## Gittin Daf 36a

###### Gittin 36a:1
[Gittin 36a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:1)

דְּמַדְּרִינַן לֵיהּ בְּרַבִּים. הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר נֶדֶר שֶׁהוּדַּר בְּרַבִּים – אֵין לוֹ הֲפָרָה; אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יֵשׁ לוֹ הֲפָרָה, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers **that we administer the vow** to the priest **in public.** The Gemara asks: **This works out well according to the one who says** that **a vow that was taken in public has no** possibility of **nullification** by a halakhic authority, **but according to the one who says it has** the possibility of **nullification, what can be said?**


###### Gittin 36a:2
[Gittin 36a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:2)

דְּמַדְּרִינַן לֵיהּ עַל דַּעַת רַבִּים – דְּאָמַר אַמֵּימָר, הִלְכְתָא: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר נֶדֶר שֶׁהוּדַּר בְּרַבִּים יֵשׁ לוֹ הֲפָרָה, עַל דַּעַת רַבִּים – אֵין לוֹ הֲפָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers **that we administer the vow to** the priest based **on the consent of the public,** making it a type of vow that cannot be dissolved without their consent. **As Ameimar said,** the ***halakha*** is as follows: **Even according to the one who says** that **a vow that was taken in public has** the possibility of **nullification,** if it was taken based **on the consent of the public,** it **has no** possibility of **nullification.**


###### Gittin 36a:3
[Gittin 36a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:3)

וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי לִדְבַר הָרְשׁוּת, אֲבָל לִדְבַר מִצְוָה – יֵשׁ לוֹ הֲפָרָה. כִּי הָהוּא מַקְרֵי דַּרְדְּקֵי דְּאַדְּרֵיהּ רַב אַחָא עַל דַּעַת רַבִּים, דַּהֲוָה פָּשַׁע בְּיָנוֹקֵי; וְאַהְדְּרֵיהּ רָבִינָא, דְּלָא אִישְׁתְּכַח דְּדָיֵיק כְּווֹתֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And this matter applies** only to when the nullification of a vow is in order to enable one **to** perform **an optional matter, but to** enable one to perform **a matter of a mitzva, it has** the possibility of **nullification.** This is **like** the incident involving **a certain teacher of children,** upon **whom Rav Aḥa administered a vow** based **on the consent of the public** to cease teaching, **as he was negligent with regard to the children** by hitting them too much. **And Ravina** had his vow nullified and **reinstated him, as they did not find** another teacher **who was as meticulous as he** was.


###### Gittin 36a:4
[Gittin 36a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:4)

וְהָעֵדִים חוֹתְמִין עַל הַגֵּט מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם: מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם?! דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא הוּא, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכָתוֹב בַּסֵּפֶר וְחָתוֹם״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught: **And the witnesses sign the bill of divorce for the betterment of the world.** The Gemara asks: Is the reason that the witnesses sign the bill of divorce **for the betterment of the world? It is by Torah law** that they must sign, **as it is written: “And subscribe the deeds, and sign** them, and call witnesses” (Jeremiah 32:44).


###### Gittin 36a:5
[Gittin 36a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:5)

אָמַר רַבָּה: לָא צְרִיכָא – לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, דְּאָמַר: עֵדֵי מְסִירָה כָּרְתִי; תַּקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן עֵדֵי חֲתִימָה, מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם – דְּזִמְנִין דְּמָיְיתִי סָהֲדִי, אִי נָמֵי זִימְנִין דְּאָזְלִי לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said: No,** it is **necessary according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar, who says: Witnesses of the transmission** of the bill of divorce **effect** the divorce, and not the witnesses who sign the bill of divorce, and by Torah law it does not need to be signed. Nevertheless, **the Sages instituted signatory witnesses for the betterment of the world, as sometimes** it occurs **that the witnesses** who witnessed the transmission of the bill of divorce **die, or sometimes** it occurs **that they go overseas,** and the validity of the bill of divorce may be contested. Since they are not present, there are no witnesses who can ratify the bill of divorce. Once the Sages instituted that the witnesses’ signatures appear on the bill of divorce, then the bill of divorce can be ratified by authenticating their signatures.


