Halakhah for Shevuot 39:2

מתניתין בשאין מסרבין בו לאכול ברייתא במסרבין בו לאכול וקאמר לא אכילנא ולא אכילנא דכי קא משתבע הכי קאמר שבועה שלא אוכל

Our Rabbis taught: Mibta is an oath; issar is an oath. What is the binding force of issar? If you say that issar is an oath, he is liable; and if not, he is exempt. If you say that issar is an oath! But you have just said that issar is an oath? Abaye said: Thus he means: Mibta is an oath; issar is tacked on to an oath. What is the binding force of issar? If you say, that which is tacked on to an oath is like a properly expressed oath, he is liable; and if not, he is exempt. And how do we know that mibta is an oath? Is it not because it is written: If any one swear, pronouncing with his lips. Then issar also [should be counted an oath], for it is written: Every vow and every oath of a bond? Then again, how do we know that issar has the force of being tacked on to an oath? Is it not because it is written: Or bound he,' soul by a bond with an oath? Then mibta also [should have the force of being tacked on to an oath], for it is written: Whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath. But, said Abaye: That mibta is an oath we deduce from this: And if she be married to a husband while her vows are upon her, or the utterance of her lips, wherewith she hath bound her soul: Now, oath is not mentioned; with what, then, did she bind herself? With mibta. Raba said: In reality, I can say to you, that which is tacked on to an oath is not like a properly expressed oath; and thus he [the Tanna] means: Mibta is an oath; issar is also an oath; and what is the binding force of issar? Scripture placed it between a vow and an oath [to teach us that] if he expressed it in the form of a vow, it is a vow; and if in the form of an oath, it is an oath. Where did [Scripture] place it [between a vow and an oath]? And if in her husband's house she vowed, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath. <br>

Sefer HaChinukh

And you may ask, "How is it that the one who makes a vow not to eat something that he is commanded about to eat, does not eat it - as behold, he is commanded about that thing with a positive commandment; and a positive commandment comes and pushes off the negative commandment of 'he shall not break.' As so did the Sages say in every place, 'a positive commandments comes and pushes off a negative commandment.'" The answer to you is that the vow is a positive commandment and there is [also] a negative commandment in it: the negative commandment is "he shall not break," and the positive commandment is "everything that comes out of his mouth he shall do." And from the reason that we gave [before] that his body is acted upon with an oath, they said (Shevuot 20a) [that] one that is added on with an oath [of someone else] is exempt [from it]; but with vows, he is obligated. How so? If he heard that his fellow made a vow and he said, "I am also like you," within the time of speech (immediately after it), behold this one is forbidden, since the intention of this one is to say, [just] like you are forbidden from this thing, so too will I be forbidden from it, and with this, it will be sufficient for him. But with an oath, wherein we picture the first one as if he acts upon his body with his words - as we have said - he has not removed something else away from his body; they, may their memory be blessed, did not see that this later one is included in this movement by saying, "I am also like you." [Rather,] he must speak out the expression of this movement with his actual mouth - for example, if he says, "I too swear like you"; or if he hears from the mouth of someone who moves him [specifically] to that thing, and he fulfills it and indicates that he wants this movement, like when another man says to him, "I put an oath upon you," and he answers, "Amen."

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse