Yerushalmi Shevuot 3:8 ירושלמי שבועות ג׳:ח׳

MISHNAH: For an intentional vain oath one is liable to be flogged; if in error one is not liable. What is a vain oath¹¹⁶An oath which either is obviously false or one which he is forbidden to keep.? One swears to change what is known to man, about a stone pillar that it is of gold, a man that he is a woman, or a woman that she is a man. One swears about an impossibility, if I did not see a flying camel, if I did not see a snake like the beam of the olive press. If one said to witnesses come and testify for me, an oath that we shall not testify for you¹¹⁷This is sinful if they know testimony, Lev. 5:1.. One swears not to keep commandments: not to make a booth⁶⁸On the festival of Tabernacles, Lev.23:42. The argument is totally parallel to that of the preceding example., not to take the lulav¹¹⁸Mishnah Nedarim3:2., not to put on phylacteries¹¹⁹From here to the end of Halakhah 10, the text also is in Nedarim3:2 (נ), explained there in Notes 37–78.; these are vain oaths for which one is liable to be flogged if intentional, and free from prosecution of unintentional.

HALAKHAH: “For an intentional vain oath one is liable to be flogged,” etc. There¹¹⁸Mishnah Nedarim3:2., we have stated: “If I did not see on this road [crowds] like those who left Egypt.” ¹¹⁹From here to the end of Halakhah 10, the text also is in Nedarim3:2 (נ), explained there in Notes 37–78. Is it impossible that crowds like those who left Egypt went by? But we are dealing with one look. Was it not the case that when Diocletian¹²⁰In Nedarim: Julianus Caesar. This is the correct text since Diocletian never made war “there”, i. e., in Babylonia. went there, 1’200’000 [men] went with him? But we must be dealing with one look.

“If I did not see a snake like the beam of the olive press.” ¹²¹The text in Nedarim either is from another textual tradition or is rather corrupt. Did not the snake of king Sapor swallow camels and carts? When they wanted to kill it, they filled camel bags with straw and put glowing coals inside; it swallowed them and died. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, I saw the hide of a snake made over eight spaces between pillars¹²²Greek μεσοστύλιον “space between columns.”. Rebbi Samuel ben Jacob said, I saw the hide of a snake covering a state coach¹²³Latin carruca“travel coach”.. Samuel said, square. If square one could state even a small one¹²⁴In Samuel’s opinion a square snake is more wonderful than an oversized one since nothing in nature is square, as stated later in the text.. Rebbi Yudan the father of Rebbi Mattaniah said, so it is. It is the way of this Tanna to use only big words, as we have stated: “A flying camel.” Could he not have stated, “a flying rat”?

¹²⁵This paragraph in addition is from Ma`serot5:7, Notes 122–129. It was stated: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, there is nothing square from the six Days of Creation. Rebbi Berekhiah objected: Did we not state: “The body of baheret is like a square Cilician grit. The place for a grit is nine lentils. The space for a lentil is four hairwidths; in all 36 hairwidths.<sup>126</sup>Mishnah Nega`im6:1. Cf. Chapter 1, Note 4.” Rebbi (Yosna)¹²⁷For the otherwise unknown name יוסנה the other two sources read the well- attested name Bisna. said, that in itself says that there is no square. Why was it stated “squared”? That he should square it¹²⁸Determine its surface area, standard Euclidean terminology.. And כגעה¹²⁹The text in Ma`serot reads ננעה, in Nedarimכנעה. The latter probably is the correct text, “lice”.? It is full of knots. But there is the bunch of pila<sup>130</sup>A kind of spice, cf. Ma`serot Note 129. Possible Latin pila, among other meanings also “ball, globe” (E. G.).! It is round below. Some wanted to say, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said this only about creatures, There is square in foods, there is no square in creatures.

¹³¹If it can be shown that they committed perjury and were duly warned.“An oath that we do not know testimony for you;” they are flogged because of witnesses’ oath¹³²Rashba (Novellae on Tractate Ševuot, on 26b, in the edition by J. D. Ilan, Jerusalem 1993, col. 97, Note 145) declares this unintelligible since it contradicts Mishnah 4:2.. “An oath that we shall not testify for you;” they are flogged because of blurted oath¹³³Since by the first oath he became obligated to eat the loaf by biblical rules, the second oath has a similar status as an oath to violate a biblical commandment..

