## Shevuot Daf 45a

###### Shevuot 45a:1
[Shevuot 45a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:1)

אַחַת שְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת וְאַחַת שְׁבוּעַת הַפִּקָּדוֹן, וַאֲפִילּוּ שְׁבוּעַת שָׁוְא; הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן מְשַׂחֵק בְּקוּבְיָא, וּמַלְוֶה בְּרִבִּית, וּמַפְרִיחֵי יוֹנִים, וְסוֹחֲרֵי שְׁבִיעִית – שֶׁכְּנֶגְדּוֹ נִשְׁבָּע וְנוֹטֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One is considered suspect with regard to oaths if he has been found to have taken a false oath, **whether** it was **an oath of testimony, or whether** it was **an oath on a deposit, or even an oath** taken **in vain,** which is a less severe prohibition. There are also categories of people who by rabbinic decree are considered suspect with regard to oaths: If **one of** the litigants **was a dice player, or one who lends with interest, or** among **those who fly pigeons, or** among **the vendors of** produce of the **Sabbatical** Year, then the litigant **opposing him takes an oath and receives** payment of his claim.


###### Shevuot 45a:2
[Shevuot 45a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:2)

הָיוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן חֲשׁוּדִין – חָזְרָה הַשְּׁבוּעָה לִמְקוֹמָהּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: יַחְלוֹקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **both** litigants **were suspect, the oath returned to its place.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yosei,** and will be explained in the Gemara. **Rabbi Meir says:** Since neither can take an oath, **they divide** the disputed amount.


###### Shevuot 45a:3
[Shevuot 45a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:3)

וְהַחֶנְוָנִי עַל פִּנְקָסוֹ – כֵּיצַד? לֹא שֶׁיֹּאמַר לוֹ: ״כְּתוֹב עַל פִּנְקָסִי שֶׁאַתָּה חַיָּיב לִי מָאתַיִם זוּז״, אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר לוֹ: ״תֵּן לִבְנִי סָאתַיִם חִטִּין״, ״תֵּן לְפוֹעֲלַי (סלע) [בְּסֶלַע] מָעוֹת״. הוּא אוֹמֵר ״נָתַתִּי״, וְהֵן אוֹמְרִים ״לֹא נָטַלְנוּ״ – הוּא נִשְׁבָּע וְנוֹטֵל, וְהֵן נִשְׁבָּעִין וְנוֹטְלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And how** does this *halakha* apply to **the storekeeper** relying **on his ledger?** This ruling is **not** referring to the case **where** a storekeeper **says to** a customer: **It is written in my ledger that you owe me two hundred dinars. Rather,** it is referring to a case where a customer **says to** a storekeeper: **Give my son two *se’a* of wheat,** or: **Give my laborers a *sela*** in small **coins.** And later the storekeeper **says: I gave** it to them; **but they say: We did not receive** it. In such a case, where the father or employer admits that he gave those instructions and it is also recorded in the storekeeper’s ledger, the storekeeper **takes an oath** that he gave the son the wheat or paid the laborers, **and he receives** compensation from the father or employer; **and** the laborers **take an oath** that they were not paid **and receive** their wages from the employer.


###### Shevuot 45a:4
[Shevuot 45a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:4)

אָמַר בֶּן נַנָּס: כֵּיצַד אֵלּוּ וְאֵלּוּ בָּאִין לִידֵי שְׁבוּעַת שָׁוְא? אֶלָּא הוּא נוֹטֵל שֶׁלֹּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה, וְהֵן נוֹטְלִין שֶׁלֹּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ben Nannas said: How** is it that both **these and those come to** take **an oath in vain?** One of them is certainly lying. **Rather,** the storekeeper **receives** his compensation **without** taking **an oath, and** the laborers **receive** their wages **without** taking **an oath.**


