Study Yoma folio 74A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
and the Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva, who said: A man prohibits himself from any amount. If a man swears that he will not eat, he thereby prohibits himself from eating even the smallest amount of food. Therefore, Reish Lakish himself maintains that eating a half-measure do
And if you say: Perhaps Reish Lakish maintains that since a half-measure is permitted by Torah law, despite the fact that it is prohibited by rabbinic law, one is liable to bring an offering for violating an oath, then there is the following problem: Didn’t we learn in a Mishnah: An oath of testim
Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: It comes to exclude one who plays with dice, whom the rabbis disqualified from giving testimony. But surely one who plays with dice is eligible by Torah law to give testimony, and it is the rabbis who disqualified him. Despite this, an oath of testimony does not apply to
The Talmud rejects this by distinguishing between the two cases: It is different there, in the case of testimony, where the verse states: “If he does not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity” (Leviticus 5:1), i.e., a man who can testify but doesn’t do so should be punished. But this person ca
§ The Talmud’s initial assumption is that the Mishnah’s use of the word prohibited is referring to a transgression not punishable by karet. The Talmud asks: And anywhere that it teaches that transgressing is punishable by karet, does it never teach using the word prohibited? Was it not taught in a