mrs. Eigelman and Mrs. Dillman in aisle 2. They were discussing the upcoming shul elections. I couldn’t believe my ears! Mrs. Dillman said that her husband is not voting for you because he was unhappy with how you chaired the Finance Committee this past year — isn’t that a chutzpah? You were the first chairman to ever get the shul’s finances in order!”

Mrs. Atlas has spoken rechilus to her husband. Just as husband and wife are not permitted to speak lashon hara to one another, so too they cannot speak rechilus.

The Chofetz Chaim adds an important insight:

When we think into this matter well, we discover that aside from the actual sin, when a husband believes rechilus that was told to him by his wife, he brings many difficult problems upon himself. For when his wife sees that he happily accepts her [sinful] words, she will frequently come to him with such reports. This will lead to his becoming angry, depressed, and involved in arguments.

Therefore, a G-d-fearing person will tell his wife not to relate such matters to him.

As we noted in Day 81, there are situations where a wife is permitted to share with her husband what would normally be considered lashon hara. The great tzaddik and posek Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach crystallized this idea in the following way:

For a marriage to function properly, a husband and wife must share their feelings. If a woman is disturbed by something involving her dealings with others and she feels that she must unburden herself, her husband should not thrust her aside by saying, “No, it’s lashon hara.” If the problem is too difficult for her to bear alone, he must share her packet of tzaros and help her overcome them.

Of course, their purpose [in discussing such matters] must be to reach a solution to the problem and to alleviate her pain — not to gossip or degrade a fellow Jew. Even while “letting off steam,” husband and wife must be careful to abide by the laws of lashon hara [and not say that which is unnecessary or express negative opinions about certain people].

An example of the above is where a woman is being mistreated by her employer and she needs to speak to her husband about it. However, in our example involving the shul elections, there is no reason why Mrs. Atlas had to tell her husband of the conversation that she overheard in the supermarket. To the contrary, as the Chofetz Chaim points out, she is actually hurting her husband by repeating such information to him. He will become angry and aggravated (assuming he transgresses the sin of believing rechilus) and will not be able to change the situation for the better.

A good wife should do her best to uproot such a conversation from her mind and act as if she never heard it.

IN A NUTSHELL

Relatives cannot speak rechilus to one another, except in a situa­tion where they are suffering emotional pain and need to unburden themselves.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 7:3-4

“Chayah, my washing machine just died and I need a new one, fast. I’m not sure if I should go to Mr. Felder’s appliance store or Mr. Adler’s. Do you have any preference?”

“I’ll tell you, Sarah, both of them have sterling reputations. They’re as honest as they come, and they stand behind their merchandise. But you know what my husband told me? He feels that Mr. Adler doesn’t just sell appliances — he knows appliances. He understands how these machines work, so when he recommends an item, it’s with the first-hand knowledge that this appliance is the best of its kind. Mr. Felder, on the other hand, goes by what he hears from wholesalers. That’s okay, but it doesn’t compare to being electronically savvy. So I feel more confident buying from Mr. Adler.

“Please don’t repeat what I just told you. I wouldn’t want it to get back to Mr. Felder.”

If Sarah can be trusted not to repeat this conversation, then Chayah has acted correctly in responding to Sarah’s question and providing her with some sound advice. If Sarah would foolishly repeat the conversation to Mr. Felder, she would be guilty of speaking rechilus.

In this segment, the Chofetz Chaim points out that one would also be guilty of rechilus by repeating the conversation to Mr. Felder’s wife or other close relative. They, too, might feel personally offended upon hearing what Chayah’s husband had to say about Mr. Felder’s appliance expertise.

As with lashon hara, it is forbidden to speak rechilus about a Jew to a non-Jew.

“Who fixed your sidewalk, Mr. McVay?” “My neighbor, Mr. Friedman. He did a good job, and gave me a good price — only $1,200.”

“You call that a good price? I could have gotten you someone who would have done the same job for $1,000.”

In this conversation, nothing has been accomplished, other than to make Mr. McVay upset at his Jewish neighbor, who claimed to have been doing the job for a bargain price. Even if it would be true that someone else would have done the job for less, the job was already done and had already been paid for. And who is to say that the person who charges $1,000 would have done the same quality work? As the saying goes, “You get what you pay for.” It is possible that Mr. Friedman’s work is actually worth more than the price he charged.

Criticizing someone’s work is no simple matter.

IN A NUTSHELL

We may not tell someone a negative report concerning his or her close relative.

We may not speak rechilus to a non-Jew.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –

SEFER CHOFETZ CHAIM — Hilchos Rechilus 7:2

How’s business, Gershon?”

“Not so good, Yisrael. That new dairy res­taurant down the block has been drawing custom­ers away from me. I think my food is just as good, but you know how it is — people always like to try something new.”

“It could be something else, Gershon. Someone told me that the Rav has been advising people to use the new store. He claims that the kashrus supervi­sion is better there. Who knows? Maybe the owner is the Rav’s cousin and he’s trying to get him customers.”

Of course, Yisrael has been guilty of speaking rechilus. The Chofetz Chaim points out that while it is forbidden to speak rechilus about any Jew, it is particularly severe when the subject is a talmid chacham.

He offers three reasons for this:

• The sin of rechilus is worse when the report is false. In the case of a talmid chacham, it is highly unlikely that he would have said or done something that is contrary to halachah. In our example, either the rav never made such a statement, or he had good reason for doing so. Suggesting that he encouraged people to use the other restaurant because the owner is his cousin is slander.

• The Torah commands us to draw close to talmidei chachamim, to assist them in any way possible, and to honor them. By speaking rechilus about a talmid chacham, one is drawing others away from him.

• Very often, people will ignore insults that others are reported to have said about them. In such cases, rechilus causes little damage. However, when someone hears that a talmid chacham has spoken against him, he tends to take it seriously, and the result can be terrible.

In our example, where the one reported to have done Gershon harm is his rav, the results can be tragic. If Gershon accepts the rechilus as fact, he may seek to have the rav fired.

The importance of showing respect for talmidei chachamim at all times cannot be overemphasized. The Chofetz Chaim once likened a talmid chacham to a doctor who possesses a wonder potion that can cure a terrible disease. And he likened those who show disrespect for a talmid chacham to someone who takes the potion out of the doctor’s hand and casts it into the river, making it impossible for him to cure anyone.

Said the Chofetz Chaim: Talmidei chachamim possess the wisdom of Torah, the “potion” that can help people to deal with all sorts of seri­ous problems. But their wisdom is beneficial only as long as respect is shown to them. When people are disrespectful towards talmidei cha­chamim, they are like the person who casts the potion into the river, for they cause others to ignore the talmid chacham’s words.

IN A NUTSHELL

Speaking rechilus about a talmid chacham is a particularly severe sin.

 -A project of  Mesorah Publications –