Deos 6:6,7,9

Perek vav halacha vav.

כשיחטא איש לאיש לא ישטמנו וישתוק כמו שנאמר ברשעים ולא דבר אבשלום עם אמנון למרע ועד טוב כי שנא אבשלום את אמנון אלא מצוה עליו להודיעו ולומר לו למה עשית לי כך וכך ולמה חטאת לי בדבר פלוני שנאמר הוכח תוכח את עמיתך ואם חזר ובקש ממנו למחול צריך למחול ולא יהא המוחל אכזרי שנאמר ויתפלל אברהם אל האלקים וגומר.

Take a look in Perek beis of Teshuvah halacha yud.

אסור לאדם שיהיה אכזרי ולא יתפייס אלא יהיה נוח לרצות וקשה לכעוס ובשעה שמבקש ממנו החוטא למחול מוחל בלב שלם ובנפש חפצה ואפילו הצר לו הרבה וחטא לו הרבה לא יקום ולא יטור וזהו דרכם של זרע ישראל ולבם הנכון.

So this din that a person should respond when asked for mechila, so the Rambam has it twice. The peshat is that the natural place for the halacha is here in Hilchos Teshuvah where the Rambam is talking about the role of mechila during teshuva, that if a person himself was chotei, then he needs to take the initiative to ask mechila. So it belongs here in Hilchos Teshuvah. The mashma'us here is that the Rambam is telling us that in addition to that there is an additional mechayev that a person should be forthcoming to be mochel, which is that it's an extension of the chiyuv to be mokiach in the first place. כשיחטא איש לאיש לא ישטמנו אלא (again skipping a line) אלא mitzvah alav lehodiyo. But that mitzvah alav lehodiyo is not lehodiyo and then to hang up the phone on him and then slam down the phone. The mitzvah alav lehodiyo and to be open to, the whole point is to not allow sinah be-lev to take root, so if there's a response that the person is asking mechila, so mitzad ha-chiyuv of hokheiakh tokheiakh as an outgrowth of that, there's also a chiyuv to be mochel. And again, the point likhora is further reinforced again, A, the fact that the Rambam has it in two places, and B, again, what we've seen several examples of. that the Rambam is very careful here in Hilchos De'os, he doesn't digress for the sake of being comprehensive, right? He only quotes here in Hilchos De'os what emerges from what the Hilchos De'os gederim. Can you please explain or clarify what the connection is between tokhacha and mechila? The chiyuv... okay, so let's maybe hold off on that for one second, let's take a look at halacha zayin and halacha tes for a minute and then try to answer your question that way בעזרת השם בלי נדר. Halacha zayin:

הרואה חבירו שחטא או שהוא הולך בדרך לא טובה מצוה להחזירו למוטב ולהודיעו שהוא חוטא על עצמו במעשיו הרעים שנאמר הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך.

Right, so the same pasuk that the Rambam quoted in halacha vav. So again, he's telling us about mitzvas tokhacha. Right, halacha vav he told us about ksheyecheta ish l'ish is mitzvas tokhacha, and now again in halacha zayin there's a mitzvas tokhacha. Just to add one other piece to the puzzle, halacha ches, halacha tes, excuse me:

מי שחטא עליו חבירו ולא רצה להוכיחו ולא לדבר לו כלום מפני שהיה החוטא הדיוט ביותר או שהיתה דעתו משובשת ומחל לו בלבו ולא שטמו ולא הוכיחו הרי זו מדת חסידות לא הקפידה תורה אלא על המשטמה.

So lechora, it's clear here in the Rambam, again, he's restarting halacha zayin again with hochei'ach tochi'ach. Halacha vav is only ksheyecheta ish l'ish. Halacha zayin is even if you're not a party to it, right? הרואה חבירו שחטא doesn't mean that chata negdo. Could be he saw him eating treif, not necessarily that it was chata negdo. So it's clear according to the Rambam that there are two chiyuvim included in the pasuk of הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך. Number one, again, not in the order in which the Rambam presents it, okay? We're doing it in the opposite order. Number one, הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך is there's a mitzvah lehachaziro l'mutav. If one sees a fellow Jew being chotei, again, lav davka that he's being chotei against you. One sees a fellow Jew being chotei, so then there's a chiyuv to give tokhacha. The definition of that chiyuv is not to tell him off but it's lehachaziro l'mutav, it's to influence him for the better. So whatever style of approach or reproach is most likely to achieve that result. It's not a mitzvah to throw a stone if that's not the best way lehachaziro l'mutav. So that's one chiyuv within הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך. Then there's the second chiyuv where a person is sinned against, right? Where the person himself is on the receiving end of a חטא בין אדם לחברו. And there there's a separate chiyuv above and beyond the chiyuv of lehachaziro l'mutav, there's a chiyuv that the person shouldn't let that translate into sin'ah balev of לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך. Right, that's the flow of the pasuk. לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך. So hochei'ach tochi'ach stands alone, but it also stands as part of this sequence where the default would be lo sisna bilvavecha, the default would be that sin'as halev because the person wronged you. So then הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך that there should be no sin'as halev. That's why the Rambam says in halacha tes that

