Lies and Lies

ולא יהיה כקרח ועדתו                                           

The Mogen Avraham 156 quotes The Sefer Chasidim who writes when Chazal said “you may say nontruths for the sake of peace, " it only applies to the past and not for the future.

Reuvain has the money but doesn’t want to lend it to Shimon because he doesn’t trust him.

1)  Shimon asks Reuvain to lend him money. Reuvain may not lie and say he doesn’t have any money. (future)

2)  Shimon asks Reuvain How come last week when I asked you for money, you didn’t lend me. Reuvain may answer falsely
and say "I didn’t have any money." (past)  Reuvain may do so because if he lies, there will be peace between them but If he says the truth (I don’t trust you) then Shimon will be upset & angry.

The שו"ע הרב ס"ב asks, If you may lie for the sake of peace, why should there be a difference between past & future?

Mori V'Rabi Harav Hagaon R. Shlomo Miller Shlita explained the reason for the  difference with a

​ ​

simpl

e 

סברא,
 

"In case # 2) there are only two options   a) lie – will be peace    b) truth – will be upset & angry, therefore

​ ​

on

e 

may lie for peace.

In case #1)  there are three options

​ ​

a) lie,(don't have)    b)  truth,(don't trust you)    c) lend him the money.

The only time 

one 

may lie is when lying is the only option for peace.
When you have another option to keep the peace   (lend the money) then you may not lie. 

You may lie only when the only alternative for

​ ​

peace is to lie

​"​