(Mishnah): A (debt upon which a) Prozbul (was written) is not cancelled. This is one of the laws that Hillel enacted when he saw that people were refraining from lending money (before Sheviis) and transgressing the pasuk (Devarim 15:9), "Beware, lest there be in your heart an unfaithful thought, saying, ("The seventh year, the year of release has approached,'' and you will be miserly with your needy brother and not give him etc.'') - so Hillel enacted Prozbul.

What's the main body of its text? "I declare to you, Ploni and Ploni, the judges of the place Ploni, that any debt that I am owed, I will collect it whenever I wish''. And the judges (who may also act as witnesses) or the witnesses sign below.

(Gemara): (The Gemara now continues to quote from the Baraisa that was brought at the end of Chulin 44 before this Mishnah) It was this law of one who gives over his documents to Beis Din that was the Torah basis for the enactment of Prozbul. But does a Prozbul help Min HaTorah?

Answer: When Hillel enacted it, it was supported by the Torah law of giving over one's documents to Beis Din. (A Prozbul extends this one step further, as it considers it as if he had given them over to Beis Din.)

Question (Rav Chuna to R. Yaakov bar Acha): According to the opinion that one is obliged to give Ma'asros according to Torah law (even during the period of the Second Temple), (that means that the Mitzvos of Shemita are also Torah law - including the cancellation of loans). So how could Hillel make an enactment against the Torah?

(R. Yosi): Doesn't everyone agree that from when they were exiled to Bavel (at the time of the destruction of the first Temple) they only became exempt from the land-related Mitzvos and since the cancellation of loans is not land-related as it applies even in Chutz LaAretz, they still had a Torah obligation?

(R. Yosi): Rather, the pasuk states (Vayikra 15:2), "And this is the matter of Shemita, cancel..'' - when Shemita is observed Min HaTorah, the cancellation of loans is observed both in Eretz Yisrael and in Chutz LaAretz. When it is observed MiDeRabbanan, the cancellation of loans is observed in Eretz Yisrael and in Chutz LaAretz MiDeRabbanan.

Explanation #2: In Bavel they say that even according to the opinion that one is obliged to give Ma'asros according to Torah law, he agrees that observing Shemita is Rabbinic, as a Baraisa taught...

"And this is the matter of Shemita, cancel (Shemot)'' - Rebbi says that these two 'Shemitin' refer to Shemita and Yovel - when Yovel is observed, Shemita is observed Min HaTorah; when Yovel stops, Shemita is observed MiDeRabbanan.

When did Yovel stop being observed? The pasuk states about Yovel (Vayikra 25:10), "(...and proclaim freedom [for slaves] throughout the land for all) its inhabitants...'' - when its inhabitants are living there, but not when they are exiled from it. If they were living there but not in their correct tribal lands - with the tribe of Yehuda living in Binyamin's land and vice-versa, I might have thought that Yovel is observed, but the pasuk says, "for all of its inhabitants'' (rather than just saying 'for its inhabitants'). So once the tribes of Reuven, Gad and half of Menashe were exiled, Yovel observance stopped.

(R. Chizkiyah citing R. Yirmiyah): (The Mishnah taught the wording of the main body of the text.) Even if the Prozbul was given over in the Beis Din in Rome (where neither the lender nor the borrower are located), it is valid.

(R. Ba citing the Rabbis of Bavel): Three judges that judged a case and then one died, the other two sign, and write, "even though we signed as two, we judged as three''.

Support (R. Chaggai): Our Mishnah taught that the judges or the witnesses sign below. (Two judges are permitted, since it had begun with three.)

Question: Can we learn the laws of monetary cases from Prozbul?

Answer: Yes, as a Baraisa taught - 'If the borrower doesn't have land but those that owe him do have land, the lender may write a Przobul.'

What should he do? If Reuven owes Shimon and Levi owes Reuven; if Reuven doesn't own a field (see next Mishnah) and Levi does, they may write a Prozbul for Shimon because of the property of Levi. (This concept is learned from the law of Shibuda D'R. Nasan, which applies in monetary cases - see, for example, Kesubos Bavli 19a and Pesach Bavli 31a. This shows that we equate the laws of Prozbul with other monetary laws.)