Hashem gives us the strength to pass on Divrei Torah (words of Torah) and inspiration on a day that's Ki Tov (that it was good), not once, but twice.
In today's daily session, based on a calendar from Rav Segal of Manchester, England, developed half a century ago, the Chafetz Chaim discusses a situation he already discussed perhaps about a week ago. Somebody knows information, and somebody else repeats that information. It's nothing new. It's not a chidush (nothing new), and yet the aveira (transgression) applies because it's Rechilut (tale-bearing).
On that day, Day 93 in the cycle, he mentions a case where two people were having a Bar Mitzvah (coming-of-age celebration) on the same day, and they both tried to book the same party hall. It was a little touchy, touch and go. But as time went on—year one, year two, year three—the children got bigger, the families were still close, and they sort of made up.
There was a person who knew about that situation and how emotional it was at the time, and he didn't like one of the two parties. So he went and told one of them in casual conversation, casual, so to speak: “You know, it's amazing. We're getting invited to so many Simchot (celebrations). I don't know if there are enough places anymore. There must be many times when a person from one street goes to the caterer, and then the same person from the next street goes to the same caterer. They both want the same day.” And the now-healed victim of such a situation says, “Yeah, that happened to me once. We got over it.” The fact that this person brought up an old wound is Rechilut. And the person did know. The person was very aware. But bringing it up again is sort of like trying to reopen the wounds.
In today's lesson, which in the cycle is day number ninety-eight, the Chafetz Chaim brings another type of situation where a known fact could be used and be called Rechilut. Yaakov, let's say, has to go to Beit Din (rabbinical court). He goes to Beit Din with a case involving some Din Torah (Torah-law case), and he wasn't pleased with the results because he lost, so to speak. He, of course, accepts that Beit Din is Beit Din. “What am I supposed to do?” He's prepared to abide by the ruling of the judges.
He meets his friend Shimon and tells him the news. Shimon gets very angry on the surface and tells him, “I don't believe they did this to you. That's not the right way. It should have been something else. You've been wronged. You're suffering an injustice. This court doesn't know what they're doing. I wonder.”
Nothing has changed about the Beit Din's ruling, or about Yaakov's knowledge of it. However, this person is trying to rile up ill feelings about the ruling. The subject of the ruling, Reuven, is now livid with the judges. Now, Shimon, who came and riled him up, is guilty of Rechilut. He created harmful feelings, bad feelings between people through his words. In fact, it's a little worse than the normal case because he spoke against judges and Talmidei Chachamim (Torah scholars). That makes it more serious. And it's Efshar (possible), we say. It's worse.
Now, sometimes there are marital situations. A person may have a wife who is not terribly bothered by the fact that, over the years, he forgot her birthday once. Maybe he was busy with other things in business. Maybe he was traveling. But he forgot her birthday. She says, “It happens.” Her friend says, “What do you mean? Doesn't he respect you? Doesn't he appreciate all you do for him? He must have known it was your birthday. He ignored you.” That's called Rechilut. The husband may care as much as any other husband. He may have forgotten.
The same thing can happen from the other side of a marriage. A man comes home and gets dinner, which is a basic item: a potato or a vegetable, maybe some cucumbers, a little salad. It's nothing fancy, and it's served in a non-fancy way. It's the daily dinner on the dinette table, with the regular dishes. Nothing fancy. No candlelight. No flowers. And he doesn't mind. Somebody else says, “I can't believe she treats you that way.” That's his brother talking. “My wife makes sure to...” He starts describing the elaborate way she serves his meals, trying to convince his brother that his sister-in-law is not living up to her marital obligations.
This happens in many situations in life. It happens with a boss. A person goes to the boss and says, “You know, this person is not...” and gives a negative about another person to ingratiate himself with the boss. The boss now realizes how loyal this speaker is to him, how loyal this person is in revealing things the boss should know, and yet the speaker is hurting another person. That way of looking at a relationship is also Rechilut.
But there's a big chidush in today's lesson. This one is based on the same principle: even though he knows, it's still bad. Reuven speaks negatively about Shimon. Now, who is he talking to? Two people, sometimes more: Levi and Yehudah. Reuven is speaking badly about Shimon in front of Levi and Yehudah. Levi, being close to Shimon, the victim, goes and tells Shimon what Reuven said about him. The damage has been done. The man knows. The man's been hurt. The man is going to react. Nothing else is necessary to inflame the situation.
Now what does Yehudah do? Yehudah can remain silent. Yehudah doesn't have to. Yehudah says, “I can tell him because he already knows. And what's the diff? What's the difference? I know there were two of us there. I know one of us has already reported back to the victim of the speech. So what's the difference if I tell him? I'm not adding anything. I'm not telling him anything he doesn't know.” But the fact of the matter is, it's ruled as Rechilut.
Why is it Rechilut? Because this person comes and verifies that party A, Reuven, spoke negatively about party B, Shimon, in front of parties 3 and 4, Levi and Yehudah, and Levi already squealed. Yet maybe, just maybe, party 2, Shimon, the victim of the speech, doubts Levi's report. Maybe he says, “Levi's exaggerating. That's how he is. I'll downplay what he did. I'll ignore it.” Maybe, maybe, maybe, information from one person is asur. It's forbidden. But maybe it's not so accepted.
Knowing that, according to two witnesses or three witnesses, a fact is established, an incident is verified, it's certified. When the man comes along and repeats to Shimon what Reuven said about him, although Shimon has already heard it from Levi, the man is verifying it and making it a done deal. “You really did it. I can't believe he said that about me. I can't believe he did that to me with my customer. I can't believe that he told my wife such a thing.” What could have been doubted when one person reported it is not doubted when a second person reports it.
So, as we said, here's a fact that's already known. It's being repeated to somebody who knows it, and yet it's Rechilut, because it can worsen the situation by adding credibility to the first report of the same incident. In fact, Shimon's reaction may have been very, very low-key and very Pareve (neutral) until the second report came. He said, “You know something? These guys are right. Why is he talking like that?” All of a sudden, he explodes. Not because the first guy told him, but because the second guy told him. It's something he had already heard, something he already knew. Somebody put a flame to it, put oil on the fire. That's Rechilut.
That's Rechilut. All right. We can avoid revealing even things that are already known if doing so will create bad feelings or harm a person's reputation. There can be consequences for a person's ability to get married. Amen.