Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Shevuos 5:2 - 5:3

The Mishnah Yomi for Friday, February 28, 2025 is Shevuos 5:2 - 5:3

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Shevuos Perek 5 Mishnah 2

שבועות פרק ה׳ משנה ב׳

2
The mishna continues: What is the case of an oath on a deposit? It is where the claimant said to the defendant: Give me my deposit, which is in your possession, and the defendant replied: On my oath nothing of yours is in my possession; or the defendant said to him: Nothing of yours is in my possession, the claimant responded: I administer an oath to you, and the defendant said: Amen. In either case this defendant is liable to bring a guilt-offering if he lied. If the claimant administered an oath to him five times, whether in the presence of a court or not in the presence of a court, and the defendant falsely denied each claim, he is liable to bring a guilt-offering for each and every denial. Rabbi Shimon said: What is the reason? It is due to the fact that he is able to retract and confess after each oath and repay the claimant. Since he did not do so, each oath is considered a separate denial of a monetary claim.
שְׁבוּעַת הַפִּקָּדוֹן כֵּיצַד. אָמַר לוֹ, תֶּן לִי פִקְדוֹנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְיָדֶךָ, שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי, אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ אֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי, מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב. הִשְׁבִּיעַ עָלָיו חֲמִשָּׁה פְעָמִים, בֵּין בִּפְנֵי בֵית דִּין וּבֵין שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי בֵית דִּין, וְכָפַר, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מַה טַּעַם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיָּכוֹל לַחֲזֹר וּלְהוֹדוֹת:
ב׳

מפני שיכוך לחזור ולהודות – after denial, and it is found that in each oath, he denies the money.

מפני שיכול לחזור ולהודות. אחר כפירה. נמצא שבכל שבועה הוא כופר ממון:

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Shevuos Perek 5 Mishnah 3

שבועות פרק ה׳ משנה ג׳

3
If five people were suing him and they said to him: Give us back our deposit that is in your possession, and the defendant says: On my oath nothing of yours is in my possession, he is liable for only one false oath. But if he responds to each claimant: On my oath nothing of yours is in my possession, and nothing of yours, and nothing of yours, he is liable for his oath concerning each and every claim that he denied. Rabbi Eliezer says: He is not liable for his oath concerning each claim unless he says: On my oath, at the end of the denial, i.e., he says: Nothing of yours is in my possession, and nothing of yours, on my oath, so that it is clear that he is taking an oath to each one. Rabbi Shimon says: He is not liable for his oath concerning each claim unless he says: On my oath, to each and every claimant, i.e., he says: On my oath nothing of yours is in my possession, and on my oath nothing of yours, to each claimant separately. In a case where the claimant said: Give me back my deposit, and pledge, stolen item, and lost item that are in your possession, and the defendant responds: On my oath nothing of yours is in my possession, he is liable for only one false oath. But if he responds: On my oath I do not have in my possession your deposit, or pledge, stolen item, or lost item, he is liable for his oath concerning each and every claim. In a case where the claimant said: Give me back my wheat, and barley, and spelt that are in your possession, if the defendant responds: On my oath nothing of yours is in my possession, he is liable for only one false oath. But if he responds: On my oath I do not have in my possession your wheat, barley, or spelt, he is liable for his oath concerning each and every claim. Rabbi Meir says: Even if the defendant says: On my oath I do not have in my possession your grain of wheat, or grain of barley, or grain of spelt, he is liable for his oath concerning each and every claim.
הָיוּ חֲמִשָּׁה תוֹבְעִין אוֹתוֹ, אָמְרוּ לוֹ תֶּן לָנוּ פִקָּדוֹן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָנוּ בְיָדֶךָ, שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לָכֶם בְּיָדִי, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא אַחַת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי וְלֹא לְךָ וְלֹא לְךָ, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר שְׁבוּעָה בָאַחֲרוֹנָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר שְׁבוּעָה לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. תֶּן לִי פִקָּדוֹן וּתְשׂוּמֶת יָד גָּזֵל וַאֲבֵדָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְיָדֶךָ, שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא אַחַת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי פִקָּדוֹן וּתְשׂוּמֶת יָד וְגָזֵל וַאֲבֵדָה, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. תֶּן לִי חִטִּין וּשְׂעֹרִין וְכֻסְּמִין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְיָדֶךָ, שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי, אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא אַחַת. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בְיָדִי חִטִּין וּשְׂעֹרִין וְכֻסְּמִים, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ אָמַר חִטָּה וּשְׂעֹרָה וְכֻסֶּמֶת, חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת:
ג׳

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.

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.

שבועה באחרונה. אין לך בידי, ולא לך ולא לך בשבועה. והשתא קיימא שבועה אכולהו. ואין הלכה לא כרבי אליעזר ולא כר׳ שמעון:

אפילו אמר חטה ושעורה וכוסמת. דסבר ר׳ מאיר הטוען את חבירו חטה, מין חטה קאמר. וכן שעורה, וכן כוסמת, דכתיב (שמות ט׳:ל״ב) והחטה והכוסמת. והוי כאילו טענו חטין ושעורין וכוסמין. ורבנן סברי, גרגיר אחד של חטה ושל שעורה ושל כוסמת קאמר. ואין הלכה כרבי מאיר:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us