שביעית משמיטתו - שמיטת כספים IyunAP Shiur

(1) Every seventh year you shall practice remission of debts. (2) This shall be the nature of the remission: all creditors shall remit the due that they claim from their fellow [Israelites]; they shall not dun their fellow [Israelites] or kin, for the remission proclaimed is of ה'. (3) You may dun the foreigner; but you must remit whatever is due you from your kin. ... (9) Beware lest you harbor the base thought, “The seventh year, the year of remission, is approaching,” so that you are mean and give nothing to your needy kin—who will cry out to ה' against you, and you will incur guilt. (10) Give readily and have no regrets when you do so, for in return your God ה' will bless you in all your efforts and in all your undertakings.

(2) "and what you have with your brother (your hand shall release") and not what your brother has in your hand — whence it is derived that if someone lent on a pledge, shemitah does not release (the pledge).

(3) "and what you have with your brother your hand shall release": and not one who hands over his bills (of indebtedness) to beth-din (i.e., Beth-din may present the bills for him; for then it is not his hand, but their hand that is doing so.) It is for this reason, for the general welfare, that Beth-Hillel instituted the prozbul (a declaration before the beth-din authorizing them to claim one's bills). For he saw the people ceasing to lend one another and transgressing (Ibid. 9) "Take heed unto yourself lest there be in your heart a thing of wickedness, etc." He, therefore, arose and instituted the prozbul.

(1) The sabbatical year cancels a debt written in a document or one not written in a document. ...

(2) ...One who loans and takes a pledge, and one who hands over his debt documents to a court, [these debts] are not remitted.

(3) [A loan secured by] a prozbul is not cancelled. This was one of the things enacted by Hillel the elder; for when he observed people refraining from lending to one another, and thus transgressing what is written in the Torah, “Beware, lest you harbor the base thought, [‘The seventh year, the year of remission, is approaching,’ so that you are mean to your needy kinsman and give him nothing.” Hillel enacted the prozbul.

(4) This is the formula of the prozbul: “I turn over to you, so-and-so, judges of such and such a place, that any debt that I may have outstanding, I shall collect it whenever I desire.” And the judges sign below, or the witnesses.

MISHNA: In the case of witnesses who said: We testify with regard to a man called so-and-so that he owes another person one thousand dinars that he borrowed on the condition that he is to give the money back to him from now until thirty days have passed, and the borrower says that he borrowed that sum but on the condition that he is to give the money back from now until ten years have passed, and they were rendered conspiring witnesses. The court estimates how much money a person would be willing to give so that he would keep a loan of one thousand dinars in his possession, and one calculates the difference between that sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until thirty days have passed, and that same sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until ten years have passed. That difference is the sum that the conspiring witnesses sought to have the borrower loose; therefore, it's the sum they must pay.

GEMARA: Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: In the case of one who lends money to another for a period of ten years, the Sabbatical Year abrogates the debt (see Deuteronomy 15:1–11) and absolves the borrower of the obligation to repay it.

And even though now, during the Sabbatical Year, we do not yet read concerning his loan the prohibition: “He shall not exact it” (Deuteronomy 15:2), as the time for repayment has not yet arrived, ultimately, when the time for repayment arrives, he will come to a situation where the prohibition “He shall not exact it” applies. Therefore, like all other debts it is abrogated by the Sabbatical Year. Rav Kahana raises an objection from the mishna: The court estimates how much money a person would be willing to give so that he would keep a loan of one thousand dinars in his possession, and one calculates the difference between that sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until thirty days have passed, and that same sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until ten years have passed. And if you say that the Sabbatical Year abrogates a ten-year loan, the conspiring witnesses need to pay the borrower the entire sum of the loan as well, as their testimony sought to render the borrower liable to pay a debt that by right should be entirely forgiven. Rava said: What are we dealing with here in our mishna? We are dealing with debts that are not abrogated with the passing of the Sabbatical Year, e.g., in the case of one who lends money on the basis of collateral, or in the case of one who transfers his promissory notes to the court for collection. As we learned in a mishna (Shevi’it 10:2): In the cases of one who lends money on the basis of collateral and one who transfers his promissory notes to the court for collection, the Sabbatical Year does not abrogate those loans. In those cases, the debt would not have been forgiven during the Sabbatical Year. Therefore, the conspiring witnesses are not liable to pay the entire sum. There are those who state another version of this discussion: Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: In the case of one who lends money to another for a period of ten years, the Sabbatical Year does not abrogate the debt. And even though when the time for repayment arrives he will come to a situation where the prohibition “He shall not exact it” applies, now, in any event, during the Sabbatical Year we do not yet read the prohibition of “He shall not exact it” concerning his loan. Rav Kahana says: We learn this ruling in the mishna as well: The court estimates how much money a person would be willing to give so that a loan of one thousand dinars will be in his possession, and one calculates the difference between that sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until thirty days have passed, and that sum in a situation where he would be required to give the money back from now until ten years have passed. And if you say that the Sabbatical Year abrogates a ten-year loan, then the conspiring witnesses should pay the borrower the entire sum of the loan as well, as their testimony sought to render the borrower liable to pay a debt that by right should be entirely forgiven. The fact that they are not required to pay the entire sum proves that a ten-year loan is not abrogated by the Sabbatical Year. Rava said: No proof may be cited from there, as what are we dealing with here in our mishna? We are dealing with debts that are not abrogated with the passing of the Sabbatical Year, e.g., in the case of one who lends money on the basis of collateral, or in the case of one who transfers his promissory notes to the court for collection. As we learned in a mishna (Shevi’it 10:2): In the cases of one who lends money on the basis of collateral and one who transfers his promissory notes to the court for collection, the Sabbatical Year does not abrogate those loans. In those cases, the debt would not have been forgiven during the Sabbatical Year. Therefore, the conspiring witnesses are not liable to pay the entire sum.

(14) When a person lends money in exchange for security, the debt is not nullified by the Sabbatical year, provided the security is equal in value to the debt. If the debt exceeds the value of the security, the extra amount is nullified by the Sabbatical year.

(15) When a person hands over his promissory notes to the court, telling [the judges]: "Collect my debt for me," the debts are not nullified by the Sabbatical year. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 15:3]: "[a debt] that you have from your brother."[Implied is that debts demanded by "your brother," a private individual, are nullified by the Sabbatical year. [Payment for] these [debts, by contrast,] is being demanded by the court...

(16) When Hillel the Elder saw that the people would refrain from lending to each other and thus violated the Scriptural charge [Deuteronomy 15:9]: "Lest there be a wicked thought in your heart," he ordained a pruzbol so that debts would not be nullified and people would lend to each other.

A pruzbol is effective only with regard to the nullification of debts in the present era which are a Rabbinic institution. A pruzbol is not effective with regard to the nullification of debts by Scriptural Law.

(17) A pruzbol should be composed only by very great Sages like the court of Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Assi, for they are suitable to release financial [obligations due] others. Other courts [of lesser authority] may not compose [a pruzbol].

(19) A pruzbol may be composed only when [the borrower possesses] land.⁵⁵ The rationale is that when the borrower possesses land, the creditor's debt is secured, because he may expropriate the land in payment (Radbaz). Even though the land does not appear to be worth the full value of the debt, we follow the principle (see Hilchot Mechirah 13:8) that the land may never be considered overpriced (Sefer Meirat Einayim 67:41). If the borrower does not possess land, the lender should grant the borrower even the slightest amount of land - even enough to grow a cabbage stalk- in his field. [Even if] he lent him place for an oven or a range, a pruzbol may be composed. If [the borrower] owns a field that was given as security, a pruzbol may be composed on that basis.