Shevuos Daf 3 חג השבועות דַף 3

The Gemara asks why מסכת שבועות follows מכות and explains that מכות ends with several cases of multiple malkus liabilities, such as cutting פיאות on both sides of the head, and five locations for malkus for destroying one’s beard. Therefore, the Tanna continued with שבועות, which begins similarly with שבועות שתים שהן ארבע – oaths are of two basic types that are actually four. The Tanna here listed all four types of “שתים שהן ארבע”, in contrast to the Mishnayos of שבת and נגעים, because since our Tanna already listed two of these (שבועות and ידיעות הטומאה), which are written near each other in the Torah, and both are liable to a korban עולה ויורד, it therefore listed all four together. Finally, the Gemara wonders why the Mishnah began its list with שבועות, yet first explains the details of ידיעות הטומאה. It answers: איידי דזוטרין מילייהו – since the laws [of ידיעות הטומאה] are relatively few, פסיק שרי להו – [the Tanna] quickly “cuts” them away and dispenses with them, והדר תני שבועות דנפישן מילייהו  - and afterwards teaches the laws of shevuos, which are numerous.

The Gemara explains the "שתים שהן ארבע" in each one of the Mishnah’s list. (1) שבועות: “two” refers to one who swears שאוכל ושלא אוכל – “I will eat,” or “I will not eat,” (and subsequently violates his shevuah) which are four, by adding one who (falsely) swears אכלתי ושלא אכלתי – “I ate,” or “I did not eat.” (2) ידיעות הטומאה – awarenesses of tumah: “two” refers to one who forgot about his tumah, leading him to eat kodashim or enter the Mikdash. These are actually four, by adding one who forgot that what he was eating was kodashim, or the area he was entering was the Mikdash. (3) יציאות שבת – transfers on Shabbos: “two” refers to הוצאה דעני והוצאה דבעל הבית – the taking out (from a רשות היחיד to aרשות הרבים ) by a poor man (taking the item from inside and bringing it out), and the taking out of a householder (and placing the item outside). These are actually four, by adding הכנסה – bringing inside from a רשות הרבים by these two parties. (4) מראות נגעים – appearances of tzaraas: “two” are the explicitly mentioned shades of שאת and בהרת, which are four when including each one’s תולדה – subsidiary shade.

The Gemara objects that the Mishnah does not agree with either Rebbe Akiva or Rebbe Yishmael. Rebbe Yishmael holds (on Daf 25a) that only a shevuah על העתיד לבוא – about the future (e.g., “I will eat”) obligates a korban, not shevuos about the past, and Rebbe Akiva holds (on Daf 14b) העלם מקדש – forgetting about the Mikdash (when entering while tamei) does not obligate a korban!?

The Gemara below answers that the Mishnah follows Rebbe Yishmael, because although he does not obligate a korban for false shevuos about the past, he does hold the person liable to malkus for an intentional transgression, and the Mishnah is referring to malkus. The Gemara asks that if one swears “I will eat,” and does not eat, לאו שאין בו מעשה הוא – it is a prohibition which has no action (since the violation is passive), and should not be liable to malkus!? The Gemara answers that Rebbe Yishmael holds לאו שאין בו מעשה לוקין עליו. Although Rebbe Yochanan ordinarily rules like anonymous Mishnayos, he does not rule like this one, because a later Mishnah (on Daf 27b) rules otherwise, indicating that Rebbe changed his mind. This interpretation is eventually rejected on the next Daf.