Jerusalem Talmud Shevuot 3.5

משנה: אֶחָד דְּבָרִים שֶׁל עַצְמוֹ וְאֶחָד דְּבָרִים שֶׁל אֲחֵרִים וְאֶחָד דְּבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן מַמָּשׁ וְאֶחָד דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם מַמָּשׁ. כֵּיצַד אָמַר שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁאֶתֵּן לְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי וְשֶׁלֹּא אֶתֵּן שֶׁנָּתַתִּי וְשֶׁלֹּא נָתַתִּי שֶׁאִישַׁן וְשֶׁלֹּא אִישַׁן שֶׁיָּשַׁנְתִּי וְשֶׁלֹּא יָשַׁנְתִּי. שֶׁאֶזְרוֹק צְרוֹר לַיָּם וְשֶׁלֹּא אֶזְרוֹק שֶׁזָּרַקְתִּי וְשֶׁלֹּא זָרַקְתִּי. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר אֵינוֹ חַיָיב אֶלָּא עַל הֶעָתִיד לָבוֹא שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב. אָמַר לוֹ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אִם כֵּן אֵין לִי אֶלָּא דְבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה. דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה מְנַיִין. אָמַר לוֹ מֵרִיבּוּי הַכָּתוּב. אָמַר לוֹ אִם רִיבּוּי הַכָּתוּב לְכָךְ רִיבּוּי הַכָּתוּב לְכָךְ:

MISHNAH: Whether matters of himself, or matters of others, or material matters, or immaterial matters. How is this? An oath that I shall give to X, or that I shall not give, that I gave, or that I did not give, that I shall sleep, or that I shall not sleep, that I slept, or that I did not sleep, that I shall throw a pebble into the sea, or that I shall not throw, that I threw, or that I did not throw. Rebbi Ismael said, he is liable only for the future, for it is said to cause evil or cause good. Rebbi Aqiba said to him, if it is so then this refers only to matters of causing evil or good; from where matters which do not refer to causing evil or good? He answered him, from the additional text of the verse. He answered, just as the additional text of the verse is for this, the additional text of the verse is for the other.

הלכה: עִולָּה הָיָה רוֹצֶה לְהוֹרוֹת לוֹ. אֶחָד דְּבָרִים שֶׁלְּעַצְמוֹ כול׳. רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁנָּתַן פְּלוֹנִי וּפְלוֹנִי מְנָה. וְנִמְצָא שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין בְּיָדוֹ לָבֹא אֵין בְּיָדוֹ לְשֶׁעָבַר. הָתִיב רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. הֲרֵי תְפִילִּין אֵין בָּהֶן לָבֹא וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶן לְשֶׁעָבַר. אָמַר לוֹ. תְּפִילִּין מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר בָּאוּ. לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב. מָה הֲטָבָה רְשׁוּת אַף הֲרָעָה רְשׁוּת. יָצָא דָבָר שֶׁהוּא שֶׁלְּאִיסּוּר וְדָבָר שֶׁהוּא שֶׁלְּהֵיתֵר. לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יְבַטֵּא פְּרָט לְקָטָן. הָאָדָם בִּשְׁבֻעָה פְּרָט לָאָנוּס. וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ פְּרָט לְמֵזִיד. וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ. וְנֶעֶלְמָה מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁבוּעָה. אוֹ יָכוֹל וְנֶעֱלַם מִמֶּנּוּ הַחֵפֶץ. בִּשְׁבֻעָה וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ. עַל הֶעֱלֵם שְׁבוּעָה חַיָיב וְאֵינוֹ חַיָיב עַל הֶעֱלֵם חֵפֶץ. וְתֵן הֶעֱלֵם חֵפֶץ עַל הֶעֱלֵם שְׁבוּעָה וִיהֵא חַיָיב. וְאֵין בֵּינֵיהֶן הֶעֱלֵם טוּמְאָה עַל הֶעֱלֵם מִקְדָּשׁ. וִיהֵא חַיָיב שְׁתַּיִם כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דְּאָמַר. חַיָיב עַל הֶעֱלֵם טוּמְאָה וְעַל הֶעֱלֵם מִקְדָּשׁ. תַּמָּן כָּתוּב וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁנֵי פְעָמִים. וְהָכָא כָתוּב וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ אַחַת. יָכוֹל הַנִּשְׁבַּע לְהָרַע לַאֲחֵרִים יְהֵא חַיָיב. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר. לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב. מָה הֲטָבָה רְשׁוּת אַף הֲרָעָה רְשׁוּת. אוֹצִיא נִשְׁבַּע לְהָרַע לָאֲחֵרִים שֶׁיְּהֵא פָטוּר. כְּהוּא דְמִישְׁתָּבַע דְּלָא מִיתַּן לְחַבְרֵיהּ מֵיכוּל. חַמְתֵּיהּ מְפַרְפֵּר וִיהַב לֵיהּ.

