Mezuzah: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 01:42, 27 August 2024

There is a positive commandment to set up a mezuzah on every doorpost.^[1] A person who is careful with this mitzvah merits a long life and the house is protected.^[2] Even though the mezuzah affords a person protection he shouldn't put it up for that reason; he should do it because that is Hashem's will.^[3] The details as to which doorways, how the mezuzah should be placed, and the bracha are described below.

How to Put Up a Mezuzah

Preparing the Klaf

The klaf should be rolled from left to right. It should be rolled tightly so that the klaf almost but doesn't actually cover the word שדי on the outside of the klaf.^[4]
The klaf should be wrapped well, usually with saran wrap or the like, so that it doesn't get ruined by the elements.^[5]
It is proper that the klaf should be positions so that the שדי is facing outward towards the opposite doorpost.^[6]

See the Acquiring and Maintaining Stam page for more details about maintaining the klaf.

The Case

The klaf should be placed inside a case or a plastic wrap to preserve it and not simply attached to the wall without any case.^[7]
Ideally the case should be clear so that the word שדי is visible from the outside. If the area is going to be used for changing diapers or getting changed, the case should not be clear.^[8]
There is a mitzvah to get a nice mezuzah case to beautify the mitzvah of mezuzah.^[9]
A mezuzah case in which the klaf is inside a container that is separated from the wall by some airspace is valid.^[10]

Who Should Put it Up

Initially, the homeowner should put it up himself. If he can't do it, he should appoint a Jew to do it in his stead.^[11]
The bracha only after everything, such as the tape or nails, is prepared so that one can put it up without delay after the bracha.^[12] If an agent (heb. שליח; transl. shaliach) is putting up a mezuzah, some say that he should recite the bracha על קביעת מזוזה, while others say that an agent recites the same text as the homeowner, לקבוע מזוזה.^[13]
Initially one should not have a child or non-Jew put up a mezuzah. After the fact it is valid.^[14]

The Bracha

Before putting up^[15] a mezuzah one should recite the bracha of "Asher Kideshanu Bemizvotav vetzivanu likboah Mezuzah" - " אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לקבוע מזוזה" . ^[16] Ideally, the homeowner should put up the mezuzos and recite the blessing.^[17] If one puts up several mezuzot at one time one bracha suffices for all of them. ^[18] In a situation like this one should be careful not to make a hefsek (pause) between mezuzot by talking.^[19] If one did speak some poskim would require you to say a new beracha.^[20]
If he is using double sided tape or glue he should take the mezuzah in his right hand and recite the bracha. If he is using nails and a hammer he should take the mezuzah with his right hand and place it against the doorpost in the correct spot. Then he should hold it with his left hand and hold the hammer with his right hand. Before the bracha he should begin to put in the bottom nail to minimize the delay after the bracha until it is put up.^[21]

Which Doorposts Require a Mezuzah with a Bracha

A person should recite the bracha upon putting up the mezuzah that indisputably needs a mezuzah with a bracha and then without interruption put up the other mezuzot. There is no need to put up the front door one first.^[22]
In general, before putting up a Mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated in a mezuzah, one should recite the bracha. However, if one is putting up a mezuzah on a doorway that doesn't have a door or a doorway that leads into an area that doesn't have 4 by 4 amot square, no bracha is recited.^[23]
In order to be certainly obligated in order to put up the mezuzah with a bracha the doorway would need to meet all ten conditions: The doorway has (1) two side posts, that are (2) at least ten tefachim tall, (3) has a lintel on top, and (4) has a door in it. The room has (5) at least 4x4 amot square space, (6) a roof, (7) is for a private use and not a shul or bet midrash, (8) is suitable for human dwelling, (9) the room is used for honorable activities and not for a bathroom or bathhouse, and (10) it is a permanent structure.^[24]
If the doorway doesn't have a door a mezuzah is put up without a bracha. If there is a sliding door or another door without hinges there is a question whether a bracha is recited. However, if it is a folding door or even if it has hinges on the top of the door it would still require a mezuzah with a bracha.^[25]

Shehechiyanu

A shehecheyanu isn't recited when putting up a mezuzah on the doorpost even if it is the first time one is putting up a mezuzah.^[26]

Forgot to Recite Bracha Beforehand

If someone forgot to recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah, some say that you can recite a bracha afterwards, while others hold that you can't unless you take it down and put it back up.^[27] Some say that one shouldn't take them down in order to put them back up with a bracha.^[28]

Replacing Mezuzot

When replacing the mezuzot, a new beracha is recited.^[29]

Replacing a Fallen Mezuzah

If a mezuzah fell down and one is putting it up again one must recite a bracha before putting it up again if the doorway has a door and the room is at least 4 by 4 amot in size. ^[30]

Returning a Mezuzah After It Was Checked

If one took down one's Mezuzot in order to have them checked by the sofer and they were found to be kosher, according to Ashkenazim one should put them back up without a Bracha of Lekvoah Mezuzah.^[31] According to Sephardim, one should make a bracha upon putting them back up after being checked by the sofer.^[32] If one checks the mezuzah by himself, he need not say a new beracha. ^[33] If a mezuzah was found to be not kosher, then a beracha is recited when it is replaced with a kosher one. ^[34] Please note that a bracha is only said when replacing the mezuzah if the doorway has a door and the room is at least 4 by 4 amot in size. (See above #The Bracha on putting up a Mezuzah).

Replacing a Case

However, if one took down one's Mezuzah just to put it in a nicer case, one doesn't need to make a new Bracha when putting it up unless it was taken down for several hours so that one stopped thinking about the Mezuzah.^[35]

Replacing After Painting

If a mezuzah was taken down for plastering or repainting the door for a few days it should be put up again with a bracha.^[36]

When to Put It Up

Some say that a person should put up a mezuzah right when he starts to live there.^[37] However, others hold that one should put it up before one begins to live there.^[38]
One may put up a mezuzah at night.^[39]

Types of Doors

Accordion Door

An accordion door where the accordion door opens to the left certainly should have a mezuzah on the right doorpost. If the door opens to the right or both sides if after folding the door there is a tefach between the post and the area of passage, some hold that it is necessary to set up a new post next to the end of where the door folds, some hold it is exempt, and the minhag is to put the mezuzah on the right doorpost.^[40]
If there is a part of the accordion door with a thickness of a tefach that doesn't move next to the right doorpost, the mezuzah can be placed on this fixed area.^[41]

Double Doors

Double doors with or without a pole in between is considered a single doorway and needs only one mezuzah on the right.^[42]
1. Some say that putting up an extra mezuzah when a door is split with a pole and really only needs one mezuzah is a violation of baal tosif.^[43]
Two doorways next to one another that function the same room and people use one door or the other randomly, they are considered one need and only need one mezuzah on the rightmost post.^[44] Some hold that they are both obligated in mezuzot as long as there are two different doors.^[45]
Two doorways next to one another with doors that are attached to the middle pole and the pole is a tefach wide are obligated in two mezuzot.^[46]

Revolving Door

A revolving door should have a mezuzah on the right side whether the revolving door turns counter-clockwise or clockwise.^[47]

Sliding Door

A sliding door should have the mezuzah on the right doorpost even if the sliding door on the right side always remains in place.^[48]

Type of Rooms and Buildings

Closets, Pantries, and Storage Rooms

A doorway is usually obligated in a mezuzah if it has two doorposts that are 10 Tefachim tall and a lintel on top.^[49] Here an exception:
A small closet, such as a linen closet or electricity closet, that a person doesn't enter and only uses by takes things out of it isn't obligated in a mezuzah. However, if it is a large closet that is 4 by 4 amot and a person enters is obligated in a mezuzah without a bracha.^[50]
A storage room requires a mezuzah.^[51]
If there's a storage room such as an attic that you only use twice a year it is considered as though he doesn't use it at all and it doesn't require a mezuzah. However, if it is used more frequently such as once a month then it is obligated.^[52]
A garage is obligated in a mezuzah without a bracha since it is used for storage.^[53]
A walk-in freezer is not obligated in a mezuzah. A walk-in refrigerator is obligated in a mezuzah without a bracha.^[54]

Bathrooms and Bedrooms

A mezuzah should not be put up by the doorway to a bathroom, mikveh room, or a room people wash in and stand there undressed.^[55]
A bedroom should have a mezuzah.^[56]
When a couple is together if the mezuzah is on the inside of the door it should be covered with a single covering. If the mezuzah scroll is already covered with a single non-clear cover such as metal or non-clear plastic that is sufficient. However, if the scroll is in clear plastic and the case is clear it should be covered with something non-clear.^[57] Some poskim hold that the mezuzah should be covered with a double covering and so even if the case isn't clear the mezuzah needs another cover.^[58]
According to the poskim that you need a double cover, if the scroll is rolled up inside the case and the case isn't clear, if the covering was put intentionally to be a double covering as is the common custom it is considered a double covering.^[59] Some poskim consider that one a single cover and would require an external cover when a couple is going to be together.^[60]
Accordingly, if the mezuzah wasn't wrapped before it was put in the case or if you follow the stringent opinions above, before the couple is together the mezuzah should be covered with an external covering such as a piece of clothing. Even if the case is clear it counts as a single cover.^[61]
A laundry room should have a mezuzah.^[62]
A washing room before a bathroom, if it is used exclusively for washing one's hands when leaving the bathroom it is exempt. If it is used also for other functions such as storage of items or washing one's hands for a meal, and it is the size of 16 square amot, then according to most poskim it is obligated in a mezuzah.^[63] Some poskim hold even in such a case it is exempt from a mezuzah.^[64] If sometimes people get undressed in this outer room it is exempt.^[65]

Shul and Bet Midrash

A shul doesn't need a mezuzah unless people live in the shul building.^[66]
A bet midrash doesn't need a mezuzah but because some rishonim hold that it should have a mezuzah it is proper to put up a mezuzah on a bet midrash without a bracha. The reason that the bet midrash is different than a shul is since talmidei chachamim use it day and night they consider it like their home.^[67]

Offices and Stores

According to many poskim an office or store is obligated in a mezuzah even if it is only opened by day. However, since some poskim hold that it doesn't require a mezuzah if it isn't used by night in such a case a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.^[68]
A factory^[69] and bank^[70] have the same status as a store for the purposes of mezuzah.
Some say that a school requires a mezuzah just as a store does.^[71]
If a Jew owns or rents an office all of the doorways require a mezuzah, even the office rooms that are designated for non-Jews, as long as the Jew uses the room on occasion.^[72]

Elevator

Some say that the entrances on each floor to the elevator should have a mezuzah on the right from the elevator to the building.^[73] Others hold that an elevator is exempt.^[74]

Buses, Caravans, and RVs

Buses, cars, and airplanes are exempt from mezuzah since they are moveable and aren't meant for permanent dwelling.^[75] However, one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha for a RV if one lives in it like a house.^[76]
If one lives in a caravan that is stationary for a long time one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.^[77] The mezuzah should be put up after it is parked where it is meant to stay.^[78]