Meaning in halacha tes the Rambam is describing a case where there's only one mechayiv. He's a hedyot beyoter, he's not going to accept tokhacha. There isn't a reasonable chance that he's going to accept tokhacha and change his ways, either because he's a hedyot beyoter, he's so contemptuous of what's correct and what's right in life or he... So then then the mechayiv of halacha zayin is not relevant because there's no possibility of being machziro lemutav, but you still have the mechayiv of halacha vav, that there shouldn't be sinas haleiv, so there the Rambam says no, it's a middas chasidus if a person can avoid the sinas haleiv without tochacha, he can avoid the sinas haleiv just by being mochel, so then there's no chiyuv to confront him. But again bimedvarim amurim where you don't have the mechayiv of halacha zayin. So there are two distinct mechayivim, two distinct elements to mitzvas hocheiach tochiach. Again one is that nothing to do with whether or not a person is a party to the cheit. He can be a bystander, he can be a spectator, but he sees the cheit, he's aware of the cheit, so then there's mitzvas tochacha. B, if the person is the aggrieved party in the cheit, so then that it shouldn't translate into sinas haleiv, there is a chiyuv tochacha. Chiyuv number one is only if there's a reasonable chance that it's going to succeed. The Gemara in Yevamos says, which is the Rambam's makor, that

כשם שמצוה לומר דבר הנשמע, כך מצוה שלא לומר דבר שאינו נשמע.

The Nimukei Yosef doesn't take that Gemara entirely kiphshuto, but the Rambam does. The Rambam says no, if it's a davar sheino nishma, if all indications are again the way the Rambam describes it, because the individual is either hedyot beyoter or is daato meshubashet, so there's no reasonable chance that he's going to respond to the tochacha, so then mechayiv number one isn't relevant. You still have mechayiv number two. Mechayiv number two is when the person is the aggrieved party to a חטא בין אדם לחברו. So then even if there's no chance of lehachziro lemutav, he's mechuyav to say something so that it doesn't translate into sinas haleiv. Once he says something, it's not sinas haleiv. Once he airs the, once he pushes back, so then there's no sinas haleiv. There the Rambam says it's a middas chasidus if you're only dealing with mechayiv number two. So then it's a middas chasidus that a person doesn't again, it's a middas chasidus in the case where the person's not really going to accept the tochacha, so it's not as if you're going to sort of prompt him to ask mechila, so then just the person should be mochel on his own. So what we were talking about in halacha vav, when the Rambam talks about the din of mechila, what we were saying is that in addition to that as part of that chiyuv to confront the person,

