Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE EXCEPTION

(a) (Rav Huna): We Megalgel from any mid'Rabanan oath, except that of a worker.
(b) (Rav Chisda): We are not lenient (rather, one can Megalgel) from any mid'Rabanan oath, except that of a worker.
(c) Question: What is the difference between these opinions?
(d) Answer: According to Rav Huna, we suggest to the claimant that he may Megalgel; according to Rav Chisda, we do not suggest it.
(e) (Mishnah): Shemitah cancels the obligation to swear (about a claim of money owed from before Shemitah).
(f) Question: What is the source of this?
(g) Answer (Rav Gidal): "V'Zeh Devar ha'Shemitah" - even Dibur (a obligation to swear) is cancelled.

2) "SHOMERIM" THAT SWORE FALSELY

(a) (Mishnah): There are four watchmen: a Shomer Chinam, a borrower, a Shomer Sachar, and a renter;

1. A Shomer Chinam swears about any Ones (broken, captured, died; lost or stolen), and he is exempt;
2. A borrower pays for any Ones to the deposit (except if it died while working, for which he is exempt);
3. A Shomer Sachar or a renter swears (and is exempt) if the deposit was broken, captured, or died; he must pay if it was lost or stolen.

(b) Reuven claimed his deposit from Shimon, a Shomer Chinam; Shimon said that it died (or that any other Ones happened); really, a different Ones occurred. Reuven imposed this oath on him and he answered Amen; Shimon is exempt (from the sacrifice of Shevu'as ha'Pikadon, because he did not deny money, he is exempt for any Ones);

1. If Shimon denied having ever received the deposit, and really he had received it but an Ones occurred, and he accepted an oath to back up his claim; Shimon is exempt (he did not deny money, he was exempt anyway);
2. If Shimon claimed that it was lost, and accepted an oath; and witnesses testify that Shimon really ate it, he only pays principal;

i. If Shimon confesses on his own, he pays principal, an added fifth, and brings an Asham.

3. If Shimon claimed that it was stolen, and accepted an oath; and witnesses testify that Shimon really ate it, he pays double;

i. If Shimon confesses on his own, he pays principal, an added fifth, and brings an Asham.

(c) Yehudah charged Levi 'You stole my ox!'; Shimon denied this; and witnesses testify that Shimon stole it, he pays double;

i. If witnesses further testify that he slaughtered or sold it, he pays four or five;
ii. If Levi saw witnesses coming to Beis Din, and (therefore) admitted to stealing it but denied slaughtering or selling it, (even so) he only pays principal.

(d) Reuven claimed his deposit from Shimon, a borrower; Shimon said that it died (or that any other Ones happened, so he is liable); really, a different Ones occurred. Shimon accepted an oath - he is exempt;

1. If Shimon denied having ever received the deposit, and really he had received it but an Ones occurred, and he accepted an oath; Shimon is liable.

(e) Reuven claimed his deposit from Shimon, a Shomer Sachar or renter; Shimon said that it died (or another full Ones occurred, i.e. it was broken or captured, so he is exempt); really, a different full Ones occurred;

1. Or, Shimon claimed a semi-Ones (it was lost or stolen, for which he is liable); really, the other semi-Ones occurred;
2. Shimon accepted an oath; he is exempt (for he did not try to deny money).

(f) If Shimon claimed a full Ones, (exempting himself), and really a semi-Ones occurred, and he accepted an oath, he is liable;
(g) If Shimon claimed a semi-Ones, (obligating himself), and really a full Ones occurred, and he accepted an oath, he is exempt.
(h) The general rule is: if by lying he remained liable (as he would be if he told the truth), or he remained exempt, or he obligated himself when he was really exempt, he is exempt for the oath;

1. If by lying he exempted himself when he was really liable, he is liable.

(i) The general rule is: if by lying he decreased his liability, he is liable; if he increased his liability, he is exempt.
(j) (Gemara) Question: Who is the Tana of the Mishnah, who says that there are four watchmen?
(k) Answer (Rav Nachman citing Rabah bar Avuha): R. Meir.
(l) Objection (Rava): All agree that there are four watchmen!
(m) Answer (Rav Nachman): I meant, R. Meir is the Tana who says that a renter is liable like a Shomer Sachar.
(n) Question: That is the opinion of R. Yehudah, not R. Meir!

1. (Beraisa - R. Meir): A renter is liable like a Shomer Chinam;
2. R. Yehudah says, he is liable like a Shomer Sachar.

(o) Answer: Rabah bar Avuha's text of that Beraisa switches the opinions.
(p) Question: Since a renter is liable like a Shomer Sachar, there are only three watchmen!
(q) Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): There are four kinds of watchmen, there are three laws of watchmen.

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven claimed from a Shomer Chinam...
(b) (Rav): Whenever the Mishnah says 'exempt', he is exempt from Shevu'as ha'Shomerim, he is liable for oath of Bituy;
(c) (Shmuel): He is exempt even from Bituy.
(d) Question: On what do they argue?
(e) Answer: Shmuel holds that since the oath does not apply to the future (e.g. to swear that it will be stolen), he is not liable for Bituy;
(f) Rav holds that since the oath applies in the positive and negative (e.g. it was not stolen), he is liable.
(g) Question: They already argued about this elsewhere!

1. (Rav): Reuven swore that Ploni threw (or did not throw) a stone into the river - he is liable, because the oath applies to the positive and negative;
2. (Shmuel): He is exempt, for it does not apply to the future (to swear that he will throw).

(h) They must argue in both cases.

1. If they only argued there, one might have thought that Rav obligates because Reuven himself decided to swear, but he admits that he is exempt if Beis Din forced him to swear, like R. Ami taught;

i. (R. Ami): One is never liable for Bituy for an oath Beis Din forced him to take.

2. If they only argued here, one might have thought that Shmuel exempts because Beis Din forced him to swear, but he admits that he is liable if he himself decided to swear.

(i) (R. Ami): One is never liable for Bituy for an oath Beis Din forced him to take - "*Ki* Sishava" - on his own volition.

1. (Reish Lakish): 'Ki' has four meanings: if, perhaps, rather, and because (here, it means if (he chooses to swear).

(j) (R. Elazar): In all cases, he is liable for oath of Bituy, except for when he is liable for Shevu'as ha'Shomerim, i.e. a borrower who denies having received the deposit, or a Shomer Sachar or renter who (falsely) claim that a full Ones occurred, for they denied money.