Shevuos 27a

שבועות כ״ז ע״א

Shevuot 27a

Learn Shevuos 27a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Shevuos 27a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Oaths about a מצוה and the קרבן of שבועת ביטוי; proving that 'להרע או להיטיב' refers to optional matters

Overview

The משנה rules that if a person swears to refrain from a מצוה, or to do a מצוה, and then breaks the oath, he does not bring the קרבן for a שבועת ביטוי. רבי יהודה בן בתירא argues with a קל וחומר that an oath to do a מצוה should make him חייב, and the חכמים reject his argument. The גמרא brings a ברייתא that learns from 'להרע או להיטיב' that this קרבן applies only to optional (רשות) matters. So oaths about a מצוה are excluded. An oath to harm oneself counts, an oath to harm others does not, and an oath to do good for others counts. The גמרא then asks how we know the פסוק is about optional matters. A first proof from comparing 'harm' to 'good' is rejected. A second proof comes from the extra word 'או', which would be unnecessary if the פסוק were about מצוות. The גמרא asks whether 'או' is needed to separate the cases, and answers that no פסוק is needed for that. It then notes that this answer fits רבי יונתן but not רבי יאשיה, and it brings their מחלוקת about cursing a father and mother. The answer for רבי יאשיה continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (24)

1. StatementThe משנה's ruling on oaths about a מצוה
2. Proofרבי יהודה בן בתירא's קל וחומר
3. RejectionThe חכמים refute the קל וחומר
4. QuestionThe ברייתא raises a possible assumption
5. ResponseThe verse limits liability to optional matters
6. QuestionWhat if he swore to do a מצוה and did not do it?
7. ResponseAn oath to do a מצוה is excluded
8. QuestionWhat if he swore to harm himself and did not?
9. ResponseAn oath to harm oneself is included
10. QuestionWhat if he swore to harm others and did not?
11. ResponseAn oath to harm others is excluded
12. ResponseDoing good for others is included
13. ResponseAn example of harming others
14. ChallengeMaybe the פסוק is about מצוה matters
15. ResolutionHarm and good must match, so doing harm can't be about מצוות
16. ResolutionThe comparison also works in reverse
17. ChallengeThat argument would wreck optional matters too
18. ResolutionThe extra word 'או' proves it is about optional matters
19. ProofIn a מצוה reading, 'או' would be unnecessary
20. ChallengeMaybe 'or' is needed to separate the cases
21. ResolutionNo פסוק is needed to separate
22. ChallengeThat only works for רבי יונתן; what about רבי יאשיה?
23. ProofThe ברייתא: רבי יאשיה on cursing father and mother
24. Statementרבי יונתן: 'and' means both together and each alone