Sources:
Well known are the words of the holy Or HaChaim on the verse, “You intended evil against me, but God intended it for good,” where he writes: “This is comparable to one who intends to give his fellow a cup of death to drink, but gives him a cup of wine; he incurs no liability whatsoever, and they are exempt and vindicated even according to the judgment of Heaven.” End quote. Much ink has been spilled in resolving this, for Chazal said (Kiddushin 81b; Nazir 23a): “Her husband annulled it, and Hashem will forgive her”—the verse speaks of a woman whose husband annulled her vow and she did not know it; nevertheless, she requires atonement and forgiveness. Therefore, one who intended to eat pork but instead ate lamb requires atonement and forgiveness; see there. In my humble opinion, it appears that the intent of the holy Or HaChaim may be explained as referring to one who intended to give his fellow a cup of death for his benefit—for example, where he was liable to death under an emergency ruling or the like—and ultimately erred and gave him a cup of wine. Afterwards it became clear that he was indeed innocent and not liable to death. This is comparable to Yosef and his brothers: the one giving the drink incurs no liability whatsoever, and likewise the tribes are exempt and vindicated even according to the judgment of Heaven, since their entire intention was to act in accordance with halachah. Similarly, the Chatam Sofer wrote there in his work Torat Moshe that Yosef told them: “You judged me correctly, whether to kill me or sell me, for you thought that I had spoken evil reports and ruled me liable under the law, and you bear no guilt, for a judge has only what his eyes see. But God, Who knows, intended it for good, for my intention was for good; therefore He made me His agent to preserve a great people alive. Thus, we are both correct.” See my work “Eshkol Yosef—Yosef al HaTorah” (vol. I, Parashat Miketz, section 3), where I elaborated in clarifying on what basis the tribes ruled Yosef liable to death; see there, where I brought more than ten explanations. See also Sforno (verse 18), who writes that they considered him to have the status of a rodef; likewise wrote the Baalei HaTosafot, and likewise wrote the Meshech Chochmah (chapter 42). The Baalei HaTosafot further wrote in the name of a manuscript of one of the Rishonim that they judged him as a moser, whom one lowers into a pit and does not raise out (Avodah Zarah 26a); it is even permitted to kill a moser directly, as explained in several places. Now, none of this bears any resemblance whatsoever to the case raised by the esteemed questioner, in which the entire intention of the person humiliating them was sinful. His sin is exceedingly grave, and he will receive no reward from Hashem for his humiliation of them. On the contrary, unless he repents, he will certainly be punished for his transgression and sin. I have been brief here, though there is much more to elaborate upon; the essence and summary of the matter I wrote in the responsum above, and from there it may be understood.
This response was translated automatically from Hebrew and has not yet been reviewed by a person. Therefore, it may contain inaccuracies and should not be considered a definitive reference.
This response was translated automatically from Hebrew and has not yet been reviewed by a person. It may therefore contain inaccuracies and should not be considered a definitive reference.
