Talmud su Deuteronomio 29:14

“And the oath of a witness and the oath about a deposit.” One makes him swear in his own language. If one made them swear not in their language and they said “Amen”, they are not prosecutable²⁶Nobody is prosecutable for perjury if he was not admonished in his own language by the court before answering the oath read to him. In the Babli, 33a, the rule is derived from verses. The Tosephta, 7:1, has a different version: If the court explained to him five times in any language he understands and he confirms his oath, he is guilty (if he swears falsely).. As we have stated²⁷The text is also in Nedarim 3:1; a parallel text in Babli Šebuot 29a, Nedarim 25a.: The oath before the judges is according to our understanding, not according to your understanding. Rebbi Yudan said, it is to be assumed that he makes them swear according to his understanding. Why does he have to spell out this condition to him? Because of the uneducated, lest they say that there may be mental reservations for oaths. Rebbi Ḥanania stated before Rebbi Mana: Is there not written²⁸Deut. 29:14. The argument is about what is written before and after the fragment quoted: “Not with you alone am I concluding this covenant and this oath. But with everybody who stands here with us today, and with those who are not with us today.” How can you have an oath with anybody not involved?: “But with everybody who stands here with us today”? He said to him, the future generations do not have mental reservations²⁹Since the unborn cannot have mental reservations, so the mental reservations of the living are invalid..