Gemara Clarity

Shevuos 23b

שבועות כ״ג ע״ב

Shevuot 23b

Learn Shevuos 23b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Shevuos 23b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Separate oaths from naming several items, and how an oath can take effect on food the תורה already forbids

Overview

The גמרא finishes explaining why the משנה repeats 'פת' before each grain: the extra word shows he meant a separate oath for each kind of bread. It then asks why naming wine, oil, and honey makes him liable for each, since nothing there is extra. רב פפא says the drinks were in front of him, and the גמרא works through several shorter wordings until it reaches 'these and their types.' רב אחא בריה דרב איקא instead says a friend had pressed him to drink these drinks, so naming them was extra. The גמרא then quotes a משנה about a false שבועת הפקדון, together with רבי יוחנן's rule that the grains combine to a פרוטה and a dispute about whether a list also holds a general oath. רבא explains that this dispute cannot apply to our oath, because a person who is מושבע ועומד cannot take on a second oath. Finally, the גמרא resolves why inedible food makes him exempt while נבילות make him liable, and asks how an oath can take hold on food already forbidden from הר סיני. רב, שמואל and רבי יוחנן answer that he included permitted foods too, and ריש לקיש answers that it only works with a half-measure. The amud ends as ריש לקיש begins to explain why he does not accept the idea of איסור כולל here; his answer continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

וְדִלְמָא עַל יְדֵי תַּעֲרוֹבֶת?

But perhaps [it would mean bread made] from a mixture?

אֵימָא ״וְכֵן שֶׁל שְׂעוֹרִים

Let him say: 'And so of barley'

וְכֵן שֶׁל כּוּסְּמִין״;

'And so of spelt';

״פַּת״ ״פַּת״ לְמָה לִי?

Why do I need 'bread,' 'bread'?

The steps (24)

  1. RejectionWhy he could not just list the grains without saying bread each time
  2. ConclusionRepeating the word bread shows each grain is a separate oath
  3. StatementQuoting the משנה about an oath not to drink
  4. ChallengeIn the drinks case there is no extra word, so why separate liabilities?
  5. Resolutionרב פפא: the drinks were sitting in front of him
  6. ChallengeSaying 'these' might have forbidden only these specific drinks
  7. ResolutionHe could have said 'drinks like these'
  8. Challenge'Like these' could mean the amount
  9. ResolutionHe could have said 'from these types'
  10. Challenge'These types' might leave the cups themselves allowed
  11. ResolutionHe could have said 'these and their types'
  12. Resolutionרב אחא: a friend kept pressing him to drink
  13. StatementA related משנה about a false oath on a deposit
  14. Statementרבי יוחנן: the grains combine to reach a פרוטה
  15. Statementרב אחא and רבינא argue: is there also a general oath?
  16. QuestionHow does this apply to our case?
  17. Responseרבא: The deposit case cannot be compared to our oath
  18. ChallengeThe two halves of the משנה seem to contradict each other
  19. ResolutionFirst half is an unspecified oath, second half names the items
  20. ChallengeBut he is already sworn at הר סיני not to eat these
  21. ResolutionHe included permitted foods together with the forbidden ones
  22. Resolutionריש לקיש: it only works with a half-measure
  23. QuestionWhy does ריש לקיש not accept רבי יוחנן's answer?
  24. Responseריש לקיש begins to explain his reason