שבועות ג׳Shevuot 3

Mishnah

משנה: שְׁבוּעוֹת שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאוֹכַל וְשֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל שֶׁאָכַלְתִּי וְשֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתִּי. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל וְאָכַל כָּל שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֵיכָן מָצִינוּ בְּאוֹכֵל כָּל שֶׁהוּא שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב שֶׁזֶּה חַיָיב. אָמַר לָהֶן אֵיכָן מָצִינוּ בִּמְדַבֵּר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן שֶׁזֶּה מְדַבֵּר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן.

MISHNAH: There are two kinds of oaths which are four kinds: An oath that I shall eat, or that I shall not eat; that I ate, or that I did not eat. An oath that I shall not eat, when he ate the most minute amount, he is liable, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. They said to Rebbi Aqiba, where do we find that one who eats the most minute amount should be liable, that this one be liable? He told them, where do we find that a person talks and has to bring a sacrifice; but this one talks and has to bring a sacrifice!

Halakhah

הלכה: שְׁבוּעוֹת שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע כול׳. נִיחָא שֶׁאוֹכַל וְשֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל. שֶׁאָכַלְתִּי וְשֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתִּי. מָה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁאָכַל וְנִשְׁבַּע שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל. שְׁבוּעַת שֶׁקֶר הוּא. וְאִם סָבוּר שֶׁאָכַל וְנִשְׁבַּע שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל. רִבִּי בָּא רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם רַב. בְּשׁוֹגֵג בְּקָרְבָּנָהּ וּבְמֵזִיד בְּקָרְבָּנָהּ. אֲבָל. סָבוּר הָיִיתִי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ שְׁבוּעָה. מוּתָּר. אֶלָּא בְמֵזִיד בָּהּ וּבְשׁוֹגֵג בְּקָרְבָּנָהּ. וְלֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מֵזִיד בְּחֵלֶב וְשׁוֹגֵג בְּקָרְבָּן מַתְרִין בּוֹ וְלוֹקֶה וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. לֵית יְכִיל. דָּמַר רִבִּי לָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. כָּךְ מֵשִׁיב רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. מָצִינוּ דָּבָר שֶׁחַיָיבִין בִּזְדוֹנוֹ מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּעַת שֶׁקֶר וּבְהֶעֱלֵימוֹ מִשּׁוֹם בִּיטּוּי. וִיתִיבִינֵיהּ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. מָצִינוּ דָבָר שֶׁחַיָיבִין בִּזְדוֹנוֹ מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּעַת שֶׁקֶר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. אֶלָּא כִי נָן קַיּיָּמִין בְּבָרִיא לוֹ שֶׁאָכַל וְנִשְׁבַּע וְנִמְצָא שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל. לֹא בְאוֹמֵר. אֵין זוֹ שְׁבוּעָה. תַּמָּן בָּאוֹמֵר. אֵין זוֹ שְׁבוּעָה. בְּרַם הָכָא בְּיוֹדֵעַ בָּהּ שֶׁשְּׁבוּעָה הִיא אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא בְטוֹעֶה מַחְמַת דָּבָר אַחֵר.

HALAKHAH: “There are two kinds of oaths which are four kinds,” etc. One understands “that I shall eat, or that I shall not eat.” “That I ate, or that I did not eat”? Where do we stand? If it is known that he ate and he swore that he did not eat, it is a false oath. But if he was of the opinion that he ate and swore that he did not eat? Rebbi Abba, Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: If he is inadvertent for its sacrifice or intentional for its sacrifice. But “I was of the opinion that this is not an oath” is permitted. But it must be that he was intentional in the deed but in error about the sacrifice. Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Intentional about fat and in error about the sacrifice, one warns him, he is flogged and has to bring a sacrifice. This is impossible, as Rebbi La said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: So did Rebbi Ismael answer Rebbi Aqiba: Do we find a situation where one is liable if intentional because of a false oath and in oblivion because of blurting? Should not Rebbi Aqiba retort, we find a situation where one is liable if intentional because of a false oath and he brings a sacrifice? But we deal here with the case that he was sure that he ate, and he swore, and it turned out that he had not eaten. Not about him who said that this is not an oath? There, if he says this is not an oath; but here if he knows that this is an oath but he errs because of something else.

מָה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאוֹכַל אֲכִילַת תּוֹרָה. אַף רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מוֹדֶה. וְאִם בָּאוּמֵר. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אֶטְעוֹם. אַף רַבָּנִן מוֹדוּ. אֶלָּא כִי נָן קַיָימִין כָּל שֶׁהוּא. כָּל שֶׁהוּא אֲכִילָה. פָּתַר לָהּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה דְּאָמַר. כָּל שֶׁהוּא אֲכִילָה. מַה מַפְקָה מִבֵּינֵיהוֹן. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וַאֲכָלָהּ חָסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה חַיָיב. עַל דַעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין פָּטוּר. שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זֶה. וַאֲכָלָהּ חָסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה פָטוּר. עַל דַעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין חַיָיב. אַף בִּשְׁבוּעַת בִּיטּוּי כֵן. שְׁבוּעָה אִשְׁתִּי נֶהֱנִית לִי אִם אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וַאֲכָלָהּ חָסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. עַל דַעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין אִשְׁתּוֹ מוּתֶּרֶת. שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וַאֲכָלָהּ חָסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אִשְׁתּוֹ מוּתֶּרֶת. עַל דַעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. אוּף בִּנְכָסִין כֵּן. שְׁבוּעַת נְכָסַיי עָלַי אִם אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וַאֲכָלָהּ חָסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֲסוּרִין. עַל דַעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין נְכָסִים מוּתָּרִין. שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וַאֲכָלָהּ חָסֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה נְכָסָיו מוּתָּרִין. עַל דַעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין אֲסוּרִין.

