(Rava): If one swore not to eat a loaf, and ate from it; he can ask to permit it (and he will not have transgressed) only if he left over a k'Zayis.

Question (Rav Acha brei d'Rava): What is the case?

If he swore 'I will not eat', once he ate a k'Zayis, he already transgressed!

If he swore 'I will not eat it, even if less than a k'Zayis remains, he should be able to permit it!

Answer #1: He swore 'I will not eat.' Permitting the oath on the rest also retroactively uproots the entire oath, so he never transgressed.

Answer #2: He swore 'I will not eat it.' If less than a k'Zayis remains, this is not important enough to permit the oath. (Tosfos - because he already transgressed, leaving less than a k'Zayis is like eating it all.)

Question (Beraisa): If one accepted Nezirus two times, conducted 30 days of Nezirus, separated Korbanos, and asked to annul the first Nezirus, he fulfills the second Nezirus through the days he conducted (and can use the Korbanos for it). (This shows that one can permit a vow even after it no longer applies!)

Answer #1: The case is, he did not yet bring the Korban (so the first Nezirus was never finished).

Rejection (Beraisa): (He permits it even if) he already offered the Korbanos.

Answer #2: The case is, he did not yet shave;

The Beraisa is R. Eliezer, who says that Nezirus is not finished until he shaves.

Rejection (Beraisa): (He permits it even if) he already shaved.

Answer #3 (Rav Ashi): There, the first Nezirus prevents the second Nezirus from taking effect, so it is as if he never finished the first Nezirus, so he can permit it.

(Ameimar): Even if he ate the entire loaf, he can annul the oath (because the effects of the oath still apply):

If he ate b'Shogeg, he must bring a Korban;

If he ate b'Mezid, he must be lashed;

However, once he was tied down to be lashed (it is as if he already was lashed), he cannot annul it.

(Shmuel): If one was tied down to be lashed and fled from Beis Din, he is exempt (since he was already disgraced).

Rejection: No, there he is exempt because he suffered the disgrace of running from Beis Din. Ameimar discusses one who did not run (he was not disgraced, so he can still annul it).

(Rava): If one swore 'I will not eat this loaf (we shall call this the Isur loaf) if I eat this other loaf (the Tanai loaf)', and he ate both:

(Rashi, R. Tam - the oath should take effect when he eats the first loaf. If he did not remember that he swore about the loaf when he ate it, this is not "ha'Adam bi'Shvua'h", so the oath does not take effect. Tosfos - the oath should take effect when he eats the Tanai. If he did not remember the oath then, it does not take effect. Rashi, Tosfos - in the following, 'first' refers to the Tanai, and 'second' is the Isur; R. Tam - first and second refer to the order in which he ate them.)

If he ate the first b'Shogeg and (Rashi - then) the second b'Mezid, he is exempt (since he was unaware when the oath should take effect, it does not take effect).

If he ate the first b'Mezid and (Rashi - then) the second b'Shogeg, he must bring a Korban (the oath took effect, and he did not intend to transgress);

If he ate both b'Shogeg, he is exempt;

If he ate both b'Mezid, if he ate the Tanai first (and was warned just before eating the Isur), he is lashed;

R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue about when he ate the Isur first. (The warning he received was Safek, for if he would not eat the other loaf, he would not have transgressed);

Reish Lakish holds that Safek warning is considered warning, so he is lashed;

R. Yochanan holds that Safek warning is not considered warning, so he is exempt.

If he made each a Tanai for the other, i.e. 'I will not eat this loaf if I eat that one, and I will not eat that one if I eat this one', and he ate both;

If when he ate each loaf he remembered that it was an Isur loaf but forgot that it was a Tanai, he is exempt; (Tosfos - neither oath takes effect; Rashi - the oath forbidding the loaf he ate first takes effect, but since he knowingly and permissibly ate it, he does not bring a Korban; R. Tam - the oath forbidding the first loaf takes effect; the case is, he intended to transgress, therefore he does not bring a Korban);

If when he ate each he remembered that it was a Tanai but forgot that it was an Isur, he is liable (Tosfos - he brings a Korban for each oath; Rashi, R. Tam - he brings for the oath that forbade the loaf he ate last).

If he forgot the oaths when he ate each (neither oath takes effect), he is exempt;

If he remembered the oaths when he ate each (both oaths take effect), he is lashed for the second loaf he ate. R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue about whether he is lashed for the first loaf (like above, since the warning was Safek).

Support ((that an oath takes effect only if he is aware at the time) - Rav Mari - Mishnah): The following mistaken vows are permitted: (I forbid this to myself) if I ate or drank (today, and he forgot that he had done so);

(I forbid this to myself) if I will eat or drink (today, and he forgot this vow and ate or drank);

(Beraisa): Just like mistaken vows are permitted, also mistaken oaths.

Question (Avimi): If one said 'I swear that I did not eat, I swear that I did not eat' (and he had eaten), what is the law?

Answer #1 (Eifa): He brings only one Korban (the second oath does not take effect).

Rejection (and Answer #2 - Avimi): No. We say that a second oath does not take effect only regarding oaths for the future. Here, each is a false oath the moment he says it (he is liable for each).

Question (Avimi): If one said 'I swear that I will not eat nine figs, I swear that I will not eat ten figs' (and he ate ten), what is the law?

Answer #1 (Eifa): He brings two Korbanos (the second oath forbids eating a tenth, so it takes effect).

Rejection (and Answer #2 - Avimi): No. The first oath (not to eat nine) already forbids him from eating ten, so the latter oath does not take effect. Rather, he brings only one Korban.

Question (Avimi): If one said 'I swear that I will not eat ten figs, I swear that I will not eat nine figs' (and he ate ten), what is the law?

Answer #1 (Eifa): He brings only one Korban (the second oath is included in the first. It does not take effect.)

Rejection (and Answer #2 - Avimi): No, the first oath (not to eat ten) does not forbid eating nine, so the latter oath takes effect. Rather, he brings two Korbanos.