There was a recent post on the Hirhurim blog entitled “Swearing in Court ” that got me contemplating some contemporary usage of "oaths" in our religion. Off the cuff here are a couple of interesting items that I have come up with:
• The famous “Three Oaths” are a major corner stone of the theological debate between those who support and those who oppose the establishment of the medina. (See the discussion in Rav Shlomo Aviner's "Do not ascend like a wall ")
• Using oaths as a mechanism of creating “mitzvahs” to solve issues of egalitarianism. [See the post “Voluntary Obligations ” where Prof Joel Roth proposes that oaths can be used by woman to give them the same halachic obligations and rights as men]
However it got me thinking, can Oaths be used to create obligations to sin? As a case in point, what of the episode of Jepthah and his daughter?
29 Then the spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon. 30 And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said: 'If Thou wilt indeed deliver the children of Ammon into my hand, 31 then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, it shall be the LORD'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt-offering.' 32 So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and the LORD delivered them into his hand. 33 And he smote them from Aroer until thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto Abel-cheramim, with a very great slaughter. So the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel. 34 And Jephthah came to Mizpah unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances; and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said: 'Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art become my troubler; for I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back.' 36 And she said unto him: 'My father, thou hast opened thy mouth unto the LORD; do unto me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as the LORD hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, even of the children of Ammon.' 37 And she said unto her father: 'Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may depart and go down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my companions.' 38 And he said: 'Go.' And he sent her away for two months; and she departed, she and her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains. 39 And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed; and she had not known man. And it was a custom in Israel, 40 that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.
(Judges Chapter 11, verses 29 – 40)
Another example, is this din in the Mishna Torah (Hilchot Shavuot 5:17). "If a man swore to harm himself, eg he swore to wound himself, even though it is not permissible to wound oneself, if he did not harm himself, he is guilty because of Shavuat Bituy".
The above scenarios seem to create a "Catch 22". On the one hand you made an oath to do x, but on the other hand that x is a sin. Quite clearly killing your daughter or harming yourself is sin. So how can it take effect? Also how would a person get out of it? Imagine going to the beis din and saying "Rabbis I made an oath to kill my daughter, but had I known its a sin I wouldn't have done it" – Muttar lach, muttar lach, muttar lach, they all respond. It just seems quite ridiculous. Any thoughts from some of the more learned readers?
To be continued….