## Gittin Daf 37b

###### Gittin 37b:1
[Gittin 37b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:1)

הַמַּחֲזִיר חוֹב לַחֲבֵירוֹ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית – צָרִיךְ שֶׁיֹּאמַר לוֹ: ״מְשַׁמֵּט אֲנִי״; וְאִם אָמַר לוֹ: ״אַף עַל פִּי כֵן״, יְקַבֵּל הֵימֶנּוּ. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְזֶה דְּבַר הַשְּׁמִטָּה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In the case of **one who repays a debt to his friend during the Sabbatical** Year, the creditor **must say to him: I abrogate** the debt, **but if** the debtor then **said to him: Nevertheless,** I want to repay you, **he may accept it from him, as it is stated: “And this is the manner [*devar*] of the abrogation”** (Deuteronomy 15:2). From the fact that the verse employed a term, *devar*, that can also mean: This is the statement of the cancellation, the Sages derived that the creditor must state that he cancels the debt, but he is allowed to accept the payment if the debtor insists on repaying.


###### Gittin 37b:2
[Gittin 37b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:2)

אָמַר רַבָּה: וְתָלֵי לֵיהּ עַד דְּאָמַר הָכִי. אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: כְּשֶׁהוּא נוֹתֵן לוֹ, אַל יֹאמַר לוֹ: ״בְּחוֹבִי אֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָךְ״, אֶלָּא יֹאמַר לוֹ: ״שֶׁלִּי הֵן, וּבְמַתָּנָה אֲנִי נוֹתֵן לָךְ״! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: תָּלֵי לֵיהּ נָמֵי עַד דְּאָמַר הָכִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabba said: And** the creditor is permitted **to lift up** his eyes **to him** hopefully, demonstrating that he wishes to accept the payment, **until** the debtor **says this,** that he nevertheless wishes to repay him. **Abaye raised an objection to** Rabba’s statement from a *baraita*: **When** the debtor **gives** the creditor payment for a debt that has been canceled **he should not say to him: I give** this **to you** in payment of **my debt; rather, he should say to him: This is my** money **and I give it to you as a gift.** This indicates that the debt is repaid only by the initiative of the debtor. Rabba **said to him:** The creditor is permitted to **lift up** his eyes **to him** hopefully **as well, until** the debtor **says this,** that he gives it as a gift, but the initiative may come from the creditor.


###### Gittin 37b:3
[Gittin 37b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:3)

אַבָּא בַּר מָרְתָּא, דְּהוּא אַבָּא בַּר מִנְיוֹמֵי, הֲוָה מַסֵּיק בֵּיהּ רַבָּה זוּזֵי. אַיְיתִינְהוּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ בִּשְׁבִיעִית, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מְשַׁמֵּט אֲנִי. שַׁקְלִינְהוּ וַאֲזַל. אֲתָא אַבָּיֵי, אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ דַּהֲוָה עֲצִיב, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַמַּאי עֲצִיב מָר? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָכִי הֲוָה מַעֲשֶׂה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was a man by the name of **Abba bar Marta, who is** also known as **Abba bar Minyumi, from whom Rabba was** attempting to **collect a debt. He brought it to him in the Sabbatical** Year. Rabba **said to him: I abrogate** this debt. Abba bar Marta **took** the money **and left. Abaye came** before Rabba and **found that he was sad.** Abaye **said to him: Why is** the **Master sad?** Rabba **said to him: This was the incident** that occurred, explaining that Abba bar Marta understood his statement literally and did not repay the debt.