“An oath that I shall eat this loaf;” etc. ¹³³Since by the first oath he became obligated to eat the loaf by biblical rules, the second oath has a similar status as an oath to violate a biblical commandment.Vain and untruth both were said together, which is impossible for the ear to hear and the mouth to say. Its desecrator shall be put to death and on the Sabbath day two sheep¹³⁴Ex. 31:14, Num. 28:9. were said together. Do not wear ša`aṭnez, fringes you shall make for yourselves¹³⁵Deut. 22:11–12., both were said together. The nakedness of your brother’s wife and her brother-in-law shall come to her¹³⁶Lev. 18:16, Deut. 25:5. were said together. You shall not move property; any daughter inheriting real estate¹³⁷Num. 36:8–9. both were said together, which is impossible for the mouth to say and the ear to hear. And so it says, God spoke once, two I heard from this¹³⁸Ps. 62:12.. And it says, is not My word like fire, says the Eternal¹³⁹Jer. 23:29. The reference is to the end of the verse, and like a hammer splintering rock..

¹⁴⁰A corrupt copy of the text in Nedarim3:2, Notes 60–65. R. La (Ulla) is quoted in the Babli, 29a. A vain oath, if one swears to change what is known to men; a false oath if he swears to substitute. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: anything known to two persons is a (vain)¹⁴¹One has to exchange “vain” and “false” as in Nedarim. A vain oath is obviously vain, a false oath is materially false but may not generally be seen as such. oath, to three it is (false)¹⁴¹One has to exchange “vain” and “false” as in Nedarim. A vain oath is obviously vain, a false oath is materially false but may not generally be seen as such.. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If it is known to two persons and another one at the end of the world, it is a vain oath. What is the difference between them? If he was untrue before two [persons], threw it into the sea, and they had warned him because of a vain oath; in the opinion of R. Joḥanan he is not flogged, in the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar he is flogged. If they had warned him because of a false oath, in the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar he is flogged, in the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan he is not flogged¹⁴²With the Nedarim text, one has to switch “flogged” and “not flogged”.. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi¹⁴³With Nedarim read: Rav. Jehudah, even an egg¹⁴⁴Reading בֵּיצָה; it may not be a scribal error but a dialectal identification of ظ for ض. and a pearl. What means “even”? But, for example, an egg and a pearl.

¹⁴⁵Nedarim3:2 Notes 66–69, Tosephta Nedarim2:1, Babli Nedarim24b. It was stated: “Just as vows of exaggeration are permitted, so oaths of exaggeration are permitted.” But was it not stated: Vows of exaggeration are forbidden? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Pedat: Here about those who insist, there about those who do not insist. You may even say in both cases if they insist; here it is about one who intends that his oath should fall on his property, “an oath that my property [should be forbidden] to me.” Then his property is forbidden [to him]. But in matters of flogging, he cannot be flogged. Just as speeding-up vows are permitted, so speeding-up oaths are permitted. It is the same case; if he intends that his oath should fall on his property, “an oath that my property [should be forbidden] to me.” Then his property is forbidden [to him]. But in matters of flogging, he cannot be flogged.

Ḥizqiah said: he who swears that two are two is flogged for a vain oath. Rebbi Menahem¹⁴⁶In Nedarim: Ḥaggai. in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: He who saw rain falling and said Κύριε πόλυ βρέξον¹⁴⁷O Lord, make it rain a lot (Musaphia). The invocation of the Lord is considered a violation of the Third Commandment. It is possible to read the first word as a contraction Κῦρι. The statement shows that Κύριος was accepted as a Divine Name. is flogged for a vain oath. Rebbi Onias, Rebbi Jacob ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman: 24 city councils¹⁴⁸Greek βουλή. were in Judea and they all were destroyed because of true vain oaths, as it is written: For the vain did I hit your sons¹⁴⁹Jer.2:30..