###### Gittin 36a:6
[Gittin 36a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:6)

רַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר, הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא עֵדִים מְפָרְשִׁין שְׁמוֹתֵיהֶן בְּגִיטִּין – מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef said: You** can **even say** that it is **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** that signatory witnesses on the bill of divorce effect the divorce, and the mishna should be understood as follows: **They instituted that the witnesses must specify their** full **names on bills of divorce** and not merely sign the document, **for the betterment of the world.**


###### Gittin 36a:7
[Gittin 36a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:7)

כִּדְתַנְיָא: בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה כּוֹתֵב ״אֲנִי פְּלוֹנִי חָתַמְתִּי עֵד״; אִם כְּתַב יָדוֹ יוֹצֵא מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר – כָּשֵׁר, וְאִם לָאו – פָּסוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 9:13): **At first,** the witness **would write** only: **I, so-and-so, signed** as **a witness,** but they did not state their full names. Therefore, the only way to identify the witness was to see if an identical signature could be found on a different document that had been ratified in court. Therefore, **if** another copy of a witness’s **signature is produced from elsewhere,** i.e., another court document, it is **valid, but if not,** then the bill of divorce is **invalid** even though it is possible that he was a valid witness, and as a result of this women were left unable to remarry.


###### Gittin 36a:8
[Gittin 36a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:8)

אָמַר רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: תַּקָּנָה גְּדוֹלָה הִתְקִינוּ, שֶׁיִּהְיוּ מְפָרְשִׁין שְׁמוֹתֵיהֶן בְּגִיטִּין – מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabban Gamliel said: They instituted a great ordinance that** the witnesses **must specify their** full **names on bills of divorce,** stating that they are so-and-so, son of so-and-so, and other identifying features, **for the betterment of the world.** This made it possible to easily clarify who the witnesses were and to ratify the bill of divorce by finding acquaintances of the witnesses who recognized their signatures.


###### Gittin 36a:9
[Gittin 36a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:9)

וּבְסִימָנָא לָא?! וְהָא רַב צָיֵיר כְּוָרָא; וְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא צָיֵיר חֲרוּתָא; רַב חִסְדָּא סָמֶךְ; וְרַב הוֹשַׁעְיָא עַיִן; רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא צָיֵיר מָכוּתָא! שָׁאנֵי רַבָּנַן, דִּבְקִיאִין סִימָנַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** is it **not** sufficient to sign **with** a pictorial **mark? But Rav drew a fish** instead of a signature, **and Rabbi Ḥanina drew a palm branch** [***ḥaruta***]; **Rav Ḥisda** drew the letter ***samekh*, and Rav Hoshaya** drew the letter ***ayin*;** and **Rabba bar Rav Huna drew a sail** [***makota***]. None of these Sages would sign their actual names. The Gemara answers: **The Sages are different, as** everyone is **well versed in their** pictorial **marks.**


###### Gittin 36a:10
[Gittin 36a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:10)

מֵעִיקָּרָא בְּמַאי אַפְקְעִינְהוּ? בְּדִיסְקֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Initially, with what did they publicize** these marks, as they could not use them in place of signatures before people were well versed in them? The Gemara answers: They initially used their marks **in letters,** where there is no legal requirement to sign their names. Once it became known that they would use these marks as their signatures, they were able to use them as signatures even on legal documents.