###### Gittin 37b:4
[Gittin 37b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:4)

אֲזַל לְגַבֵּיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַמְטֵית לֵיהּ זוּזֵי לְמָר? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וּמַאי אֲמַר לָךְ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״מְשַׁמֵּט אֲנִי״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וַאֲמַרְתְּ לֵיהּ ״אַף עַל פִּי כֵן״? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְאִי אֲמַרְתְּ לֵיהּ ״אַף עַל פִּי כֵן״, הֲוָה שַׁקְלִינְהוּ מִינָּךְ; הַשְׁתָּא מִיהַת אַמְטִינְהוּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ, וְאֵימָא לֵיהּ ״אַף עַל פִּי כֵן״. אֲזַל אַמְטִינְהוּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ, וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ ״אַף עַל פִּי כֵן״. שַׁקְלִינְהוּ מִינֵּיהּ, אָמַר: לָא הֲוָה בֵּיהּ דַּעְתָּא בְּהַאי צוּרְבָּא מֵרַבָּנַן מֵעִיקָּרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye **went to** Abba bar Marta, and **said to him: Did you bring the money to** the **Master? He said to him: Yes.** Abaye **said to him: And what did he say to you? He said to him** that Rabba had responded: **I abrogate** this debt. Abaye **said to him: And did you say to him: Nevertheless,** I want to repay you? Abba bar Marta **said to him: No.** Abaye **said to him: But if you had said to him: Nevertheless,** I want to repay you, **he would have taken it from you. Now, in any event, bring it to him and say to him: Nevertheless,** I want to repay you. Abba bar Marta **went** and **brought** the money **to** Rabba **and said to him: Nevertheless,** I want to repay you, and Rabba **took it from him.** In the end, Rabba **said: This Torah scholar was not knowledgeable from the beginning,** as it was necessary to teach him how to react.


###### Gittin 37b:5
[Gittin 37b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:5)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: נֶאֱמָן אָדָם לוֹמַר: ״פְּרוֹסְבּוּל הָיָה בְּיָדִי, וְאָבַד מִמֶּנִּי״. מַאי טַעְמָא? כֵּיוָן דְּתַקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן פְּרוֹסְבּוּל, לָא שָׁבֵיק הֶיתֵּירָא וְאָכֵיל אִיסּוּרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Yehuda says** that **Rav Naḥman says: A person is deemed credible to say: I had a *prosbol* and I lost it,** and collect payment of his debt. The Gemara explains: **What is the reason** for this? **Since the Sages instituted** the ***prosbol*** in a manner that allows anyone to write one without difficulty, in a situation such as this **one does not leave aside a permitted** item, i.e., collecting a debt after having written a *prosbol*, **and eat a forbidden** item, i.e., collecting a debt without having written a *prosbol*.


###### Gittin 37b:6
[Gittin 37b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:6)

כִּי אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִידֵּי פְּרוֹסְבּוּל הָיָה לְךָ וְאָבַד? כְּגוֹן זֶה, ״פְּתַח פִּיךָ לָאִלֵּם״ הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When they would come before Rav** with a case where a creditor who did not have a *prosbol* was demanding payment of a debt after the Sabbatical Year, **he** would **say to** the creditor: **Did you have any *prosbol* and it was lost?** The Gemara explains that **this is** a case **where** the directive of the verse: **“Open your mouth for the mute”** (Proverbs 31:8) is applicable; this is not considered an intervention on behalf of one party, as it is only providing assistance for someone who was unaware of a claim that he should make.


###### Gittin 37b:7
[Gittin 37b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:7)

תְּנַן: וְכֵן בַּעַל חוֹב שֶׁמּוֹצִיא שְׁטַר חוֹב, וְאֵין עִמּוֹ פְּרוֹסְבּוּל – הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ לֹא יִפָּרְעוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges: **Didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Ketubot* 89a): **And similarly, a creditor who presents a promissory note unaccompanied by a *prosbol*, these** debts **may not be collected.** This demonstrates that even if a creditor himself claims that he had written a *prosbol* but it was lost, his claim is not accepted and the debt is canceled.


###### Gittin 37b:8
[Gittin 37b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:8)

תַּנָּאֵי הִיא – דְּתַנְיָא: הַמּוֹצִיא שְׁטַר חוֹב – צָרִיךְ שֶׁיְּהֵא עִמּוֹ פְּרוֹסְבּוּל. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: It **is** a dispute between ***tanna’im*, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: With regard to **one who presents a promissory note** after the Sabbatical Year, **he must** present **a *prosbol*** along **with it** in order to collect payment, **and the Rabbis say: He does not need** to present a *prosbol*, as it is assumed that he wrote one.


