Menachos 34
Summary
- A study session on *Menachot* 34 begins at *itmar* and presents practical rulings about *mezuzah* obligations for multiple entrances, corner openings, and doorways with incomplete posts, alongside the principle that a *mezuzah* is placed on the right side of entry. A dispute appears between Rav Meir and the Chachamim about whether one doorpost can obligate a *mezuzah*, with Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva offering different textual derivations. The text then establishes that *mezuzah* writing must be *ketivah tamah* on parchment and affixed to the doorpost rather than written on the doorframe itself. The sugya shifts to *tefillin*, defining invalidation through missing or improperly separated letters, deriving the four compartments of *tefillin shel rosh*, detailing how the parchments and *batim* are formed, addressing converting between *shel yad* and *shel rosh* in light of *kedushah* and *hazmanah*, and ending with the dispute that underlies Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam about the order of the *parshiyot* and the invalidation of swapped placements.
- A session begins with “שלום to all” and identifies the learning as מנחות דף ל\"ד starting about the fourth line with the word איתמר. A sponsorship is stated לעילוי נשמת מרת מרים שרה בת יעקב משה, with the wish that her נשמה should have an עליה. A transition sets the topic as different דינים about מזוזה.
- A case is stated of an opening between a house and an עלייה, explained by רש\"י as two stacked apartments with separate street entrances and an internal stairwell or ladder opening that can connect them. A door is used to block unauthorized access between the two residents. Rav Huna rules that if there is one entrance it requires one *mezuzah*, and if there are two entrances it requires two *mezuzot*, meaning that if each level has its own door around the stairwell then each door needs a *mezuzah*, and if only one side has a door then only that side needs one.
- Rav Pappa derives from Rav Huna that a room with four doorways is obligated in four *mezuzot*. The Gemara answers that the novelty is that even if people regularly use only one doorway, all four still require *mezuzah*. A distinction is made from a prior case of a side entrance to a *beit midrash* where a rarely used entrance could be *batel* to the main one when there are only two entrances, while with three or more entrances they are not treated as *batel* to the commonly used entrance.
- Amimar rules that a corner opening is obligated in *mezuzah*, described as an entrance created by cutting off a corner so the walls do not meet at a right angle and the resulting gap serves as the entry. Rav Ashi challenges this because it lacks *p’tzimin* (side posts), and Amimar responds “הא דאי” and asserts that it does have *p’tzimin* because the ends of the walls function as the posts, so it remains obligated.
- Rav Pappa visits Mar Shmuel and sees an entrance with only one post on the left side and places a *mezuzah* there. A challenge is raised that this seems to follow Rav Meir, and even then Rav Meir may only obligate when the single post is on the right, not on the left. A baraita derives from ביתך that the entry is from the right, and it establishes that the *mezuzah* is on the right, with Rabbah explaining that a person begins walking by lifting the right leg, described as דרך ביאתך מן הימין. Rav Shmuel bar Acha in front of Rav Pappa in the name of Rav Ulla brings a proof from the verse about Yehoyada placing a chest opening “מימין בבוא איש בית ה'” for those entering the House of Hashem, showing placement on the right side of entry.
- A baraita states that a house with only one doorpost is obligated in *mezuzah* according to Rav Meir and exempt according to the Chachamim. The Chachamim ground their exemption in the plural word מזוזות, requiring two posts. Rav Meir’s reasoning is presented through teachings attributed to Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva: Rabbi Yishmael treats the repeated מזוזות as a *ribui achar ribui* that results in limitation to even one *mezuzah*, and Rabbi Akiva derives from “על המשקוף ועל שתי המזוזות” that the Torah specifies “two” only when it means two, implying that an unstated מזוזה can mean one unless the verse explicitly states otherwise.
- A baraita initially entertains writing the *mezuzah* on the stones of the doorframe, then compares “כתיבה” of *mezuzah* to “כתיבה” of a *get* to conclude it is written “על הספר,” meaning on parchment. An alternative comparison to writing Torah on stones in the days of Yehoshua is rejected because *mezuzah* and *get* are *nohaget l’dorot* while the stone inscription is not. A supporting verse is cited about writing “על הספר בדיו.” Rav Acha the son of Rav Ulla challenges the method because the Torah says “על המזוזות,” and Rav Ashi answers that “וכתבתם” implies כתיבה תמה, complete enduring writing, so the text is written first and then placed “על מזוזות.” The Gemara adds that without the *gezera shava* one might have thought to engrave on stone and attach it, so the *gezera shava* is needed to require parchment.
- The Mishnah’s rule that the four *parshiyot* of *tefillin* invalidate each other and that even one “כתב” invalidates is challenged as obvious. Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav explains it refers to the קוצה של יוד, and that too is challenged as obvious, so the Gemara ties it to another statement of Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav that any letter not surrounded by clear parchment on all four sides is invalid, including when letters touch despite being correctly formed.
- A baraita derives four compartments from the three occurrences of לטטפת with differing spellings, yielding “הרי כאן ד',” as the view of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva derives four from languages where טט in כתפי means two and פת in אפריקי means two.
- A baraita rejects making the four compartments out of four separate hides by reading “ולזכרון בין עיניך” as requiring one remembrance rather than multiple. It sets the correct form as writing the four *parshiyot* on four parchments and placing them in four compartments, with the compartments formed from one hide. It validates the case where the *parshiyot* are written on one parchment and placed into four compartments if there is spacing between them according to Rabbi, while the Chachamim say spacing is not required, and both agree a string or cord is placed between each. It rules that if the external groove is not recognizable the *tefillin* are invalid.
- A baraita states that *tefillin shel yad* are written on one parchment, and if written on four parchments and placed in the single compartment they are valid if they are joined, because “והיה לך לאות על ידך” implies one sign externally and one sign internally, so the wearer should sense one unit. This requirement is attributed to Rabbi Yehuda, while Rabbi Yosi says it is not necessary. Rabbi Yosi reports that Rabbi Yehuda bar Rabbi agrees that someone lacking *shel yad* but having two *shel rosh* can cover one with leather to make it appear as one compartment and wear it on the arm, and Rava explains that Rabbi Yehuda retracted based on Rabbi Yosi’s report.
- A challenge is brought from a message in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that one may make a *shel yad* into a *shel rosh* but not a *shel rosh* into a *shel yad* because one does not reduce from higher *kedushah* to lower. The Gemara answers by distinguishing old from new, allowing repurposing only when the *shel rosh* was never used as such. A further refinement addresses the view that *hazmanah milta hi*, resolving it by saying he stipulated from the outset *d’atnei alei me’ikara* that he may change its use if needed.
- A baraita states the order as קדש לי and והיה כי יביאך on the right and שמע and והיה אם שמוע on the left, and an apparent contradiction is resolved by distinguishing the right of the reader from the right of the wearer, with the reader reading them in Torah order. The text explains that this becomes the source for the difference between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam, with Rabbeinu Tam understanding the “left” placement as reversing the last two *parshiyot* so the sequence becomes קדש, והיה כי יביאך, והיה אם שמוע, שמע. Rav Chananel in the name of Rav rules that swapped *parshiyot* are invalid, Abaye limits the invalidation to swaps between inner and outer compartments, and Rava rejects the distinction and rules that any switching among the four compartments invalidates because each *parashah* must be in its correct side exposure. The session ends with stopping there and continuing later with the discussion of the *batim* of the *tefillin*.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions