The gemorah brings a proof that it is assur to advise a rasha and brings a proof from Daniel,who gave Nevuchadnetzar advice and was punished. What is the basis for this issur? The Rambam brings this l'halacha, but the Rif, Rosh, and Shulchan Aruch do not. The only other Rishon that I've found that gives p'shat is the Meiri, but that doesn't explain the Rambam. I thought it might be from "Lo Sechanaim", but again that doesn't seem to be what the Rambam is saying, and the Shulchan Aruch should have then brought it l'halacha.
I hope you can help me.
Thank you,
jeffrey perman, chicago,usa
Some commentaries indeed understand this is due to Lo Sechaneim (as apparent from the notes on the Rambam, indicating that this is the position of the Rogatchover in Tzofnas Panei'ach). However, the Divrei Malkiel (4:71) in fact seems to understand that the reasoning of the Meiri is the explanation of the Rambam. This must be the explanation if one holds that there is no prohibition of Lo Sechaneim by an Eved (a question discussed by the Tzofnas Panei'ach quoted above).
The explanation of the Divrei Malkiel in a nutshell is that any person who is a Nochri or Eved and has no interest at all in becoming closer to Hash-m should not be guided regarding how to better his portion in Olam ha'Zeh or Olam ha'Ba. The reason this does not apply to a regular Jewish Rasha is because there is a law of Arvus, that we are responsible for each other's actions. Accordingly, it is in the best interests of Klal Yisrael that even such a Jew not commit sins, and we should therefore ensure he does not sin, even if he currently doesn't care one way or the other. [See Divrei Malkiel ibid. at length.]
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose