Study Shevuot folio 29B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אלא כי היכי דלא תהוי הפרה לשבועתייהו.
Rather, Moses administered the oath in this manner so that there would not be any possibility of the nullification of their oath. An oath taken with public consent cannot be dissolved. In this case, Moses and God constitute the public that gives its consent to the oath administered to the people. This was the reason for Moses’ insistence that the oath was taken according to his and God’s awareness; it was not because there was a possibility that the people could take the oath according to a private meaning.
ו״אם לא ראיתי נחש כקורת בית הבד״. ולא?! והא ההוא דהוה בשני שבור מלכא, הוה חד דאחזיק תליסר אורוותא תיבנא!
§ The Mishnah teaches with regard to an oath about a matter that is impossible, e.g., If I did not see a camel flying through the air, or: If I did not see a snake as large as the beam of the olive press. The Talmud asks: And are there no snakes that large? But wasn’t there a certain snake during the years of the reign of King Shapur, one snake that could contain, i.e., swallow, 13 stables of straw?
אמר שמואל: בטרוף. כולהו נמי מיטרף טריפין! בשגבו טרוף.
Shmuel said: The size of the snake is not the subject of the analogy. The oath is referring to a snake that was flat [taruf ] like the beam of an olive press. The Talmud asks: Aren’t they all flat? The Talmud explains: Snakes’ undersides are flat. This oath is referring to a snake whose back is flat.
״שבועה שאוכל ככר זו״, ״שבועה שלא אוכלנה״ כו׳. השתא משום שבועת ביטוי מיחייב, משום שבועת שוא לא מיחייב?! הרי יצתה שבועה לשוא!
§ The Mishnah teaches: If one said: On my oath I will eat this loaf, and later said: On my oath I will not eat it, the first oath is an oath on an utterance, and the second is an oath taken in vain. If he ate the loaf, he violated the prohibition against taking an oath in vain. If he did not eat it, he violated the prohibition against breaking an oath on an utterance. The Talmud asks: Now, if he did not eat it, he is liable because he violated his oath on an utterance. Is he not also liable for an oath taken in vain? An oath was issued in vain when he took the oath not to eat the loaf, as this required a violation of the oath he had taken to eat it.