למה עשית לי כך וכך ולמה חטאת לי בדבר פלוני,

so as an outgrowth of that, so there's a chiyuv to be mochel as well. And that's why the Rambam records the din here in Hilchos De'os, because it's an outgrowth of that lo sisna but rather hocheiach tochiach, in addition to in Hilchos Teshuva. Where did the Meiri say that we should even if the Rambam said that if a person wouldn't be receptive potentially to the tochacha they should not just forgive him, they should rather speak it out then? He should give tochacha because of halacha zayin. I mean it doesn't prevent him from being mochel, but it's not a middas chasidus to keep quiet. That's why the Rambam only describes the middas chasidus of keeping quiet in the case where the individual is a hedyot beyoter or daato meshubashet, where the tochacha in terms of being machzir lemutav is a davar sheino nishma. Then but you still should have been mochiach because of לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך. Okay, so then it's a middas chasidus just to be mochel. What if it's not sure if he's the right person to give tochacha, if it's better not to, better just to, you know, machila on the, or is it better to... See, bizman hazeh, it's very very very very complicated. It's very complicated because, you know, in a very non-Torahdik fashion, I think too many of us, I mean if there's one of us it's too many, but I think maybe more than one also, too many of us sort of have the mindset that when you're a little kid, so then your parents can tell you you did something wrong. But once you reach a certain age, no one's supposed to tell you anything. The knee-jerk reaction to any tochacha is mind your own business or who are you, whether we articulate it or not, but that's often the thought that crosses our mind. That's one consideration for why Say lema'aseh when we have that mindset we probably qualify as hedyos but be that as it may if that mindset exists so that's one reason why we don't give tochacha. Another reason that we don't give tochacha again in the form of very directly is that again the mitzvah is lehachziro l'mutav. The mitzvah is not to, again talking about halacha zayin now, the mechayiv of lehachziro l'mutav, it's to be effective and again this is interconnected with a previous point. If inviting someone who's a mechallel Shabbos, not talking about where he'll be mechallel Shabbos to take your invitation, that's a separate parsha. If inviting him for a Shabbos meal is arguably going to plant the seeds for to be mashpia on him more than just telling him he shouldn't be mechallel Shabbos although that's a kiyum in hochei'ach tochi'ach. Hochei'ach tochi'ach is result oriented; it's not to tell them off. I think the Biur Halacha in סימן תרח, I think that's the siman where the Shulchan Aruch quotes the Gemara that there's no mitzvas tochacha if you have good reason to think that the person is shogeg and the result of just hearing the tochacha is that you'll make them into meizid rather than improving things. So then the Gemara says מוטב שיהיו שוגגין ואל יהיו מזידין. So whenever there's a presumption that the person knows so then that's not a cheshbon but when the presumption is that the person doesn't know so then a person also has to think twice no maybe that's maybe all indications are that one is going to make things worse by speaking up. מוטב שיהיו שוגגין ואל יהיו מזידין. So apropos of that I think there's a Biur Halacha there in Biur Halacha where he talks about again why we're not mekayeim so much mitzvas tochacha bizman hazeh and talks about maybe the fact that ein yadeinu takifa that when frum Jews in the majority it was easier to exert influence and בזמן הזה שאין ידינו תקיפה so I forget who he quotes it from the Smak maybe I forget who he quotes that from. But if there is an opportunity so then if none of these cheshbonos are relevant so it is a mitzvah. Okay again halacha zayin here. So

הרואה חברו שחטא או שהוא הולך בדרך לא טובה מצוה להחזירו למוטב ולהודיעו שהוא חוטא על עצמו במעשיו הרעים שנאמר הוכח תוכיח את עמיתך.

So in giving tochacha the mochi'ach is supposed to explain to the chotei that his actions are self-destructive שהוא חוטא על עצמו. To highlight for the chotei how he's the he himself the chotei himself is the one he's victimizing himself through cheit. להודיעו שהוא חוטא על עצמו במעשיו הרעים. So it's interesting if you take a look in Hilchos Teshuva, the Rambam has this exact same perspective in Perek Vav, Hilchos Teshuva, Halacha Beis.

אל יעבור במחשבתך דבר זה שאומרים טפשי האומות ורוב גולמי בני ישראל שהקדוש ברוך הוא גוזר על האדם מתחילת ברייתו להיות צדיק או רשע.

Ein Hadavar Kein. There's no predestination.

אלא כל אדם ואדם ראוי להיות צדיק כמשה רבנו או רשע כירבעם.

A person can't be a Novi like Moshe Rabbeinu, but he can be a Tzadik like Moshe Rabbeinu.

כל אדם ואדם ראוי להיות צדיק כמשה רבנו או רשע כירבעם או חכם או סכל.

A person can't determine his IQ, but to the extent that being a Chacham means to act with Chochma, so that a person can do. You can have a person, a person can have an IQ that's off the charts and he can act like a fool. So או חכם או סכל in terms of, in terms of behavior.

או רחמן או אכזרי או כילי או שוע וכן שאר כל הדעות ואין לו מי שיכפהו ולא גוזר עליו ולא מי שמושכו לאחד משני הדרכים.

There are no, there's no external force that compels or even pushes a person in either of the two directions.

אלא הוא מעצמו ומדעתו נוטה לאיזו דרך שירצה. הוא שירמיהו אומר מפי עליון לא תצא הרעות והטוב.

