Even the "dust" of rechiluth [viz. Principle VIII] is forbidden to be spoken in all instances, even if what he says that Ploni spoke about the other may be taken in two ways. If he says it in a way that indicates that the intent of Ploni was to demean him, certainly it is forbidden [to mention it] in all instances. And even if the manner in which he expresses it inclines more to the other interpretation of his words, that the intent of Ploni was not to demean him, still, if he knew the nature of the one spoken about to be that of a nirgan [a "grumbler"], (one who always judges his friend in the scales of guilt, and says of whatever his friend does or speaks that his intent is only to oppose him [viz. Sha'arei Teshuvah 231]); or, if there is, aside from this, a measure of hatred between them from the past, and a man like this is only seeking some pretext against his friend, it is forbidden to mention it in any instance.
אֲפִלּוּ אֲבַק רְכִילוּת (כְּפִי מה שנבאר לקמן בכלל ח מה נקרא אבק רכִילוּת) גַּם כֵּן אָסוּר לְסַפֵּר בְּכָל גַּוְנִי. וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם הַדִּבּוּר שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁמְּסַפֵּר לוֹ, מַה שֶּׁאָמַר פְּלוֹנִי עָלָיו, יֵשׁ לוֹ שְׁנֵי פָּנִים, אִם הוּא אוֹמְרָה (ב) בְּאֹפֶן דְּמוּכָח, שֶׁכַּוָּנַת הָרִאשׁוֹן הָיְתָה לְגַנּוֹתוֹ, בְּוַדַּאי אָסוּר בְּכָל גַּוְנִי, וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם הוּא מוֹצִיא זֶה מִלְּשׁוֹנוֹ, בְּעִנְיַן דְּנוֹטֶה יוֹתֵר כַּפֵּרוּשׁ הָאַחֵר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בִּדְבָרָיו, שֶׁכַּוָּנַת הָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא הָיְתָה לְגַנּוֹתוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן (ג) אִם הוּא מַכִּיר אֶת טִבְעוֹ שֶׁל זֶה הַשֵּׁנִי, שֶׁהוּא אִישׁ נִרְגָן, (הַיְנוּ, שֶׁהוּא דָּן אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ לְכַף חוֹב תָּמִיד, וְכָל מַה שֶּׁחֲבֵרוֹ עוֹשֶׂה, אוֹ מְדַבֵּר, הוּא אוֹמֵר שֶׁכִּוֵּן רַק לְהִתְנַגֵּד לוֹ בָּזֶה, כְּמוֹ שֶׁכָּתַב בְּשַׁעֲרֵי תְּשׁוּבָה לְרַבֵּנוּ יוֹנָה), אוֹ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְבַד זֶה קְצָת שִׂנְאָה בֵּינֵיהֶם מִכְּבָר, וְאִישׁ כָּזֶה אֵינוֹ צָּרִיךְ רַק לִמְצֹא עֲלִילָה עַל חֲבֵרוֹ, אָסוּר בְּכָל גַּוְנִי.
Even the "dust" of rechiluth [viz. Principle VIII] is forbidden to be spoken in all instances, even if what he says that Ploni spoke about the other may be taken in two ways. If he says it in a way that indicates that the intent of Ploni was to demean him, certainly it is forbidden [to mention it] in all instances. And even if the manner in which he expresses it inclines more to the other interpretation of his words, that the intent of Ploni was not to demean him, still, if he knew the nature of the one spoken about to be that of a nirgan [a "grumbler"], (one who always judges his friend in the scales of guilt, and says of whatever his friend does or speaks that his intent is only to oppose him [viz. Sha'arei Teshuvah 231]); or, if there is, aside from this, a measure of hatred between them from the past, and a man like this is only seeking some pretext against his friend, it is forbidden to mention it in any instance.