Where do we hold? If about one who said, an oath that I shall eat according to Torah standards, even Rebbi Aqiba will agree. And if about one who says, an oath that I shall not taste, even the rabbis will agree. But we hold, about minute amounts. Are minute amounts eating? Explain it following Rebbi Aqiba who said that a minute amount is eating. What is the difference between them? “An oath that I shall eat this loaf,” and he ate it except a minute amount. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba he is liable, in the opinion of the rabbis he is not liable. “That I shall not eat this loaf,” and he ate it except a minute amount. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba he is not liable, in the opinion of the rabbis he is liable. Also for blurted oaths it is so: “An oath that my wife may not have any usufruct from me if I shall eat this loaf,” and he ate it except a minute amount. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba his wife is forbidden [to have usufruct], in the opinion of the rabbis his wife is permitted. “That I shall not eat this loaf,” and he ate it except a minute amount. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba his wife is permitted [to have usufruct], in the opinion of the rabbis his wife is forbidden. Also with property it is the same. “An oath that my properties be forbidden to me if I shall eat this loaf,” and he ate it except a minute amount. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba they are forbidden, in the opinion of the rabbis his properties are permitted. “That I shall not eat this loaf,” and he ate it except a minute amount. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba his properties are permitted, in the opinion of the rabbis they are forbidden.

וַהֲרֵי הַמְגַדֵּף מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. חֲבֵרַיָיא אָמְרֵי בְשֵׁם רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. כְּשִׁיטָּתוֹ הֵשִׁיבוּהוּ. כְּשִׁיטָּתָךְ שֶׁאַתָּה אוֹמֵר. אֵין הַמְגַדֵּף מַעֲשֶׂה. אֵיכָן מָצִינוּ בִמְדַבֵּר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן שֶׁזֶּה מְדַבֵּר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. רִבִּי בָּא קַרְתִּיגְנָאָה בָעֵי. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטַּת רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. תַּמָּן מָר. לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֵין הַמְגַדֵּף מַעֲשֶׂה. וְהָכָא מָר. מְגַדֵּף מַעֲשֶׂה כְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. רִבִּי לָא בְשֵׁם רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. תְּרֵין תַּנָיִין אִינּוּן עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. חַד אָמַר. אֵין הַמְגַדֵּף מַעֲשֶׂה. וְחַד אָמַר. הַמְגַדֵּף מַעֲשֶׂה.

Does not the blasphemer have to bring a sacrifice? The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: They answered him according to his argument. Following your argument, since you say that the blasphemer does not act, where do we find that somebody talks and brings a sacrifice that this one talks and brings a sacrifice? Rebbi Abba from Carthage asked, is not Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish’s argument inverted? There he said, for Rebbi Aqiba the blasphemer does not act. But here he says, the blasphemer is acting in the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Two Tannaïm following the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba. One said, the blasphemer does not act, and the other said, the blasphemer does act.

Mishnah

משנה: שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה אֵינוֹ חַיָיב אֶלָּא אֶחָת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל וְשֶׁלֹּא אֶשְׁתֶּה וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה חַיָיב שְׁתַּיִם:

MISHNAH: An oath that I shall not eat, when he ate and drank he is liable only for one. An oath that I shall not eat or drink, when he ate and drank he is liable for two.

