Is an oath made under duress and coercion valid?

Our Mishna on Amud Beis discusses circumstances whereby if one makes an oath under duress, such as when threatened by bandits or a rogue tax collector, the oath is not binding. Thus if he says, “The produce of the world should be forbidden to me if…[whatever he is saying is false]”, it is not binding.  (The case of the rogue tax collector is referring to a so-called government functionary who is taking an unjust portion of the money for himself under the badge of government authority. And, to think we have problems with the “deep state”!)

The Gemara on 28a clarifies that there is a trick clause.  In his mind, he must add an additional qualifier, “The produce of the world should be forbidden to me TODAY”, so that tomorrow the oath falls away.  The Gemara says, since he is under duress, this hidden clause is valid.  But if he said it without thinking the clause, he would be bound to this oath nonetheless.

There is a historic and national tradition about a vow that also was made under duress as described in Gemara Shabbos (88a):

״וַיִּתְיַצְּבוּ בְּתַחְתִּית הָהָר״, אָמַר רַב אַבְדִּימִי בַּר חָמָא בַּר חַסָּא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכָּפָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עֲלֵיהֶם אֶת הָהָר כְּגִיגִית, וְאָמַר לָהֶם: אִם אַתֶּם מְקַבְּלִים הַתּוֹרָה מוּטָב, וְאִם לָאו — שָׁם תְּהֵא קְבוּרַתְכֶם. אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב: מִכָּאן מוֹדָעָא רַבָּה לְאוֹרָיְיתָא. אָמַר רָבָא: אַף עַל פִּי כֵן הֲדוּר קַבְּלוּהָ בִּימֵי אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ, דִּכְתִיב: ״קִיְּמוּ וְקִבְּלוּ הַיְּהוּדִים״ — קִיְּימוּ מַה שֶּׁקִּיבְּלוּ כְּבָר.

The Torah says, “And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God; and they stood at the lowermost part of the mount” (Exodus 19:17). Rabbi Avdimi bar Ḥama bar Ḥasa said: the Jewish people actually stood beneath the mountain, and the verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above the Jews like a tub, and said to them: If you accept the Torah, excellent, and if not, there will be your burial. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: From here there is a substantial caveat to the obligation to fulfill the Torah. The Jewish people can claim that they were coerced into accepting the Torah, and it is therefore not binding. Rava said: Even so, they again accepted it willingly in the time of Ahasuerus, as it is written: “The Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them” (Esther 9:27), and he taught: The Jews ordained what they had already taken upon themselves through coercion at Sinai.

The Chida (Chomas Anach Koheles 5:1) quotes commentaries who ask on this teaching from our Gemara.  How would the Jewish people’s vow at Sinai be invalidated, as they did not think of any hidden clause!  Some answer that a hidden clause only has meaning if you have the ability to think it, and if you did not, that shows you are committed to the vow.  Since God can read a person’s mind, the Jews could not even have thought of a hidden clause, thus this unusual vow is disqualified due to duress, even without a clause.

Regardless of how we explain the technicalities, the upshot of the tradition of Mount Sinai is instructive about the patterns of human nature and development. The Midrash taps into archetypes and models that teach us about who we really are.  There are times in life when we feel that circumstances have forced us to make decisions, and only much later do we realize that it was the best for us.  

The Midrash metaphorically compares the giving of the Torah to a wedding between God and the Jewish people (see for example, Sifri Devarim 345.)  Whether we dated litvish style, or had more of an arranged marriage, many of us rightfully feel that we chose our partners when we were “young and dumb.”  It is not uncommon to have feelings that societal and internal pressures coerced a person to choose a marriage partner before he or she was ready.  There are times where this leads to tragic and unfair entrapments, but it also can be fairly said, the sad alternative to not marrying young and dumb may be becoming old and lonely. There are many who would say, years later, they feel “״קִיְּמוּ וְקִבְּלוּ הַיְּהוּדִים״ — קִיְּימוּ מַה שֶּׁקִּיבְּלוּ כְּבָר. We now come to fully accept what originally was felt to be coercive.  

The challenge in life is to see the truth, was it good for us, or not so good, that we accepted certain decisions?  Is a rough patch where we feel resentful and regretful an indicator that we should bail out and cut our losses, or should we ride it out and see the good that may come?