HALAKHAH: He wants to teach himself a pretext. “Whether matters of himself,” etc. Rebbi Abba in the name of Samuel: “An oath that X gave a mina to Y,” and it turns out that he did not give, since it was not in his power for the future, it is not in his power for the past. Rebbi Yose objected, about phylacteries there is nothing about the future but there is about the past! He told him, phylacteries came from another source. To cause evil or cause good; just as doing good is optional so doing bad is optional; this excludes anything involving a prohibition or anything involving a permission. Anything which one will blurt out, excluding a minor. A person in an oath, excluding a person not acting at his own will. And it will be forgotten by him, he will be oblivious of the oath. Or could I think that the object was forgotten by him? The verse says, in an oath and it was forgotten by him; he is liable for forgetting the oath; he is not liable for forgetting the object. Could one not add forgetting the object to forgetting the oath so that he should be liable? What is the difference between this and forgetting impurity and forgetting the Sanctuary so that he should be liable twice following Rebbi Ismael, who said forgetting impurity and forgetting the Sanctuary? There it is written it was forgotten by him, it was forgotten by him twice. Here it is written it was forgotten by him once. I could think that one who swears to the detriment of others should be liable: the verse says, to cause evil or cause good; just as doing good is optional so doing bad is optional. I shall exclude one who swears to the detriment of another that he should not be liable. For example, if one swears that he will not provide food for another. He saw him in convulsions and gave to him.

הֵיךְ רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דְּרִישׁ. אוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִשָּׁבַע לְבַטֵּא בִשְׂפָתַיִם כְּלָל. לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב פְּרָט. כְּלָל וּפְרָט אֵין בִּכְלָל אֶלָּא מַה שֶׁבִּפְרָט. וַהֲלֹא אֵין בִּפְרָט אֶלָּא דְבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה. אֶלָּא כֵינִי. לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב פְּרָט. לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יְבַטֵּא כְלָל. פְּרָט וּכְלָל וְהַכֹּל בִּכְלָל וְרִיבָה דְבָרִים שֶׁהֵן לְשֶׁעָבַר. אֶלָּא כֵינִי. אוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִשָּׁבַע לְבַטֵּא כְּלָל. לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב פְּרָט לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יְבַטֵּא חָזַר וְכָלַל. כְּלָל וּפְרָט וּכְלָל אֵי אַתָּה דָן אֶלָּא כְעֵין הַפְּרָט. מָה הַפְּרָט מְפוּרָשׁ דְּבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה. וּדְבָרִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה מְנַיִין. אָמַר לוֹ. מֵרִיבּוּי הַכָּתוּב. אָמַר לוֹ. אִם רִיבָּה הַכָּתוּב לְכָךְ רִיבָּה הַכָּתוּב לְכָךְ. לֵית יְכִיל דָּמַר רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. כָּךְ מֵשִׁיב רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֶת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. מָצִינוּ דְבָרִים שֶׁחַיָיבִין עַל זְדוֹנָן מִשֵׁם שְׁבוּעַת שֶׁקֶר וּבְהֶעֱלֵימָן מִשֵׁם שְׁבוּעַת בִּיטּוּי. וִיתֵיבִינֵיהּ. מָצִינוּ דָבָר שֶׁחַיָיבִין בִּזְדוֹנוֹ מִשֵׁם שְׁבוּעַת שֶׁקֶר וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְאִית לָךְ דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה וְלֵי נָן כְּתִיבִין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אַף עַל גַּב דְּאִית לִי דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה. לֵית אִינּוּן כְּתִיבִין אִין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם הֲרָעָה וַהֲטָבָה. הָא לְשֶׁעָבַר לֵית.

How does Rebbi Ismael explain the verse? Or a person, if he would swear blurting out with his lips, a general statement. To cause evil or cause good, a detail. A general statement followed by a detail; the general statement contains only what is in the detail. But the detail only contains matters of causing evil or good! But it is so: To cause evil or cause good, a detail. Anything which a person will blurt out, a general statement. A detail followed by a general statement, everything is included; this adds matters directed towards the past. But it is so: Or a person, if he would swear blurting out with his lips, a general statement. To cause evil or cause good, a detail. Anything which a person will blurt out, a general statement. A general statement followed by a detail followed by a general statement, you only argue in the pattern of the detail. Since the detail is explicit, matters of causing evil or good, from where matters not causing evil or good? “He answered him, from the additional text of the verse. He answered, just as the verse added for this, the verse added for the other.” You cannot, as Rebbi Hila said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: So did Rebbi Ismael answer Rebbi Aqiba. Do we find cases where one is liable for intentional action because of a false oath but if in oblivion because of a blurted oath? Could he not have objected, do we find cases where one is liable for intentional action because of a false oath and he has to bring a sacrifice? He said to him, do you agree that there are cases which are not matters of causing evil or good, even if they are not written? He told him, even though I accept cases which are not matters of causing evil or good, are they only written if they be matters of causing evil or good? Therefore never for the past.