הלכות שבועות

There are four types of oaths [for which one may be liable]: sh'vuat bitui, sh'vuat shav, sh'vuat hapikadon, and sh'vuat ha'edut.
Sh'vuat bitui literally means "expression." I.e., this oath is taken expressing statements concerning the past or the future. See Chapters 4 and 5 where this subject is discussed in detail. is referred to in the Torah [by Leviticus 5:4]: "When a soul will take an oath, expressing with his lips, whether he will do harm or do good." [This category] subdivides into four groupings: two has both these forms is derived from the prooftext cited which states: "Whether he will do harm or do good." See Chapter 9, Halachah 18. [involving statements made] concerning the future and two [involving statements made] concerning the past. For example, he took an oath concerning a past event that it occurred or did not occur, or concerning a future event, that he will do it or that he will not do it.

[The concept of] a sh'vuat bitui applies with regard to deeds that a person could perform whether in the past or in the future.
What is implied? With regard to the past: "I ate," "I cast a stone into the sea," or "So-and-so spoke with so-and-so"; "I did not eat," "I did not cast a stone into the sea," or "So-and-so did not speak with so-and-so." With regard to the future: "I will eat" or "I will not eat," "I will..." or "I will not cast a stone into the sea." Thus there are two groupings concerning the past and two groupings concerning the future.

If a person takes an oath concerning one of these four categories and does the opposite, he has taken a false oath. For example, he took an oath not to eat and he ate, that he would eat and he did not eat, that he ate, when he did not or that he did not eat, when he had eaten. With regard to these matters, [Leviticus 19:12] states: "Do not swear falsely in My name." (negative commandment 61) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 227) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. If he willfully swears falsely, he is liable for lashes. 21a interprets that to mean that a person who takes an oath in vain is liable for lashes. See also Chapter 4, Halachot 20-21 for more factors concerning this concept. If he does so inadvertently, he must bring an adjustable guilt offering, as [ibid. 5:4] states: "And it became concealed from him and he did not know and became guilty."

[The prohibition against taking] a sh'vuat shav, an oath taken in vain, also subdivides into four categories: the first, a person took an oath concerning a known matter that was not true, e.g., he took an oath that a man was a woman, a woman was a man, that a marble pillar was gold, or concerning other similar factors.

The second: that one takes an oath on a known matter concerning which no one has a doubt, e.g., one took an oath that the sky was the sky, that a stone is a stone, on two [objects] that they are two, and the like. Even though there is no doubt about the matter for a person of sound mind, one takes an oath to strengthen [the appreciation of] the matter.

The third is one who takes an oath to nullify a mitzvah. What is implied? One took an oath not to wrap himself in tzitzit,, for a person is not obligated to wear a tallit by Scriptural Law (see Hilchot Tzitzit 3:11). Instead, the intent is to take an oath that he will wear a four-cornered garment and not put tzitzit on it. not to put on tefilin, not to dwell in a sukkah throughout the holiday of Sukkot, not to eat matzah on Pesach night, that he would fast on the Sabbaths and the festivals, 30:12; Hilchot Sh'vitat Yom Tov 6:17). or concerning other analogous instances.

The fourth - that one took an oath concerning a matter that he is unable to perform. What is implied? He took an oath that he would not sleep for three consecutive days and nights, he would not eat for seven consecutive days or concerning any analogous matter.
Whenever a person takes an oath in vain by taking one of these four types of oaths, he transgresses a negative commandment, (negative commandment 62) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 30) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. as [Exodus 20:7] states: "And you shall not take the name of God your Lord in vain." If he [takes the oath] willfully, he is liable for lashes. If he does so inadvertently, he is exempt entirely.

What is meant by a sh'vuat hapikadon, [an oath concerning an entrusted object]?. Nevertheless, as the Rambam continues to explain, the term has a broader halachic meaning in this context. The Radbaz explains that the mishnah uses the term sh'vuat hapikadon, because it is most common that such a claim will be made with regard to an entrusted object. Alternatively, because the prooftext (Leviticus 5:21 mentions an entrusted object first. See Chapters 7 and 8 where this subject is discussed in detail. [It applies] when a person has money belonging to a colleague in his possession - whether it be an entrusted article or a loan, he stole from him, withheld his wages, he found a loss object belonging to him and did not return it, or any similar situation. If his colleague claims the money that he has in his possession and he denies the claim, he violates a negative commandment, (negative commandment 248) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 225) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. as [Leviticus 19:11] states: "You shall not deny..."; this is a warning [not to] deny a monetary [claim]. One is not liable for lashes for this transgression. 18:2).
If one took a false oath with regard to the financial claim that he denied, he transgresses another negative commandment, 20b; Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 249)]. as [the above verse] continues: "A person may not lie to his colleague." (loc. cit.) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 226) include this prohibition among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah. This is a warning against swearing [falsely] when denying a financial [obligation].

What is a person's liability for taking a false sh'vuat hapikadon? He must pay the principle that he denied plus an additional fifth, he must pay 25 in restitution. and bring a definite guilt offering as a sacrifice. [This applies] whether he [transgressed] intentionally or unintentionally, as indicated by Leviticus 5:21-23 which] states: "And he will deny his [obligation to] a colleague concerning an entrusted object, a [financial] deposit, a robbery... when he will sin and become guilty." [The verse] does not say: "And it will become concealed from him,". indicating that one who transgresses willfully is liable just as [one who transgresses] inadvertently.

The above applies when the person willfully accepted the entrusted object or the money that he was obligated and knew about it at the time of the oath. If, however, he acted unintentionally, forgot that he had the money in his possession, therefore denied it and took an oath, and then discovered the matter, he is considered [to have transgressed because of] factors beyond his control and is not liable at all. Similarly, if the person did not know that it was forbidden to take a false oath in denial of a financial claim, he is considered [to have transgressed because of] factors beyond his control and is not liable.

If so, what is meant by acting inadvertently with regard to a sh'vuat hapikadon? For example, he forgot that one is liable to bring a sacrifice for [taking such a false oath], but knew that it was forbidden to do so and that he has the other person's money in his possession. This is considered the inadvertent transgression [of this prohibition]. Willful transgression is when he knows that he is liable to bring a sacrifice [because of the transgression].

What is meant by sh'vuat ha'edut? Witnesses know testimony associated with a monetary claim and the person affected by the testimony demanded that they testify on his behalf. The witnesses deny knowledge of testimony, do not testify, and take an oath that they do not know any testimony concerning him. This is referred to as a sh'vuat ha'edut. For taking a [false] oath of this nature, one is liable for an adjustable guilt offering, [This applies] whether he [transgressed] intentionally or unintentionally, as [indicated by Leviticus 5:1 which] states: "When a person will sin: If he heard a demand for an oath and he had witnessed...." [The verse] does not say: "And it will become concealed from him," indicating that one who transgresses willfully is liable just as [one who transgresses] inadvertently.

What is meant by acting inadvertently with regard to a sh'vuat ha'edut? For example, he forgot that one is liable to bring a sacrifice for [taking such a false oath], but knew that this oath was forbidden and that he would be swearing falsely. Willful transgression is when he knows that he is liable to bring a sacrifice [because of the transgression]. If he did not know that [taking such an oath] is forbidden or forgot the testimony and took an oath and later it was discovered that he knew testimony and took a false oath, he is considered [to have transgressed because of] forces beyond his control and he is not liable to bring a sacrifice.