###### Shevuot 45a:5
[Shevuot 45a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:5)

אָמַר לַחֶנְוָנִי: ״תֵּן לִי בְּדִינָר פֵּירוֹת״, וְנָתַן לוֹ; אָמַר לוֹ: ״תֵּן לִי אוֹתוֹ דִּינָר״, אָמַר לוֹ: ״נְתַתִּיו לָךְ וּנְתַתּוֹ בְּאוּנְפָּלִי״ – יִשָּׁבַע בַּעַל הַבַּיִת שֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ אֶת הַדִּינָר. אָמַר לוֹ: ״תֵּן לִי אֶת הַפֵּירוֹת״, אָמַר לוֹ: ״נְתַתִּים לָךְ וְהוֹלַכְתִּים לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתְךָ״ – יִשָּׁבַע חֶנְוָנִי. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כׇּל שֶׁהַפֵּירוֹת בְּיָדוֹ – יָדוֹ עַל הָעֶלְיוֹנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ If one **said to a storekeeper: Give me produce** valued **at a dinar, and he gave him** the produce. And later the storekeeper **said to him: Give me that dinar** you owe me, and the customer **said to him: I gave it to you, and you put it in** your **wallet [*be’unpali*], the customer shall take an oath that he gave him the dinar.** If, after he gave the storekeeper the money, the customer **said to him: Give me the produce,** and the storekeeper **said to him: I gave it to you and you transported it to your house, the storekeeper shall take an oath** that he has already filled the order, and he is exempt from supplying the produce. **Rabbi Yehuda says: Whoever has the produce in his possession has the advantage,** and his claim is accepted without his taking an oath.


###### Shevuot 45a:6
[Shevuot 45a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:6)

אָמַר לַשּׁוּלְחָנִי: ״תֵּן לִי בְּדִינָר מָעוֹת״, וְנָתַן לוֹ; אָמַר לוֹ: ״תֵּן לִי אֶת הַדִּינָר״, אָמַר לוֹ: ״נָתַתִּי לְךָ וּנְתַתּוֹ בְּאוּנְפָּלִי״ – יִשָּׁבַע בַּעַל הַבַּיִת. נָתַן לוֹ אֶת הַדִּינָר; אָמַר לוֹ: ״תֵּן לִי אֶת הַמָּעוֹת״, אָמַר לוֹ: ״נְתַתִּים לָךְ וְהִשְׁלַכְתָּ לְתוֹךְ כִּיסְךָ״ – יִשָּׁבַע שׁוּלְחָנִי. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵין דֶּרֶךְ שׁוּלְחָנִי לִיתֵּן אִיסָּר עַד שֶׁיִּטּוֹל דִּינָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, if one **said to a money changer: Give me** small **coins** valued **at a dinar, and he gave him** the coins, and subsequently the money changer **said to him: Give me the dinar,** and the customer **said to him: I gave it to you, and you put it in your wallet; the customer shall take an oath** that he paid. If the customer **gave** the money changer **the dinar,** and then **said to him: Give me the coins,** and the money changer **said to him: I gave them to you and you cast them into your purse, the money changer shall take an oath. Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not a money changer’s way to give** even **an *issar* until he receives a dinar.** Therefore, the fact that the customer received the coins indicates that the money changer already received his payment.


###### Shevuot 45a:7
[Shevuot 45a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:7)

כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאָמְרוּ: הַפּוֹגֶמֶת כְּתוּבָּתָהּ – לֹא תִּפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה; וְעֵד אֶחָד מְעִידָהּ שֶׁהִיא פְּרוּעָה – לֹא תִּפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה; מִנְּכָסִים מְשׁוּעְבָּדִים וּמִנִּכְסֵי יְתוֹמִים – לֹא תִּפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה; וְהַנִּפְרַעַת שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו – לֹא תִּפָּרַע אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה. וְכֵן הַיְּתוֹמִים – לֹא יִפָּרְעוּ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ These cases of taking an oath are **just like** other cases where the Sages **said** that one takes an oath and receives payment. The mishna (see *Ketubot* 87a) teaches: A woman **who vitiates her marriage contract** by acknowledging receipt of partial payment **may collect** the remainder **only by** taking **an oath; or** if **one witness testifies that** her marriage contract **has been paid, she may collect** it **only by** taking **an oath. She may collect** it **from liened property** that has been sold to a third party, **or from the property of orphans, only by** taking **an oath, and** a woman **who collects** it from her husband’s property **when not in his presence may collect** it **only by** taking **an oath. And likewise, orphans may collect** a loan **with** a promissory note inherited from their father **only by** taking **an oath.**


###### Shevuot 45a:8
[Shevuot 45a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:8)

״שְׁבוּעָה שֶׁלֹּא פְּקָדַנוּ אַבָּא, וְלָא אָמַר לָנוּ אַבָּא, שֶׁלֹּא מָצִינוּ בֵּין שְׁטָרוֹתָיו שֶׁל אַבָּא שֶׁשְּׁטָר זֶה פָּרוּעַ״. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ נוֹלַד הַבֵּן לְאַחַר מִיתַת הָאָב – הֲרֵי זֶה נִשְׁבָּע וְנוֹטֵל. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: אִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁאָמַר הָאָב בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָתוֹ: ״שְׁטָר זֶה אֵינוֹ פָּרוּעַ״ – הוּא נוֹטֵל שֶׁלֹּא בִּשְׁבוּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Orphans who wish to collect payment of money owed to their father must take the following oath: On our **oath our father did not direct us** on his deathbed not to collect with this promissory note, **and our father did not say to us** that this note was paid, and **we did not find among our father’s documents** a record showing **that this** promissory **note was paid.** After taking that oath, they may collect the money. **Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says: Even** if **the son was born after the father’s death, he** needs to **take an oath** in order to **receive** the money owed to his father. **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: If there are witnesses that the father said at the time of his death: This** promissory **note has not been paid,** the son **collects** the debt **without** having to take **an oath.**


