Menachot 66

ומאי תחילת שליש העליון דקא אמר להרחיקה שלא להרחיקה מן הקורה של מעלה יותר משליש

for 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.

אמר רבא מצוה להניחה בטפח הסמוך לרה"ר מאי טעמא רבנן אמרי כדי שיפגע במזוזה מיד רב חנינא מסורא אומר כי היכי דתינטריה

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.

אמר רבי חנינא בוא וראה שלא כמדת הקב"ה מדת בשר ודם מדת בשר ודם מלך יושב מבפנים ועם משמרין אותו מבחוץ מדת הקב"ה אינו כן עבדיו יושבין מבפנים והוא משמרן מבחוץ שנאמר (תהלים קכא, ה) ה' שומרך ה' צלך על יד ימינך

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.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ps. CXXI, 5. The mezuzah which is upon thy right hand protects the house.');">¹</span> R'Joseph the son of Raba stated in his discourse in the name of Raba, If one set it deep in the door-post, the depth of a handbreadth, it is invalid.

דרש רב יוסף בריה דרבא משמיה דרבא העמיק לה טפח פסולה לימא מסייעא ליה הניחה בפצין או שטלה עליה מלבן אם יש שם טפח צריך מזוזה אחרת אם לאו אינו צריך מזוזה אחרת

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,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the existing door-frame upon which there was already fixed a mezuzah.');">²</span>

כי תניא ההיא בפתח שאחורי הדלת

and there was the depth of a handbreadth,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 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.');">³</span> 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.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 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.');">⁴</span>

הא בהדיא קתני לה פתח שאחורי הדלת אם יש שם טפח צריך מזוזה אחרת ואם לאו אינו צריך מזוזה אחרת כיצד קתני

But this is expressly stated further on, [thus,] If there was 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].

תנא העמיד לה מלבן של קנים חותך שפופרת ומניחה אמר רב אחא בריה דרבא לא שנו אלא שהעמיד ולבסוף חתך והניחה אבל חתך והניח ולבסוף העמיד פסולה תעשה ולא מן העשוי

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'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 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. hj,p');">⁵</span> Raba also said, Faulty<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Semitic doors' (R. Han. in Tosaf. 'Erub. 11a, s.v.) .');">⁶</span>

ואמר רבא הני פיתחי שימאי פטורין מן המזוזה מאי פיתחי שימאי פליגי בה רב ריחומי ואבא יוסי חד אמר דלית להו תקרה וחד אמר דלית להו שקופי

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;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'doors to a room which has no ceiling'. But v. Tosaf. a.l.');">⁷</span>

אמר רבה בר שילא אמר רב חסדא אכסדרה פטורה מן המזוזה לפי שאין לה פצימין הא יש לה פצימין חייב לחיזוק תקרה הוא דעבידי

and the other says, Those that have no side-posts.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'lintels'.');">⁸</span> R'Hisda said, An exedra<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A hall, closed on three sides and open on the fourth.');">⁹</span>

הכי קאמר אע"פ שיש לה פצימין פטורה שאין עשויין אלא לחיזוק לתקרה אמר אביי חזינא להו לאיספלידי דבי מר דאית להו פצימי ולית להו מזוזתא קסבר לחיזוק תקרה הוא דעבידי

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.

מיתיבי בית שער אכסדרה ומרפסת חייבין במזוזה באכסדרה דבי רב אכסדרה דבי רב כאינדרונא מעלייתא הוא באכסדרה רומיתא

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.

אמר רחבה אמר רב יהודה בי הרזיקי חייב בשתי מזוזות מאי בי הרזיקי אמר רב פפא סבא משמיה דרב בית שער הפתוח לחצר ובתים פתוחין לבית שער

An objection was raised: A lodge,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The watchman's lodge at the entrance of a house.');">¹⁰</span> an exedra, and a balcony, each requires a mezuzah! - The reference here is to the exedra of a school-house.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A hall having four walls but which do not reach to the roof.');">¹¹</span>

ת"ר בית שער הפתוח לגינה ולקיטונית רבי יוסי אומר נידון כקיטונית וחכ"א נידון כבית שער רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו מגינה לבית כולי עלמא לא פליגי דחייב מאי טעמא ביאה דבית היא

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.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which had sides only a few feet high and the rest of each side was made up of lattice-windows.');">¹²</span> Rehabah said in the name of Rab Judah, An entrance-lodge requires two mezuzoth.

כי פליגי מבית לגינה מר סבר קיטונית עיקר ומר סבר גינה עיקר

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<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus: Fig. 1 Fig. 2 The dispute is concerning that door which leads from the lodge into the garden.');">¹³</span>

רבה ורב יוסף דאמרי תרוייהו מבית לגינה דכולי עלמא לא פליגי דפטור מאי טעמא פיתחא דגינה הוא כי פליגי מגינה לבית מר סבר ביאה דבית הוא ומר סבר כולה

is, according to R'Jose, considered as the outhouse.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And requires a mezuzah.');">¹⁴</span> But the Sages say, It is considered as the air space<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 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. ,hc rga ,hc ,hc');">¹⁵</span> [of the garden]. Rab and Samuel both said, If the door opens from the garden into the house,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the ensuing argument 'house', , stands for , the lodge; cf. Alfasi and Asheri, where the word 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.');">¹⁶</span> there is no dispute at all that i requires a mezuzah, since it clearly admits into the house; they differ only where the door opens from the house into the garden,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the hinges are on the outside, so that the door opens outside into the garden (v. Fig. 2) .');">¹⁷</span> the one maintaining that the outhouse is the main thing,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 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.');">¹⁸</span> the other that the garden is the main thing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Sages' view. It is therefore exempt from the mezuzah.');">¹⁹</span> But Rabbah and R'Joseph both said, If the door opens from the house into the garden<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 211, n. 8.');">²⁰</span> there is no dispute at all that it is exempt, since it is clearly the door for the garden; they differ only wher the door opens from the garden into the house, the one maintaining that it serves for entering into the house,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the lodge. This is R. Jose's view.');">²¹</span> the other that it was entirely