Summer House

There is an obligation to put up a mezuzah on a summer home or any home that is lived in even for part of the year. ^[79]

Doorways to Courtyards and Cities

The doorway to a courtyard or city is obligated in having a mezuzah on the right side as one enters.^[80] In a city that has some non-Jews the city gate does not need a mezuzah.^[81]
The electrical posts used for an eruv do not need a mezuzah even though they function as doorways.^[82]

Apartment Buildings

An apartment building that is owned by a Jew should have a mezuzah. However, if it is a jointly owned by a Jew and non-Jew it should not have a mezuzah.^[83]
The door to the stairwell should also have a mezuzah.^[84]

Inner Rooms

Every doorway of one's house is obligated in mezuzah. Even if a room has several doorways, each one is obligated in having a mezuzah. If a doorway isn't used for entering it doesn't need a mezuzah.^[85]

Cellar Doors

The doorpost of a cellar that is lying flat or nearly flat^[86] on the ground is not obligated in having a mezuzah.^[87]

Emergency Exits

An emergency exit or any door only used to exit is not obligated in a mezuzah.^[88]

Hospitals

A Jewish hospital should have a mezuzah without a bracha.^[89]

Structure of Doorframe and Room

Minimum Size of Room

A doorway is only obligated in a mezuzah if the room has 4 by 4 amot of space. If there's not 4 by 4 square amot but there is the same amount of area, such as 2 by 8 amot, there is a dispute whether the doorway is obligated in a mezuzah. In such a case one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha, or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah.^[90]
If a room is four by four amot even if there large items such as a refrigerator or oven in that room and it is normally there and enables the room to be used normally it is obligated in a mezuzah.^[91]
A room in the shape of a T or L is obligated in a mezuzah if has an area of a rectangle of 16 square amot (either areas A, B, and C OR B and D in picture). If there is only 16 square amot of area when total the area of the shape it is a dispute if it is obligated in a mezuzah.^[92]

One Doorpost

Picture #1:End of wall on right side functions as right doorpost
Picture #2: End of wall on left side without a right doorpost

If a doorway only has one doorpost, such as if the lintel is connected to a wall, if the doorpost is on the right (picture #1), one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. If the doorpost is on the left (picture #2), that doorway isn't obligated in a mezuzah.^[93]

Ends of Walls Serving as Doorposts

Picture #1: Two ends of walls serving as doorposts
Picture #2: Both end of walls serves as walls for other rooms
Picture #3: Room with right doorpost as end of wall
Picture #4: Room with left doorpost as end of wall

A room that has two walls coming to an end to serve as its entrance (picture #1) is obligated in a mezuzah.^[94] Because it is a dispute one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.^[95]
A room that has two walls which turn a corner and serve as walls for other rooms (picture #2) is not obligated in a mezuzah.^[96]
If the left doorpost is the end of a wall that extends to the left and the right doorpost is the end of a wall (picture #3) that is considered as though there is a right doorpost without a left one and one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.^[97] Others hold that this case is exempt altogether.^[98]
If the right doorpost is the end of a wall that extends to the right and the left doorpost is the end of a wall (picture #4) that is considered as though there is a left doorpost without a right one and the entrance is completely exempt from a mezuzah.^[99]

No Lintel

Picture #1: Door with two posts and lintel
Picture #2: Door with two posts and no lintel

A regular doorway has two doorposts and a lintel (picture #1). If the doorway has two doorposts and there is no lintel but the area has a roof (picture #2), if the roof comes to an edge at the point of the door some say that one should put up a mezuzah, while others hold that doesn't require a mezuzah. Therefore, a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.^[100]

Small Room Opening into Big Room

Picture #1: Normal way to walk is from the big room into the small room
Picture #1*: Wide room that leads into hallway
Picture #2: Normal way to walk is from the small room into the big room
Picture #2*: Hallway that leads into wide room

If the big room is an entrance into the small room (picture #1), if that entrance is created by the ends of walls and not doorposts, some poskim hold that the entrance is exempt from mezuzah.^[101] Some disagree.^[102] To avoid the dispute one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.^[103]
If the small room is an entrance into the big room (picture #2)^[104] that entrance is obligated even if the doorpost is created by the ends of the walls.^[105] Other argue that it is exempt from having a mezuzah.^[106]

Screen Door Before the Front Door

If there are two doorframes one in front of the other if they're within 1 amah of each other it is considered one doorway and one mezuzah on the outermost tefach suffices. However, if there is a space of more than 1 amah, they each require a separate mezuzah.^[107]

Doorway in a Room

If there are polls or an arch in the middle of a room that creates a doorway, if the two halves of the room are used for the same purpose there is no obligation to put up a mezuzah on the polls, however, if the polls separate the room in two and they are used for different uses then the doorway created by the polls requires a mezuzah.^[108]

How the Mezuzah Should Be Placed

Height

The mezuzah should be placed at the beginning of the upper third of the height of the doorway^[109] but it should be placed at least a Tefach from the top of the doorway. ^[110] If it is not in the top third it isn't kosher. ^[111] If it isn't a tefach from the top of the door it should be fixed.^[112]
If the floor or the lintel are uneven, how do you measure the height of the doorway to put it at 2/3 of the height?
1. If there is a step within the doorway, the height of the doorway is determined by the place where you put the mezuzah. If the mezuzah is placed in the outer tefach and the step doesn't begin at that point, the height doorway is determined without the step.^[113]
2. If the floor on the left side is lower than the right side, if that area is at least 4 tefachim wide, the height is determined by the left side.^[114]
3. If there is a window beginning in the middle of the doorway the height of the doorway is determined by where the mezuzah is placed. If the mezuzah is placed in the outer tefach and the window doesn't begin at that point, the height of the doorway is determined without the window. However, to avoid any dispute one should put it within the top third of the door if it is determined with and without the window. If the mezuzah is placed under the part with the window the height is determined with the window.^[115]

Very Tall Doorways

If a doorway is very tall, according to Ashkenazim, one should put up the mezuzah at shoulder height.^[116] However, according to Sephardim, one should place it in the upper third in all circumstances.^[117]
What is considered a very tall doorway for this halacha? Some say that as long as the mezuzah is visible within the normal eyesight it isn't considered too high. Accordingly, some estimate that if the door is less than 8.86 feet (106 inches) it should have the mezuzah at the height of 2/3, but if it is taller than it should have it at shoulder height.^[118] Some say that anytime that the beginning of 2/3 of the doorway is taller than one's shoulders, one should put it at one's shoulder height.^[119]

Arched Doorway

If the doorway is arched there is a dispute whether the height of the doorposts includes the arched section where the doorway has a width of 4 tefachim. Therefore, if there is a small area which is arched and the doorway has a width of greater than 4 tefachim, it is possible to satisfy both opinions by placing it on the vertical section of the door but still within the top third of the doorway.^[120] (For example, if a doorway is 90 inches and the top 12 inches are arched and still has a width of tefachim, one should place the mezuzah in the vertical section above 60 inches.^[121])
If the height of the arch is more than one third of the height of the entire doorway so that it isn't possible to satisfy both opinions the primary opinion is to place the mezuzah two thirds up the vertical part of the doorway excluding the arch.^[122]

Posts that Don't Reach the Ceiling

If there are doorposts which are ten tefachim but they don't reach the ceiling and there is a wall which reaches the ceiling the mezuzah should be placed on the doorposts and not the wall (spot ב in the picture).^[123]

In the Doorframe

Picture #1: Mezuzah on wall in front of door within tefach
Picture #2: Inward swinging door with mezuzah behind door within frame
Picture #3: Blue mezuzah on thicker post and gold on thinner post

The mezuzah is placed on the right side of the doorframe underneath the lintel within a tefach of the outside of the doorframe.^[124] The mezuzah must be placed so that it is visible or there is a symbol to indicate that there is a mezuzah.^[125] If it can't be placed under the lintel it could be put even before the lintel within the doorframe.^[126]
If it can't be placed on the doorpost, it should be drilled into the doorpost. If it can't be drilled into the doorpost see the next halacha.^[127]
If there is no place to put the mezuzah within the doorframe (picture #1), according to Ashkenazim the mezuzah can be placed on the area in front of the doorframe, even not on the material of the actual frame,^[128] within a tefach of the doorframe.^[129] According to Sephardim it must be placed within the doorframe in front of the door or behind the door (picture #2).^[130]
If a doorpost has a thicker post and a thinner post which is further towards the outside (picture #3), the mezuzah can be placed on the thinner part (gold mezuzah in picture).^[131] Some hold it should be placed specifically on the thicker part (blue mezuzah in picture).^[132]
If part of the doorpost is blocking more than a tefach of the entranceway, the mezuzah should be placed on the most extended part of the doorpost blocking the door.^[133]
The mezuzah should not be placed behind the door on the wall next to the doorframe. If it is, according to many poskim, the mezuzah is invalid.^[134]
If the door swings out and there is no place in the doorpost to put the mezuzah in front of the door, the mezuzah should be placed behind the door within the doorframe.^[135]

Outer Tefach

The mezuzah should be placed on the outer tefach of the doorpost^[136] both for the front door as well as any other door.^[137]
After the fact it is kosher. If it isn't too difficult one should fix it.^[138]
When placing the mezuzah on a slant, it is sufficient if part of the mezuzah is within a the outer tefach.^[139]
If the outer tefach is exposed to sun and rain and it might get ruined, it is better not to leave it in the outer tefach.^[140]

Fixed to the Doorpost

A mezuzah should be established in a sturdy way so that it won't fall down. Also, it should not be hanging.^[141]
A mezuzah could be put up with nails, one on top and one on bottom, but not with just one nail.^[142] If one put it up with only one nail but it was tightly fastened to the wall and doesn't move it is valid.^[143]
A mezuzah could be put up with tape or glue.^[144]
Some say that a mezuzah could be put up with Velcro.^[145]
Some say that a mezuzah shouldn't be put up with a magnet.^[146]
The minhag is to put the mezuzah in a case.^[147]

Straight or Diagonal

While Sephardim place the mezuzah straight up^[148], Ashkenazim place it on a slant, with the top leaning towards the inside and the bottom towards the outside.^[149]

Which Is the Right Side?

