More Discussions for this daf
1. Hasra'as Safek 2. Shevu'ah and "Lav she'Ein Bah Ma'aseh" 3. Atonement
4. Hilchesa Kavasei... 5. Tosafos DH I Hachi 6. Tosfos DH Hasra'ah
7. Stam Mishnah Rule
DAF DISCUSSIONS - SHEVUOS 3

Elimelech Fischman asks:

In Shevuos 3b, Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish agree that one of the four oaths mentioned in the Mishnah is not punishable. The Gemara asks how R' Yochanan could argue with a Stam Mishnah. Why doesn't the Gemara ask this same question for Resh Lakish?

Elimelech Fischman, Brooklyn, NY

The Kollel replies:

Reb Elimelech, it is great to hear from you again!

The difference here is that it is only Rebbi Yochanan who said that the Halachah always follows a Stam Mishnah, as the Gemara reports here. We do not know if Resh Lakish agrees with the rule that the Halachah always follows a Stam Mishnah.

Therefore, since there is a Stam Mishnah that he gets Malkus if he takes an oath that he will eat but then did not eat, this indicates that Rebbi Yochanan must agree that he gets Malkus in such a scenario. However, this contradicts Rebbi Yochanan's opinion that one does not get Malkus for a Lav which does not involve an action.

The Gemara could not ask this question on Resh Lakish, because it may be that Resh Lakish maintains that if he took a Shevu'ah to eat and then did not eat, he would not get Malkus for this.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom