Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) PRUZBUL

(a) Question: What does the word Pruzbul mean?
(b) Answer (Rav Chisda): Prus (an enactment for) Buli and Buti (rich and poor).

1. Buli are the rich, as Rav Yosef taught.

i. (Rav Yosef): "I will break your strength" - these are the Buli of Yehudah.

2. Buti are the poor - "Ha'avet Ta'aViTenu (you will lend him)".

(c) Answer #2: A non-Hebrew speaker told Rabah that Pruzbul is a language of an enactment.
(d) (Rav Yehudah): Orphans do not need a Pruzbul.
(e) (Rami bar Chama): This is because R. Gamliel and his Beis Din are like the father of orphans (so they enacted as if orphans automatically have a Pruzbul).
(f) (Mishnah): Pruzbul may only be written on a loan in which the borrower has land.

1. If he has no land, the lender gives him a tiny piece of his land.
2. Question: How small can it be?
3. Answer (R. Chiya bar Ashi): The size of a cabbage stalk.

(g) (Rav Yehudah): Even if the borrower borrowed place to put a stove (in a courtyard), Pruzbul may be written on this.
(h) Question: But Hillel taught, we only write Pruzbul on a flowerpot with a hole, not one without a hole!

1. If it suffices to have borrowed a place - the place where he leaves the flowerpot (without a hole) should suffice for Pruzbul!

(i) Answer: The case is, the flowerpot is on pegs (he did not borrow the place it rests over).
(j) Rav Ashi gave a borrower a stump of a palm tree and wrote a Pruzbul.
(k) The Rabanan of Rav Ashi's Beis Medrash recited the text of Pruzbul in front of R. Chiya bar Aba, without writing it.

1. (R. Chiya bar Aba): This is sufficient.

(l) (Beraisa): If the borrower lacks land but the Arev (guarantor) has land, Pruzbul may be written;
(m) If neither the borrower nor the Arev has land, but someone who owes money to the borrower has land, Pruzbul may be written, by R. Noson's law.

1. (Beraisa - R. Noson): "You will give to the one he sinned against" - If Reuven owes Shimon and Shimon owes Levi, we take money from Reuven to pay Levi.

(a) (Mishnah): Shemitah cancels a loan, whether a document was written on the loan or not;

1. (Rav and Shmuel): 'A document was written on the loan' - this means a document with which one can collect from mortgaged (sold) property;
2. 'A document was not written on the loan' - this means, a document which cannot be used to collect from mortgaged property.

i. All the more so, a loan without any document (is cancelled).

3. (R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish): 'A document was written on the loan' - this is a document which cannot be used to collect from mortgaged property;
4. 'A document was not written on the loan' - this means, no document was written at all;

i. But if there is a document that can be used to collect from mortgaged property, the loan is not cancelled.

(b) (Beraisa): The borrower designated a field that will be used to pay the loan - the loan is not cancelled in Shemitah.

1. Even if the borrower wrote, 'All my property is like a guarantor and may be used to pay the loan' - the loan is not cancelled.

(c) R. Asi's relative had a document which could be used to collect from mortgaged property.

1. R. Asi: The loan is not cancelled is Shemitah.
2. The lender went to R. Yochanan, who said that the loan is cancelled in Shemitah.
3. The lender: But you taught that it is not cancelled!
4. R. Yochanan: Should we act upon my reasoning and comparisons?!
5. The lender: But a Beraisa supports you!
6. R. Yochanan: That Beraisa could be like Beis Shamai, who say that a document standing for collection is considered to already be collected.

(d) (Mishnah): One who lends money and takes a pledge, or one who hands over his documents to Beis Din - the loan is not cancelled in Shemitah.
(e) We understand one who hands over his documents to Beis Din - they are holding the debt, so it is not cancelled.

1. Question: One who lends on a pledge - why isn't such a loan cancelled?
2. Answer #1 (Rava): It is as if he is holding the repayment.
3. Question (Abaye): According to this, if the lender lodges in the borrower's courtyard, we should also say the loan is not cancelled!
4. Answer (Rava): The case of a pledge is different, for the lender acquires a pledge, as R. Yitzchak taught.

i. (R. Yitzchak): "To (the lender) it will be Tzedakah (to return the pledge)" - if the lender does not own it, why is it called Tzedakah to return it?
ii. We learn from here that the lender acquires the pledge.