Halakhah

הלכה: שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל. וְאָכַל כול׳. שְׁתִיָיה בִּכְלָל אֲכִילָה וְלֹא אֲכִילָה בִכְלָל שְׁתִיָיה. רִבִּי יוֹנָה שָׁמַע כּוּלְּהוֹן מִיכָּא. עַל כֵּן אָמַרְתִּי לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כָּל נֶפֶשׁ מִכֶּם לֹא תֹאכַל דָּם. מָה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּדָם שֶׁקָּרַשׁ. הָתַנֵּי. דָם שֶׁקָּרַשׁ אֵינוֹ לֹא אוֹכֶל וְלֹא מַשְׁקֶה. (אֶלָּא כֵן נָן קָיָימִין. כָּל שֶׁהוּא. כָּל שֶׁהוּא אֲכִילָה. פָּתַר לָהּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אָמַר. כָּל שֶׁהוּא אֲכִילָה.) וְהָתַנֵּי. הִמְחָה הַדָּם וּגְמָעוֹ אוֹ שֶׁהִקְפָּה חֵלֶב וַאֲכָלוֹ. אִם יֵשׁ בּוֹ כְזַיִת חַיָיב. מָה עֲבַד לָהּ רִבִּי יוֹנָה. אֵינוֹ אוֹכֶל לִיטָּמֵא טוּמְאַת אוֹכְלִין וְלֹא מַשְׁקֶה לִיטָּמֵא טוּמְאַת מַשְׁקִין. חָזַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה וּפָתַר מַתְנִיתָה. וְנָתַתָּה הַכֶּסֶף בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר תְּאַוֶּה נַפְשְׁךָ. מָה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּטוֹעֵם טַעַם יַיִן לְתַבְשִׁיל. וַהֲלֹא הַטַּעַם לִפְגָם. אֶלָּא כֵן נָן קָיָימִין כָּל שֶׁהוּא וְרַחֲמָנָא קְרָיֵיהּ אֲכִילָה. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיסָרִין אָמְרִין. תִּיפְתָּר בְּאִילֵּין גֳּמְרַיָיה וְאוֹרְזָרַיָיה שֶׁהָכֹּל טְפֵילָה לָאֲכִילָה כָּאֲכִילָה.

HALAKHAH: “An oath that I shall not eat; when he ate,” etc. Drinking is subsumed under eating but eating is not subsumed under drinking. Rebbi Jonah understood all this from: Therefore, I told the Children of Israel, none of you shall eat blood. Where do we hold? If about congealed blood, was it not stated that congealed blood is neither food nor drink? (But we hold, about minute amounts. Are minute amounts eating? Explain it following Rebbi Aqiba who said that a minute amount is eating.) And was it not stated: If one liquefied the blood and swallowed it, or froze fat and ate it, if there is the volume of an olive he is liable. What does Rebbi Jonah do with this? It is not food to become impure in the impurity of food, or fluid to become impure in the impurity of fluids. Rebbi Jonah changed and explained the Mishnah: You shall spend the money for anything you desire. Where do we hold? If about one who gives the taste of wine into a cooked dish, is that not spoiling the taste? But we hold with everything and the Merciful called it “eating.” The rabbis of Caesarea said, explain if about gomraya and orzaraya, since anything that is auxiliary to food is like food.

רִבִּי יוֹסֵי שָׁמַע כּוּלְּהוֹן מִיכָּא. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל. וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה. אֵין חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אֶחָת. אָמְרֵי חֲבֵרַיָיא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וָמַר דְּבַתְרָהּ. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל וְשֶׁלֹּא אֶשְׁתֶּה וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה. אֵין חַיָיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. אָמַר לוֹן רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אִילּוּ מִי שֶׁאָמַר. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וְחָזַר וְאָמַר. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל כִּכָּר זוֹ. וְאָכַל שְׁתֵּיהֶן. שֶׁמָּא אֵינוֹ חַיָיב שְׁתַּיִם.

Rebbi Yose understood all this from the following: “An oath that I shall not eat; when he ate and drank he is liable only for one.” The colleagues said before Rebbi Yose, but it is said following this, “an oath that I shall not eat nor drink, when he ate and drank” should he be liable only for one? Rebbi Yose told them, if somebody said, an oath that I shall not eat this loaf, and he continued, an oath that I shall not eat this other loaf, when he ate both of them would he not be guilty on two counts?

רִבִּי חֲנִינָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי פִינְחָס שָׁמַע כּוּלְּהוֹן מִיכָּא. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל. וְאָכַל אוֹכְלִין שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיִין וְשָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיִין. פָּטוּר. הָא אָכַל אוֹכְלִין רְאוּיִין וְשָׁתָה מַשְׁקִין רְאוּיִין חַיָיב.

Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Phineas understood all this from the following: “An oath that I shall not eat; when he ate inedible food and drank undrinkable fluids, he is not liable.” Therefore if he ate edible food and drank drinkable fluid he is liable.

רִבִּי בָּא שָׁמַע כּוּלְּהוֹן מִיכָּא. אָכַל וְשָׁתָה בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד אֵינוֹ חַיָיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁאָמַר. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל וְשָׁתָה. וּכְרִבִּי שֶׁאָמַר. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אֶשְׁתֶּה.

Rebbi Abba understood all this from the following: “If he ate and drank in one forgetting he is liable only once.”

רִבִּי חִינְנָא שָׁמַע כּוּלְּהֹן מִיכָּא. לֹא אָכַלְתִּי בְאֹנִי אֶלָּא שָׁתִיתִי.

Rebbi Ḥinena understood all this from the following: I did not eat from it in my mourning, but I drank?

עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁאָמַר. שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל. וְשָׁתָה. אָמַר. שֶׁלֹּא אֶשְׁתֶּה. וְאָכַל. שְׁתִיָיה בִּכְלָל אֲכִילָה וְלֹא אֲכִילָה בִכְלָל שְׁתִיָיה.

So far if he said, that I shall not eat, but he drank. If he said, that I shall not drink, but he ate? Drinking is subsumed under eating but eating is not subsumed under drinking.