Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) EXEMPTIONS FFROM "SHEVU'AS HA'EDUS"

(a) (Mishnah): 'I impose an oath on you if you will not testify that Ploni promised to give me 200 Zuz, and did not give me' - they (the witnesses) are exempt (for even if this is true, Ploni need not give);

1. One is only liable for a claim of money that must be paid, similar to a deposit.

(b) 'I impose an oath on you that you will testify for me after you will see testimony' - they are exempt, for the oath preceded (seeing) the testimony.
(c) If he said in the synagogue 'I impose an oath on (all of) you, that if you will know testimony for me you will testify' - they are exempt, (for he did not specify the witnesses);
(d) 'I impose an oath on you, Ploni and Almoni, that if you will know testimony for me you will testify', and they heard testimony from another witness, or one of them was a relative or an invalid witness, they are exempt;
(e) Reuven (the claimant) sent his slave to ask the witnesses to testify, or the defendant made them swear - they are exempt, because Reuven did not ask them to testify.
(f) (Gemara - Beraisa): 'I impose an oath on you if you will not testify that Ploni promised to give me 200 Zuz, and did not give me' - one might have thought that they (the witnesses) are liable - "Secheta-Secheta" teaches that they are only liable for a case similar to Shevu'as ha'Pikadon, i.e. when there is a claim of money (that must be paid).
(g) (Beraisa): 'I impose an oath on you that you will testify for me after you will see testimony' - one might have thought that they are liable - "V'Sham'ah Kol Alah v'Hu Ed" - he must already be a witness at the time of the oath.
(h) (Mishnah): If he said in the synagogue 'I impose an oath on (all of) you...'
(i) (Shmuel): Even if there are witnesses among them, they are exempt.
(j) Objection: This is obvious!
(k) Answer: The Chidush is, even if they are right by him;

1. One might have thought, this is like specifying them - Shmuel teaches, this is not so.

(l) Support (Beraisa): He saw a throng of people and witnesses were among them, and said 'I impose an oath on you that you will testify for me if you know testimony'. One might have thought that they are liable - "V'Hu Ed" - he must specify the witnesses;

1. One might have thought, even if he said '(I impose an oath on) you that are standing here' they are exempt - "V'Hu Ed" - since he specified the witnesses, they are liable.

(m) (Mishnah): 'I impose an oath on you, Ploni and Almoni...'
(n) (Beraisa): 'I impose an oath on you, Ploni and Almoni, that if you will know testimony for me you will testify', and they heard testimony from another witness, or one of them was a relative or an invalid witness;

1. One might have thought, they are liable - "Im Lo Yagid v'Nasa Avono", the witnesses must be fitting to testify.

(o) (Mishnah): He sent his slave...
(p) (Beraisa): He sent his slave to ask the witnesses to testify, or the defendant made them swear - one might have thought that they are liable - "Im Lo Yagid v'Nasa Avono" teaches that they are exempt.
(q) Question: How does the verse teach this?
(r) Answer (R. Elazar): The word 'Lo' is written with an 'Aleph' *and* 'Vav', suggesting that we read it both ways, 'Im Lo Lo Yagid (if he will not tell *to* *him*)'.

(a) (Mishnah): 'I impose an oath on you', (or) 'I command you', 'I forbid you' - they are liable;
(b) If he made them swear by Heaven and earth, they are exempt;
(c) If he made them swear by any of the following, they are liable: 'Aleph-Dalet' (and 'Nun-Yud', the way we pronounce Hash-m's name'), 'Yud-Kei' (Rashi - Hash-m's four-letter name itself; Tosfos ha'Rosh - the first two letters of it), Shakai, Tzevakos, Chanun, Rachum, Erech Apayim, Rav Chesed, or any Kinuy (name that refers to Hash-m).
(d) R. Meir says, one who curses Hash-m or his parents with any of these names is liable (to death administered by Beis Din); Chachamim exempt him;
(e) One who curses himself or another person with any of these names transgresses a Lav;
(f) 'Hash-m should strike you (if you will not testify for me)' - this is the Alah (curse) the Torah refers to;
(g) R. Meir says, 'Hash-m should not strike you', or 'Hash-m should bless you', 'Hash-m should do good to you (if you will testify for me)' - they are liable; Chachamim exempt them.
(h) (Gemara) Question: What does the Mishnah mean 'I impose an oath on you...'?
(i) Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): 'I impose an oath on you - the oath mentioned in the Torah; 'I command you' - with the command mentioned in the Torah (by the Parshah of vows); 'I forbid you' - with the Isur mentioned in the Torah.
(j) Question (Abaye): But R. Chiya taught, 'Kovalchem (I put you in fetters)' - they are liable;

