Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

September 12, 2018 | 讙壮 讘转砖专讬 转砖注状讟

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Menachot 33

Various laws relating to mezuzot are discussed. Where? In what positions? On what types of entrances?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讘讟驻讞 讛住诪讜讱 诇专砖讜转 讛专讘讬诐 讻诪讛 讚诪专讞拽 诪注诇讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

in the handbreadth adjacent to the public domain, perhaps the further the mezuza is from the inside of the house the better, and one may affix it even fully outside the airspace of the entrance. To counter this, Shmuel teaches us that the mezuza must be within the airspace of the entrance itself.

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讻转讘讛 注诇 砖谞讬 讚驻讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 诪讬转讬讘讬 讻转讘讛 注诇 砖谞讬 讚驻讬谉 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讘砖谞讬 住讬驻讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 讛讗 讘住祝 讗讞讚 讻砖专讛 专讗讜讬讛 诇砖谞讬 住讬驻讬谉 拽讗诪专

And Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: If one wrote a mezuza on two sheets it is unfit. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita that teaches: If one wrote a mezuza on two sheets and placed it on the two doorposts of the entrance, it is unfit. The Gemara states the objection: By inference, if the mezuza was affixed on one doorpost, it is fit, despite the fact that it is written on two sheets. The Gemara answers: The baraita is not referring to a case where one affixed the mezuza on two doorposts. Rather, the baraita is saying that if it was written on two sheets in such a manner that it is fit to be affixed to two doorposts, i.e., there is a space between the writing of the first and second passages, so that one can separate the two sheets for different doorposts, it is unfit. This is in accordance with the statement of Rav Yehuda, citing Shmuel.

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讘诪讝讜讝讛 讛诇讱 讗讞专 讛讬讻专 爪讬专 诪讗讬 讛讬讻专 爪讬专 讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讗讘拽转讗 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讻讙讜谉 驻讬转讞讗 讚讘讬谉 转专讬 讘转讬 讘讬谉 讘讬 讙讘专讬 诇讘讬 谞砖讬

And Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The halakha is that a mezuza must be affixed to the doorpost on its right side, and the right side is determined by the direction from which one enters the room. With regard to a mezuza, when deciding which side is the right side, one should follow the indication of the hinge. The The Gemara asks: What is the indication of the hinge? Rav Adda said: The socket into which the hinge is inserted. The room with the socket is considered the inside room, and the mezuza is affixed to the side which is on one鈥檚 right when entering that room. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances, i.e., in what kind of case was this guideline to follow the indication of the hinge necessary? The Gemara answers: This indication is necessary in a case where there is an entrance that is between two houses, e.g., between a room for men and a room for women, as in such a situation the direction of the entrance is unclear.

专讬砖 讙诇讜转讗 讘谞讗 讘讬转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 拽讘注 诇讬 诪讝讜讝转讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 转诇讬 讚砖讬 讘专讬砖讗

The Gemara relates: The Exilarch built a new house. He said to Rav Na岣an: Affix mezuzot for me in the house. Rav Na岣an said: First erect the doors, so that I can affix the mezuzot in the appropriate places, according to the placement of the hinges.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 注砖讗讛 讻诪讬谉 谞讙专 驻住讜诇讛 讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讻讜诇讛讜 诪讝讜讝转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讻诪讬谉 谞讙专 讛讜讜 注讘讬讚谉 讜讛讛讬讗 驻讬转讞讗 讚注讬讬诇 讘讬讛 专讘讬 诇讘讬 诪讚专砖讗 诇讗 讛讜讛 诇讛 诪讝讜讝讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚注讘讬讚讗 讻住讬讻转讗 讛讗 讚注讘讬讚讗 讻讗讬住转讜讬专讗

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one fashioned a mezuza like a bolt, i.e., he wedged it into a hole in the doorpost of a gate, or affixed it to the doorpost horizontally, it is unfit. The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so? But when Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: All the mezuzot in the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi were fashioned like a bolt, and he also said: That entrance by which Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi entered the study hall did not have a mezuza. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This ruling, that it is unfit, is referring to a case where it is prepared like a peg, i.e., he inserted it deep into the doorpost while it was lying horizontally. That ruling, that it is fit, is referring to a case where it is prepared like an ankle [ke鈥檌stevira], i.e., it is vertical.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讛讛讜讗 驻讬转讞讗 讚讛讜讛 注讬讬诇 讘讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讘讬 诪讚专砖讗 讜讛讜讬讗 诇讛 诪讝讜讝讛 讛讛讜讗 专讙讬诇 讛讜讛 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讘诪讝讜讝讛 讛诇讱 讗讞专 讛专讙讬诇