The criteria by which one can determine which side the mezuzah should be used in the follow order. For other opinions of how to order these criteria see footnote.^[150]
1. From Exempt to Obligated: Any door that goes from a place that is exempt from mezuzah to a place that is obligated in mezuzah should have the mezuzah on the right side entering into the place that is obligated in mezuzah. For example, the mezuzah on the front door or back door of a house is always placed on the right side going into the house since the house is obligated in mezuzah and the street isn’t. A walk-in closet which is less than 4x4 amot the mezuzah is put on the right side going from the closet into the room since the closet isn’t obligated.^[151]
2. Entry: The mezuzah should be put up on the doorpost which is to one's right upon one's entering the house.^[152] This criteria applies equally to the outer doors of the house to the rooms inside the house.^[153] For example, a room that only has one entrance obviously has the mezuzah placed on the right side going into the room.^[154]
3. Usage: If a room has two doorways if one of the two rooms that it connects is used more frequently then the mezuzah should be put up on the right side going into the room that is used more frequently.^[155]
4. Majority of Walking: If the position isn't determined by entry or by which is used more frequently it can be determined by which room people walk from one room to another; if majority of the times people enter in one direction the mezuzah is placed on the right of that direction.^[156]
5. Doorway: If the position of the mezuzah cannot be determined based on which direction is used for entry or which room is used more frequently it can be determined by the door. Since the door generally swings into the room (besides the outermost door of the house) the way the door swings can be considered the way one enters the room and the mezuzah is placed on the right side entering the room.^[157] However, if the mezuzah is determined based on the previous factors it doesn't matter which way the door swings.^[158]
6. Doubt: If it is impossible to determine which side to put up the mezuzah based on the criteria of (1) whether the door is used more for entry or exiting, (2) which of the two rooms that the door connects is used more frequently, and (3) the door hinges because the door is used equally for entry and exiting, the two rooms are used equally and there is no door, according to some poskim there is no obligation to put up a mezuzah at all. Some poskim write that one should put up a mezuzah on both sides, but other poskim write that may not do so since it is [Bal Tosif], adding onto a mitzvah.^[159]
The halacha that the mezuzah is placed on the right side of the door applies equally to a left footed person as well.^[160]
The side on which the mezuzah is placed depends on the norm of the people who use the house whether they own it, live there, are obligated in mezuzah or not. It doesn't depend on which way the homeowner wants to be the main direction of entry; it solely depends on which direction is used for more for entry in practice by the people who use it.^[161]
If the mezuzah was placed on the left side of the door it needs to be taken down and put up on the right side with a bracha.^[162]

Back Door to Backyard

If there's a back door that opens to an enclosed backyard that is completely closed then the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going into the backyard.^[163]
If the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a courtyard or street then the back door should have a mezuzah on the right side going into the house because the house is used more than the backyard.^[164] Some hold that the mezuzah is placed on the right side in the direction of whichever way the majority of the time people enter.^[165]

Balcony or Porch

A roofed front porch that is open to the front yard or street and opens up to the house is obligated in a mezuzah. If it has 4 amot by 4 amot of space it is obligated in a mezuzah with a bracha. If the area it surrounds is 16 square amot, one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.^[166]
A roofed porch that has 4 amot by amot of space on the side or back of the house is obligated in a mezuzah with a bracha.^[167]
A balcony or deck that opens to a house and has no other entrance or exit should have a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the balcony.^[168]
Even if the balcony is less than 4x4 amot and isn't roofed, according to Sephardim, the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going from the house to the balcony.^[169] Ashkenazim hold that if the balcony is less than the equivalent of 16 square amot the mezuzah should be put on the right side going from the balcony into the house. But if it is more than the equivalent of 16 square amot the mezuzah is placed on the right side going from the house out to the balcony.^[170]

Walk-in Closet

The questions to clarify for whether a closet is obligated in a mezuzah and as to which side the mezuzah is placed depends on the following:
1. If a closet is 4x4 amot it is certainly obligated in a mezuzah^[171] going into the closet.^[172]
2. Most poskim hold that an area that has 16 square amot, even if it doesn't have 4x4 amot in any one place, is obligated in a mezuzah^[173] going into the closet without a bracha.^[174] It doesn't matter what shape it is in as long as it is usable.^[175]
3. A walk-in closet that is not 4x4 amot and doesn't even have the area of 4x4 amot, according to most poskim it is completely exempt from a mezuzah, though some say it is obligated since it is useful the way it is.^[176] Therefore, strictly speaking it doesn't need a mezuzah, but many poskim are strict to place a mezuzah going out from the closet into the room that itself is obligated in a mezuzah.^[177] Either way, the mezuzah is put up without a bracha.^[178] According to Sephardim, the closet is exempt.^[179]
A closet that you do not walk into is exempt from a mezuzah.^[180]

Having One's Mezuzot Checked

One should have one's Mezuzot checked by a sofer twice in seven years, or once in every three and a half years, and it is a pious practice to check them every year during Elul.^[181]
Some poskim hold that it isn't necessary to get one's mezuzot checked if they are completely sealed.^[182]
If one's mezuzah became wet one should check it immediately.^[183]
The mezuzah's of a publicly owned building only need to be checked twice in fifty years.^[184]
Ideally Ashkenazim should get mezuzot with a ketav (handwriting) that is Ashkenazic and Sephardim the Sephardic ketav. If one uses the other one it is still valid.^[185]
A Sephardi should have a mezuzah with a paragraph break like the Rambam and not the Taz, which is common in Ashkenazi mezuzot. For a Sephardi it is possibly invalid and should be replaced.^[186]
It is permitted to check all of one's mezuzot at once and it isn't necessary to take them down and check them one at a time.^[187]
Before touching the actual klaf of the mezuzah one should wash his hands with a cup as he would do netilat yadayim for a meal.^[188]

Rentals

If someone is renting a house in Israel he is obligated to put up a mezuzah with a bracha immediately.^[189] However, if one is renting outside Israel for less than 30 days isn't obligated to put up a mezuzah and if he wishes to be strict to put a mezuzah he should do so without a bracha.^[190] Some say that the Ashkenazic minhag is to put it up with a bracha.^[191] If he stays for more than 30 days and he put up a mezuzah previously he should make a bracha upon the mezuzot. Some say that one has to take down the mezuzah after 30 days^[192] and put them up again with a bracha.^[193] Others say that one doesn't have to take it down to make a bracha upon it.^[194] It is proper to take it down check them and put them back up with a bracha.^[195]
If someone is renting a house for more than 30 days, some say that he is obligated to put up a mezuzah immediately^[196] without a bracha.^[197] Others hold that one is exempt until after 30 days have passed.^[198]
Someone renting a bungalow for more than 30 days must put up mezuzah but some hold that no bracha is recited.^[199]
A yeshiva dormitory requires mezuzot and they should be put up by the yeshiva and not the students.^[200]

Proper Behavior When Passing a Mezuzah

When one leaves one's house should kiss the mezuzah to remind one of the unity of Hashem, as discussed below. There are different opinions as to how exactly one should behave when passing a mezuzah.^[201]
When one enters or exits a room one should think about the unity of Hashem, our love for Hashem, and be awakened from the slumber of the vanities of the world. One should think that there's nothing that last forever except knowledge of Hashem, and immediately this will help a person follow the proper path. ^[202]
One should be very careful with the mitzvah of mezuzah because it is a mitzvah that applies to everyone always.^[203]

Non-Jew

A Jew who owns a building in partnership with a non-Jew according to Ashkenazim is exempt from mezuzah^[204], but according to Sephardim is obligated to put up a mezuzah^[205] without a bracha.^[206]
A person shouldn't give a mezuzah to a non-Jew unless there is a concern that the non-Jew will be hate him for it.^[207]

Women

Women are obligated in mezuzah. ^[208]
There is a discussion among the poskim if women can ideally place the mezuzot. Many poskim write that it is even ideal for women to put up the mezuzot. ^[209]

Children

Ideally, a child should not place the mezuzah on a doorpost. ^[210] Sephardim hold that the child should put up the mezuzah for his doorway and when he becomes bar mitzvah'ed it should be taken down, checked, and put up again with a bracha.^[211]
The doorway to a child's room should have a mezuzah for chinuch.^[212]
In a room where the baby is changed if the mezuzah is on the inside of the door it should be covered.^[213]
Even though it is technically permitted to have a child potty in a room with a mezuzah since the mezuzah is covered and above 10 tefachim it isn't proper to do so.^[214]

Moving

If a person is moving and another Jew is moving in one must leave them your mezuzot.^[215] The reasoning is that you shouldn't remove mezuzot is because they are used to serve to protect the house from harm and taking them indicates that you don't care about those moving in^[216] or that mezuzot represent that the divine presence resides in the home and that isn't something one should remove.^[217]
The one moving can charge the next tenant to pay for the mezuzot^[218], but even if he isn't willing to pay one still shouldn't take down the mezuzot.^[219]
It is permitted to switch more mehudar mezuzot with less kosher mezuzot. It is better to have them checked before switching them.^[220]
There is an opinion that you may take down the mezuzot if you're going to put them up in another house, however, that opinion isn't accepted as the halacha.^[221]
There is what to rely upon to take down the mezuzah if it is going to be painted before the next tenant moves in so that they don’t get ruined.^[222]
If the house is going to be closed up and no one is going to move in afterwards for the foreseeable future one can take one's mezuzot.^[223]
If someone has a door which he used to use and decides never to use that door again, some hold it is exempt,^[224] while most hold it is obligated.^[225] If that room has another door and one decides not to use one of the doors ever again, some of the poskim who are strict in the first case agree here that it is exempt.^[226]