1. We do not find this language in the Torah!

(k) Answer #2 (Abaye): Rather, each of these languages ('I impose an oath, I command, I forbid, I put you in fetters') is with an oath (and Hash-m's name).

(a) (Mishnah)::With 'Aleph-Dalet', 'Yud-Kei', Shakai, Tzevakos, Chanun, Rachum, Erech Apayim, Rav Chesed...
(b) Inference: This teaches that Chanun and Rachum are names of Hash-m.
(c) Contradiction (Beraisa): Some names of Hash-m may be erased, other names that refer to Him may not;

1. The following may not be erased: Kel, Eloka, Elokim, Elokeichem, Echyeh Asher Echyeh, 'Aleph-Dalet', 'Yud-Kei', Shakai, and Tzevakos.
2. The following may be erased: ha'Gadol, ha'Gibor, ha'Nora, ha'Adir, ha'Chazak, ha'Amitz, ha'Izuz, Chanun, Rachum, Erech Apayim, and Rav Chesed!

(d) Answer (Abaye): In our Mishnah, he refers to the One Who is Chanun (gracious) or Rachum (merciful).

(e) Question (Rava): If so, when he made them swear by Heaven and earth, we should say, the Owner of Heaven and earth!
(f) Answer (Abaye): No - nothing else is called Chanun (or Rachum), so surely he means 'The One Who is Chanun (or Rachum)';

1. Regarding Heaven and earth, he made them swear by Heaven and earth themselves!

(g) (Beraisa): If one wanted to write 'Elokim', once he writes 'Aleph-Lamed', these letters are (themselves a name of Hash-m, they are) Kodesh, they may not be erased; the same applies to 'Yud-Kei' of Hash-m's name;

1. If he wrote 'Shin-Dalet' from Shakai, ('Aleph-Dalet' from Adon-i - R. Chananel's text puts this in the previous clause, it may not be erased), 'Tzadi-Beis' from Tzevakos, these letters may be erased;
2. R. Yosi says, the entire word 'Tzevakos' may be erased, for it is not a name of Hash-m, it refers to Yisrael - "Tziv'osai Es Ami Venei Yisrael".

(h) (Shmuel): The Halachah does not follow R. Yosi.
(i) (Beraisa): Any letters appended to Hash-m's name, whether before or after it, may be erased;

1. If 'Lamed', 'Beis', 'Vav', 'Mem', 'Shin', 'Hei', or 'Kaf' is prefixed to Hash-m's name, it may be erased.
2. The letters 'Nun-Vav', 'Hei-Mem', or 'Chaf-Mem' suffixed to 'Elokai' may be erased.
3. Others say, letters suffixed may not be erased, because Hash-m's name that precedes them makes them Kodesh.
4. (Rav Huna): The Halachah follows this latter opinion.

(j) All the occurrences of Hash-m's name ('Aleph-Dalet') written by Avraham are Kodesh, except for "Adonai Im Na Matzasi Chen b'Einecha" (he was addressing the man (really, angel) in the middle).
(k) Chanina ben Achi R. Yehoshua and R. Elazar ben Azaryah say, even this is Kodesh.

1. (Rav Yehudah): Hosting guests is greater than receiving the Divine Presence.
2. This is according to Chanina and R. Elazar. (Avraham was speaking to Hash-m, and stopped to host guests.).

