Gittin 37 - June 22, 3 Tamuz

Today's daf is sponsored by Natanya Slomowitz in loving memory of her mother, Haviva Lilka Bat Necha and Avraham.  Today’s daf is sponsored by Tina Lamm in celebration of the engagement of her daughter, Devorah, to Daniel Battat of Jerusalem! Mazal tov! What is the etymology of the word pruzbol? Orphans do not need a pruzbol to collect their father's loans as they are considered under the court's jurisdiction. Since one can only write a pruzbol if the borrower has land, the rabbis come up with ways to give people a minimum amount of land or allow other things to qualify as land in order to ensure a pruzbol can be written. Some allow pruzbol to be just said, without requiring a document. Some allow pruzbol if the guarantor to the loan has land or even if one who owes money to the lender has land, based on the principle of shiabuda d'Rabbi Natan that if one borrows money and subsequently lends that money to someone else, the creditor can collect the loan directly from the second borrower. There is a debate about whether shmita cancels loans that have a property guarantee. Despite the fact that Rabbi Yochanan held that the loan is not canceled, he was unwilling to act upon that and ruled that the loan was canceled. There are two major exceptions to the rule of cancellation of loans - one is if one gave one's promissory notes to the court and the other is one who loaned with collateral, as it is as if the loan is already collected. This follows Rabbi Yitzchak's opinion that the collateral is considered acquired by the creditor. In the event there was not a pruzbol, if the borrower comes to pay back the loan, the one creditor needs to say that shmita has canceled the loan, but then the borrower should say he wants to give him back the money anyway as a gift. Others allow one to claim he has a pruzbol but lost it, and they even ask those who came to court without one if perhaps they had one and lost it. If a Caananite slave is taken captive and redeemed not by its owner, what is the status of the slave? There is a debate about whether or not it depends on if the redeemer had in mind to redeem him to be a slave or with the intent to make him a free man. According to the Gemara, it also may depend on whether or not the original owner had "ye'ush" - had given up on ever getting the slave back or not. Rava and Abaye have different interpretations of the case in the Mishna. Each interprets both the takana itself and the need for the takana in an entirely different manner.