Shevuos 29b

שבועות כ״ט ע״ב

Shevuot 29b

Learn Shevuos 29b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Shevuos 29b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

משה's oath, the flat-backed snake, the clashing oaths on one loaf, and a new משנה on who is bound by שבועת ביטוי and שבועת שוא, including שמואל's rule that answering אמן counts as swearing.

Overview

The amud opens by finishing an earlier point: משה tied the people's oath to his own mind and God's so that it could never be undone through הפרה. The גמרא then explains the משנה's 'snake like an olive-press beam' example of a שבועת שוא. שמואל says it means a snake whose back is flat, and no such snake exists. Next, for someone who swore to eat a loaf and then swore not to eat it, רבי ירמיה reads the משנה as saying that not eating makes him liable also for the שבועת ביטוי. A new משנה teaches that both שבועת ביטוי and שבועת שוא bind everyone, in or out of בית דין. Breaking either on purpose brings מלקות, but only a mistaken שבועת ביטוי brings a קרבן עולה ויורד. Both oaths count even when someone else says the oath and the person answers אמן. שמואל learns this from the סוטה, who answers 'אמן אמן,' and the גמרא supports him from sources that seem to clash until we split them by whether אמן was answered. The פרק שבועות שתים then closes with הדרן.

Opening lines

The steps (24)

1. ResolutionWhy משה tied the oath to his own mind and God's
2. StatementQuoting the משנה's example of the huge snake
3. ChallengeBut there was a giant snake in the days of שבור מלכא
4. Resolutionשמואל: the comparison is about flatness, not size
5. ChallengeBut all snakes are flat
6. ResolutionA snake whose back is flat
7. StatementQuoting the משנה about two clashing oaths on one loaf
8. ChallengeShouldn't he also be liable for the vain oath?
9. Resolutionרבי ירמיה fixes the reading: also liable for שבועת ביטוי
10. StatementNew משנה: who is bound by שבועת ביטוי and its punishments
11. Statementשבועת שוא: same people, but no קרבן for a mistake
12. StatementAnswering אמן to someone else's oath counts as swearing
13. StatementAnswering אמן counts like swearing yourself
14. Proofרב פפא brings support from a משנה
15. ProofThe ברייתא says they are liable even outside court
16. ChallengeThe two sources contradict each other
17. ResolutionOne case answered אמן, the other did not
18. ConclusionThe גמרא agrees
19. ProofOur משנה also hints at שמואל's rule
20. ChallengeThe end of the משנה seems to say the opposite
21. ResolutionThe difference is whether he answered אמן
22. QuestionSo what did שמואל add?
23. Responseשמואל was explaining the משנה's careful reading
24. Conclusionהדרן: Closing שבועות שתים