Links

Mezuzah on aish.com
Halachos of Mezuzah on www.vaadmhk.org

Sources

↑ Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Positive Commandment 15, Sefer HaChinuch Mitzvah 423, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 from Devarim 6:9 and 11:20. Shulchan Aruch YD 285:1, Chayei Adam 15:13, Aruch Hashulchan 285:2 say that one should be very meticulous with this mitzva.
↑ Tur YD 285 writes based on the pasuk that follows in Parashat Ekev, 11:21, that one who is meticulous in this mitzva merits long life. Bach YD 285 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 285:3 write that a house with a mezuzah has extra protection. Shabbat 23b states that someone who is careful with mezuzah merits to have a nice house.
↑ Rosh end of Hilchot Mezuzah
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:8
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:10
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:33
↑ Bava Metsia 102a, Agur Bohalecha 9:1
↑ Agur Bohalecha 9:4-5
↑ Agur Bohalecha 9:12
↑ Agur Bohalecha 9:18, 10:15
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:15, 8:15
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:18
↑ Rambam Brachot 11:13 writes that an agent who puts up a mezuzah writes the bracha על קביעת מזוזה. Agur Bohalecha 7:9 rules like the Rambam, but cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha edition 3) and Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 4) that even an agent should recite לקבוע מזוזה based on the Rama 265:2 regarding milah.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 8:22. He rejects the Chikrei Lev 128 and others who invalidate a mezuzah put up by a non-Jew. There are four reasons it could be invalid: 1) We learn from tzitzit that just like tzitzit made by a non-Jew is invalid so too mezuzah. 2) There needs to be shelichut and there is no shelichut for a non-Jew. 3) The putting up has to be done lishma. 4) We should learn from Tefillin that just as non-Jews don't have the mitzvah of tefillin they may not write a mezuzah.
↑ No bracha is recited for living in a house with mezuzot that were already put up (Birkei Yosef 19 in disagreement with the Magen Avraham 19:1). Agur Bohalecha 7:3 rules like the Birkei Yosef.
↑ Gemara Menachot 42b, Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 5:7, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Aruch Hashulchan 289:3
↑ Rabbi Reuvain Mendlowitz (cited at Mezuzah Blessing - The Seven Most FAQ)
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Aruch Hashulchan YD 289:4, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:160, Rivevot Ephraim 3:508, Az Nidberu 3:61
↑ Mezuzat Baitecha 289:6, Rivevot Ephraim 2:29:21, Pitchei Mezuzot 289:10, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:8
↑ Chovat Hadar 11:9, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:8. Mikdash Miat 289:6 and Birchot Habayis 59:1 disagree.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:19, 24
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:57
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 296:15 writes that a doorway that doesn't have a door is obligated in a mezuzah, however, some disagree. The Shach YD 296:25 writes that because of this dispute one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha, or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in another doorway that is obligated, and afterwards put up this mezuzah as well. Similarly, Shulchan Aruch YD 296:13 writes the opinion of the Rambam that if the room has an area of 4 by 4 amot even if it isn't a square it is obligated in a mezuzah. The Shach 296:23 notes that the opinion of the Rosh is that the doorway isn't obligated unless there is a 4 by 4 amot square area. Due to this dispute, the Shach concludes that one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah.
↑ Rambam Mezuzah 6:1
↑ Chovat Hadar ch. 7 fnt. 41 has a doubt about the case and leaves it unresolved. Mezuzah Vhilchoteha ch. 10 fnt. 22 cites this Chovat Hadar and adds regarding a curtain the sefer Mezuzat Beytecha says it requires a bracha, but the sefer Pitchei Mezuzot argues that a curtain isn't a door.
↑ Chovat Hadar 11:2, Mezuzat Baitecha 289:3, Agur Bohalecha 1:43
↑ Yabia Omer YD 8:27 disagrees with Rav Massas in Tevuot Shamesh YD 96 who holds that if one forgot to recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah one can't make the bracha afterwards. Yabia Omer holds that there is an ongoing mitzvah of having the mezuzah up and so a bracha can be recite afterwards. He also holds that it is better to take down the mezuzot, get them checked, and put them back up with a bracha. Agur Bohalecha p. 106 quotes the son of the Rambam in Maspik Ldvar Hashem v. 2 ch. 30 as a support for Rav Massas.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 7:7
↑ Maharam Shik YD 285, Rivevot Ephraim 7:239, Beer Moshe 2:92, Avnei Yashfei 1:207:1, Doleh Umashke (p. 275, footnote 69) quoting Rav Elyashiv and Rav Nissim Karelitz.
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Beer Moshe 6:6, Chovat Hadar (11:15:footnote 29), Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:7, Avnei Yashfei 1:207:3-4, Rivevos Ephraim 2:28:5. Orchos Rabbeinu (v. 3, p. 178 #38) however, disagrees.
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7 writes that there's a doubt if one should make a bracha if a mezuzah was taken down to check it.
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:93 writes that one should recite a bracha if they were taken down to be checked by a sofer.
↑ Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 8, Pitchei Teshuva 289:1, Aruch Hashulchan 289:4, Chovat Hadar 11:14
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3,5, Rivevot Ephraim 1:19, Beer Moshe 2:92:13, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:6, Chovat Hador 11:11:footnote 20, Yabia Omer YD 3:17
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:94, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha p. 109 citing Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo 8, Halichot Olam p. 261
↑ Beer Moshe 2:92 writes that it is obvious that when putting up a mezuzah after it was taken down for two or three days that a new bracha is necessary. He says that it is obvious that a person had a hesech hadaat. He compares it to Shulchan Aruch 8:14 by tzitzit that was removed and put back on. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha p. 110 concludes like the Divrei Shalom 4:167 that one can recite a bracha when putting it back up but it is better to have them checked and make a bracha when putting them up. Agur Bohalecha 7:23 holds that one can recite a new bracha if it was done for a few hours, however, he cites the practice of Yerushalayim only to recite a new bracha if it was down for one night.
↑ Magen Avraham 19:1 assumes a person puts up a mezuzah once he starts to live there.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:1 and 8:1 writes that if one started to live in the house one should put the mezuzah right away. But he adds that it is better to put it up in advance right before one starts to live there, even though one is only obligated after he started to live there. In ch. 7 fnt. 1 he cites that Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo Tefilla ch. 23 fnt. 54) ruled to put up the mezuzah with a bracha even before beginning to live there. Nonetheless, he also cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 288:78) who is concerned for the Mishna Brurah 19:4 that the mezuzah should be put up immediately before starting to live there or right after beginning to live there.
↑ Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:10), Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2: Halacha 4, Shevet Hakehati 1:277, Mezuzat Baitecha 289:6, Rivevot Ephraim 7:369.
↑ Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 14) accepts the minhag to place it on the right doorpost even though it is more than a tefach from the entranceway. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 3:328 and Otzrot Piskei Igrot Moshe p. 11 quoting Ohalei Yeshurun fnt. 175 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:15 agree. Chut Shani p. 121 seems to agree. Teshuvot Vehanagot reasons that the door itself can't nullify part of the doorway since it is part of the function of the doorway. Chovat Hadar 8:3 fnt. 8 holds that an accordion door needs a post placed next to where the folds end so that the mezuzah is within a tefach of the passageway of the door.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 22:11
↑ Rashba (teshuva 4:91) writes that double doors with a pole in the middle, with the doors that are attached to the pole in the middle should have two mezuzot, but if they're attached to the side doorposts it should have one mezuzah since the pole in the middle is only for decoration and not to create two doorways. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 codifies the Rashba. The Tur Y.D. 286:21, although similar in formulation to the Rashba, writes that if there is a single door that opens for two doorways it only needs one mezuzah, implying that if there are two doors that can open separately they need two mezuzot. Yad Ketana ch. 3 fnt. 9 makes this point but finds the opinion of the Tur very difficult to sustain in this case since the door functions as one doorway. He concludes that we follow the Rashba and Shulchan Aruch in that case and one mezuzah suffices.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 15:6
↑ Agur Bohalecha 26:8, Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Daat Noteh Mezuzah p. 570) defending the Yad Ketana, Birur Halacha Hakatzar p. 79 202:3
↑ Pitchei Mezuzot 296:109 writes that we shouldn't be lenient like the Yad Ketana that anytime they're functioning the same room they're considered one doorway, rather we should follow the implication of the Tur. He understands that the Rashba agrees with the Tur that a pole in the middle isn't just for decorative purposes if it is used to hold the hinges of one of the doors. This also seems to be the understanding of the Chayei Adam 15:13.
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 based on Rashba, Agur Bohalecha 26:10
↑ Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 7)
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:16, Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:15, Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 121
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 287:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11
↑ Pitchei Mezuzot 19:10-1 (p. 257), Minchat Yitzchak 3:103, 4:92:3, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 60)
↑ The Gemara Yoma 11a cites a dispute between Rav Kahana and Rav Yehuda if a storage room needs a mezuzah if it isn't used for anything else. Rav Kahana held that this was a dispute in the tenayim. The Rif (Mezuzah 6b) and Rosh (Mezuzah no. 15) hold that it is obligated, while the Rambam Mezuzah 6:7 holds it is not. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:2 accepts the opinion of the Rif. Yalkut Yosef YD 285:30 writes that one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha. Aruch Hashulchan 286:9 agrees. There are a number of Acharonim who suggest that it is best to avoid making a beracha since there are Rishonim who rule that a storage room does not require a mezuzah at all. Rav Wosner in Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127 also writes to put up a mezuzah on a storage room without a bracha. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Parsha Sedura n. 16 organizes the rishonim. He summarizes that the Rambam, Ritva, Meiri, Riaz, Smag, Tosfot Rid, Lekach Tov, Seda Lderech, and Tosfot Menachot hold it is exempt, but the Shiltot, Bahag, Rabbenu Chananel, Rif, Rosh, eshkol, Yereyim, Smag, Chinuch, Mordechai, Rabbenu Yerucham, Tur, Rabbenu Yohanatan, Hashlama, Piskei Rid, Orchot Chaim, and Shulchan Aruch hold it is obligated. Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:66 holds it is obligated with a bracha.
↑
Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 0-2). See Rama 286:18 and Shach 286:26. This is also the opinion of Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127). Chovat Hadar ch. 2 fnt. 12 writes that it seems from the poskim that a storage room is only obligated because frequently a person goes in an out but if a person doesn't use it regularly he shouldn't be obligated. However, he admits that he didn't find the poskim who said this and instead it seems that they obligate a storage room in all cases. Igrot Moshe YD 2:141 holds that a storage room is obligated in a mezuzah even if it isn't used frequently even if it is only used once every few years. Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman said that the minhag of Yerushalayim is to put up a mezuzah for a storage room even if it is only used twice a year (as explained by Arugot Bosem Menachot p. 334). Rav Elyashiv in Kovetz Teshuvot 1:117 implies that a storage room is always obligated as long as you have access to enter. Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 60) agrees that a storage area is obligated even if you don't enter. Mezuzah Vehilchoteh 3:4 writes that a room that is used even once a year needs a mezuzah.