###### Gittin 37b:9
[Gittin 37b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:9)

**מַתְנִי׳** עֶבֶד שֶׁנִּשְׁבָּה וּפְדָאוּהוּ, אִם לְשׁוּם עֶבֶד – יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד; אִם לְשׁוּם בֶּן חוֹרִין – לֹא יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In the case of a Canaanite **slave that was captured, and** Jews who had not owned him **redeemed him, if** he was redeemed **to be a slave** then **he will be a slave. If** he was redeemed **to be a freeman** then **he will not be a slave. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Both in this** case **and in that** case **he will be a slave.**


###### Gittin 37b:10
[Gittin 37b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:10)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן? אִילֵימָא לִפְנֵי יֵאוּשׁ, לְשׁוּם בֶּן חוֹרִין – אַמַּאי לָא יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד? אֶלָּא לְאַחַר יֵאוּשׁ, לְשׁוּם עֶבֶד – אַמַּאי יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **With what are we dealing? If we say** that the slave was redeemed **before** the first owner reached a state of **despairing** with regard to recovering the slave, then even if he was redeemed **to be a freeman,** he should still belong to his first owner; **why** would the mishna state that **he will not be a slave? Rather,** we might say that the slave was redeemed **after** the **despairing** of the first owner. Then, even if he was redeemed **to be a slave, why will he be a slave?** After his owner despairs of recovering him, he becomes ownerless property and consequently acquires his own freedom.


###### Gittin 37b:11
[Gittin 37b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:11)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לְעוֹלָם לִפְנֵי יֵאוּשׁ, וּלְשׁוּם עֶבֶד – יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד לְרַבּוֹ רִאשׁוֹן, לְשׁוּם בֶּן חוֹרִין – לֹא יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד לֹא לְרַבּוֹ רִאשׁוֹן וְלֹא לְרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי; לְרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי לָא, דְּהָא לְשׁוּם בֶּן חוֹרִין פַּרְקֵיהּ, לְרַבּוֹ רִאשׁוֹן נָמֵי לָא, דִּילְמָא מִמַּנְעִי וְלָא פָּרְקִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said: Actually,** the mishna is referring to a case where the slave was redeemed **before** the **despairing** of the owner. Therefore, according to the unattributed opinion of the mishna, if he was redeemed **to be a slave, he will be a slave to his first master.** If he was redeemed **to be a freeman, he will not be a slave, neither to his first master nor to his second master,** i.e., the one who redeemed him. He will **not** be a slave **to his second master because he redeemed him as a freeman** and cannot now demand that he become a slave. He will **also not** be a slave **to his first master lest** people **refrain from redeeming** slaves. If they know that a redeemed slave remains a slave of his original owner, they will not see any reason to redeem them from captivity.


###### Gittin 37b:12
[Gittin 37b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:12)

רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד – קָסָבַר: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּצְוָה לִפְדּוֹת אֶת בְּנֵי חוֹרִין, כָּךְ מִצְוָה לִפְדּוֹת אֶת הָעֲבָדִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye continues his explication of the mishna: **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Both in this** case **and in that** case **he will be a slave** to his first master. The Gemara explains: **He holds** that **just as it is a mitzva to redeem freemen, so** too, **it is a mitzva to redeem slaves,** and there is no concern that people will refrain from redeeming captured slaves.


###### Gittin 37b:13
[Gittin 37b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:13)

רָבָא אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם לְאַחַר יֵאוּשׁ, וּלְשׁוּם עֶבֶד – יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד לְרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי, לְשׁוּם בֶּן חוֹרִין – לֹא יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד לֹא לְרַבּוֹ רִאשׁוֹן וְלֹא לְרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי; לְרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי לָא, דְּהָא לְשׁוּם בֶּן חוֹרִין פַּרְקֵיהּ, לְרַבּוֹ רִאשׁוֹן נָמֵי לָא, דְּהָא לְאַחַר יֵאוּשׁ הֲוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** The mishna should be understood differently. **Actually,** the mishna is referring to a case where the slave was redeemed **after** the **despairing** of the owner. **And** therefore, according to the unattributed opinion in the mishna, if he was redeemed **to be a slave** then **he will be a slave to his second master,** as his original owner had despaired of recovering him. If he was redeemed **to be a freeman** then **he will not be a slave, neither to his first master nor to his second master.** He will **not** be a slave **to his second master as he redeemed him as a freeman.** He will **also not** be a slave **to his first master, as** he **was** freed **after** the **despairing** of the first master.


