מנחות 33 — Soncino English Talmud

¹in the handbreadth nearest to the street, the further it is from the house the better, he therefore teaches us [that it is not so]. Rab Judah further said in the name of Samuel, If one wrote it on two sheets, it is invalid. An objection was raised: It was taught: If one wrote it on two sheets and fixed it on the two door-posts, it is invalid. It follows, however, that if it was placed on one doorpost it is valid! — [The Baraitha] meant that it could be placed on two door-posts. Rab Judah further said in the name of Samuel, In the law of mezuzah one must be guided by the conclusiveness of the hinge. What is meant by ‘the hinge’? — R. Adda said, The sockets [for the pin of the hinge]. In what circumstances? — For example, where there is a door between two houses, one house being for men and the other for women. The Exilarch once built a house and said to R. Nahman, ‘Fix the mezuzoth for me’; whereupon R. Nahman replied, ‘First put the door[-posts] in their places’. Rab Judah said in the name of Rab, If one fixed it in the manner of a bolt, it is invalid. But this cannot be, for when R. Isaac b. Joseph came [from Palestine] he reported that all the mezuzoth in Rabbi's house were fixed in the manner of a bolt, and also that the door through which Rabbi used to enter the House of Study had no mezuzah! — This is no contradiction, for in the one case it was attached horizontally, in the other it was bent at a right angle. But this too cannot be, for the door through which R. Huna used to enter the House of Study had a mezuzah! — That [door] was used more frequently [than the others]. And Rab Judah has said in the name of Rab that in the law of mezuzah one must decide upon the [door] most frequently used. R. Zera said in the name of R. Mattena who said it in the name of Samuel, The proper performance of the precept is to fix it at the beginning of the upper third of the door-post. But R. Huna said, It must be raised one handbreadth from the ground and it must be one handbreadth away from the lintel, otherwise the whole of the door-post is valid for the mezuzah. An objection was raised: It must be raised one handbreadth from the ground and it must be one handbreadth away from the lintel, otherwise the whole of the door-post is valid for the mezuzah. So R. Judah. R. Jose says, It is written, And thou shalt bind them, and And thou shalt write them: as the binding [of the tefillin] is high up, so the writing must be placed high up. Now according to R. Huna this is well, for he agrees with R. Judah; but with whom does Samuel agree? Neither with R. Judah nor with R. Jose! — R. Huna the son of R. Nathan answered, Indeed he agrees with R. Jose,^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ

^ᵃnote:So Tosaf. and Asheri. According to Rashi: ‘in two columns’.
^ᵇnote:Even though written on two sheets; contra Rab Judah.
^ᶜnote:In the Baraitha cited, the two sheets were actually placed on one door-post, but it could have been placed on the two door-posts since there were separate sheets; thus it is in accordance with Rab Judah.
^ᵈnote:Is one to be guided by the conclusiveness of the hinge.
^ᵉnote:The mezuzah must be affixed to the right door-post as one enters the house; in this case, however, where one door communicates between two houses, whilst each house has its own door leading into the street, it is difficult to establish which house leads into the other, and on which door-post of this door is the mezuzah to be fixed. We are therefore taught the following test: that side of the door where the sockets for the door-pin are placed is considered to be the inside. Accordingly the mezuzah must be affixed to the right door-post as one enters that house on the inside of which the sockets are found.
^ᶠnote:For only then arises the duty to fix the mezuzah.
^ᵍnote:I.e., horizontally.
^ʰnote:In which case it is invalid.
^ⁱnote:I.e., partly horizontal and partly vertical; like the thigh and the leg which form a right angle at the knee when sitting. In this case it is valid.
^ʲnote:The report that the door through which Rabbi used to enter the House of Study had no mezuzah.
^ᵏnote:I.e., in a room which has more than one door the mezuzah must be affixed to that door which is most frequently used.
^ˡnote:Deut. VI, 8.
^ᵐnote:Ibid. 9.
^ⁿnote:At the top of the head; v. infra 37a.
^ᵒnote:At the top of the door-post, close to the lintel.

