Menachos 34 - NBTD
00:00 - Good Voch
00:10 - 33B
02:06 - 34A
16:36 - 34B
25:14 - Have a Wonderful Week!
Quiz - Kahoot.MDYdaf.com
Summary
- The text presents several halachic rulings from the גמרא about when an entrance is חייב במזוזה, how to determine the “main” use of a doorway based on the swing of its door, and how many מזוזות are required when there are multiple openings. It then moves to doorways lacking standard doorposts and to the rule that entry is defined as “from the right,” and it brings the מחלוקת of רבי מאיר וחכמים about a doorway with only one פצים. It continues with the derashah of וכתבתם to establish that a מזוזה must be written as a complete כתיבה and not directly on stones, and it shifts to the laws of תפילין about the four פרשיות, the validity requirements down to details like גויל מוקף and the קוצה של יוד, how the פרשיות are placed in the בתים, and how rules of קדושה and *hazmanah* affect whether תפילין של ראש can be repurposed as תפילין של יד.
- The case is a בית שער that opens to a גינה and to קיטונות, and the חיוב מזוזה depends on the swing of the door. Rabbi Yosi says it is judged like קיטונות and is חייב במזוזה, and the חכמים say it is judged like בית שער and is פטור. Rav and Shmuel say that when the door swings מגינה לבית everyone agrees it is חייב because it is ביאה דביתא, and they locate the מחלוקת in the other direction. Rav and Rav Yosef say that when the door swings מבית לגינה everyone agrees it is פטור because it is פיתחא דגינה and “ביתך” applies to a house and not to a garden, and they place the מחלוקת when it swings מגינה לבית between viewing it as ביאת הבית or as made primarily for the גינה. Abaye and Rava act like Rav and Rav Yosef, Rav Ashi acts like Rav and Shmuel לחומרא, and the concluding הלכה is כרב ושמואל לחומרא.
- Rav Huna rules about a לול פתוח מן הבית לעליה that if it has one entrance it requires one מזוזה and if it has two entrances it requires two מזוזות. Rav Pappa infers that a room with four doors is חייב בארבע מזוזות even if one door is used regularly and the others are not. A difficulty is raised from the earlier case involving רבי where a door used only by one person does not require a מזוזה, and Rashi answers with two explanations, including that the usage pattern differs or that some doors can be בטל, and the text concludes with “עיין רש''י.”
- Amemar rules that האי פיתחא דקרנא is חייב במזוזה, and Rav Ashi challenges that it lacks פצימין. Amemar answers that the existing wall edges function as the פצימי when they align as a frame. Rav Pappa sees a doorway with only one recognizable פצים on the left and places a מזוזה, and he is challenged that this follows רבי מאיר incorrectly because even if רבי מאיר obligates with one פצים, he requires it on the right side of entry and not on the left. The source is derived from ביתך as ביאתך, with the rule דרך ביאתך מן הימין, explained by Rav a that most people step first with the right foot.
- A supporting proof is brought from the verse about יהוידע הכהן placing a box “מימין” near the מזבח, showing placement on the right side of entry. The text describes the path of entry and identifies the צדקה box as positioned to the right.
- Rabbi Meir obligates a house that has only one פצים, and the חכמים exempt it. The reasoning of the חכמים is that מזוזות is written in the plural, requiring two doorposts. Rabbi Meir derives from the repetition of מזוזות that it becomes a *ribuy achar ribuy* that results in limiting the requirement to one, and the teaching is attributed as דברי רבי ישמעאל. Rabbi Akiva derives from the phrase על המשקוף ושתי המזוזות by קרבן פסח that only when the Torah specifies “שתי” is two required, and otherwise כל מקום שנאמר מזוזות אינו אלא אחת עד שיפרש לך הכתוב שתי.
- The text asks how וכתבתם על מזוזות ביתך implies writing on parchment in a case rather than writing directly on the doorpost. A ברייתא offers that one could think to write on stones, and it weighs a גזירה שוה of כתיבה from גט, which is written on ספר, against writing the תורה on stones. The resolution is that mezuzah is learned from a כתיבה הנוהגת לדורות like גט rather than a one-time command of writing on stones, and a verse from ירמיהו is cited: מפיו יקרא אלי את הדברים האלה ואני כותב על הספר בדיו. Rav Acha the son of Rava challenges Rav Ashi that the plain meaning says to write on the doorposts, and the answer derives from וכתבתם that it requires כתיבה תמה and only then “והדר על מזוזות,” with Rashi and Tosafos explaining that writing on stone will not endure. The text concludes that without the גזירה שוה one might have thought to engrave on stone and affix it, and the גזירה שוה teaches to write on parchment, establishing the mezuzah as practiced.
- A משנה states that the ארבע פרשיות in תפילין מעכבות זו את זו and even one missing letter invalidates them. Rav Yehuda quoting Rav says the case is needed even for the קוצה של יוד, with Rashi and Tosafos debating what this refers to and רבינו תם identifying a specific small stroke, and the text asserts that contemporary תפילין follow רבינו תם on this point. Another statement of Rav Yehuda quoting Rav rules that any letter not surrounded by גויל on all four sides is פסולה, illustrated by an example where letters touch.
- A ברייתא derives four compartments from the three occurrences לטטפת לטטפת לטטפות as one plus one plus two, attributed to Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says the derivation is from languages where טט in כתפי means two and פת in Africa means two, totaling four. The text rejects wearing four separate תפילין and derives from ולזכרון between the eyes that there is one זכרון, leading to writing on four parchments placed into four בתים within one עור. It rules that if all four פרשיות were written on one עור and placed into the four בתים it is יצא, with a requirement of ריוח between sections, and this is stated as דברי רבי while the חכמים say it is not necessary. The text requires a חוט המשיכה between each compartment and states that if אין חריץ ניכר it is פסול.
- A ברייתא teaches that תפילה של יד is written on one עור in order and that writing them on four עורות and placing them in one house is יצא but requires gluing, derived from והיה לך לאות על ידך so that just as the outside is one אות, the inside is one, and this is attributed to Rabbi Yehuda while Rabbi Yosi says it is not required. Rabbi Yosi states that Rabbi Yehuda bar Rabbi Shimi agrees that one who lacks תפילה של יד but has two תפילה של ראש may cover one and wear it, and the גמרא explains that in this matter Rabbi Yehuda retracted. A statement in the name of רבי יוחנן says תפילין של יד may be made into של ראש but not the reverse because אין מורידין מקדושה חמורה לקדושה קלה, and the higher קדושה of של ראש is tied to containing more letters of the Divine Name. The resolution distinguishes between עתיקא and חדתא, and the text adds that even new items could gain status through designation according to the view *hazmanah milsa hi*, but it is avoided when a condition was made from the outset allowing switching.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions