And through this you will see in actuality how far we have gone astray in our many sins — that if one suffers a loss through an informer or the like, and he has "indications" against a Jew, relying upon them [the indications], he goes and informs against him too! For it is an axiom among people that if one informed on his friend, the latter may inform on him too! And, in truth, this is an absolute error for several reasons:
a) This is only if the second informing may lead to future benefit, that his antagonist not repeat his informing. If he cannot rescue himself in any other way, this is permitted. But if his intent is only to avenge himself upon him, it is certainly an absolute issur (as explained in Choshen Mishpat 388:9).
b) Furthermore, all of this applies only if he saw himself being informed against with his own eyes; but he may not rely on "indications," even if they are real indications and he saw them himself. How much more so is it forbidden [to accept the rechiluth] if he were told by others that he had informed against him. For in such an instance, even to believe in his heart that the thing is true is also forbidden, so long as they have not testified against him in beth-din (or even outside of beth-din if it is absolutely clear that there is no doubt about the story). How much more so is it forbidden to rely upon this and to cause his friend any monetary loss, even if his intent in this is "future benefit."
וְעַל פִּי זֶה תִּרְאֶה בְּחוּשׁ, בַּמֶּה שֶּׁנִּכְשָׁלִין, בַּעֲוֹנוֹתֵינוּ הָרַבִּים, שֶׁאִם אֶחָד יֵשׁ לוֹ הֶזֵּק בְּעִסְקוֹ מִצַּד מַלְשִׁינוּת וְכַדּוֹמֶה, וְיֵשׁ לוֹ עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים, שֶׁהוּא עָשָׂה לוֹ אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה, עַל זֶה הַסְמָךְ הוּא הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר כָּךְ וּמַלְשִׁין אוֹתוֹ גַּם כֵּן, כִּי מַרְגְּלָא בְּפוּמַיְהוּ דְּאִינְשֵׁי {מורגל, בפי האנשים}, שֶׁאִם אֶחָד הִלְשִׁין עַל חֲבֵרוֹ, מֻתָּר הוּא גַּם כֵּן אַחַר כָּךְ לְהַלְשִׁינוֹ, וּבֶאֱמֶת הִיא טָעוּת גְּמוּרָה מִכַּמָּה טְעָמִים:
And through this you will see in actuality how far we have gone astray in our many sins — that if one suffers a loss through an informer or the like, and he has "indications" against a Jew, relying upon them [the indications], he goes and informs against him too! For it is an axiom among people that if one informed on his friend, the latter may inform on him too! And, in truth, this is an absolute error for several reasons:
א דְּדִין זֶה הוּא דַּוְקָא אִם עַל יְדֵי מַלְשִׁינוּת הַשְּׁנִיָה תִּהְיֶה תּוֹעֶלֶת עַל לְהַבָּא, שֶׁהַשֶּׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ לֹא יַחֲזֹר וְיַלְשִׁינוֹ עוֹד, וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לְהַצִּיל עַצְּמוֹ בְּדֶרֶךְ אַחֶרֶת, אָז מֻתָּר. אֲבָל אִם הוּא מִתְכַּוֵּן רַק לִנְקֹם נָקָם, בְּוַדַּאי אִסוּר גָּמוּר הוּא, וְכַמְבֹאָר בְּחֹשֶן מִשְׁפָּט {בסימן שפח סעיף ט' בהגהה}.
a) This is only if the second informing may lead to future benefit, that his antagonist not repeat his informing. If he cannot rescue himself in any other way, this is permitted. But if his intent is only to avenge himself upon him, it is certainly an absolute issur (as explained in Choshen Mishpat 388:9).
ב וְעוֹד, דְּכָל זֶה אִם הוּא רוֹאֶה בְּעֵינָיו שֶׁהִלְשִׁינוֹ, אֲבָל לֹא לִסְמֹךְ עַל דְּבָרִים הַנִּכָּרִים, אֲפִלּוּ אִם הֵם דְּבָרִים נִכָּרִים מַמָּשׁ, וְרָאָה אוֹתָן בְּעַצְּמוֹ, וְכַנַּל. וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם רַק אֲנָשִׁים סִפְּרוּ לוֹ שֶׁהוּא הִלְשִׁינוֹ, דְּבָזֶה אפִלּוּ לְהַחְלִיט בְּלִבּוֹ, שֶׁהַדָּבָר הַזֶּה אֱמֶת, גַּם כֵּן אָסוּר, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא הֵעִידוּ עָלָיו בְּבֵית דִּין, (אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין, רַק שֶׁנִּתְבָּרֵר בְּבֵרוּר, שֶׁאֵין אַחֲרָיו סָפֵק), וְעַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁאָסוּר לִסְמֹךְ עַל זֶה וּלְהַפְסִיד לַחֲבֵרוֹ הֶפְסֵד כָּל דְּהוּא, אֲפִלּוּ אִם הוּא מְכַוֵּן בָּזֶה לְתוֹעֶלֶת עַל לְהַבָּא.
b) Furthermore, all of this applies only if he saw himself being informed against with his own eyes; but he may not rely on "indications," even if they are real indications and he saw them himself. How much more so is it forbidden [to accept the rechiluth] if he were told by others that he had informed against him. For in such an instance, even to believe in his heart that the thing is true is also forbidden, so long as they have not testified against him in beth-din (or even outside of beth-din if it is absolutely clear that there is no doubt about the story). How much more so is it forbidden to rely upon this and to cause his friend any monetary loss, even if his intent in this is "future benefit."