יורה דעה רל״טYoreh De'ah 239

Se’if 1א׳

דִּין הַשְּׁבוּעָה כְּדִין הַנֶּדֶר לְכָל דָּבָר, בֵּין לְעִנְיָן שֶׁצָּרִיךְ שֶׁיּוֹצִיא בִּשְׂפָתָיו בֵּין לְעִנְיָן שֶׁנִּתְכַּוֵּן לוֹמַר פַּת חִטִּים וְאָמַר פַּת שְׂעוֹרִים אוֹ פַּת סְתָם, בֵּין שֶׁהוֹלְכִין בָּהּ אַחַר לְשׁוֹן בְּנֵי אָדָם, בֵּין לְעִנְיַן הֲקָמָתָהּ וּבִטּוּלָהּ, בֵּין לְעִנְיַן תְּנַאי. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁכְּשֵׁם שֶׁנִּדְרֵי זֵרוּזִין וַהֲבַאי וָאֳנָסִים וּשְׁגָגוֹת מֻתָּרִים, הוּא הַדִּין לְעִנְיַן שְׁבוּעָה, וְהוּא שֶׁכְּשֶׁנִּשְׁבַּע שְׁבוּעַת הֲבַאי לֹא יְהֵא מַעֲמִיד דְּבָרָיו לוֹמַר שֶׁוַּדַּאי רָאָה בְּאוֹתוֹ דֶּרֶךְ כְּיוֹצְאֵי מִצְרַיִם, דְּאִם כֵּן אָסוּר הוּא. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דִּשְׁבוּעוֹת הֲבַאי בְּכָל גַּוְנָא אֲסוּרוֹת. וּמִדִּבְרֵי הָרַמְבַּ"ם נִרְאֶה דִּשְׁבוּעוֹת זֵרוּזִין אֲסוּרוֹת. וְגַם בִּשְׁאָר שְׁבוּעוֹת נִרְאֶה מִדְּבָרָיו שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁפָּטוּר מִקָּרְבָּן, אִסוּרָא מִיהָא אִכָּא. הַגָּה: יְהוּדִי שֶׁגָּנַב לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים וְחִיְּבוּהוּ לִשָּׁבַע בְּמַעֲמַד שְׁאָר הַיְּהוּדִים, וְיוֹדְעִים שֶׁנִּשְׁבָּע לַשֶּׁקֶר, יְכוּפוּהוּ שֶׁיִּתְפַּשֵּׁר עִם הָעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים וְלֹא יִשָּׁבַע לַשֶּׁקֶר, אֲפִלּוּ אִם הָיָה אָנוּס עַל הַשְּׁבוּעָה, הוֹאִיל וְיֵשׁ חִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם בִּשְׁבוּעָתוֹ (תְּשׁוּבַת מהר"מ וְהַגָּהוֹת אֲשֵׁרִ"י רֵישׁ פֶּרֶק שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת). וְאִם הָיָה אָנוּס וְלֵיכָּא חִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם בַּדָּבָר, מְבַטֵּל הַשְּׁבוּעָה בְּלִבּוֹ, הוֹאִיל וְהוּא אָנוּס בִּשְׁבוּעָה, כְּדִלְעֵיל סי' רל"ב (ד"ע).

The law of an oath is as the law of a vow in every respect: whether as to the requirement that he bring it out with his lips, or as to where he intended to say wheat bread and said barley bread or bread without qualification, or as to our going in it after the language of men, or as to its upholding and its nullification, or as to a condition. And there are those who say that just as vows of urging and of exaggeration and of compulsion and of unwitting error are permitted, so is the law as to an oath — and that is where, when he swore an oath of exaggeration, he does not stand by his words to say that he certainly saw on that road as many as those who came out of Egypt; for if so, it is forbidden. And there are those who say that oaths of exaggeration are forbidden in every case. And from the words of the Rambam it appears that oaths of urging are forbidden. And as to the rest of oaths also it appears from his words that even though he is exempt from an offering, there is at any rate a prohibition. Hagah [Rema]: A Jew who stole from an idolater, and they obliged him to swear in the presence of the rest of the Jews, and they know that he is swearing falsely — they compel him to come to terms with the idolater and not to swear falsely, even if he was under compulsion as to the oath, since there is a desecration of the Name in his oath (a responsum of the Maharam, and Hagahot Asheri, the beginning of the chapter "The oath of testimony"). And if he was under compulsion and there is no desecration of the Name in the matter, he nullifies the oath in his heart, since he is under compulsion in the oath, as above, siman 232 (his own opinion).

Se’if 2ב׳

תְּקִיעַת כַּף, דִּינָהּ כְּדִין שְׁאָר שְׁבוּעוֹת וְיֵשׁ לָהּ הַתָּרָה. וּלְכַתְּחִלָּה לֹא יַתִּירָהּ רַק בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁמַּתִּירִין שְׁבוּעָה, (טוּר וְהַתּוֹסָפוֹת בְּשֵׁם רַבֵּנוּ תָּם מַחְמִירִים בת"כ יוֹתֵר מִשְּׁבוּעוֹת) וְעַיִּןִ לְעֵיל סִימָן ר"ג ור"ל. וְהָנֵי מִלֵּי כְּשֶׁהִיא דֶּרֶךְ שְׁבוּעָה, אֲבָל כְּשֶׁהִיא כְּדֶרֶךְ הַסוֹחֲרִים שֶׁתּוֹקְעִים כַּפָּם זֶה לָזֶה לְקַיֵּם הַמִּקָּח, אֵין לָהּ דִּין שְׁבוּעָה כְּלָל. הַגָּה: הִגְבִּיהַּ יָדוֹ וְאָמַר: אֲנִי תּוֹקֵעַ כַּפַּי לַשָּׁמַיִם אוֹ לְצוּרִי, צָרִיךְ הַתָּרָה (בְּמָרְדְּכַי פ"ג דִּשְׁבוּעוֹת וּתְשׁוּבַת ר"י וּתְשׁוּבַת מיימ'). הַנּוֹתֵן תְּקִיעַת כַּף לַחֲבֵרוֹ, וְתָלָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ, יָכוֹל לִמְחֹל לוֹ. וְאִם לֹא תָּלָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ, רַק עֲשָׂאוֹ דֶּרֶךְ שְׁבוּעָה, לֹא יוּכַל לִמְחֹל לוֹ וּבָעֵי הַתָּרָה (גַּם זֶה שָׁם).

Tekiat kaf (the striking of the hand, given in confirmation of an undertaking): its law is as the law of the rest of oaths, and it has release. And at the outset he shall not release it save in a place where they release an oath (Tur, and the Tosafot in the name of Rabbeinu Tam are stringent in tekiat kaf more than in oaths), and see above, siman 203 and siman 230. And these words apply where it is by way of an oath; but where it is in the way of traders, who strike their hands one with another to confirm the sale, it has not the law of an oath at all. Hagah [Rema]: He raised his hand and said: I strike my hands to Heaven, or to my Rock — he requires release (in Mordechai, chapter 3 of Shevuot, and a responsum of the Ri and a responsum of Maimoni). One who gives tekiat kaf to his fellow and made it depend upon his mind is able to remit it for him; and if he did not make it depend upon his mind but made it only by way of an oath, he cannot remit it for him, and it requires release (this also there).

Se’if 3ג׳

שְׁבוּעָה חָלָה עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מַמָּשׁ, כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּע שֶׁלֹּא יִישַׁן אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יְדַבֵּר. הַגָּה: נִדּוּי יֵשׁ לוֹ דִּין שְׁבוּעָה (בֵּית יוֹסֵף סוֹף סִימָן ר"ו בְּשֵׁם יְלַמְּדֵנוּ). וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּדָנִין לְחֻמְרָא, שֶׁחָל עַל כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁחָל עָלָיו הַשְּׁבוּעָה וְעַל כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁחָל עָלָיו הַנֶּדֶר (שָׁם בְּשֵׁם רשב"ץ).

An oath takes effect upon a thing that has no substance, such as where he swore that he would not sleep or that he would not speak. Hagah [Rema]: A ban has the law of an oath (Beit Yosef at the end of siman 206 in the name of Yelamdenu). And there are those who say that we judge to the stringent side, that it takes effect upon everything upon which an oath takes effect and upon everything upon which a vow takes effect (there, in the name of Rashbatz).