- Rabbi Akiva Eiger (sh"t 9, cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 291:4) writes that a person is only obligated in mezuzah while he is living at home, but once he leaves even to go to work he isn't fulfilling the mitzvah of mezuzah. Nachalat Tzvi 291, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Ayin Yitzchak YD 1:31), and Dvar Avraham 1:37 disagree. Rav Elchanan holds that it is considered dwelling in the house even though one is coming in and out. Dvar Avraham explains that the obligation of mezuzah doesn't change when one left since one intended on returning. Rabbenu Yohatan (shitah mikubeset b"m 101b) also holds that the area is obligated even if one only goes in once a year and isn't currently dwelling there.
↑ Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:647, Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 4:7 citing Az Nidbaru 3:58 and Minchat Yitzchak 10:97, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 50)
↑ Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127)
↑ Yoma 11b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:4, Aruch HaShulchan YD 286:5, Yalkut Yosef 285:43
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 285:5, Aruch Hashulchan 286:13
↑ Aruch Hashulchan 286:12-15 proves that the Bet Yosef's opinion that the bedroom needs a mezuzah and it is sufficient to have it covered with one covering. Yalkut Yosef YD 285:41 and Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 302 agree for additional reasons such as the Smag who holds that if the mezuzah is ten tefachim from the ground it is considered in another domain. Zivchei Tzedek OC 38 and Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Ki Tavo, no. 16) are lenient and write that such is the minhag. Kaf Hachayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 40:13 agrees but adds that initially one should be strict for the Magen Avraham.
↑ Magen Avraham 40:2 holds that a mezuzah that is facing the inside of the room needs to be covered with a double covering to permit having tashmish in the room. Divrei Chamudot (Mezuzah no. 46), Eliya Rabba 40:2, Mishna Brurah 40:7, Ginzei Hakodesh 4:14, and Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Ki Tavo, no. 16) citing the Yad Ketana 13 agree.
↑ Chachmat Adam 128:10, Mishna Brurah 40:7, Kaf Hachayim 40:19. Ahava Achva Vshalom p. 121 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding like Chachmat Adam. Maharsham in Daat Torah 40:2 cites the Chachmat Adam.
↑ Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 175 n. 34 quotes the Chazon Ish and Steipler as disagreeing with the Chachmat Adam. If there's a double covering that is the usually there it is considered like a single covering even if it was put there intentionally to be a double cover. This can also be found in Igrot Vereshimot Kehilat Yakov v. 5 p. 266 of the Steipler. It also quotes this from Meorer Yeshenim. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh v. 3 p. 461 agrees. Mechzeh Eliyahu 1:8:28 p. 74 is strict and quotes many who are strict including: Gidulei Hekdesh 4, Mateh Yehuda 40, Chesed Lalafim, Divrei Chamudot n. 46, Derech Hachayim, Yad Ketana, and Pri Megadim OC EA 240:17.
↑ See above notes. Rav Schachter (Laws of Mezuzah min 55-6) cites both opinions but seems to be strict to cover the mezuzah with a cloth if it is on the inside and the couple is going to be together. Mishna Brurah 40:7 clarifies that it is sufficient if one of the covers is not designated for the mezuzah. (Avnei Nezer YD 383:1 explains that something inside a double covering is like it isn't in the house at all.)
↑ Rav Moshe Feinstein (Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 277) explains that a laundry room is obligated even though it isn't a very honorable room since generally it doesn't have uncovered feces or a bad smell. Shaarei Mezuzah 2:12 quotes Rav Elyashiv (Sefer Habayit 20:25), Rav Nissim Karelitz (Leket Hilchot Mezuzah ch. 3), and Shevet Hakehati 2:296 as holding that laundry rooms today require a mezuzah since generally the rooms are clean. In conclusion, Shaarei Mezuzah writes to put up a mezuzah without a bracha like Yalkut Yosef 286. Az Nidbaru 10:32 favors the approach that a laundry room needs a mezuzah if it is a clean room such as an apartment building laundry room or drycleaner.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 32:18-9 writes that a room that is used exclusively as a passageway to a bathroom is exempt from mezuzah. However, if it is used also for honorable activities it would be obligated in mezuzah. He clarifies in fnt. 42 that a room used for washing one's hands outside of a bathroom is obligated if it is also used to wash one's hands for a meal or another honorable activity. However, if it is just used to wash one's hands on one's way out of the bathroom that is exempt. Shaarei Hamezuzah 2:26, Or Yitzchak YD 1:55, and Ohalei Shem (Mezuzah 286 siman 15) all agree with Agur Bohalecha. Chovat Hadar 2:10 is a good proof that he agrees with Agur Bohalecha as well.
↑ Pitchei Shaarim p. 136 quotes Rav Belsky in name of Rav Moshe Feinstein that it is exempt even in this case. Mishnat Yehoshua 6:11 agrees. Az Nidbaru 3:63 seems to agree with Rav Moshe. Also, Minchat Yitzchak 4:90's quote of Rav Horowitz seems to agree as well. Minchat Yitzchak's actual opinion there isn't relevant to this case. Chayey Halevi 2:67:14 isn't sure if it is chayav when it is used for other purposes besides washing after going to the bathroom, but says that it isn't 4x4 amot it is exempt on left side. He says that in the house of the Squever Rebbe they have such a room and it doesn't have a mezuzah.
↑ Mishna Brurah 84:7 quoting Pri Megadim, Az Nidbaru 3:63
↑
The Gemara Yoma 11a establishes that a shul that no one lives in doesn't need a mezuzah. The Gemara 11b implies that the reason for this is that only a house that belongs to clearly designated owners needs a mezuzah excluding a shul that belongs to the community or public. Tosfot 11b s.v. shein accepts this understanding and says that a privately owned shul would require a mezuzah. He uses this idea to explain the Yerushalmi Megillah which speaks about a mezuzah on a shul unlike the Gemara Yoma and Brachot 47a that assumed that a shul doesn't need a mezuzah. The Rif (Hilchot Mezuzah 6b), Rosh (Mezuzah 6b), and Rambam (Mezuzah 6:6) distinguish between a shul in a city is exempt but in a village it is obligated because most likely people live in the shul building. The Shulchan Aruch YD 286:3 concludes that a shul does not require a mezuzah.
- The Rambam Mezuzah 6:6 writes that a shul doesn't need a mezuzah since it is an area of kedusha. There is a difficulty regarding the Rambam's opinion regarding its source from the Gemara Yoma 11b which seems only to apply this reason to the bet hamikdash. The Chatom Sofer YD 291 however explains that the Rambam means that even though the shechina dwells in the shul it isn't considered as though it is a house used for dwelling since it needs to be used for human dwelling to be obligated in mezuzah.
- Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a shul is exempt and not obligated like a storage house for the siddurim or other items left there since it isn't built in order to be a storage house. Shaarei Hamezuzah p. 110 writes that the minhag of the world is to put up a mezuzah on a shul, but Rav Willig disagrees and doesn't have a mezuzah on his shul to indicate that people shouldn't eat in the shul.
↑ The Gemara Yoma 11b treats a shul and bet midrash equally regarding mezuzah. Tosfot Yoma 11b writes that based on Yoma it sounds like there is no obligation to have a mezuzah for a bet midash, but Menachot 33a implies otherwise. Tosfot concludes that if it is privately owned or if it has a door from the bet midrash that opens into someone's private house then that door is obligated in a mezuzah. The Rosh (Mezuzah no. 10) writes that the Maharam Rotenberg learned from the Yerushalmi that a bet midrash should have a mezuzah. He added that a evil spirit bothered him when he slept in the bet midrash during the day until put up a mezuzah. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:10 concludes that a bet midrash does not need a mezuzah but since some say it should have one it is proper to put up one without a bracha. The Shach 286:19 explains that the reason to distinguish between a shul and bet midrash is that the talmidei chachamim live in the bet midrash day and night.
↑ The Gemara Yoma 10a establishes that according to the rabbis a sukkah does not require a mezuzah since it is a temporary dwelling. The Tur YD 286:11 extends this to a boat and store that are also considered a temporary dwelling which doesn't require a mezuzah. The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:11 concurs. The Taz 286:10 explains that even if the store is used every day it is exempt since no one lives in it at night. He adds obviously that if someone has a store in their house they require a mezuzah. However, the Perisha 286:22 wonders if store nowadays are exempt since they are permanent. In fact, the Pitchei Teshuva 286:14 cites the Yad HaKetana 2:21 who argues that a store that is set up for a temporary marketplace for a week or so is exempt from a mezuzah, but an established store requires a mezuzah. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:14, Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:647, Rav Poalim YD 2:36, Yabia Omer YD 10:58:28, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:36, Rav Chaim Kanievsky on Masechet Mezuzah 1:16 agree with the Yad HaKetana. See further Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 302. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:28 holds that a mezuzah can be put up with a bracha. Yalkut Yosef writes that a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha because of the dispute but if someone recites a bracha they have what to rely upon. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 4:1 agrees. Teshuvot Vehanhagot and Rav Wosner in Kovetz Mbet Levi (5753 v. 2 p. 127) hold that a mezuzah is put up without a bracha. The Ohel Aryeh 4:8 writes that perhaps the Taz would agree nowadays since the stores are open partially into the night and since it is used by day and night it is considered permanent.
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:37
↑ Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127)
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:38
↑ Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:4 writes that if a Jew has a room for his non-Jewish worker that room needs a mezuzah. See Daat Kedoshim 285:17. Beero Shel Avraham YD 1:33 writes that a non-Jewish worker in a yeshiva who has a private room to stay if the worker works at any time when he's needed such as to fix things his room requires a mezuzah. However, if he works specific hours and part of his salary is his private room then it is exempt from a mezuzah.
↑
Lehorot Natan 3:72, Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish YD 286), Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 129). Minchat Yitzchak 4:93 holds one should put up a mezuzah on the elevator cab itself on the right side going in and not each floor. Teshuvot Vehanahgot 2:547 agrees. Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Tuvcha Yabiu - Hilchot Shecheinim 34) also holds that even if the elevator itself is not 4 by 4 amot, the doorpost from the hallway that leads into the elevator requires a mezuzah.
- Lehorot Natan 3:72 writes that there should be a mezuzah from the elevator to the building. He explains that it is like a foyer (bet shaar) that leads to a house. Additionally, he adds that according to Rabbi Akiva Eiger 286:13 even if it doesn't require a mezuzah itself, it needs a mezuzah since it opens to a room that requires a mezuzah. Minchat Yitzchak 4:93 agrees with his first point that it requires a mezuzah since it opens up to a house, but disagrees with the application to Rabbi Akiva Eiger.
- Regarding the first point, there is a nuanced difference between the Lehorot Natan and Minchat Yitzchak. Minchat Yitzchak thinks that fundamentally the elevator should be exempt since it isn't meant for significant dwelling as it continually moves. However, since it allows passageway to houses it is obligated like a bet shaar, which doesn't meet the criteria for mezuzah but is obligated since it allows entrance to houses. This is the opinion of the Chamudei Doniel who obligates a bet shaar even though it lacks the area of 4x4 amot. Lehorot Natan responds that he believes the Chamudei Doniel is incorrect. However, if the elevator is 4x4 amot it is considered a bet shaar because of its function to enable passage from floor to floor and ultimately to houses.
- Minchat Yitzchak writes that Rabbi Akiva Eiger is only relevant to a small room attached to a bigger room, such that if the bigger room were removed it would be open to the street and require a mezuzah. But since the elevator is in a shaft even if it were removed the bigger room would be open to an unusable area. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 129) holds like the Lhorot Natan that one should put up a mezuza going out on every floor. Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish YD 286, Dinei Habayit Hameshutaf p. 123) agrees. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchat Shlomo 2:100:5) held that it was exempt but good to put up a mezuzah going out on every floor like Rabbi Akiva Eiger.
- Chovat Hadar 5:11 writes that the entrances all require a mezuzah, but the lobby floor should have it on the right going into the elevator, while on the other floors should have it on the right going out to the floors. His reasoning is that the elevator is like a bet shaar since it allows entranceway to houses. However, the cab itself he writes is exempt since it isn't meant for dwelling. Shvut Yitzchak (v. 16 p. 29 2:2) quotes Rav Elyashiv as agreeing that the mezuzah is place on the right side going out besides on the lobby where it should be on the right going in. Rabbi Elchanan Lewis quotes the Chovat Hadar and Minchat Yitzchak.
