R. Meir dit: Il y a des choses qui sont comme la terre et qui ne sont pas comme la terre; et les sages ne sont pas d'accord avec lui. Comment? (Si l'un dit :) "Je vous ai donné dix vignes chargées", et l'autre dit: "Ils ne sont que cinq", R. Meir demande un serment, et les sages disent: Tout ce qui est attaché au sol est comme le sol. [Les raisins en attente de récolte sont le point de différence entre les sages et R. Meir. Selon R. Meir, les raisins en attente de récolte sont considérés comme récoltés, et selon les sages, ils ne sont pas considérés comme récoltés. La halakha est conforme aux sages. Et ce, uniquement en ce qui concerne les observateurs (crevettes), mais en ce qui concerne l'achat et la vente et ona'ah (surfacturation), et admettre une partie de la réclamation—dans tous ceux-ci, ils soutiennent que ce qui attend la récolte est considéré comme récolté. Et c'est la halakha.] Un serment n'est prêté que sur quelque chose qui peut être mesuré ou pesé. Comment? (Si l'un dit :) "Je vous ai donné une maison pleine (de produits)", ou: "Je vous ai donné une bourse pleine (d'argent)", et l'autre dit: "Je ne sais pas, mais prenez ce que vous posé, "il est dispensé (de serment). Si l'un dit: «Jusqu'au ziz» [une poutre de l'étage supérieur faisant saillie de l'intérieur de la maison], et l'autre: «Jusqu'à la fenêtre», il est responsable. [La règle: on n'est jamais responsable d'un serment mandaté par la Torah à moins que la réclamation ne porte sur quelque chose qui peut être mesuré, pesé ou compté, et qu'il y ait admission d'une partie de la mesure, du poids ou du décompte.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
העבדים והשטרות והקרקעות וכו' – as it is written (Exodus 22:8): “In all charges of misappropriation” – generalization; “pertaining to an ox, an ass, a sheep a garment,” – specification; “or any other loss” - he has returned and made a generalization. If a generalization is followed by a specification and this in turn, by a generalization, one must be guided by what the specification implies. Just as the specification is explanation by something that is movable and its essence is monetary, so also everything that movable and its essence is monetary, excluding real estate which are not movable ,excluding slaves which were compared to real estate, excluding documents for even though they are movables, their essence is not financial. For all of these we don’t impose oaths upon a thing dedicated [to the Temple] we don’t take an oath, as it is written, (Exodus 22:6): “When a person gives [money or goods] to another [for safekeeping,” and not of something dedicated [to the Temple].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shevuot
Introduction
Mishnah five discusses cases where no oath is imposed because of the nature of the object in dispute.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
אין בהן תשלמי כפל – for in these, especially that we use an additional word for the purpose of intimating something not otherwise included (i.e., the widen the scope of a law), something like the specification as it is written in that portion (Exodus 22:8): “[he whom God declares guilty] shall pay double to his neighbor,” and not of something dedicated [to the Temple].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Shevuot
And these are the things for which no oath is imposed: slaves, bonds, lands, and dedicated objects. [The law of] paying double, or four or five times the value, does not apply to them. An unpaid guardian does not take an oath, and a paid guardian does not pay. Rabbi Shimon says: “For dedicated objects for which he is responsible an oath is imposed and for [dedicated objects] for which he is not responsible an oath is not imposed. A person does not have to take an oath over any of the objects that are listed in this section. This means that if Reuven claims that Shimon owes him slaves, bonds or land, and Shimon admits to part of the claim, he need not swear over the rest. The laws of paying double, or four of five times the value also do not apply to these things. These are the penalties for one who steals, or one who steals and then sells or slaughters that which he stole. If Reuven steals a bond from Shimon and then sells it, Reuven is only obligated to restore the value of the slave, but not the double payment. If Reuven steals a sheep that had been dedicated to the Temple, and then sells the sheep, he is not liable to pay back to the Temple four times the value of the sheep. The laws of guardianship also do not apply to these things. If an unpaid guardian is watching a slave, and the slave runs away, the unpaid guardian need not swear that he was not negligent. A paid guardian does not have to pay if, while watching one of these objects, it is stolen or lost. Rabbi Shimon distinguishes between dedicated objects for which a person is responsible and those for which he is not responsible. If a person says, “I dedicate this sheep to the Temple” and the sheep dies, he is not responsible to replace the sheep. Since this sheep is already considered Temple property, it is not subject to the laws of oaths and guardianship. If a person says, “I dedicate a sheep to the Temple” and he sets aside a sheep to bring to the Temple, and the sheep dies, he must replace the sheep with another sheep. Since the first sheep is still under his responsibility, and is therefore still his sheep, it is subject to the laws of oaths and guardianship.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
ולא תשלומי ארבעה וחמישה – for wherever that there is not’s double paymenr, he doesn’t pay four-times or five-times [the base amount], for since there isn’t double payment, the would have would have three-time or four-time [the base] payment, but the All-Merciful stated (Exodus 22:37): “[When a man steals an ox or a sheep, and slaughters it or sells it,] he shall pay five oxen for the ox, and four sheep for the sheep,” and not three or four-fold payment.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
שומר חנם אינו נשבע – the unpaid bailee only has upon him an oath, as it is written (Exodus 22:7): “the owner of the house shall depose before God that he has not laid hands [on the other’s property],” and the entire portion is stated concerning the unpaid bailee,. But he does not take an oath regarding slaves and real-estate and on documents, for we derive it from what is written (Exodus 22:6): “When a man gives…to another” – a generalization; “money or goods” – a specification; “”for safekeeping,”- he returns and makes a generalization; if a generalization is followed by a specification and this in turn, by a generalization, one must be guided by what the specification implies. Just as the specification is explained as something movable and its essence is money, even all things, etc., excluding real estate which are not movables, etc. But all of these that we stated regarding them, one does not take an oath, especially the oath of the Torah, but we require the oath of inducement.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Shevuot
נושא שכר אינו משלם – theft and loss which is written in it, to be liable, as it is written (Exodus 22:11): “But if [the animal] was stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner.” But slaves, and real estate and documents, he does not pay, as it is written regarding the paid bailee (Exodus 22:9): “When a man gives to another” – a generalization; “an ass, an ox, a sheep or any other animal” – a specification; “to guard” – he returns and makes a generalization, etc., as we have stated above. The [term] רעהו/to another – is written with regard to an unpaid bailee and a paid bailee, that implies, “another person” and not dedicated [to the Temple], but the borrower and the renter (i.e., the other two bailees) are not mentioned here, to exlude from them slaves and real estate and documents and dedication [to the Temple], for a borrower does not belong with real estate and not with documents for the most part, and all the more so, renters do not belong with documents, and similarly, the borrower and renters do not belong with things dedicated [to the Temple] for it is forbidden to lend and to rent that which is dedicated [to the Temple].