With regard to the second element of Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef鈥檚 statement, that the entrance by which Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi entered the study hall did not have a mezuza, the Gemara asks: Is that so? But what of that entrance by which Rav Huna would enter the study hall, which had a mezuza? The Gemara answers: That entrance was the one through which all were accustomed to enter the study hall. By contrast, the entrance that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi used was a side entrance, which was designated for him alone. Consequently, it was exempt from the obligation to affix a mezuza, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: With regard to a mezuza, follow the entrance that people are accustomed to using.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪爪讜讛 诇讛谞讬讞讛 讘转讞诇转 砖诇讬砖 讛注诇讬讜谉 讜专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诪讙讘讬讛 诪谉 讛拽专拽注 讟驻讞 讜诪专讞讬拽 诪谉 讛拽讜专讛 讟驻讞 讜讻诇 讛驻转讞 讻讜诇讜 讻砖专 诇诪讝讜讝讛

Rabbi Zeira says that Rav Mattana says that Shmuel says: It is a mitzva to place the mezuza at the beginning of the upper third of the doorpost. And Rav Huna says: One raises the mezuza a handbreadth from the ground, or one distances it from the cross beam, i.e., the lintel, a handbreadth, and the entire entrance between those two handbreadths is fit for the placement of the mezuza.

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪讙讘讬讛 诪谉 讛拽专拽注 讟驻讞 讜诪专讞讬拽 诪谉 讛拽讜专讛 讟驻讞 讜讻诇 讛驻转讞 讻讜诇讜 讻砖专 诇诪讝讜讝讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讜拽砖专转诐 讜讻转讘转诐 诪讛 拽砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讘讛 讗祝 讻转讬讘讛 讘讙讜讘讛

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: One raises the mezuza a handbreadth from the ground, or one distances it from the cross beam a handbreadth, and the entire entrance between those two handbreadths is fit for the placement of the mezuza; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: The verse states: 鈥淎nd you shall bind them for a sign upon your arm鈥 (Deuteronomy 6:8), and then it states: 鈥淎nd you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house鈥 (Deuteronomy 6:9). Just as the binding of the phylacteries is performed on the upper part of the arm, so too, the writing, i.e., the placement, of a mezuza must be specifically on the upper part of the entrance.

讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诇讗 诇砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专 讻诪讗谉 诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬

The Gemara explains the objection: Granted, according to Rav Huna, he states his ruling in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda; but according to Shmuel, in accordance with whose opinion does he state his ruling? It is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, and it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 谞转谉 诇注讜诇诐 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬

Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said: Actually, Shmuel鈥檚 ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei,

讜诪讗讬 转讞讬诇转 砖诇讬砖 讛注诇讬讜谉 讚拽讗 讗诪专 诇讛专讞讬拽讛 砖诇讗 诇讛专讞讬拽讛 诪谉 讛拽讜专讛 砖诇 诪注诇讛 讬讜转专 诪砖诇讬砖

and what is the meaning of the phrase: The beginning of the upper third of the entrance, that Shmuel says? This is referring to the maximum distancing of the mezuza from the doorframe, i.e., that one should not distance it from the upper cross beam more than one-third of the height of the entrance.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪爪讜讛 诇讛谞讬讞讛 讘讟驻讞 讛住诪讜讱 诇专砖讜转 讛专讘讬诐 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 专讘谞谉 讗诪专讬 讻讚讬 砖讬驻讙注 讘诪讝讜讝讛 诪讬讚 专讘 讞谞讬谞讗 诪住讜专讗 讗讜诪专 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚转讬谞讟专讬讛

Rava says: It is a mitzva to place the mezuza in the handbreadth adjacent to the public domain. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Rabbis say that it is in order that one encounter the mezuza immediately upon one鈥檚 entrance to the house. Rav 岣nina from Sura says: It is in order that the mezuza protect the entire house, by placing it as far outside as one can.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘讜讗 讜专讗讛 砖诇讗 讻诪讚转 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪讚转 讘砖专 讜讚诐 诪讚转 讘砖专 讜讚诐 诪诇讱 讬讜砖讘 诪讘驻谞讬诐 讜注诐 诪砖诪专讬谉 讗讜转讜 诪讘讞讜抓 诪讚转 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 讗讬谞讜 讻谉 注讘讚讬讜 讬讜砖讘讬谉 诪讘驻谞讬诐 讜讛讜讗 诪砖诪专谉 诪讘讞讜抓 砖谞讗诪专 讛壮 砖讜诪专讱 讛壮 爪诇讱 注诇 讬讚 讬诪讬谞讱

The Gemara adds: Rabbi 岣nina says: Come and see that the attribute of flesh and blood is not like the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He. The attribute of flesh and blood is that a king sits inside his palace, and the people protect him from the outside, whereas with regard to the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He, it is not so. Rather, His servants, the Jewish people, sit inside their homes, and He protects them from the outside. As it is stated: 鈥淭he Lord is your keeper, the Lord is your shade upon your right hand鈥 (Psalms 121:5).