²for by ‘the beginning of the upper third’ he meant that as the furthest point, for one should not fix it lower than a third of the door-post away from the lintel. Raba said, The proper performance of the precept is to fix it in the handbreadth nearest to the street. Why? — The Rabbis say, So that one should encounter a precept immediately [on one's return home]; R. Hanina of Sura says, So that it should protect the entire house. R. Hanina said, Come and see how the character of the Holy One, blessed be He, differs from that [of men] of flesh and blood. According to human standards, the king dwells within, and his servants keep guard on him from without; but with the Holy One, blessed be He, it is not so, for it is His servants that dwell within and He keeps guard over them from without; as it is said, The Lord is thy keeper; the Lord is thy shade upon thy right hand. R. Joseph the son of Raba stated in his discourse in the name of Raba, If one set it deep in the door-post, to the depth of a handbreadth, it is invalid. Shall we say that the following Baraitha supports him? For it was taught: If one set it in the post [of the door] or if one added another frame, and there was the depth of a handbreadth, another mezuzah is necessary, but if less, no other mezuzah is necessary! — That [first clause of the Baraitha] refers to a door behind a door. But this is expressly stated further on, [thus,] If there was a door behind a door and there was a depth of a handbreadth, another mezuzah is necessary, but if less, no other mezuzah is necessary! — This is merely stated as illustrating [the cases mentioned]. A Tanna taught: If a man set up a door-frame of [hollow] reeds, he may cut away a length of reed and place [the mezuzah in the hollow]. R. Aha the son of Raba said, This was taught only if he first set up the door-frame and then cut away a length of reed and placed [the mezuzah] therein; but if he first cut away a length [of the reed] and placed therein [the mezuzah] and then set up [the whole as a door-frame], it is invalid, because of the principle ‘Thou shalt make, but not [use] what is ready made’. Raba also said, Faulty doors are exempt from mezuzah. What is meant by ‘faulty doors’? — In this R. Rehumai and Abba Jose differ; one says, Those that have no upper beam; and the other says, Those that have no side-posts. R. Hisda said, An exedra is exempt from mezuzah, since it has no door-posts. It follows, however, that if it had door-posts it would require a mezuzah, but surely [the posts] were made only as supports for the ceiling! — He meant to say this: even though it has door-posts it is exempt, for they were made only as supports for the ceiling. Abaye said, I have seen that the halls in the Master's house, although they have posts, have no mezuzoth. Obviously he was of the opinion that they serve only as supports for the ceiling. An objection was raised: A lodge, an exedra, and a balcony, each requires a mezuzah! — The reference here is to the exedra of a school-house. But the exedra of a school-house is a proper room, is it not? — We must say that the reference is to a Roman exedra. Rehabah said in the name of Rab Judah, An entrance-lodge requires two mezuzoth. What is meant by ‘an entrance-lodge’? — R. Papa the Elder said in the name of Rab, It is a lodge, with one door opening on to the courtyard and another leading to the dwelling-houses. Our Rabbis taught: A lodge which leads into a garden and thence into an outhouse is, according to R. Jose, considered as the outhouse. But the Sages say, It is considered as the air space [of the garden]. Rab and Samuel both said, If the door opens from the garden into the house, there is no dispute at all that it requires a mezuzah, since it clearly admits into the house; they differ only where the door opens from the house into the garden, the one maintaining that the outhouse is the main thing, the other that the garden is the main thing. But Rabbah and R. Joseph both said, If the door opens from the house into the garden there is no dispute at all that it is exempt, since it is clearly the door for the garden; they differ only where the door opens from the garden into the house, the one maintaining that it serves for entering into the house, the other that it was entirely^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ

^ᵖnote:Ps. CXXI, 5. The mezuzah which is upon thy right hand protects the house.
^ᵠnote:To the existing door-frame upon which there was already fixed a mezuzah.
^ʳnote:In the first clause, presumably this means that it was set in deep in the post to the depth of a handbreadth, and in the second clause this means that the thickness of the new frame was a handbreadth, so that the mezuzah on the original frame is now sunken in to the depth of a handbreadth.
^ˢnote:The post referred to in the first clause of the Baraitha was a post that served as the right door-post for two doors. Thus, through the first door one entered the house, and at right angles to this door and hard by it on the right there opened another door through which one entered into an inner room. If the thickness of this door-post was a handbreadth or more, then two mezuzoth are necessary, but if less, then one mezuzah serves for both doors. Similarly the framework spoken of in the second clause of the Baraitha refers also to this post, thus a jamb was added on each side of this door-post making the thickness of the whole more than a handbreadth. Another explanation is that the Baraitha refers to a small door that is made in a large door; if the width from the right edge of the small door to the right edge of the large door is a handbreadth or more, then each door requires a mezuzah; but if less, one mezuzah (i.e., the one on the doorpost of the large door) serves for both doors.
^ᵗnote:The principle stated here, which is derived from the law of sukkah (v. Deut. XVI, 13) and of zizith (v. ibid. XXII, 12), where in both texts the expression ‘thou shalt make’ is used, is that one's duty is fulfilled only when the precept has been performed after the obligation for its performance has fallen due. In this case, however, the mezuzah was fixed to the door-post before the latter had been set in position and then there was no obligation for a mezuzah; therefore when later it is set in position the mezuzah is ‘ready made’ and cannot serve the purpose.
^ᵘnote:‘Semitic doors’ (R. Han. in Tosaf. ‘Erub. 11a, s.v. hj,p).
^ᵛnote:Or ‘doors to a room which has no ceiling’. But v. Tosaf. a.l.
^ʷnote:Or ‘lintels’.
^ˣnote:A hall, closed on three sides and open on the fourth.
^ʸnote:The watchman's lodge at the entrance of a house.
^ᶻnote:A hall having four walls but which do not reach to the roof.
^ᵃᵃnote:Which had sides only a few feet high and the rest of each side was made up of lattice-windows.
^ᵃᵇnote:Thus: Fig. 1 Fig. 2 The dispute is concerning that door which leads from the lodge into the garden.
^ᵃᶜnote:And requires a mezuzah.
^ᵃᵈnote:And does not require a mezuzah. This reading ‘as the air space’ is obviously the correct one and is supported by MSS. and Sh. Mek. Cur. edd. read ‘as the lodge’, which gives no sensible meaning.
^ᵃᵉnote:In the ensuing argument ‘house’, ,hc, stands for rga ,hc, the lodge; cf. Alfasi and Asheri, where the word ,hc is used at the beginning of the passage too. The interpretation as preferred by Rashi is as follows: if the hinges of the door in question are on the inside, so that the door opens inside (v. Fig. 1), this is conclusive evidence that the door belongs primarily to the lodge (v. supra p. 207), and therefore it requires a mezuzah. V. Rashi for other interpretations of this uncertain passage.
^ᵃᶠnote:I.e., the hinges are on the outside, so that the door opens outside into the garden (v. Fig. 2).
^ᵃᵍnote:This is R. Jose's view. He holds that the purpose of this door is not so much for the garden as for the outhouse which can be reached only through this door; and as the outhouse requires a mezuzah so does this door too require a mezuzah.
^ᵃʰnote:The Sages’ view. It is therefore exempt from the mezuzah.
^ᵃⁱnote:V. p. 211, n. 8.
^ᵃʲnote:Sc. the lodge. This is R. Jose's view.