Talmud su Shevu'ot 3:1

שְׁבוּעוֹת שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁהֵן אַרְבַּע, שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֹכַל וְשֶׁלֹּא אֹכַל, שֶׁאָכַלְתִּי וְשֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתִּי. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אֹכַל וְאָכַל כָּל שֶׁהוּא, חַיָּב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, הֵיכָן מָצִינוּ בְּאוֹכֵל כָּל שֶׁהוּא שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב, שֶׁזֶּה חַיָּב. אָמַר לָהֶן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, וְכִי הֵיכָן מָצִינוּ בִּמְדַבֵּר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן, שֶׁזֶּה מְדַבֵּר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אֹכַל וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא אַחַת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא אֹכַל וְשֶׁלֹּא אֶשְׁתֶּה וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה, חַיָּב שְׁתָּיִם:

I giuramenti sono due, che sono quattro: giuro che mangerò o che non mangerò [Questi sono i due che sono esplicitamente scritti. Cioè. (Levitico 5: 4): "fare del male o fare del bene", implicando in futuro: non mangerò—"fare del male"; Io mangerò—"fare il bene".]; (Giuro) di aver mangiato o di non aver mangiato [Questi sono i due aggiuntivi derivati dai saggi.] "Giuro che non mangerò", e ha mangiato qualsiasi quantità, è responsabile. Queste sono le parole di R. Akiva. Gli hanno chiesto: dove troviamo che chi mangia qualsiasi importo è responsabile, che questo dovrebbe essere responsabile! Ha risposto: E dove troviamo che chi parla porta un'offerta [per rompere la sua parola] che questo dovrebbe parlare e portare un'offerta! [E poiché è a causa della violazione della sua parola (che è responsabile), anche questo sta infrangendo la sua parola. Perché quando uno dice "Non mangerò", intende qualsiasi importo.] "Giuro che non mangerò", e mangiò e bevve, è responsabile solo per uno (offerta). [Anche se bere è incluso nel mangiare, è responsabile solo per uno, perché è come se mangiasse e mangiasse di nuovo, in un atto di dimenticanza.] "Giuro che non mangerò e che non berrò, "e ha mangiato e bevuto, è responsabile per due. [Ciò costituisce due giuramenti. E anche se quando diceva "Non mangerò", anche il bere (anche lui) gli era proibito, bere era incluso nel mangiare, così che quando poi disse "Non mangerò", c'è motivo di dire che un giuramento fa non "prendere" un altro (dello stesso tipo), qui è diverso. Perché da quando ha detto per la prima volta "Non mangerò", e poi "Non berrò", si manifesta che per "mangiare" intendeva mangiare da solo.]

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Rebbi Mana understood it²⁵That the Sages and R. Jehudah do not agree about the weight of a person’s disclaimer as against two witnesses to his actions. from the following²⁶Mishnah Keritut 3:1.: “They told him, if he wishes, he says that he did it intentionally.” What can he say for an assigned slave girl²⁷Lev. 19:20–22, the case of a man sleeping with a slave girl assigned as a future wife to another free man. As long as the girl is not totally freed, she cannot marry the man to whom she is assigned. Therefore, her relations with another man are not adultery. A reparation offering is required from the man. This is one of the few cases in which a sacrifice is possible for deliberate sin.? In error²⁸If in the dark he thought that she was his wife., he is obligated; intentionally²⁹This is the case treated by the verse. If he denies the accusation by two witnesses, one cannot take his denial as assertion that he did it but already had remedied the situation., he is obligated! He can tell him, I touched her but did not finish³⁰This is a first explanation: A sacrifice is due only if there was an ejaculation of semen (v. 20). If he took the slave girl to bed but stopped before there was an ejaculation, no sacrifice is due., or as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, I was forced to it by the spell she put on me³¹He disclaims responsibility by reason of temporary insanity caused by the girl’s charms. This is enough to support his disclaimer against even two witnesses.. For a nazir³²Exposed to the impurity of the dead; the case of the Mishnah. what can you say? In error, he is obligated; intentionally, he is obligated; forced, he is obligated! “Suddenly”, to include in error, “suddenly”, to include intentionally³³This is proof that the nazir must bring his sacrifices even if forced. The reference is to Num. 6:9. In all other sources, Sifry Num. 28 [= Num. rabba 10(31)], Babli Keritut 9a, the inference is from the double expression “if a person should die near him suddenly,unexpectedly …” “Suddenly” is taken to refer to accidental impurity, “unexpectedly” to outside force (Sifry) or outside force and intention (Babli).. “There was a condition in my mind that if I should become impure, my nezirut should burst away from me and a new nezirut would fall on me”; in any case he was not obligated to be a nazir until now³⁴Since the vow of nezirut could have been formulated in a way that eliminates the possibility of a sacrifice for impurity, the testimony of the witnesses can be explained away.. (“There was a condition in my mind that if I should become impure, my nezirut should burst away from me and a new nezirut would fall on me”; in any case he was not obligated to be a nazir until now.)³⁵A case of dittography. What do you have in case of an oath³⁶If two witnesses tell a person that he owes a sacrifice because he has violated an oath imposed on him by other people (Lev. 5:1,4). How can he be believed if he denies the accusation?? In error, he is obligated; intentionally, he is obligated³⁷Mishnah Keritut 2:2.! A condition may apply to words³⁸If he undertakes anything, he may add conditions. If others (usually a court of law) impose an oath on him, he swears according to their understanding, rather than his own.; there is no condition for oaths! It follows what Rebbi Abba said, Rav Jehudah: For error, its sacrifice, for intention, its sacrifice. But if he said, I thought that this was no oath, he is free³⁹Here, there may be a case in which no sacrifice can be demanded if the interested party denies their obligation.. Therefore, all these subjects cannot be stated, but the following can be stated⁴⁰In all cases discussed so far, the Sages cannot disagree with R. Jehudah; that is possible only in the cases dealt with in the next paragraph..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Capitolo completo Versetto successivo