↑ Beer Moshe 2:88 thinks that an elevator and the entrances are exempt since the elevator isn't suited for living and the shaft isn't either. Betzel Hachachma 3:80-82 agrees. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 n. 44) and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 277) agree. He also cites this from his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, in Halichot Olam v. 8. Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 3) explained that the minhag is that elevators are completely exempt from mezuzah. Rav Yerucham Erlinger quotes that the Steipler (Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 172) and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Yesodei Yeshurun v. 2 fnt. 66) also held that an elevator are exempt from a mezuzah.
↑ Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 6:10 quoting Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 300, Az Nidbaru 3:30:2, Chovat Hadar 4:6. Regarding airplanes he quotes Halichot Olam and Shevet Halevi 2:156
↑ Rivevot Efraim 3:505
↑ Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 6:5 citing Aruch Hashulchan 286:26, Minchat Yitzchak 2:82
↑ Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 6:7
↑ Yoma 11a, Shitah Mikubeset b”m 102, Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 0-2)
↑ Yoma 12a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:2-3
↑ Yoma 11a. Rama YD 286:1 quoting the Aguda that even if some non-Jews live in the city they are exempt from mezuzah on the city gate. The Taz 286:3 explains that the exemption is based on a danger.
↑ Chazon Ish YD 172:3 writes that even though the electrical posts with the wires on top can serve as doorways to enclose an eruv for Shabbat (under certain conditions) they do not need a mezuzah since the mezuzah won't be guarded and also it might be a partially owned by non-Jews which would be exempt. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 48-53) explained that the factors why we don’t put up a mezuzah for a communal eruv are both because it might get ruined by weather or stolen. Additionally, it is because the Derech Hachaim Siddur writes that since the poles don’t divide the way the area is used (tashmisho echad) and it is more open than it is closed (omed murebeh al haparutz) for mezuzah purposes the poles don’t create a doorway. Therefore, an eruv doesn't require a mezuzah even in a Jewish community.
↑ Shulchan Aruch and Rama Y.D. 286:1, Rav Shmuel Eliyahu, Rav Yosef Eliyahu, Rav Shmuel Shapira
↑ Rav Yaakov Ariel
↑ Maharil (responsa 94) bemoans the fact that many people think that it is sufficient to have one mezuzah per house when in fact every doorway requires its own mezuzah. The Darkei Moshe 286:4 cites the Maharil. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 concurs.
↑ Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 3) explained based on Chazon Ish OC 73:9 that if it is less than 22.6 degrees, which is the measure of a slope in eruvin that counts as a wall, it is exempt from mezuzah.
↑ Chaye Adam 15:15 writes that a cellar door on the floor is exempt from mezuzah based on Kiddushin 22b that states that a doorpost lying on the ground isn't considered a doorpost. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:20 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:41 concur.
↑ Minchat Shlomo 2:100:5, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 2)
↑ Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20-22) explains that a hospital is like a hotel that even though people live there temporarily since the Jewish owner has people living there he is obligated in a mezuzah. He also cited Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:10 records a dispute between the Rambam and Rosh on this matter. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:13 writes the opinion of the Rambam that if the room has an area of 4 by 4 amot even if it isn't a square it is obligated in a mezuzah. The Shach 286:23 notes that the opinion of the Rosh is that the doorway isn't obligated unless there is a 4 by 4 amot square area. Due to this dispute, the Shach concludes that one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. Binyan Tzion 99 follows Shulchan Aruch.
↑ Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 9:3 writes that if there are large items in a room such as a refrigerator or oven they don't minimize the space of the room and count towards the four by four amot since they are normally there and enhance the use of the room. His sources include: Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 285, Maharsham 3:263, Shevet Halevi 2:187, and Chovat Hadar 4 fnt. 22. Chut Shani p. 83 suggests that the cabinets do not minimize the space since they aid use of the kitchen. He is certain though that the refrigerator and oven which are moveable do not minimize the space. Even the oven which is attached to a gas line doesn't minimize the space since it is moveable within the kitchen.
↑ Chazon Ish YD 169:6 learns from Eruvin 88b that for the Rambam two rooms that adjacent and only overlap in one area they combine for the requisite measure for mezuzah. Agur Bohalecha 18:9 cites this but disagrees. He holds that only a rectangle combines for the Rambam but not a L or T shape, but also cites in the opinion of the Chazon Ish. Chovat Hadar (ch. 4 fnt. 17) cites this Chazon Ish.
↑ The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a doorway is only obligated in a mezuzah if it has two doorposts and a lintel. Shach 287:1 quotes the Rosh and Rabbenu Yerucham who are strict if there's one doorpost on the right side and concludes that one should put up a mezuzah in such a case without a bracha. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11, Yalkut Yosef Sovah Semachot p. 546 no. 19, and HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 10:4 agree.
↑ Rosh (Halachot Ketanot n. 14), Tur Y.D. 287:1
↑ Chazon Ish YD 172:2
↑ Mikdash Me'at 287:3-4
↑ Chovat Hadar 7:7 in fnt.
↑ Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 based on Mikdash Me'at 287:3-4
↑ Chovat Hadar 7:7 in fnt.
↑
Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a door isn't obligated in a mezuzah unless the doorway has a lintel. Shulchan Aruch implies that a roof isn't a lintel. Accordingly, the Chazon Ish YD 172:3 s.v. mah writes that if the lintel doesn't extend downward to block part of the opening it isn't considered a lintel but just part of the roof. Shevet Halevi 2:150 agrees and proves this from Rashi Menachot 33b s.v. achsadra. This is also the ruling of Rav Moshe Heinemann (Guide to Halachos v. 1 p. 100).
- However, the Mikdash Me'at 287:1:5 suggests that perhaps a roof can function as a lintel. Also, the Chovat Hadar 7:5 fnt. 8 equates the issue with that of having the edge of a roof function as a lintel to the opinion of the Rosh who holds that the edge of a wall can function as a doorpost. The Netivot in Derech Hachaim Siddur 239:1 also holds that a roof can serve as a lintel. Minchat Yitzchak 10:91 explains that a roof doesn't function as a lintel but if the roof has an edge where the door is, according to some opinions, it functions as a lintel. Yet, if the roof extends beyond the door in both directions it doesn't function as a lintel. He compares it to the dispute between the Rama 630:2 and Magen Avraham 630:2 if there's doorposts and no lintel if that can serve as a tzurat hapetach. He admits that it seems not to be a proof though from further analysis. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Somachot v. 1, Mekomot Hachayavim n. 16) agrees.
- Adoney Paz 2:121:1 sides with the Chazon Ish though he recommends being strict for all opinions to put up a mezuzah without a bracha. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 10:3 concurs.
- Chazon Ish 172:2 in explaining the Ravyah writes that having two posts making the part of the roof to be like a recognizable lintel since the posts are recognizable. Then he compares it to the opinion of the Rosh that the end of a wall can function as a post. If so, it seems just like we're strict for the Rosh we should follow the Ravyah. This is the opinion of the Agur Bohalecha. However, the Chazon Ish 172:3 implies that the halacha is you need a recognizable lintel to be obligated like the Riaz against the Ravyah. Minchat Yitzchak rejects the proof from the Ravyah based on the Eliya Rabba that is only relevant to sukkah.
↑ Chovat Hadar 7:7, Agur Bohalecha 21:25. Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding that it is exempt from a mezuzah. His reasoning is that the ends of the walls of the big room aren't doorposts for the small room since they are really one wall with a break. The end of a wall serving as a doorpost is only if there's no continuation of that wall on the opposite side continuing the wall.
↑ Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 107) holds that it is obligated to put up a mezuzah with a bracha since from the inside of the big room it is recognizable as a doorway. Pitchei Mezuzot p. 154-5 holds that it requires a mezuzah according to the Rosh since it is the end of a wall and can be seen as a doorpost. According to him, it doesn't matter if it is from the small room to the big room or otherwise. Pitchei Shaarim 287:1:12 p. 215 agrees.
↑ Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:11 writes that this case of a big room into a small room is a big dispute and unresolved one should put up a mezuzah there without a bracha. Madanei Asher (Mezuzah 30:3 p. 88) agrees.
↑ Another picture of this case can be found in Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata p. 430.
↑ Chovat Hadar 7:7 writes that if there's a small room which opens into a big room if the big room is an entrance to the small room it is considered exempt. If the small room is an entrance to the big room it is obligated since the walls of the big room serve as the mezuzot for the entrance going into the big room. Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 107) originally writes that this is exempt but then seems to agree that it is obligated to put up a mezuzah. Pitchei Shaarim 287:1:12 p. 215 agrees.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 21:26. Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 says that it is clearly exempt since there are no noticeable doorposts from inside the small room. Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:11 writes that this case of a small room into a big room is an unresolved question and should have a mezuzah without a bracha. Madanei Asher (Mezuzah 30:3 p. 88) agrees. Madenei Asher cites Maaseh Nissim ch. 24 who says that in the Ben Ish Chai's house he didn't have a mezuzah on a room that was just three walls and the fourth was completely open (e.g. [1]), though he is puzzled about why he didn't put up a mezuzah in light of Ben Ish Chai (Ki Tavo n. 13).
↑ Chovat Hadar 8:3:1 fnt. 3 writes that if there are two doorframes one in front of the other if they're within 1 amah of each other it is considered one doorway and one mezuzah on the outermost tefach suffices. However, if there is a space of more than 1 amah, they each require a separate mezuzah. Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:8 agrees. Hatorah Vehamitzvah (v. 2 ch. 137 pp. 611-612) distinguishes whether or not it is possible to use the area between the doorways in which case it is two doorframes, otherwise it is one long entrance and only one mezuzah is necessary.
↑ Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 48-53) quoting the Derech Hachaim Siddur
↑
Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5, Rashi Menachot 33a s.v. “bitechila,” Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 6:12, Tur 289, Prisha 289:6, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Bet Halevi (on Chumash, Menachot 33a s.v. amar Shmuel), Pitchei Mezuzah 289:24, Chovat Hadar 8:2:4, Teshuvot Vihanhagot 2:539. Agur Bohalecha 12:2 follows the Rambam since there's nothing to lose by following the Rambam.
- See Yabia Omer YD 2:21 where Chacham Ovadia Yosef quotes poskim who say that if it was placed higher than the beginning of the top third it should be moved without a beracha to there, but himself disagrees. Agur Bohalecha ch. 12 fnt. 4 writes that one does not need to change it.
- Nekudat Hakesef 289 supports the minhag is just to put it within the top third, like Rashi and Tosfot, and not specifically at the beginning of the top third, like the Rambam.
↑ Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5
↑ Beit Yosef 289, Shach 289:4, Taz 289:3.
↑ Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:8 quotes Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 251 who writes that according to Shulchan Aruch if the mezuzah is within a tefach of the ceiling it needs to be fixed. He says that it is in disagreement with the Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo n. 7 who writes that after the fact it is kosher.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 12:16
↑ Agur Bohalecha 12:17
↑ Agur Bohalecha 12:11-13
↑ Yerushalmi Megillah 4:12, Tosfot Yoma 11b s.v. shein, Shach 289:4, Agur Bohalecha 12:7
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:77
↑ Agur Bohalecha 12:8
↑ Derech Hachaim 240:2
↑ Chovat Hadar (p. 59, n. 35)
