Talmud do Wyjścia 24:14

Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, watch it for it is otherwise¹³⁸From the arrangement of the Mishnah one gets the impression that partner, sharecropper, trustee, etc., are freed from their oath in the Sabbatical year. But the Sabbatical eliminates only oaths referring to loans which are actually annulled in it.. What do we say? Watch it, for it is not negligible. “Owner,” “owner.¹³⁹In Ex. 24:14 anybody having a law suit is called בַּעַל; in the laws of annulment of debts (Deut. 15:2) the creditor is called בַּעַל. This sets up the argument of “equal cut” indicating that the person going to court is one subject to the laws of the Sabbatical.” Since the owner mentioned there is subject to annulment, so also here he is subject to annulment¹⁴⁰Since after annulment the creditor cannot go to court to collect the debt, neither can he go to court to have an oath imposed on the debtor. (Explanation of the commentary To`afot Re’em, R. Abraham Abba Schiff, to Sefer Yere’im§164 Note 17). The Babli 49a has a different interpretation of Deut. 15:2.. The Sabbatical annuls things which are his hand’s loans<sup>141</sup>The expression used in Deut. 15:2. and annuls the corresponding oaths; the Sabbatical does not annul things which are not his hand’s loans, nor does it annul the corresponding oaths. “For anything which the Sabbatical annuls it annuls the corresponding oath; anything which the Sabbatical does not annul it does not annul the corresponding oath<sup>142</sup>Tosephta Ševi`it8:6. There is no redundancy here. The preceding sentence was the argument, the last sentence is the tannaitic formulation..”