###### Gittin 37b:14
[Gittin 37b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:14)

רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד – כִּדְחִזְקִיָּה, דְּאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה: מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ יִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד? שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא כׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הוֹלֵךְ וּמַפִּיל עַצְמוֹ לִגְיָיסוֹת, וּמַפְקִיעַ עַצְמוֹ מִיָּד רַבּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava continues his explication of the mishna: **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Both in this** case **and in that** case **he will be a slave.** This should be understood **in accordance with** the statement **of Ḥizkiyya, as Ḥizkiyya said: For what** reason did **they say** that **both in this** case **and in that** case **he will be a slave?** They said it **so that each and every** slave **should not go and hand himself over to** gentile **troops, and** in this manner **release himself from the possession of his master.**


###### Gittin 37b:15
[Gittin 37b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:15)

מֵיתִיבִי, אָמַר לָהֶן רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּצְוָה לִפְדּוֹת אֶת בְּנֵי חוֹרִין, כָּךְ מִצְוָה לִפְדּוֹת אֶת הָעֲבָדִים. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְאַבָּיֵי – דְּאָמַר לִפְנֵי יֵאוּשׁ, הַיְינוּ דְּקָאָמַר ״כְּשֵׁם״;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to Rava’s explanation from a *baraita*: **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to them: Just as it is a mitzva to redeem freemen, so** too, **it is a mitzva to redeem slaves. Granted, according to Abaye** this works out well **as he said** that the mishna is referring to a slave that was redeemed **before** the **despairing** of his owner, and the unattributed opinion of the mishna rules that he will not be a slave to his original owner due to a concern that people will refrain from redeeming slaves. **This is** the reason **that he said: Just as,** since he was explaining that this concern does not exist.


###### Gittin 37b:16
[Gittin 37b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:16)

אֶלָּא לְרָבָא – דְּאָמַר לְאַחַר יֵאוּשׁ, הַאי ״כְּשֵׁם״?! מִשּׁוּם דְּחִזְקִיָּה הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However, according to Rava, who said** that the mishna is referring to a slave that was redeemed **after** the owner’s **despairing,** and the unattributed opinion of the mishna is not concerned that people will refrain from redeeming slaves, is **this** the rationale of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, that **just as** it is a mitzva to redeem freemen, so too, it is a mitzva to redeem slaves? His reason **is because** of the statement **of Ḥizkiyya.**


###### Gittin 37b:17
[Gittin 37b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:17)

אָמַר לָךְ רָבָא: רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לָא הָוֵי יָדַע מַאי קָאָמְרִי רַבָּנַן, וְהָכִי קָאָמַר לְהוּ: אִי לִפְנֵי יֵאוּשׁ קָאָמְרִיתוּ – הַיְינוּ ״כְּשֵׁם״; אִי לְאַחַר יֵאוּשׁ קָאָמְרִיתוּ – כִּדְחִזְקִיָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Rava** could have **said to you: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel did not know what** exactly **the Rabbis said, and this is what he said to them: If you say** this ruling with regard to a slave who was redeemed **before** his owner’s **despairing, this is** my response, that **just as** it is a mitzva to redeem freemen, so too, it is a mitzva to redeem slaves. **If you say** that this case was **after** his owner’s **despairing,** then the reason that I disagree is **in accordance with** the statement **of Ḥizkiyya.**


###### Gittin 37b:18
[Gittin 37b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:18)

וּלְרָבָא – דְּאָמַר לְאַחַר יֵאוּשׁ, וּלְרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי; רַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי מִמַּאן קָנֵי לֵיהּ – מִשַּׁבַּאי, שַׁבַּאי גּוּפֵיהּ מִי קָנֵי לֵיהּ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And according to Rava, who said** that the mishna is referring to where the slave was redeemed **after** the **despairing** of the owner, **and** he will be a slave **to his second master,** one can ask: With regard to the **second master, from whom did he acquire** the slave? If you say that he acquired him **from the captor, did** the gentile **captor himself acquire** the slave? The ownership of the second master is contingent on his acquiring the slave from someone who himself had ownership over the slave.


###### Gittin 37b:19
[Gittin 37b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/37b:19)

אִין; קָנֵי לֵיהּ לְמַעֲשֶׂה יָדָיו – דְּאָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מִנַּיִן לְגוֹי, שֶׁקָּנָה אֶת הַגּוֹי לְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדָיו? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְגַם מִבְּנֵי הַתּוֹשָׁבִים הַגָּרִים עִמָּכֶם מֵהֶם תִּקְנוּ״ – אַתֶּם קוֹנִים מֵהֶם,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Yes, he acquired** ownership **with regard to his labor, as Reish Lakish says: From where** is it derived **that a gentile can acquire** another **gentile** as a slave **with regard to his labor? As it is stated: “Moreover, of the children of the strangers who sojourn among you, of them you may acquire”** (Leviticus 25:45). This indicates that **you,** Jews, can **acquire** slaves **from them,**