↑ According to the opinion that the arched section is included the mezuzah should be placed at 60 inches (2/3 of 90) and above and according to the opinion that the arched section isn't included the mezuzah should be placed at 52 inches (2/3 of 78) and above. To satisfy both opinions one can place it at 60 inches where the doorpost is still vertical.
↑ Chovat Hadar p. 60 n. 35 writes that the Taz 287:2 in such a case says to place the mezuzah in the arched part like Rashi. He explains that even Rambam could agree since anyway there is a vertical doorway that is 10 tefachim. Chovat Hadar quotes achronim who disagree and side with Rambam. Shulchan Aruch YD 287:2 holds like the Rambam. Igrot Moshe OC 4:105:2 explains the Taz. More details about how to affix a mezuzah on an archway.
↑
Derech Hachaim 240:8, Pitchei Teshuva 286:10, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:12, Chovat Hadar 8:2:2, Agur Bohalecha 22:24, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 22).
- Derech Hachayim 240:8 writes that if a doorpost doesn't reach the ceiling the mezuzah should be placed on that doorpost as long as it is ten tefachim tall. The Mikdash Me'at 286:36 establishes the case of the Derech Hachaim to only when the door reaches within a third of the entire doorway. However, the Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata p. 389 points out that this Mikdash Me'at is a very difficult explanation of the Derech Hachaim. He agrees with the Derech Hachaim. Also, Chovat Hadar 8:2:2 p. 73 writes that if there are doorposts which are ten tefachim they are considered the right place for the mezuzah even though they do not reach the ceiling and there is a wall which does reach the ceiling. Sechel Tov 289:73 quotes others who agree with the Chovat Hadar. However, Rabbi Simon discusses this case at length and comes to the conclusion that it should be placed on the wall if the doorposts aren't shoulder height (spot א in the picture).
- In theory, Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:4 writes that there's two reasons why such a doorway would require a mezuzah. 1) The ten tefach posts are viewed as though they are extended up to the ceiling based on gud asik (Meiri Eruvin 11b, Sh"t Rav Eliyahu Mizrachi 2:26). 2) The posts don't need to touch the roof (Chesed Lavraham 16, Chazon Ish 170:3). Seemingly according to the first approach the mezuzah would be placed a third of the way to the ceiling, whereas the second approach would say to put it a third of the way up the post itself. He points out that another factor to consider is whether the mezuzah needs to be within a third of the height of the post or the doorway.
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1, Agur Bohalecha 14:1. Agur Bohalecha 14:9 writes that the entire mezuzah should be within the doorframe, though he cites the Shevet Halevi 3:151 who holds that it is sufficient if part is in the doorframe.
↑ Yad Haketana (ch. 3 fnt. 25) explains that it is critical to the mezuzah that a person be able to see the mezuzah and thinking about Hashem. If it is inserted into the post there must be a symbol engraved on the outside of the post to indicate that there is a mezuzah there.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 14:6
↑ The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant based on Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:4
↑ Agur Bohalecha 14:15
↑ According to the Shach's understanding the Rama 289:1 rules like the Tur that after the fact a mezuzah is kosher if it is behind the door outside of the doorframe. Agur Bohalecha siman 44-46 discusses at length whether having the mezuzah in front of the doorframe is the equivalent of behind the doorframe or better. Either way, in a case where it is impossible to put it in the doorframe it is best to put it in front of the doorframe. The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant agrees.
↑ Shulchan Aruch, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70). Yalkut Yosef clarifies that having the mezuzah within the doorframe behind the door is also called in the doorway and kosher for Shulchan Aruch. Agur Bohalecha siman 43 agrees.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:6
↑ Chovat Hadar 8:3:1 fnt. 3 explaining the position of Rav Dovid Yungreis
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:13 quoting Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 285:20), Daat Kedoshim (285:1), Chovat Hadar 8:3:3, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Hatorah Vehamitzvah v. 2 p. 663)
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1 holds that it is invalid. Shach 291:3 explains while the Tur and Rama hold it is valid after the fact, the Bet Yosef and Levush hold otherwise. He is strict for the Bet Yosef. Nishmat Adam 15:1 shows that most rishonim hold it is valid and in extenuating circumstances it is permitted to place it there without a bracha.
↑ Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70), Agur Bohalecha 14:2
↑ Gemara Menachot 32b, Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Aruch Hashulchan 289:9. Taz 289:3 writes that the mezuzah is still kosher if the mezuzah isn't within the outer tefach.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:5
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:3. He suggests that as long as it isn't very difficult one should fix it. If it would cost more than a third of the cost of a basic mezuzah one is exempt from fixing this.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:4. He observes that this is how it was placed in Rav Elyashiv's house.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 13:8
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1. Bach understands the reason that the halacha insists that a mezuzah should be put up with nails is so that it doesn't fall down. One should establish it in a way that even in the unlikely scenario it won't fall down. The Chayei Adam 15:19 implies that the reason that it should be put up with two nails is because if one only uses one mezuzah on top, the mezuzah is like it is hanging and the mezuzah should not be hanging.
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1, Chayei Adam 15:19
↑ Agur Bohalecha 10:4
↑ Agur Bohalecha 10:5-6, Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 123. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472 writes that initially one should not put up a mezuzah with glue.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 10:18 quoting Rav Elyashiv
↑ Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472
↑ Maaseh Rav n. 98 cites the practice of the Gra to place the mezuzah directly onto the post with no case specifically so that there’s no interposition between the mezuzah and the post. Pitchei Teshuva 289:2 quotes this but questions it. However, Aruch Hashulchan 289:19 and Yabia Omer YD 8:29 strongly disagree with this citation and think that the Gra never said it. Agur Bohalecha (ch. 9 fnt. 3) writes that the minhag is not concerned for this citation of the Gra and it isn’t recommended since it will make the mezuzot invalid much more quickly. He also records the practice of Brisk to follow this citation of the Gra.
↑ Rashi Menachot 33a s.v. pesula, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:6, Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 7. This was also the minhag of the Gr"a (Biurei Hagra 289:14 and Maaseh Rav n. 97). Also see Orchos Rabbeinu 1:page 378:27 who quotes that the Chazon Ish and Steipler put their mezuzot on a small slant because if it would be on a diagonal one doesn't fulfill the opinion of Rashi or Tosfot. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Mezuzot Beytecha (Shaarei Tzion 289:22) also records this practice of the Chazon Ish.
↑ Rabbenu Tam cited by Tosfot Menachot 33a s.v. ha, Rama 289:6, Levush 289:6, Chayei Adam 15:19, Minchas Elazar 1:36:1, Pitchei Mezuzahs 289:57, Chovat Hadar 9:footnote 20. Chovat Hadar 9:footnote 20 explains that the reason for this is that the opinion of Rashi says if you place it sideways it is not kosher, while Rabbenu Tam Menachot 33a s.v. ha holds that if it is straight up it is not kosher, so Ashkenazim try to fulfill the mitzvah according to both opinions. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 131) holds that it isn't put up on a 45 degree angle, rather it is put on a small slant. Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 173 writes that the Chazon Ish put his mezuzah on a slight slant, with the top of the mezuzah 3 cm from the bottom of the mezuzah (approximately at a 75 degree angle).
↑
*According to Rav Hershel Schachter the rules are ordered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. This is repeated in another shiur.
- According to Igrot Moshe YD 4:43 the rules are ordered 2, 4, 3, 5. Teshuva M'ahava 1:61, Mikdash Me'at 289:18. Minchat Yitzchak 1:89 and 3:47, Chovat Hadar 8:1:4, Aruch Hashulchan 289:8, and Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 Makom Vseder Keviyut Mezuzah fnt. 76) agree.
- According to Chelkat Yakov YD 161 the rules are ordered 2, 3, 5. Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:12 agrees. Chelkat Yakov doesn't hold of majority of walking (#4) at all. According to Agur Bohalecha 27:3 the rules are 2, 3, 5, 4.
- According to Daat Kedoshim YD 289:11 the rules are ordered 2, 5, 3, 4.
- According to Bet Meir YD 289 the rules are ordered 3, 2, 5. Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 16 p. 6 fnt. 21) agreed. Chazon Ish YD 168:1 and 168:7 hold that the rules are ordered 2, 3, 5. The Bet Meir places his emphasis on which side is important. That rule trumps all others even if it is going from the inner to outer room. The Chazon Ish agrees with the Bet Meir that which side is more important determines the mezuzah but only if it isn't going from an inner to outer room, in which case the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the inner room.
↑ Binyan Tzion 99 writes that a door from a place that isn't obligated in a mezuzah to a place that is obligated in a mezuzah should have a mezuzah on the right side going from the place that is exempt to the place that is obligated. His example is the closet that is less than 4x4 amot which is seen as an entrance from the closet to the room. Also, a front door to the street certainly has a mezuzah from the street to the house. Chovat Hadar 8:1:2 agrees. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) explained that this is the first factor by which a person determines on which side of the door the mezuzah is placed. Agur Bohalecha ch. 27 fnt. 10 argues with the Binyan Tzion.
↑ Gemara Menachot 33b, Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 6:12, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Taz 289:3, Levush 289:2, Aruch Hashulchan 289:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu 11:3, Igrot Moshe Y.D. 1:181.
↑ Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:4
↑ Ben Ish Chai (Ki Tavo, Shana Sheniya no. 6) writes that if there’s a room that’s a dead end then it is obvious that we put the mezuzah on the right going into that room. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) agreed. Based on the Maharil (responsa 94) regarding courtyards and balconies this rule is obvious. See below.
↑
*The Levush 289:3 writes that the side rooms of a house which open to the main room which was warm in the winter should have a mezuzah going into the main room since it is used more than the side room. This rule trumps the direction of the door. This is accepted by the Shach 289:6 who comments that it is obvious. The Derech Hachaim 240:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:4, Chayei Adam 15:18, Chelkat Yakov YD 161, Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42), Igrot Moshe 4:43:4 and Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:11 agree.
- The Chelkat Yakov YD 161 proves that the Mordechai is the source for the Levush. The Mordechai cited by Bet Yosef YD 289 writes that the gemara needed a doorway to resolve the question of a man's room and a woman's room next to one another because they are both equally used and open to the public. However, between a vestibule or foyer and the main room of the house that is used commonly certainly the mezuzah is placed going from the vestibule and the main room since it is used more. He adds that this is also true even if the main room is also open to the public and the vestibule is open to a courtyard.
- The Chelkat Yakov explains the Mordechai to mean to add that even though when the vestibule is open to a courtyard and the main room to the public people will use the vestibule more often as an exit than an entrance, nonetheless, since the main room is used more than the vestibule, we view the entrance between the vestibule and the main room as an entrance and not an exit. In this he is proving that the rule of majority of walking is trumped by majority of usage.
- Igrot Moshe 4:43:4 writes that rule of majority of walking trumps the rule of usage and also the rule of doorway. His logic is that the room that is used more is only an indication of which way people walk a majority of the time but the main factor is the way people walk. He holds that the way people enter a majority of the time is an application of the deoritta halacha to put a mezuzah on the right as a person enters.
↑
Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) holds that the factor of looking at the majority of the way people walk one room to another trumps the rule of the way the door is placed. Aruch Hashulchan 289:8 and Igrot Moshe YD 1:176 agree. Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:12 holds that this factor is to be used after the door rule. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 agrees.
