Gemara Clarity

Shevuos 22a

שבועות כ״ב ע״א

Shevuot 22a

Learn Shevuos 22a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Shevuos 22a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

How much eating breaks an oath or a קונם, רבי עקיבא's claim that a שבועה is unique, and when forbidden amounts combine

Overview

The גמרא continues the משנה about someone who swore 'I will not eat' and then ate a tiny amount. First it asks whether the חכמים' rule that eating needs a כזית settles רבא's question about eating dirt. It answers that the rule only covers real food. Then it tests רבי עקיבא's claim that a שבועה is unique as speech that brings a קרבן. It brings four challenges, a מגדף, a נזיר, הקדש and קונמות, and answers each one by defining his claim more sharply. רבא and רב פפא then limit the argument in the משנה: if the person spelled out 'any amount', or said 'I will not taste', or made a קונם, everyone agrees any amount counts. A ברייתא saying that קונמות combine challenges רב פפא. That leads to a discussion of when vows and oaths combine, רב פנחס's reason that oaths are different, and the reversal of רבי מאיר's words. Finally רבינא splits the cases between מלקות and a קרבן. The גמרא questions whether the רבנן hold there is מעילה with קונמות, and it begins quoting a ברייתא that continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

תִּיפְשׁוֹט דְּבָעֵי רָבָא:

Resolve that which Rava asked:

״שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אוֹכַל״ וְאָכַל עָפָר,

"An oath that I will not eat," and he ate dirt,

בְּכַמָּה?

for how much is he liable?

תִּפְשׁוֹט עַד דְּאִיכָּא כְּזַיִת!

Resolve it: not until there is an olive-bulk!

The steps (29)

  1. ProofCan the חכמים' words answer רבא's question about eating dirt?
  2. RejectionThe חכמים only meant real food
  3. ChallengeWhat about קונמות?
  4. Resolutionקונמות count as if he said 'any amount'
  5. Statementרבי עקיבא's reply: speech that brings a קרבן
  6. ChallengeBut a מגדף also speaks and brings a קרבן
  7. ResolutionSpeech that creates a prohibition versus speech that is a sin
  8. ChallengeBut a נזיר speaks, forbids, and brings a קרבן
  9. ResolutionA נזיר's קרבן comes to allow wine, not because of his words
  10. ChallengeWhat about consecrated property?
  11. ResolutionA שבועה forbids only to oneself, but הקדש forbids to everyone
  12. ChallengeWhat about קונמות?
  13. Resolutionרבי עקיבא holds there is no מעילה with קונמות
  14. StatementThe argument is only about a plain oath
  15. StatementThe argument is only about 'I will not eat', not 'I will not taste'
  16. ChallengeIsn't that obvious?
  17. ResolutionPeople sometimes say 'taste' when they mean 'eat'
  18. Statementרב פפא: The argument is only about oaths, not vows
  19. ChallengeChallenge: Why would vows need to combine?
  20. ResolutionAnswer: The vow mentioned eating
  21. ChallengeChallenge: Two separate vows should not combine
  22. ResolutionAnswer: One vow covering both items
  23. ChallengeChallenge: Then why don't oaths combine?
  24. Resolutionרב פנחס: Oaths are different because of separate חטאות
  25. ChallengeWhy would רבי מאיר say vows are like oaths?
  26. ResolutionReverse רבי מאיר's statement
  27. Resolutionמלקות for any amount, a קרבן only for a שוה פרוטה
  28. ChallengeDo the רבנן hold that מעילה applies to קונמות?
  29. Proofרבי מאיר: consecrated loaf versus loaf forbidden to me