讚专砖 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讛注诪讬拽 诇讛 讟驻讞 驻住讜诇讛 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注讗 诇讬讛 讛谞讬讞讛 讘驻爪讬谉 讗讜 砖讟诇讛 注诇讬讛 诪诇讘谉 讗诐 讬砖 砖诐 讟驻讞 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转 讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转

Rav Yosef, son of Rava, taught in the name of Rava: If one dug one handbreadth deep into the doorpost and placed a mezuza there, it is unfit. The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the following baraita supports his ruling: In a case where one affixed a mezuza deep in the wooden doorpost of an entrance, or after placing it in the entrance one added [tala] an inner framework [malben] to it that covers the doorpost, if there is a depth of one handbreadth there, one requires another mezuza, but if not, one does not require another mezuza.

讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 讘驻转讞 砖讗讞讜专讬 讛讚诇转

The Gemara deflects the support: When that baraita is taught, it is referring to an entrance that is behind the door, i.e., there is another entrance on the other side of the framework, which serves for both entrances. The baraita is teaching that if the framework is one handbreadth thick, then each side is considered a separate entrance, and each requires its own mezuza.

讛讗 讘讛讚讬讗 拽转谞讬 诇讛 驻转讞 砖讗讞讜专讬 讛讚诇转 讗诐 讬砖 砖诐 讟驻讞 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转 讻讬爪讚 拽转谞讬

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But the same baraita teaches explicitly this ruling of the case of another entrance: With regard to an entrance that is behind the door, if there is a depth of one handbreadth there, one requires another mezuza, but if not, one does not require another mezuza. The Gemara explains: This clause of the baraita is teaching which case is the subject of the previous clause, i.e., the baraita does not state two halakhot but only one, which it explains as it proceeds: In what case is it taught that if there is a depth of a handbreadth there, one requires another mezuza? It is taught in the case of an entrance that is behind the door.

转谞讗 讛注诪讬讚 诇讛 诪诇讘谉 砖诇 拽谞讬诐 讞讜转讱 砖驻讜驻专转 讜诪谞讬讞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖讛注诪讬讚 讜诇讘住讜祝 讞转讱 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讗讘诇 讞转讱 讜讛谞讬讞 讜诇讘住讜祝 讛注诪讬讚 驻住讜诇讛 转注砖讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛注砖讜讬

搂 It is taught in a baraita with regard to the affixing of a mezuza: If one positions a mezuza in an entrance which was a framework of reeds, to which one cannot affix the mezuza with nails, he carves a kind of tube from the reed on the right side and places the mezuza in that tube. Rav A岣, son of Rava, says: They taught that one may affix the mezuza in this manner only in a case where one positioned the framework in its place first, and ultimately carved a tube and then placed the mezuza in it. But if before positioning the framework one carved a tube and placed the mezuza in it, and ultimately positioned the framework, the mezuza is unfit. This in accordance with the principle stated with regard to objects used for mitzvot: Prepare it, and not from what has already been prepared. In this case he affixed the mezuza before the obligation took effect with regard to the framework.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛谞讬 驻讬转讞讬 砖讬诪讗讬 驻讟讜专讬谉 诪谉 讛诪讝讜讝讛 诪讗讬 驻讬转讞讬 砖讬诪讗讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讛 专讘 专讬讞讜诪讬 讜讗讘讗 讬讜住讬 讞讚 讗诪专 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 转拽专讛 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 砖拽讜驻讬

And Rava says: With regard to these broken entrances [pit岣i shima鈥檈i], which lack the proper form of doorways, one is exempt from the obligation of placing a mezuza. The Gemara asks: What are broken entrances? Rav Ri岣mi and Abba Yosei disagree with regard to this. One says that they do not have a proper ceiling, and one says that they do not have lintels [shakofei] above the openings.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗讻住讚专讛 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪讝讜讝讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诇讛 驻爪讬诪讬谉 讛讗 讬砖 诇讛 驻爪讬诪讬谉 讞讬讬讘 诇讞讬讝讜拽 转拽专讛 讛讜讗 讚注讘讬讚讬

Rabba bar Sheila says that Rav 岣sda says: With regard to a portico, i.e., a structure at the entrance to a house that is entirely open on its front side, one is exempt from the obligation of placing a mezuza, because it does not have doorposts [patzimin] on its sides. The Gemara questions this reason: This indicates that if it has doorposts, one would be obligated to place a mezuza. But that is not logical, as these doorposts are not there to serve as an entrance; rather, they are made to strengthen the ceiling. In that case, why should one be obligated?

讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讬砖 诇讛 驻爪讬诪讬谉 驻讟讜专讛 砖讗讬谉 注砖讜讬讬谉 讗诇讗 诇讞讬讝讜拽 诇转拽专讛 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讞讝讬谞讗 诇讛讜 诇讗讬住驻诇讬讚讬 讚讘讬 诪专 讚讗讬转 诇讛讜 驻爪讬诪讬 讜诇讬转 诇讛讜 诪讝讜讝转讗 拽住讘专 诇讞讬讝讜拽 转拽专讛 讛讜讗 讚注讘讬讚讬

The Gemara answers: This is what Rav 岣sda is saying: Even if it has doorposts, one is exempt from the obligation to place a mezuza there, because they are made only to strengthen the ceiling, not as an entrance. Similarly, Abaye said: I saw the porticos [le鈥檌spelidei] of the house of the Master, Rabba, that they had doorposts but they did not have mezuzot. Rabba evidently holds that its doorposts are made to strengthen the ceiling.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讘讬转 砖注专 讗讻住讚专讛 讜诪专驻住转 讞讬讬讘讬谉 讘诪讝讜讝讛 讘讗讻住讚专讛 讚讘讬 专讘 讗讻住讚专讛 讚讘讬 专讘 讻讗讬谞讚专讜谞讗 诪注诇讬讬转讗 讛讜讗 讘讗讻住讚专讛 专讜诪讬转讗

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: With regard to a gatehouse, a portico, and a balcony, one is obligated to place a mezuza. The Gemara answers: The halakha of the baraita is stated with regard to a specific type of portico, the portico of a study hall, which is closed on all sides, but its walls do not reach the ceiling. The Gemara raises a difficulty: A portico of a study hall is like a full-fledged room [inderona], and therefore it should not be labeled a portico with regard to the halakhot of mezuza. The Gemara answers: The halakha of the baraita is stated with regard to a Roman portico, which is more open than the portico of a study hall, as it is built with many windows instead of proper walls. The baraita is teaching that one is obligated to place a mezuza on this type of portico.

讗诪专 专讞讘讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讬 讛专讝讬拽讬 讞讬讬讘 讘砖转讬 诪讝讜讝讜转 诪讗讬 讘讬 讛专讝讬拽讬 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 住讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讘讬转 砖注专 讛驻转讜讞 诇讞爪专 讜讘转讬诐 驻转讜讞讬谉 诇讘讬转 砖注专

Ra岣va says that Rav Yehuda says: With regard to a bei harziki, one is obligated to place two mezuzot. The Gemara asks: What is a bei harziki? Rav Pappa the Elder says in the name of Rav: It is a gatehouse that opens to a courtyard, and houses also open directly to the gatehouse. It requires two mezuzot, one for the entrance from the courtyard to the gatehouse, and one for the entrance from the gatehouse to the houses.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讘讬转 砖注专 讛驻转讜讞 诇讙讬谞讛 讜诇拽讬讟讜谞讬转 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 谞讬讚讜谉 讻拽讬讟讜谞讬转 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞讬讚讜谉 讻讘讬转 砖注专 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪讙讬谞讛 诇讘讬转 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讞讬讬讘 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讘讬讗讛 讚讘讬转 讛讬讗

The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to a gatehouse that has two entrances, as it opens both to a garden, which is exempt from a mezuza, and to a small room [ulekitonit], Rabbi Yosei says: Its halakhic status is like that of a small room, and it requires a mezuza, and the Rabbis say: Its halakhic status is like that of a gatehouse, and it does not require a mezuza. There is a difference of opinion among amora鈥檌m with regard to this dispute. Rav and Shmuel both say: With regard to the entrance through which one enters from the garden to the house, i.e., the entrance of the gatehouse to the small room, everyone agrees that one is obligated to place a mezuza. What is the reason? It is the way of entering the house, and the house requires a mezuza.

讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 诪讘讬转 诇讙讬谞讛 诪专 住讘专 拽讬讟讜谞讬转 注讬拽专 讜诪专 住讘专 讙讬谞讛 注讬拽专

Rav and Shmuel continue: When they disagree it is with regard to the entrance through which one enters from the house to the garden, i.e., the entrance of the gatehouse to the garden. One Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the small room into which the gatehouse opens is the main area, and therefore the gatehouse, which is used for entering the small room, is considered like a regular gatehouse to a house, and all its entrances require a mezuza. And one Sage, the Rabbis, hold that the garden is the main area, and therefore this entrance does not require a mezuza.

专讘讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪讘讬转 诇讙讬谞讛 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚驻讟讜专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 驻讬转讞讗 讚讙讬谞讛 讛讜讗 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 诪讙讬谞讛 诇讘讬转 诪专 住讘专 讘讬讗讛 讚讘讬转 讛讜讗 讜诪专 住讘专 讻讜诇讛

Conversely, Rabba and Rav Yosef both say: With regard to the entrance through which one enters from the house to the garden, i.e., the entrance between the gatehouse and the garden, everyone agrees that one is exempt from placing a mezuza. What is the reason? It is the entrance to the garden, and the garden does not require a mezuza. When they disagree it is with regard to the entrance from the garden to the house, i.e., the entrance between the gatehouse and the small room. One Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that it is the way of entering the house, and the house requires a mezuza, and one Sage, the Rabbis, holds that the entire

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Menachot 33

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Menachot 33

讘讟驻讞 讛住诪讜讱 诇专砖讜转 讛专讘讬诐 讻诪讛 讚诪专讞拽 诪注诇讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉

in the handbreadth adjacent to the public domain, perhaps the further the mezuza is from the inside of the house the better, and one may affix it even fully outside the airspace of the entrance. To counter this, Shmuel teaches us that the mezuza must be within the airspace of the entrance itself.