So according to the Rambam, that's not a rhetorical question. And Raos and Tov don't refer to punishment the way Rashi understands the Pasuk in Eicha, but rather Raos and Tov describe our actions and it's a declarative statement. It's Benichusa, not Bitmiya.

מפי עליון לא תצא הרעות והטוב. כלומר אין הבורא גוזר על האדם לא להיות טוב ולא להיות רע. וכיוון שכן,

and here's where we come to the parallel to our Halacha, נמצא זה החוטא הוא הפסיד עצמו. Again, he's destroying himself, right? The Choteh is destroying himself, right? That's the parallel in our Halacha to the Choteh Al Atzmo.

לפיכך ראוי לו לבכות ולקונן על מה שעשה לנפשו וגמלה רעה.

So therefore the person should, should cry and should lament what he's done to himself, his self-destructive behavior.

על מה שעשה לנפשו וגמלה רעה. הוא שכתוב אחריו מה יתאונן אדם חי גבר על חטאיו

exclamation point. Like מה נורא המקום הזה, right? Mah is not always a question word. Sometimes it introduces an exclamation. When Yaakov Avinu says מה נורא המקום הזה, it's not question mark, it's exclamation point. Similarly here too.

מה יתאונן אדם חי גבר על חטאיו. וחזר ואמר נחפשה דרכינו ונחקורה ונשובה עד ה'.

So here too the Rambam highlights that the most basic perspective, most basic because that's the one which is most easily accessible to us. A person doesn't have to be on a, a person, it's a higher Madreiga to do Teshuva because it was such a Chutzpah to go against Retzon Hashem, to go against Tzivui Hashem. That's a higher Madreiga. So maybe a person's not holding on that Madreiga. But the least common denominator, everyone has an instinct, right? We all have an instinct for self-survival. We all have, we all have self-love. So that, that's the least common denominator of everyone and that's why again the Chiyuv Teshuva also, also accentuates this, also appeals to our sense of. to to this נמצא זה החוטא הוא הפסיד את עצמו. So mimila the yesod that even when we're talking about teshuvah, we appeal to that because again that's the least common denominator, that that's something that we all can relate to. Higher madregos lav davka that we can all relate to that. So heyos that that's the most basic impetus to teshuvah, so mimila that's that needs to be included in the tochachah because the tochachah is to to inspire the person to do teshuvah. So the most basic perspective for teshuvah is hifsid atzmo. So mimila that's what the the tochachah has to has to highlight. Could could be I'm not sure. Just just coming back to the last line of halachah vav again for a moment, rabosai,

ואם חזר ובקש ממנו למחול לו צריך למחול ולא יהיה המוחל אכזרי שנאמר ויתפלל אברהם אל האלקים.

So that's just sort of reinforcement, meaning not to be mocheil would be achzaryos, right? So the Rambam says tzarich limchol and then he he reinforces it now as it were you know he says it belashon asei and belashon lo sa'aseh. So belashon asei tzarich limchol and belashon lo sa'aseh ולא יהיה המוחל אכזרי. Yitachen though that that the ולא יהיה המוחל אכזרי goes beyond the tzarich limchol. Achzari again we we translate that as cruel, which is usually correct, but lichora what it what it means most basically is unfeeling, unresponsive. And maybe the ולא יהיה המוחל אכזרי means it goes beyond the the chiyuv. The chiyuv is to go beyond mechilah. And that's what the Rambam is illustrating with ויתפלל אברהם אל האלקים. Avraham Avinu could have said to Avimelech, okay I'm mocheil you, but why should I also now now be mocheil you, I should, you know, I should now put myself out for you? And that's lichora what the lashon is ולא יהיה המוחל אכזרי, meaning even if he's being mocheil there would still be room for an achzaryus if if he would, you know, refuse to to be of help. And and the ולא יהיה המוחל אכזרי means that not only should one be mocheil but beyond that one should now turn around and look to to assist the the chotei. Lo zu bilvad to be mocheil but now to help the chotei. And that's what the Rambam illustrates with ויתפלל אברהם אל האלקים. Again it I don't know that it would have otherwise been been a differ- been a problem, but the Rambam Hilchos Teshuvah taki doesn't quote the ויתפלל אברהם אל האלקים because in Hilchos Teshuvah he's only talking about the din of mechilah. He's not talking about he doesn't have occasion to be talking about going beyond the the mechilah. Okay, so we'll stop here bli neder we'll continue be'ezras Hashem. Okay, so we'll stop here. Bli neder, we'll continue be'ezras Hashem.