(l) The occurrences of 'Adonai' written by Lot are Chol, only "Al Na (Hash-m)...Lehachayos Es Nafshi" is Kodesh;

1. He addressed Hash-m, Who can kill or keep alive.

(m) All the occurrences of Hash-m's name by Navos are Kodesh; those by Michah are Chol;

1. R. Eliezer says, the names 'Yud-Kei' by Michah are Kodesh, the names 'Aleph-Lamed' are not, except for "Beis ha'Elokim b'Shilo".
2. R. Eliezer says, all the occurrences of Hash-m's name written by the war against Binyamin are not Kodesh; R. Yehoshua says, they are Kodesh.
3. R. Eliezer: They cannot be Kodesh, had Hash-m promised Benei Yisrael victory, he would have fulfilled it (the first time)!
4. R. Yehoshua: Hash-m did not promise victory, for they did not ask about this, until the last time (then, He promised and fulfilled).

(n) Every 'Shlomo' in Shir ha'Shirim refers to Hash-m (the One to Whom is Shal-m), except for "Ha'Elef Lecha Shlomo" - Shlomo had 1000 servants;

1. "U'Masayim l'Noterim Es Piryo" - these are Chachamim.
2. Some say, also "Hine Mitaso Shel Shlomo" is Chol.
3. Question: Shmuel taught, a king that conscripts a sixth of the population for his work (Rashi; Tosfos - that kills a sixth of the world in optional wars; Rashba - that executes a sixth of his subjects) is not punished - "Ha'Elef Lecha Shlomo" (1000 for Hash-m) and "U'Masayim l'Noterim Es Piryo" (200 for the king);

i. This is not like either Tana (both agree that "Ha'Elef Lecha Shlomo" is Chol)!

4. Correction: Rather, some say, "Ha'Elef Lecha Shlomo" is Kodesh and "Hine Mitaso Shel Shlomo" is Chol;
5. Shmuel holds like this latter Tana.

(o) Every 'Malkiya' in Daniel is Chol, except for ('Melech' in) "Ant Malka, *Melech* Malkaya..."
(p) Some say, also the following is Kodesh - "Mari Chelma l'Sanach u'Fishrei l'Arach";

1. He could not refer to Nebuchadnetzar, who hated Yisrael, for then Daniel would have cursed Yisrael!
2. The first Tana holds that surely he also hated some Nochrim.

(a) (Mishnah): If he made them swear by any Kinuy of Hash-m, they are liable.
(b) Contradiction (Beraisa) It says (by Sotah) "l'Alah veli'Shevu'ah" - but it already says "Bi'Shvu'as ha'Alah"!

1. It is extra to make a Gezerah Shavah to teach about 'Alah' written by Shevu'as ha'Edus: just as the Alah of Sotah is a Shevu'ah with Hash-m's name, also that by Shevu'as ha'Edus.

(c) Resolution (Abaye): That Beraisa is R. Chanina bar Idi (and our Mishnah is Chachamim).

1. (Beraisa - R. Chanina bar Idi): The Torah commands to swear (Rashi - the oath of Shomerim; R. Chananel - the oath of Sotah) and not to swear (falsely); it commands to curse (a Sotah), and not to curse (Hash-m or people);

i. Just as we are commanded to swear and curse with Hash-m's name, we are commanded not to swear and curse with Hash-m's name.

(d) Question: How do Chachamim learn?

1. If they also learn the Gezerah Shavah, they should also require Hash-m's name!
2. If they do not learn the Gezerah Shavah, what is their source that Alah is an oath?

(e) Answer: (They do not learn the Gezerah Shavah,) they learn that Alah is an oath as follows.

1. (Beraisa): 'Alah' means oath, as it says regarding a Sotah "V'Hishbi'a... bi'Shvu'as ha'Alah".
2. Question: We cannot learn from there, there it says "*Shvu'as* ha'Alah'!
3. Answer: Rather, "V'Hishbi'a... bi'Shvu'as ha'Alah" teaches that Alah is with an oath;

i. "V'Sham'ah Kol Alah" teaches that (Rashi deletes the following from the text: 'Alah' written without Shevu'ah is like Alah with Shevu'ah, and) Shevu'ah without Alah like Shevu'ah with Alah.