2,696. What We Mean By "Exempt"

Hilchos Shevuos 9:14

Whenever we say that someone isn’t liable, we mean that they’re not liable for a false oath of testimony. They are nevertheless still liable for making a false oath of expression if they made the oath themselves or answered amen to an oath imposed by someone else. However, when a person is liable for an oath of testimony, he’s only liable for an oath of testimony and not for an oath of expression, even if he made the false oath himself, and made it intentionally. This is because the Torah extracted oaths of testimony from among oaths of expression so that one who intentionally makes a false oath of expression is obligated to bring an offering just like one who made such an oath unintentionally. Such a person isn’t liable to the penalty of lashes, as per Leviticus 5:5, which says “for one of these.” We see that a person who makes an oath can be liable for one kind – either an oath of testimony or an oath of expression – but not both.

Hilchos Shevuos 9:15

Let’s say that the plaintiff imposes an oath on the witnesses that they come testify that person X has an entrusted item, a deposit, stolen goods and a lost item belonging to the plaintiff. The witnesses respond with an oath that they don’t have any relevant information. In such a case, they’re only liable to bring one offering. However, if they respond with an oath that they don’t have any information about an entrusted item, a deposit, stolen goods and a lost item of the plaintiff’s, then they’re obligated to bring an offering for each one.