###### Gittin 36a:11
[Gittin 36a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:11)

הִלֵּל הִתְקִין פְּרוֹסְבּוּל וְכוּ׳: תְּנַן הָתָם, פְּרוֹסְבּוּל אֵינוֹ מְשַׁמֵּט. זֶה אֶחָד מִן הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁהִתְקִין הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן; שֶׁרָאָה אֶת הָעָם שֶׁנִּמְנְעוּ מִלְּהַלְווֹת זֶה אֶת זֶה, וְעָבְרוּ עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה ״הִשָּׁמֶר לְךָ פֶּן יִהְיֶה דָבָר עִם לְבָבְךָ בְלִיַּעַל וְגוֹ׳״, עָמַד וְהִתְקִין פְּרוֹסְבּוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught that **Hillel** the Elder **instituted a document that prevents the Sabbatical** Year **from abrogating an outstanding debt [*prosbol*]. We learned** in a mishna **there** (*Shevi’it* 10:3): If one writes **a *prosbol*,** the Sabbatical Year **does not abrogate** debt. **This is one of the matters that Hillel the Elder instituted because he saw that** the people of **the nation were refraining from lending to one another** around the time of the Sabbatical Year, as they were concerned that the debtor would not repay the loan, **and they violated that which is written in the Torah: “Beware that there be not a base thought in your heart,** saying: The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and your eye be evil against your needy brother, and you give him nothing” (Deuteronomy 15:9). **He arose and instituted** the ***prosbol*** so that it would also be possible to collect those debts in order to ensure that people would continue to give loans.


###### Gittin 36a:12
[Gittin 36a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:12)

וְזֶה הוּא גּוּפוֹ שֶׁל פְּרוֹסְבּוּל: ״מוֹסְרַנִי לָכֶם פְּלוֹנִי [וּפְלוֹנִי] דַּיָּינִין שֶׁבְּמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי, שֶׁכׇּל חוֹב שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי אֵצֶל פְּלוֹנִי, שֶׁאֶגְבֶּנּוּ כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁאֶרְצֶה״. וְהַדַּיָּינִים חוֹתְמִים לְמַטָּה, אוֹ הָעֵדִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And this is the essence of the** text of the ***prosbol*: I transfer to you, so-and-so** the **judges, who are in such and such a place,** so **that I will collect any debt that I am owed by so-and-so whenever I wish,** as the court now has the right to collect the debts. **And the judges or the witnesses sign below,** and this is sufficient. The creditor will then be able to collect the debt on behalf of the court, and the court can give it to him.


###### Gittin 36a:13
[Gittin 36a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:13)

וּמִי אִיכָּא מִידֵּי דְּמִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא מְשַׁמְּטָא שְׁבִיעִית, וְהִתְקִין הִלֵּל דְּלָא מְשַׁמְּטָא?! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: בַּשְּׁבִיעִית בִּזְמַן הַזֶּה, וְרַבִּי הִיא –

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks about the *prosbol* itself: **But is there anything** like this, **where by Torah law the Sabbatical** Year **cancels** the debt **but Hillel instituted that it does not cancel** the debt? **Abaye said:** The *baraita* is referring **to the Sabbatical** Year **in the present,** and **it is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi.


###### Gittin 36a:14
[Gittin 36a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/36a:14)

דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: ״וְזֶה דְּבַר הַשְּׁמִיטָּה שָׁמוֹט״ – בִּשְׁתֵּי שְׁמִיטוֹת הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר: אַחַת שְׁמִיטַּת קַרְקַע וְאַחַת שְׁמִיטַּת כְּסָפִים. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאַתָּה מְשַׁמֵּט קַרְקַע – אַתָּה מְשַׁמֵּט כְּסָפִים, בִּזְמַן שֶׁאִי אַתָּה מְשַׁמֵּט קַרְקַע, אִי אַתָּה מְשַׁמֵּט כְּסָפִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** The verse states in the context of the cancellation of debts: **“And this is the manner of the abrogation: He shall abrogate”** (Deuteronomy 15:2). **The verse speaks of two** types of **abrogation: One** is **the release of land and one** is the **abrogation of monetary** debts. Since the two are equated, one can learn the following: **At a time when you release land,** when the Jubilee Year is practiced, **you abrogate monetary** debts; **at a time when you do not release land,** such as the present time, when the Jubilee Year is no longer practiced, **you** also **do not abrogate monetary** debts.