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讻转讘讛 注诇 砖谞讬 讚驻讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 诪讬转讬讘讬 讻转讘讛 注诇 砖谞讬 讚驻讬谉 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讘砖谞讬 住讬驻讬谉 驻住讜诇讛 讛讗 讘住祝 讗讞讚 讻砖专讛 专讗讜讬讛 诇砖谞讬 住讬驻讬谉 拽讗诪专

And Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: If one wrote a mezuza on two sheets it is unfit. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita that teaches: If one wrote a mezuza on two sheets and placed it on the two doorposts of the entrance, it is unfit. The Gemara states the objection: By inference, if the mezuza was affixed on one doorpost, it is fit, despite the fact that it is written on two sheets. The Gemara answers: The baraita is not referring to a case where one affixed the mezuza on two doorposts. Rather, the baraita is saying that if it was written on two sheets in such a manner that it is fit to be affixed to two doorposts, i.e., there is a space between the writing of the first and second passages, so that one can separate the two sheets for different doorposts, it is unfit. This is in accordance with the statement of Rav Yehuda, citing Shmuel.

讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讘诪讝讜讝讛 讛诇讱 讗讞专 讛讬讻专 爪讬专 诪讗讬 讛讬讻专 爪讬专 讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讗讘拽转讗 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讻讙讜谉 驻讬转讞讗 讚讘讬谉 转专讬 讘转讬 讘讬谉 讘讬 讙讘专讬 诇讘讬 谞砖讬

And Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The halakha is that a mezuza must be affixed to the doorpost on its right side, and the right side is determined by the direction from which one enters the room. With regard to a mezuza, when deciding which side is the right side, one should follow the indication of the hinge. The The Gemara asks: What is the indication of the hinge? Rav Adda said: The socket into which the hinge is inserted. The room with the socket is considered the inside room, and the mezuza is affixed to the side which is on one鈥檚 right when entering that room. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances, i.e., in what kind of case was this guideline to follow the indication of the hinge necessary? The Gemara answers: This indication is necessary in a case where there is an entrance that is between two houses, e.g., between a room for men and a room for women, as in such a situation the direction of the entrance is unclear.

专讬砖 讙诇讜转讗 讘谞讗 讘讬转讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 拽讘注 诇讬 诪讝讜讝转讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 转诇讬 讚砖讬 讘专讬砖讗

The Gemara relates: The Exilarch built a new house. He said to Rav Na岣an: Affix mezuzot for me in the house. Rav Na岣an said: First erect the doors, so that I can affix the mezuzot in the appropriate places, according to the placement of the hinges.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 注砖讗讛 讻诪讬谉 谞讙专 驻住讜诇讛 讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讻讜诇讛讜 诪讝讜讝转讗 讚讘讬 专讘讬 讻诪讬谉 谞讙专 讛讜讜 注讘讬讚谉 讜讛讛讬讗 驻讬转讞讗 讚注讬讬诇 讘讬讛 专讘讬 诇讘讬 诪讚专砖讗 诇讗 讛讜讛 诇讛 诪讝讜讝讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚注讘讬讚讗 讻住讬讻转讗 讛讗 讚注讘讬讚讗 讻讗讬住转讜讬专讗

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: If one fashioned a mezuza like a bolt, i.e., he wedged it into a hole in the doorpost of a gate, or affixed it to the doorpost horizontally, it is unfit. The Gemara raises a difficulty: Is that so? But when Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: All the mezuzot in the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi were fashioned like a bolt, and he also said: That entrance by which Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi entered the study hall did not have a mezuza. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This ruling, that it is unfit, is referring to a case where it is prepared like a peg, i.e., he inserted it deep into the doorpost while it was lying horizontally. That ruling, that it is fit, is referring to a case where it is prepared like an ankle [ke鈥檌stevira], i.e., it is vertical.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讛讛讜讗 驻讬转讞讗 讚讛讜讛 注讬讬诇 讘讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讘讬 诪讚专砖讗 讜讛讜讬讗 诇讛 诪讝讜讝讛 讛讛讜讗 专讙讬诇 讛讜讛 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讘诪讝讜讝讛 讛诇讱 讗讞专 讛专讙讬诇

With regard to the second element of Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef鈥檚 statement, that the entrance by which Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi entered the study hall did not have a mezuza, the Gemara asks: Is that so? But what of that entrance by which Rav Huna would enter the study hall, which had a mezuza? The Gemara answers: That entrance was the one through which all were accustomed to enter the study hall. By contrast, the entrance that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi used was a side entrance, which was designated for him alone. Consequently, it was exempt from the obligation to affix a mezuza, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: With regard to a mezuza, follow the entrance that people are accustomed to using.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪爪讜讛 诇讛谞讬讞讛 讘转讞诇转 砖诇讬砖 讛注诇讬讜谉 讜专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 诪讙讘讬讛 诪谉 讛拽专拽注 讟驻讞 讜诪专讞讬拽 诪谉 讛拽讜专讛 讟驻讞 讜讻诇 讛驻转讞 讻讜诇讜 讻砖专 诇诪讝讜讝讛

