Daf Hashavua
Bava Metzia 87a
讙讚讜诇 砖诇讜诐 砖讗驻讬诇讜 讛拽讘"讛 砖讬谞讛-
讜讗讚讜谞讬 讝拽谉/讜讗谞讬 讝拽谞转讬
The Mogen Avraham 157 quotes The Sefer Chasidim
who writes when Chazal said “you may say
non truths
for the sake of peace, " it only applies to the
past and
not for the future.
The Sefer Chasidim explains this halacha :
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 obvious question is:
If you may lie for the sake of peace , why should
there be a difference between past & future?
Mori V'Rabi Harav Hagaon Reb Shlomo Miller Shlita explained the reason for the difference:
"In case # 2) there are only two
options
a) lie – will be peace
b) truth – will be upset & angry, therefore you 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 that you 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".
This is not a simple, clear cut, or light matter.
ReplyDeleteOther authorities rule otherwise/more stringently.
We know how much our Torah is opposed to falsehood.
Note that the lashon used is not 诇砖拽专, but rather 诇砖谞讜转.