פירוש על שבועות 5:3

שבועה באחרונה – You have nothing in my hand, nor you, nor you,” in an oath, and now there exists an oath for all of them, But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer nor according to Rabbi Eliezer nor according to Rabbi Shimon.

Introduction This mishnah distinguishes between cases where a person has taken one oath of deposit and cases where a person has taken more than one oath of deposit. Similar mishnayoth were taught in 4:5, and 3:2-3 with regards to the other types of oaths.

אפילו אמר חטה ושעורה וכוסמת – for Rabbi Meir held that a person who makes a claim [in court] of wheat from his fellow, a species of wheat is mentioned, and similarly barley, and similarly spelt, as it is written (Exodus 9:32): “but the wheat and the emmer (a kind of wheat) [were not hurt, for they ripen late].” For it is as if they made the claim of wheat and barley and spelt. But the Rabbis held that one grain/berry of wheat and of barley and of barley is mentioned. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

If five claimed from him, and said to him: “Give us the deposit that we have in your possession,” [and he replied:] “I swear that you have nothing in my possession,” he is liable only once. [If he said:] “I swear that you have nothing in my possession, nor you, nor you,” he is liable for each one. Rabbi Eliezer says: “Only if he says, ‘I swear’ at the end.” Rabbi Shimon says: “Only if he says, ‘I swear’ to each one.” In this scenario five people at the same time claim from one person an object that they say is in his possession. If he takes one oath denying that he has the object, he will be liable for one sacrifice, if the oath was false. There are three different opinions as to how he can make his statement into five different oaths and thereby be liable for each one. According to the first opinion each time he repeats “you” he is swearing a new oath, and will therefore be liable for another sacrifice. According to Rabbi Eliezer, in order to make all of the subsequent “you”s into new oaths, he must repeat the word “oath” at the end of the statement. If he does not it still counts as one oath. According to Rabbi Shimon he must repeat the word, “I swear” to each individual who makes a claim against him. If he does not it will count as one oath.

“Give me the deposit, loan, theft, and lost object that I have in your possession,” [and he replied], “I swear that you do not have these in my possession,” he is liable only once. “I swear that you do not have in my possession a deposit, a loan, a theft, and a lost object,” he is liable for each one. In this scenario a person claims four different categories of things from another person. These four are patterned after the language of the Leviticus 5:21. If the person responds with one oath of denial without specifying what he is denying, he will be liable for only one sacrifice. If he mentions all four things which he is denying, he will be obligated for four sacrifices.

“Give me the wheat, barley, and spelt that I have in your possession”, [and he replied], “I swear that you do not have these in my possession,” he is liable only once. “I swear that you do not have in my possession wheat, barley, and spelt,” he is liable for each one. Rabbi Meir said: “Even if he said, ‘... A grain of wheat, barley and spelt,’ he is liable for each one. This same rule applies if the claimant claims different types of the same item. Again, if he mentions each type individually, he is liable for multiple sacrifices. If he groups them together in one general statement, then he is liable for only one sacrifice. Rabbi Meir adds that even if he slightly changes the language of the claim, from plural to singular, he is still liable.

Questions for Further Thought:
• Why does the mishnah need to teach section three after having taught section two? In other words, why would you have thought that the case of wheat, barley and spelt was different from the case of deposit, loan, theft and lost object?