(f) (Mishnah): Reuven returns a debt to Shimon is Shemitah. Shimon must say 'I refrain (from collecting)'.

1. If Reuven says, 'Even so, I want to repay', Shimon may take the money.
2. We learn this from "This is the matter (word) of Shemitah" (one must say that he refrains from collecting.)

(g) (Rabah): Shimon may hang (coerce) Reuven until Reuven says that he wants to repay anyway.
(h) Question (Abaye - Beraisa): When Reuven pays - he should not say, 'I am paying the loan' - rather, he should say it is a gift.
(i) Answer (Rabah): Yes - Shimon hangs Reuven until he says thusly.
(j) Aba bar Marsa owed money to Rabah; he brought it to him in Shemitah.

1. Rabah: I refrain.

(k) Aba bar Marsa took his money and left. Abaye noticed that Rabah was sad; Rabah explained what happened.

1. Abaye told Aba bar Marsa that he should have said that he wants to pay anyway, and that he should now return the money and say thusly. Aba bar Marsa did so.
2. Rabah: He did not know enough to do so the first time.

(l) (Rav Yehudah): A person is believed to say that he wrote a Pruzbul, but it was lost.
(m) Question: Why?
(n) Answer: Since Pruzbul was enacted, a lender can always collect his loan legally - a person will not abandon a permitted way to achieve something and do it in a forbidden manner.
(o) When lenders would come before Rav, he would ask - 'Perhaps you had a Pruzbul and lost it?'

1. This is a case when we open the mouth of a mute (one who does not know what he should say).

(p) (Mishnah): Also, a creditor that presents a loan document without a Pruzbul - he does not collect.
(q) Tana'im argue on this law.
(r) (Beraisa): A creditor that presents a loan document must have a Pruzbul to collect; Chachamim say, he does not need a Pruzbul.

(a) (Mishnah): Shimon's slave was captured; Reuven redeemed him. If he redeemed him in order that he should be a slave, he works as a slave; if he redeemed him in order that he should be free, he does not work;
(b) R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, in either case he works.
(c) (Gemara) Question: What is the case?

1. Suggestion: If Reuven redeemed him before Shimon despaired (of getting back his slave) in order that he should be free - why doesn't he work (for Shimon)?

(d) Answer #1: It must be, he redeemed him after Shimon despaired.
(e) Objection: If so - when he was redeemed in order that he should be a slave - why does he work?
(f) Answer #2 (Abaye): Really, he redeemed him before Shimon despaired. If he was redeemed in order that he should be a slave - he works for Shimon; if he was redeemed in order that he should be free - he does not work for Reuven or Shimon.

1. He does not work for Reuven - since Reuven redeemed him in order that he should be free!
2. He does not work for Shimon - this is an enactment, lest people refrain from redeeming slaves.
3. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, in either case he works - he holds, it is a Mitzvah to redeem slaves, just as it is a Mitzvah to redeem free people (so there is no need for an enactment).

(g) Answer #2 (Rava): Really, he redeemed him after Shimon despaired. If he was redeemed in order that he should be a slave - he works for Reuven; if he was redeemed in order that he should be free - he does not work for Reuven or Shimon.

1. He does not work for Reuven - since Reuven redeemed him in order that he should be free!
2. He does not work for Shimon, because Shimon already despaired.
3. R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, in either case he works - as Chizkiyah taught.

i. (Chizkiyah): He works in either case - this is an enactment, in order that slaves should not get themselves captured to escape their masters.

(h) Question (Beraisa): R. Shimon ben Gamliel told Chachamim - just as it is a Mitzvah to redeem free people, it is a Mitzvah to redeem slaves.
(i) We understand this according to Abaye - this is why R. Shimon ben Gamliel says there is no enactment.

1. According to Rava - R. Shimon ben Gamliel's reason is like Chizkiyah!

(j) Answer (for Rava): R. Shimon ben Gamliel did not know Chachamim's opinion.

1. He said: If you speak in the case before despair - just as...;
2. If you speak in the case after despair - we make an enactment, like Chizkiyah.