Parallel
שבועות 49
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
On all [oaths] we impose others, except on [the oath of] the hired labourer on which we do not impose others. R. Hisda said: To all we are not lenient, except a hired labourer to whom we are lenient. What is the difference between them? — There is this difference: [whether the court] find an opening for him [to impose another oath]. BUT THE SABBATICAL YEAR CANCELS THE OATH. Whence do we know this? — R. Giddal said that Rab said: Because Scripture says. And this is the word of the release: even a ‘word’ it releases. MISHNAH. THERE ARE FOUR GUARDIANS: AN UNPAID GUARDIAN, A BORROWER, A PAID GUARDIAN, AND A HIRER. AN UNPAID GUARDIAN TAKES AN OATH IN ALL CASES; A BORROWER PAYS IN ALL CASES; A PAID GUARDIAN AND A HIRER TAKE AN OATH IN THE CASE OF INJURY, CAPTURE, OR DEATH, BUT PAY FOR LOSS OR THEFT. IF HE [THE OWNER] SAID TO THE UNPAID GUARDIAN, WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘IT DIED,’ WHEREAS IT WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED], ‘IT WAS INJURED,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS CAPTURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS CAPTURED,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS STOLEN,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS LOST,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR STOLEN; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU,’ AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN’, HE IS EXEMPT. [IF THE OWNER SAID,] ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU SAY,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU,’ AND HE SAID, AMEN, HE IS EXEMPT. [IF THE OWNER SAID,] ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘IT WAS LOST’; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU’, AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN’; AND WITNESSES TESTIFIED AGAINST HIM THAT HE HAD CONSUMED IT, HE PAYS THE PRINCIPAL; IF HE CONFESSED HIMSELF, HE PAYS THE PRINCIPAL, FIFTH, AND GUILT-OFFERING. [IF THE OWNER SAID,] ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘IT WAS STOLEN;’ [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU, AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN;’ AND WITNESSES TESTIFIED AGAINST HIM THAT HE HIMSELF STOLE IT, HE PAYS DOUBLE; IF HE CONFESSED HIMSELF, HE PAYS THE PRINCIPAL, FIFTH, AND GUILT-OFFERING. IF A MAN SAID TO ONE IN THE STREET, ‘WHERE IS MY OX WHICH YOU HAVE STOLEN?’ AND HE REPLIED, ‘I DID NOT STEAL IT,’ AND WITNESSES TESTIFIED AGAINST HIM THAT HE DID STEAL IT, HE PAYS DOUBLE; IF HE KILLED IT OR SOLD IT, HE PAYS FOUR OR FIVE TIMES ITS VALUE. IF HE SAW WITNESSES COMING NEARER AND NEARER, AND HE SAID, I DID STEAL IT, BUT I DID NOT KILL OR SELL IT,’ HE PAYS ONLY THE PRINCIPAL. IF HE [THE OWNER] SAID TO THE BORROWER, ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM,
—
‘IT DIED,’ WHEREAS IT WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS INJURED,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS CAPTURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS CAPTURED, WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS STOLEN, WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS LOST, WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR STOLEN; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU,’ AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN,’ HE IS EXEMPT. [IF THE OWNER SAID,] ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU SAY,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED OR STOLEN OR LOST; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU,’ AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN,’ HE IS LIABLE. IF HE SAID TO A PAID GUARDIAN, OR HIRER. ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ AND HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘IT DIED,’ WHEREAS IT WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS INJURED,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS CAPTURED; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS CAPTURED,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS STOLEN, WHEREAS IT WAS LOST; [OR HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS LOST,’ WHEREAS IT WAS STOLEN; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU,’ AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN,’ HE IS EXEMPT. [IF HE REPLIED,] ‘IT DIED,’ OR, ‘IT WAS INJURED,’ OR, ‘IT WAS CAPTURED,’ WHEREAS IT WAS STOLEN OR LOST; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU.’ AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN,’ HE IS LIABLE. [IF HE REPLIED,] ‘IT WAS LOST,’ OR, ‘IT WAS STOLEN,’ WHEREAS IT DIED OR WAS INJURED OR CAPTURED; [AND THE OWNER SAID,] ‘I ADJURE YOU,’ AND HE SAID, ‘AMEN,’ HE IS EXEMPT. THIS IS THE PRINCIPLE: HE WHO [BY LYING] CHANGES FROM LIABILITY TO LIABILITY. OR FROM EXEMPTION TO EXEMPTION, OR FROM EXEMPTION TO LIABILITY, IS EXEMPT; FROM LIABILITY TO EXEMPTION, IS LIABLE. THIS IS THE PRINCIPLE: HE WHO TAKES AN OATH TO MAKE IT MORE LENIENT FOR HIMSELF, IS LIABLE; TO MAKE IT MORE STRINGENT FOR HIMSELF, IS EXEMPT. GEMARA. Who is the Tanna who holds that there are four guardians? — R. Nahman said that Rabbah b. Abbuha said: It is R. Meir. Said Raba to R. Nahman: Is there then a tanna who does not hold that there are four guardians! — He said to him: Thus I meant to say to you: Who is the tanna who holds that a hirer is like a paid guardian? Rabbah b. Abbuha said: It is R. Meir. But surely, we have heard that R. Meir holds the reverse [view], for we learnt: A hirer: how does he pay? R. Meir said: Like an unpaid guardian; R. Judah said: Like a paid guardian! — Rabbah b. Abbuha learned it reversed. Are they four? They are three! — R. Nahman b. Isaac said: There are four guardians, but their regulations are three. IF HE SAID TO AN UNPAID GUARDIAN, etc. ‘WHERE IS MY OX?’ etc. IF HE SAID TO ONE IN THE STREET, etc. IF HE SAID TO A GUARDIAN, etc. WHERE IS MY OX?’ HE REPLIED TO HIM, ‘I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU SAY,’ etc. Rab said: They are all exempt from the oath of guardians, but are liable in respect of the oath of utterance; and Samuel said: They are exempt also in respect of the oath of utterance. In what do they disagree? — Samuel holds it is not [possible of application] in the future; and Rab holds it is [possible of application] both negatively and positively. But they have already expressed their disagreement on this point once, for it was stated: ‘I swear that So-and-so threw a pebble into the sea,’ ‘I swear that he did not throw [a pebble into the sea]’; Rab says, he is liable, and Samuel says, he is exempt. Rab says, he is liable, because it is [applicable] negatively and positively; and Samuel says, he is exempt, because it is not [applicable] in the future! — It is necessary [for them to express their disagreement in the present instance too], for if they had told us [their disagreement] in that case, [we might have thought that] in that case Rab says [he is liable], because he swears of his own accord, but in this case, where the Court administer the oath to him, we might have thought that he agrees with Samuel; as R. Ammi said, for R. Ammi said: In any oath which the Judges administer there is no liability in respect of the oath of utterance. And if [their disagreement] had been stated in this case, [we might have thought that] in this case Samuel says [he is exempt]. but in that case we might have thought that he agrees with Rab, therefore it is necessary [for their disagreement to be stated in both cases]. [To turn to the main] text: R. Ammi said: In any oath which the Judges administer there is no liability in respect of the oath of utterance, for it is said: Or if any one swear, uttering with the lips — of his own accord; as Resh Lakish said, for Resh Lakish said: ki is translatable by four expressions: ‘if’, ‘perhaps’, ‘but’, ‘because’. R. Eleazar says: They are all exempt from the oath of guardians, but are liable in respect of the oath of utterance, except [in the case of the statement], ‘I DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU SAY, [made] by the borrower, and that of theft and loss, by the paid guardian and hirer, where they are liable, for they denied money.
—