Study Shevuot folio 27B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
unless the verse specifies that one is liable only if he curses both together. An example of a verse where the Torah specifies that the halakha applies only to the two elements in conjunction is: “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together” (Deuteronomy 22:10).
The Talmud continues: You may even say that the verse is referring to optional matters according to the opinion of R' Yoshiya. He holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva, who interprets the Torah using the hermeneutical principle of amplifications and restrictions (see 26a), and the word “
The Talmud explains how one derives that the oaths referred to in the verse are oaths about optional matters in accordance with R' Yoshiya, who interprets the verse in accordance with the principle of amplifications and restrictions: Granted, if you say that the verse about an oath on an utterance i
§ The Mishnah teaches: R' Yehuda ben Beteira said: What? If, with regard to an oath concerning an optional matter, for which one is not under oath from Mount Sinai, he is liable for breaking it, then with regard to an oath about a mitzva, for which he is under oath from Mount Sinai, is it not logic
The Talmud responds: And R' Yehuda ben Beteira could say to you: Isn’t there the case of an oath involving doing good to others, even though it does not include the possibility of being inverted to include liability for an oath concerning harming others, but nevertheless God has amplified the halakh