Rabbi Zeira says that Rav Mattana says that Shmuel says: It is a mitzva to place the mezuza at the beginning of the upper third of the doorpost. And Rav Huna says: One raises the mezuza a handbreadth from the ground, or one distances it from the cross beam, i.e., the lintel, a handbreadth, and the entire entrance between those two handbreadths is fit for the placement of the mezuza.

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪讙讘讬讛 诪谉 讛拽专拽注 讟驻讞 讜诪专讞讬拽 诪谉 讛拽讜专讛 讟驻讞 讜讻诇 讛驻转讞 讻讜诇讜 讻砖专 诇诪讝讜讝讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讜拽砖专转诐 讜讻转讘转诐 诪讛 拽砖讬专讛 讘讙讜讘讛 讗祝 讻转讬讘讛 讘讙讜讘讛

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: One raises the mezuza a handbreadth from the ground, or one distances it from the cross beam a handbreadth, and the entire entrance between those two handbreadths is fit for the placement of the mezuza; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: The verse states: 鈥淎nd you shall bind them for a sign upon your arm鈥 (Deuteronomy 6:8), and then it states: 鈥淎nd you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house鈥 (Deuteronomy 6:9). Just as the binding of the phylacteries is performed on the upper part of the arm, so too, the writing, i.e., the placement, of a mezuza must be specifically on the upper part of the entrance.

讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诇讗 诇砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专 讻诪讗谉 诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬

The Gemara explains the objection: Granted, according to Rav Huna, he states his ruling in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda; but according to Shmuel, in accordance with whose opinion does he state his ruling? It is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, and it is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei.

讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 谞转谉 诇注讜诇诐 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬

Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said: Actually, Shmuel鈥檚 ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei,

讜诪讗讬 转讞讬诇转 砖诇讬砖 讛注诇讬讜谉 讚拽讗 讗诪专 诇讛专讞讬拽讛 砖诇讗 诇讛专讞讬拽讛 诪谉 讛拽讜专讛 砖诇 诪注诇讛 讬讜转专 诪砖诇讬砖

and what is the meaning of the phrase: The beginning of the upper third of the entrance, that Shmuel says? This is referring to the maximum distancing of the mezuza from the doorframe, i.e., that one should not distance it from the upper cross beam more than one-third of the height of the entrance.

讗诪专 专讘讗 诪爪讜讛 诇讛谞讬讞讛 讘讟驻讞 讛住诪讜讱 诇专砖讜转 讛专讘讬诐 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 专讘谞谉 讗诪专讬 讻讚讬 砖讬驻讙注 讘诪讝讜讝讛 诪讬讚 专讘 讞谞讬谞讗 诪住讜专讗 讗讜诪专 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚转讬谞讟专讬讛

Rava says: It is a mitzva to place the mezuza in the handbreadth adjacent to the public domain. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Rabbis say that it is in order that one encounter the mezuza immediately upon one鈥檚 entrance to the house. Rav 岣nina from Sura says: It is in order that the mezuza protect the entire house, by placing it as far outside as one can.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘讜讗 讜专讗讛 砖诇讗 讻诪讚转 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪讚转 讘砖专 讜讚诐 诪讚转 讘砖专 讜讚诐 诪诇讱 讬讜砖讘 诪讘驻谞讬诐 讜注诐 诪砖诪专讬谉 讗讜转讜 诪讘讞讜抓 诪讚转 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 讗讬谞讜 讻谉 注讘讚讬讜 讬讜砖讘讬谉 诪讘驻谞讬诐 讜讛讜讗 诪砖诪专谉 诪讘讞讜抓 砖谞讗诪专 讛壮 砖讜诪专讱 讛壮 爪诇讱 注诇 讬讚 讬诪讬谞讱

The Gemara adds: Rabbi 岣nina says: Come and see that the attribute of flesh and blood is not like the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He. The attribute of flesh and blood is that a king sits inside his palace, and the people protect him from the outside, whereas with regard to the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He, it is not so. Rather, His servants, the Jewish people, sit inside their homes, and He protects them from the outside. As it is stated: 鈥淭he Lord is your keeper, the Lord is your shade upon your right hand鈥 (Psalms 121:5).

