Study Shevuot folio 20B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
But according to Rava’s opinion, that association with an oath is not considered an oath, the baraita poses a difficulty, as it indicates that association with a vow is considered a vow; a corresponding rule should apply to an oath.
The Talmud answers: Rava could say to you: Resolve the difficulty posed by the baraita and say that the baraita teaches this: Which is the bond of a vow mentioned in the Torah? When is a bond, i.e., the acceptance of a prohibition on oneself, considered a vow? According to Rava, “bond” in the verse
What is the reason for Shmuel’s caveat? The verse states: “When a man vows a vow to YHWH” (Numbers 30:3). The redundancy in the phrase “vows a vow” teaches that when one associates a vow with another prohibition, it does not take effect unless he vows by associating it with an item forbidden by mean
The Talmud discusses the baraita: One who says: It is incumbent upon me that I will not eat meat and that I will not drink wine like on the day that his father died. The Talmud asks: Isn’t it obvious that he is prohibited from eating meat and drinking wine? Why does the baraita need to mention the
The Talmud comments: And R' Yoḥanan also holds in accordance with this opinion of Rava that a bond is not an association with an oath, but an oath itself, as when Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he reported that R' Yoḥanan says: If one says: By my clear utterance I will not eat of yours,