###### Shevuot 45a:9
[Shevuot 45a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:9)

וְאֵלּוּ נִשְׁבָּעִין שֶׁלֹּא בְּטַעֲנָה: הַשּׁוּתָּפִין, וְהָאֲרִיסִין, וְהָאַפּוֹטְרוֹפִּין, וְהָאִשָּׁה הַנּוֹשֵׂאת וְהַנּוֹתֶנֶת בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת, וּבֶן הַבַּיִת. אָמַר לוֹ: ״מָה אַתָּה טוֹעֲנֵינִי?״ ״רְצוֹנִי שֶׁתִּשָּׁבַע לִי״ – חַיָּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **And these** people are sometimes required to **take an oath** that they do not owe anything even **when** there is **no** explicit **claim** against them: **Partners, sharecroppers, stewards [*apotropin*], a woman who does business from home,** where she manages the property of orphans, **and the member of the household** appointed to manage the household’s affairs. For example, in a case where one of these people **said to** one of the people whose property he or she manages: **What is your claim against me?** If the other replied: **It is** simply **my wish that you take an oath to me** that you have not taken anything of mine, the former is **liable** to take that oath.


###### Shevuot 45a:10
[Shevuot 45a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:10)

חָלְקוּ הַשּׁוּתָּפִין וְהָאֲרִיסִין – אֵין יָכוֹל לְהַשְׁבִּיעוֹ. (נתגלגל) [נִתְגַּלְגְּלָה] לוֹ שְׁבוּעָה מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר – מְגַלְגְּלִין עָלָיו אֶת הַכֹּל. וְהַשְּׁבִיעִית מְשַׁמֶּטֶת אֶת הַשְּׁבוּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Once **the partners or the sharecroppers have divided** the common property, each taking his share, then one side **may not require an oath of** the other absent a definite claim. But if **an oath was imposed upon him due to some other situation, that oath can be extended** to impose **upon him any** other oath, i.e., it can be extended to apply to any other of their disputes. The mishna adds: **And the Sabbatical** Year **abrogates the** obligation to take **an oath** about a debt, just like it abrogates a debt.


###### Shevuot 45a:11
[Shevuot 45a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:11)

**גְּמָ׳** כׇּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה נִשְׁבָּעִין וְלֹא מְשַׁלְּמִין. מְנָלַן? דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״וְלָקַח בְּעָלָיו וְלֹא יְשַׁלֵּם״ – מִי שֶׁעָלָיו לְשַׁלֵּם, לוֹ שְׁבוּעָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches: **All** those **who take an oath that** is legislated **by the Torah take an oath and do not pay.** The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive that oaths mandated by Torah law serve only to exempt one from payment? We derive it from the fact **that the verse states:** “The oath of the Lord shall be between them both, to see whether he has not put his hand on his neighbor’s goods; **and its owner shall accept it, and he shall not make restitution”** (Exodus 22:10). According to the verse, with regard to **he who would** otherwise **need to pay,** it is **on him** that the obligation to take the **oath** is imposed.


###### Shevuot 45a:12
[Shevuot 45a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:12)

וְאֵלּוּ נִשְׁבָּעִין וְנוֹטְלִין כּוּ׳. מַאי שְׁנָא שָׂכִיר דְּתַקִּינוּ לֵיה רַבָּנַן דְּמִשְׁתְּבַע וְשָׁקֵיל? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת שָׁנוּ כָּאן. הֲלָכוֹת? הָנֵי הִלְכְתָא נִינְהוּ?! אֶלָּא אֵימָא: תַּקָּנוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת שָׁנוּ כָּאן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And these** litigants **take an oath and receive** possession of the disputed funds or property, and it lists a hired worker in that category. The Gemara asks: **What is different** about **a hired worker that the Sages instituted for him that he take an oath and receive** his wages? **Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said: Great *halakhot* were taught here.** The Gemara asks: ***Halakhot*? Are these** oaths actually ***halakhot*** transmitted to Moses from Sinai, as is usually indicated by the use of the term *halakhot*? They are instituted by rabbinic law. **Rather, say: Great ordinances were taught here.**


###### Shevuot 45a:13
[Shevuot 45a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:13)

גְּדוֹלוֹת – מִכְּלָל דְּאִיכָּא קְטַנּוֹת?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Since these ordinances are called **great,** can one conclude **by inference that there are** also **minor** ordinances? Are there rabbinic ordinances that are less important?


###### Shevuot 45a:14
[Shevuot 45a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:14)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: תַּקָּנוֹת קְבוּעוֹת שָׁנוּ כָּאן – עַקְרוּהָ רַבָּנַן לִשְׁבוּעָה מִבַּעַל הַבַּיִת, וְשַׁדְיוּהָ אַשָּׂכִיר; מִשּׁוּם כְּדֵי חַיָּיו. מִשּׁוּם כְּדֵי חַיָּיו דְּשָׂכִיר – קָנְסִינַן לֵיהּ לְבַעַל הַבַּיִת?! בַּעַל הַבַּיִת גּוּפֵיהּ נִיחָא לֵיהּ דְּמִשְׁתְּבַע שָׂכִיר וְשָׁקֵיל, כִּי הֵיכִי (דְּאִיתַּגְרוּן) [דְּלִיתַּגְרוּן] לֵיהּ פּוֹעֲלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rav Naḥman says** that **Shmuel says: Permanent ordinances were taught here; the Sages uprooted the oath from the employer and imposed it upon the hired worker due to** the fact that his wages are **his livelihood.** The Gemara asks: **Due to** the need to protect **the hired worker’s livelihood, do we penalize the employer** by leaving him vulnerable to a dishonest worker? The Gemara answers: **The employer himself is amenable to the hired worker taking an oath and collecting** his wages, **so that laborers will accept employment from him.** If the workers are not protected in this manner, they will be wary of accepting work.


###### Shevuot 45a:15
[Shevuot 45a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:15)

אַדְּרַבָּה, שָׂכִיר נִיחָא לֵיהּ דִּלְשְׁתְּבַע בַּעַל הַבַּיִת, וְנִפְקַע, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלֵיגְרֵיהּ בַּעַל הַבַּיִת! בַּעַל הַבַּיִת עַל כּוּרְחֵיהּ אָגַר. שָׂכִיר נָמֵי עַל כּוּרְחֵיהּ מִיתְּגַר! אֶלָּא בַּעַל הַבַּיִת טָרוּד בְּפוֹעֲלָיו הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **On the contrary, isn’t** it **preferable for the hired worker that** in the case of a dispute between them **the employer takes the oath and is released** from payment? He would agree to this arrangement **in order** to create conditions in **which the employer will** readily **hire him.** If employers are exposed to the risk of being cheated by dishonest workers, they will be wary of hiring. The Gemara answers: **The employer perforce hires** workers, since he needs the work done. The Gemara asks: Doesn’t **the hired worker also perforce accept employment,** since he needs it for his livelihood? **Rather,** the reason the worker takes the oath is that **the employer is distracted with** managing **his laborers,** so it is reasonable to assume that he forgot to pay.


###### Shevuot 45a:16
[Shevuot 45a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:16)

וְלִיתֵּב לֵיהּ בְּלָא שְׁבוּעָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **But** if it is presumed that the employer forgot to pay, **let him give** the wages to the worker **without** the worker taking **an oath.**


###### Shevuot 45a:17
[Shevuot 45a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shevuot/r/45a:17)

כְּדֵי לְהָפִיס דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת. וְלִיתֵּב לֵיהּ בְּעֵדִים! טְרִיחָא לֵיהּ מִילְּתָא. וְלִיתֵּב לֵיהּ מֵעִיקָּרָא! שְׁנֵיהֶן רוֹצִין בְּהַקָּפָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: The oath was instituted **to alleviate the concerns of the employer,** to ensure him that he is not being cheated. **And** why did the Sages not institute that the employer **should give** the worker his wages **in** the presence of **witnesses** so that it could readily be established whether he was paid? The Gemara answers: Finding witnesses whenever he pays wages would be **a burdensome matter for him. And** why did the Sages not institute that the employer **should give him** his wages **at the outset,** when he hires him, so there would be no need for an oath? The Gemara answers: **They both want** the work to be done **on credit,** i.e., before the wages are paid, as sometimes the employer has no money ready when he hires a worker, and the worker also prefers receiving his money at the end of the day.