讚专砖 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讛注诪讬拽 诇讛 讟驻讞 驻住讜诇讛 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注讗 诇讬讛 讛谞讬讞讛 讘驻爪讬谉 讗讜 砖讟诇讛 注诇讬讛 诪诇讘谉 讗诐 讬砖 砖诐 讟驻讞 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转 讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转

Rav Yosef, son of Rava, taught in the name of Rava: If one dug one handbreadth deep into the doorpost and placed a mezuza there, it is unfit. The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the following baraita supports his ruling: In a case where one affixed a mezuza deep in the wooden doorpost of an entrance, or after placing it in the entrance one added [tala] an inner framework [malben] to it that covers the doorpost, if there is a depth of one handbreadth there, one requires another mezuza, but if not, one does not require another mezuza.

讻讬 转谞讬讗 讛讛讬讗 讘驻转讞 砖讗讞讜专讬 讛讚诇转

The Gemara deflects the support: When that baraita is taught, it is referring to an entrance that is behind the door, i.e., there is another entrance on the other side of the framework, which serves for both entrances. The baraita is teaching that if the framework is one handbreadth thick, then each side is considered a separate entrance, and each requires its own mezuza.

讛讗 讘讛讚讬讗 拽转谞讬 诇讛 驻转讞 砖讗讞讜专讬 讛讚诇转 讗诐 讬砖 砖诐 讟驻讞 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讗讬谞讜 爪专讬讱 诪讝讜讝讛 讗讞专转 讻讬爪讚 拽转谞讬

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But the same baraita teaches explicitly this ruling of the case of another entrance: With regard to an entrance that is behind the door, if there is a depth of one handbreadth there, one requires another mezuza, but if not, one does not require another mezuza. The Gemara explains: This clause of the baraita is teaching which case is the subject of the previous clause, i.e., the baraita does not state two halakhot but only one, which it explains as it proceeds: In what case is it taught that if there is a depth of a handbreadth there, one requires another mezuza? It is taught in the case of an entrance that is behind the door.

转谞讗 讛注诪讬讚 诇讛 诪诇讘谉 砖诇 拽谞讬诐 讞讜转讱 砖驻讜驻专转 讜诪谞讬讞讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖讛注诪讬讚 讜诇讘住讜祝 讞转讱 讜讛谞讬讞讛 讗讘诇 讞转讱 讜讛谞讬讞 讜诇讘住讜祝 讛注诪讬讚 驻住讜诇讛 转注砖讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛注砖讜讬

搂 It is taught in a baraita with regard to the affixing of a mezuza: If one positions a mezuza in an entrance which was a framework of reeds, to which one cannot affix the mezuza with nails, he carves a kind of tube from the reed on the right side and places the mezuza in that tube. Rav A岣, son of Rava, says: They taught that one may affix the mezuza in this manner only in a case where one positioned the framework in its place first, and ultimately carved a tube and then placed the mezuza in it. But if before positioning the framework one carved a tube and placed the mezuza in it, and ultimately positioned the framework, the mezuza is unfit. This in accordance with the principle stated with regard to objects used for mitzvot: Prepare it, and not from what has already been prepared. In this case he affixed the mezuza before the obligation took effect with regard to the framework.

讜讗诪专 专讘讗 讛谞讬 驻讬转讞讬 砖讬诪讗讬 驻讟讜专讬谉 诪谉 讛诪讝讜讝讛 诪讗讬 驻讬转讞讬 砖讬诪讗讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讛 专讘 专讬讞讜诪讬 讜讗讘讗 讬讜住讬 讞讚 讗诪专 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 转拽专讛 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讚诇讬转 诇讛讜 砖拽讜驻讬

And Rava says: With regard to these broken entrances [pit岣i shima鈥檈i], which lack the proper form of doorways, one is exempt from the obligation of placing a mezuza. The Gemara asks: What are broken entrances? Rav Ri岣mi and Abba Yosei disagree with regard to this. One says that they do not have a proper ceiling, and one says that they do not have lintels [shakofei] above the openings.

讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗讻住讚专讛 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛诪讝讜讝讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诇讛 驻爪讬诪讬谉 讛讗 讬砖 诇讛 驻爪讬诪讬谉 讞讬讬讘 诇讞讬讝讜拽 转拽专讛 讛讜讗 讚注讘讬讚讬

Rabba bar Sheila says that Rav 岣sda says: With regard to a portico, i.e., a structure at the entrance to a house that is entirely open on its front side, one is exempt from the obligation of placing a mezuza, because it does not have doorposts [patzimin] on its sides. The Gemara questions this reason: This indicates that if it has doorposts, one would be obligated to place a mezuza. But that is not logical, as these doorposts are not there to serve as an entrance; rather, they are made to strengthen the ceiling. In that case, why should one be obligated?

讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讬砖 诇讛 驻爪讬诪讬谉 驻讟讜专讛 砖讗讬谉 注砖讜讬讬谉 讗诇讗 诇讞讬讝讜拽 诇转拽专讛 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讞讝讬谞讗 诇讛讜 诇讗讬住驻诇讬讚讬 讚讘讬 诪专 讚讗讬转 诇讛讜 驻爪讬诪讬 讜诇讬转 诇讛讜 诪讝讜讝转讗 拽住讘专 诇讞讬讝讜拽 转拽专讛 讛讜讗 讚注讘讬讚讬

The Gemara answers: This is what Rav 岣sda is saying: Even if it has doorposts, one is exempt from the obligation to place a mezuza there, because they are made only to strengthen the ceiling, not as an entrance. Similarly, Abaye said: I saw the porticos [le鈥檌spelidei] of the house of the Master, Rabba, that they had doorposts but they did not have mezuzot. Rabba evidently holds that its doorposts are made to strengthen the ceiling.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讘讬转 砖注专 讗讻住讚专讛 讜诪专驻住转 讞讬讬讘讬谉 讘诪讝讜讝讛 讘讗讻住讚专讛 讚讘讬 专讘 讗讻住讚专讛 讚讘讬 专讘 讻讗讬谞讚专讜谞讗 诪注诇讬讬转讗 讛讜讗 讘讗讻住讚专讛 专讜诪讬转讗

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: With regard to a gatehouse, a portico, and a balcony, one is obligated to place a mezuza. The Gemara answers: The halakha of the baraita is stated with regard to a specific type of portico, the portico of a study hall, which is closed on all sides, but its walls do not reach the ceiling. The Gemara raises a difficulty: A portico of a study hall is like a full-fledged room [inderona], and therefore it should not be labeled a portico with regard to the halakhot of mezuza. The Gemara answers: The halakha of the baraita is stated with regard to a Roman portico, which is more open than the portico of a study hall, as it is built with many windows instead of proper walls. The baraita is teaching that one is obligated to place a mezuza on this type of portico.

讗诪专 专讞讘讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讬 讛专讝讬拽讬 讞讬讬讘 讘砖转讬 诪讝讜讝讜转 诪讗讬 讘讬 讛专讝讬拽讬 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 住讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讘讬转 砖注专 讛驻转讜讞 诇讞爪专 讜讘转讬诐 驻转讜讞讬谉 诇讘讬转 砖注专

Ra岣va says that Rav Yehuda says: With regard to a bei harziki, one is obligated to place two mezuzot. The Gemara asks: What is a bei harziki? Rav Pappa the Elder says in the name of Rav: It is a gatehouse that opens to a courtyard, and houses also open directly to the gatehouse. It requires two mezuzot, one for the entrance from the courtyard to the gatehouse, and one for the entrance from the gatehouse to the houses.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讘讬转 砖注专 讛驻转讜讞 诇讙讬谞讛 讜诇拽讬讟讜谞讬转 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 谞讬讚讜谉 讻拽讬讟讜谞讬转 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞讬讚讜谉 讻讘讬转 砖注专 专讘 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪讙讬谞讛 诇讘讬转 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讞讬讬讘 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讘讬讗讛 讚讘讬转 讛讬讗

The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to a gatehouse that has two entrances, as it opens both to a garden, which is exempt from a mezuza, and to a small room [ulekitonit], Rabbi Yosei says: Its halakhic status is like that of a small room, and it requires a mezuza, and the Rabbis say: Its halakhic status is like that of a gatehouse, and it does not require a mezuza. There is a difference of opinion among amora鈥檌m with regard to this dispute. Rav and Shmuel both say: With regard to the entrance through which one enters from the garden to the house, i.e., the entrance of the gatehouse to the small room, everyone agrees that one is obligated to place a mezuza. What is the reason? It is the way of entering the house, and the house requires a mezuza.

讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 诪讘讬转 诇讙讬谞讛 诪专 住讘专 拽讬讟讜谞讬转 注讬拽专 讜诪专 住讘专 讙讬谞讛 注讬拽专

Rav and Shmuel continue: When they disagree it is with regard to the entrance through which one enters from the house to the garden, i.e., the entrance of the gatehouse to the garden. One Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that the small room into which the gatehouse opens is the main area, and therefore the gatehouse, which is used for entering the small room, is considered like a regular gatehouse to a house, and all its entrances require a mezuza. And one Sage, the Rabbis, hold that the garden is the main area, and therefore this entrance does not require a mezuza.

专讘讛 讜专讘 讬讜住祝 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪讘讬转 诇讙讬谞讛 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚驻讟讜专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 驻讬转讞讗 讚讙讬谞讛 讛讜讗 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 诪讙讬谞讛 诇讘讬转 诪专 住讘专 讘讬讗讛 讚讘讬转 讛讜讗 讜诪专 住讘专 讻讜诇讛

Conversely, Rabba and Rav Yosef both say: With regard to the entrance through which one enters from the house to the garden, i.e., the entrance between the gatehouse and the garden, everyone agrees that one is exempt from placing a mezuza. What is the reason? It is the entrance to the garden, and the garden does not require a mezuza. When they disagree it is with regard to the entrance from the garden to the house, i.e., the entrance between the gatehouse and the small room. One Sage, Rabbi Yosei, holds that it is the way of entering the house, and the house requires a mezuza, and one Sage, the Rabbis, holds that the entire

Scroll To Top