- Daat Kedoshim 289:12 holds that we only count the walking of the homeowner, while the Gidulei Hekdesh 289:7 and Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:2 argue that it depends on whoever walks through the house including all the family members and even guests.
↑ Menachot 33a, Shulchan Aruch YD 289:3, Aruch Hashulchan 289:6. Chayei Adam 15:18 writes that היכר ציר depends on which way the door swings. Chovat Hadar (ch. 8 fnt. 10) agrees. See Rashi and Tur, however, who describe it as depending on whicch side the post upon which the door hangs is placed. Today the description of Rashi and Tur is irrelevant to most of our doors.
↑ Mordechai cited by Bet Yosef YD 289, Shach 289:6, Aruch Hashulchan 289:7, Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:3, Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:11
↑
The Yavetz 70 held that in a case of doubt that can't be resolved should have a mezuzah on both sides. The Maharam Shik YD 287 argues that this would violate the prohibition of adding a mitzvah, Bal Tosif.
- Strict: HaMezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:13 citing Mezuzat Beytecha 289:16 quoting the Chazon Ish and Minchat Yitzchak 1:9 agree with the Maharam Shik. Chelkat Yakov 162 holds that it is a rabbinic form of Bal Tosif.
- Lenient: Yabia Omer 6:2:6 cites the Binyan Tzion 100 and Rav Shlomo Kluger in Kinat Sofrim 40 who say that it isn't since one is pasul and one is kosher (Shulchan Aruch OC 34:2 and Magen Avraham 34:3). Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) explained it was not Bal Tosif since one was only trying to be fulfill the mitzvah according to all opinions similar to wearing Rashi and Rabbenu Tam's tefillin simultaneously. See Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:4 where he rights that if there is a doubt as to which side the mezuzah should be placed there is a safek as to what one should do.
- Exempt: Igrot Moshe YD 1:176 holds that if the direction in which the mezuzah should be put because it isn't used more for entry than exiting, the rooms it connects are used equally, and there is no door, then there is obligation to put up a mezuzah at all. He quotes the Yavetz who says to put up a mezuzah on both posts out of doubt but he disagrees. He also rejects the opinion of the questioner to put up a mezuzah on the side of his choice.
- Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 16 p. 4), Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani, and Shevet Halevi 2:152:2 hold that the mezuzah can be put on whichever side you want. Agur Bohalecha 27:36 agrees. This is also the opinion of the Peni Moshe and Korban Haedah on Yerushalmi (Megillah 4:12).
↑ Mordechai Halachot Ketanot 962, Bach 289:5, Shach 289:5, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3, Aruch Hashulchan 289:5, Derech Hachaim 240:3, Kuntres Hamezuzah (page 102, note 22).
↑ Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:2 unlike the opinion of the Daat Kedoshim 289:11
↑ Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:10, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3
↑
Maharil (responsa 94), Bet Yosef 289:3, Taz 289:3, Chelkat Yakov YD 161, Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6. The Chelkat Yakov writes that even though the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat ask on the Maharil since most poskim accept the Maharil we follow his opinion. His opinion is based on the concept that you walk from the house to the backyard and since the back door is an entrance to the backyard which has no other entrance then the mezuzah must be on the right entering the backyard. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) agreed.
- Chazon Ish YD 168:4-6 argues with the Maharil that the mezuzah should be on the right going into the house even when there is no gate out of the courtyard. He explains that since the courtyard is only obligated because it is open to the house, the mezuzah must be placed on the right side going into the house. Bet Meir 289 agrees for another reason. However, Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 defends the Maharil and explains that once the courtyard is obligated when it opens to houses, it is obligated in it of itself.
↑ The Maharil (responsa 94) wrote that if the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a street then the direction of the mezuzah is determined by which way the door opens. Taz 289:3 quotes it. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 writes that even though the Maharil writes that when there are two doors to a backyard the mezuzah is determined by the way the door opens, the Levush holds that we would put up the mezuzah going into the house since it is used more than the backyard. Furthermore, the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat disagree with the Maharil altogether even when the backyard has no other exit. Therefore, the Chelkat Yakov concludes that since the house is used more than the courtyard that trumps the rule of the fact that the majority of the walking is from the house to the courtyard. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 and Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) agreed with the distinction of the Chelkat Yakov of accepting the Maharil where the courtyard is not open to the street, but not when the courtyard is open to the street. In that case the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the house. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) and Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 125) agree.
↑ In summary, when the house opens to a backyard and there’s another entrance from the backyard to the street, according to Bet Meir (YD 289), Chazon Ish (YD 168:4-6), and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe YD 1:181) the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the house. However, according to Maharil 94 and Taz (YD 289:4) the mezuzah is placed in the direction of the heker tzir. According to this approach, some poskim hold that we only follow heker tzir if each side is used equally. However, if the majority of the time people walk one direction, the mezuzah is placed on the right side going in that direction. Keviyut Mezuzah Vhilchoteha (10:7 p. 138) and Lev Shome’a (2:13 p. 25) quote both of these opinions.
↑ HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 3:10
↑ Chovat Hadar ch. 1 p. 15, Or Letzion YD 1:14, Yabia Omer YD 4:23, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 3:11. However, the Chazon Ish YD 168:6 held that a porch is exempt since we don't use porches today like they used to. They used to be used as one of the rooms of the house, but today they are used for temporary uses to eat a snack or take a short nap.
↑ The Maharil quoted by the Taz 289:4 writes that if a house opens to enclosed courtyard and it doesn't have any other opening then certainly the doorway to the courtyard is considered an entrance to the courtyard since there's no other way in. However, the Bet Meir 289 argues with the Maharil and says that since the house is used more than the courtyard it is considered an entrance into the house. Chazon Ish YD 168:5 (cited by Yabia Omer) and Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) agree with the Bet Meir. Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, and Chelkat Yakov YD 162 agree with the Maharil against the Bet Meir. The Daat Kedoshim agrees with the Bet Meir unless it is an area less than 4x4 amot which might not be obligated at all in which case he follows the Maharil. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 cites the Masechet Mezuzah ch. 2 which amazingly has an explicit dispute between the Tana Kama and Rabbi Yosi about this exact case where a house opens to a courtyard that doesn't have another entrance. Rav Ovadia quotes dozens of sources whether we generally follow Rabbi Yosi over Tana Kama or not and additionally if it is possible to disregard this source since it is post-talmudic. In any event, he is convinced of the argument of the Bet Meir but still follows the opinion of the Maharil being that he was quoted by the Bet Yosef and is an earlier source. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 p. 330 n. 26) writes that if the porch is enclosed completely the mezuzah is placed on the right side going out from the house, but if the porch has an entrance or gate from the yard which can be accessed from the street, the mezuzah is placed on the right side going in from the porch to the house.
↑ Yabia Omer 4:23:6, Or Letzion 1:14, Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 3:11. Or Letzion 1:14 writes that the minhag is to put a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the balcony. He explains that if the balcony is less than 4x4 amot it isn't considered obligated in a mezuzah in it of itself. Additionally, if it doesn't have a roof it isn't obligated in it of itself. However, since the balcony opens to the house which is obligated we can treat the balcony like a foyer (bet shaar) before the house which is obligated even if it is less than 4x4. However, the dispute is why the foyer is obligated. According to the Tosfot and Rosh it is only obligated rabbinically but it is obligated as a structure that is useful for its designated purpose. However, according to the Rambam, it is obligated biblically because it opens to a house. According to the Rambam the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going in from the balcony since the balcony is only obligated as it serves the house. However, according to the Tosfot and Rosh the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going from the house to the balcony as it is obligated in it of itself. Yet, the minhag is just to put a mezuzah on the right side going from the house to the balcony like the Rosh since perhaps we follow the Rosh and even if we don't we follow the opinion of the Chikrei Lev who holds that the balcony door can't be considered an entrance for the house since you can only use it if you first exited through it. He quotes that this was also the opinion of the Rosh Yeshiva of Porat Yosef, Rav Ezra Attiyah.
↑ Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19 cites the Chiko Mamtakim p. 359 who quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach has holding that a balcony that is 4x4 amot square or the equivalent should have the mezuzah from the house to the balcony like the Maharil, but if the balcony is smaller than that it should have a mezuzah on the right side from the balcony to the house like the Bet Meir, Chazon Ish, and Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Inside Stam p. 212 quotes that Rav Moshe Feinstein, Or Letzion 1:14, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:8-9 that the mezuzah should be put on the right side going out. He also quotes that Rav Elyashiv, Rav Wosner, and Rav Nissim Karelitz held that the mezuzah should be put on the left side going out.
↑ Shulchan Aruch Y.D.286:2 obligates a storage area in mezuzah if it is 4x4 amot.
↑
Once the closet is obligated in mezuzah which way should the mezuzah be? Should it be on the right side since it is a dead end or should it have a mezuzah on the left side since the room is used more than the closet? Most poskim hold that the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going into a closet if the closet is obligated in mezuzah.
- Background: The Maharil (responsa 94) holds that the mezuzah is placed on the right side going to an enclosed courtyard since the courtyard is closed and the only way to enter it is from the house so the entrance is from the house to the courtyard. The Bet Meir 289 argues since the house is used more than the closet. The Chavot Daat cited by the Bet Meir agrees with Bet Meir but doesn’t feel he is entitled to disagree with the Maharil. Our case is analogous to that of the Maharil.
- Majority of achronim accept the Maharil. Taz 289:3, Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, Chelkat Yakov YD 162, Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1), Igrot Moshe YD 1:181, Or Letzion YD 1:14, and Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 agree with Maharil in this case. Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) and Chazon Ish YD 168:5 agree with Bet Meir.
- Or Letzion YD 1:14 write that the opinion of the Maharil depends on the dispute between the Rambam and Rosh. According to the Rambam that a bet shaar is obligated because of the house that it is attached to the mezuzah should be on the left side and according to the Rosh the rabbinic obligation is for the bet shaar itself and accordingly the mezuzah should be on the right. Or Letzion concludes to place the mezuzah on the right because either we follow the Rosh or the Chikrei Lev. Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) advances the same argument. However, both Or Letzion and Yeshuot Malko conclude that we accept the Maharil. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 rejects the entire question and explains that the Rambam would hold that the bet shaar is obligated in it of itself once it is attached to a place that is used for living. He accepts the Maharil. Our summary is that most accept the Maharil in this case and would hold to put up the mezuzah on the right side. Rav Heinemann in Guide to Halachos p. 105 writes that a walk-in closet that has 50ft sq area should have a mezuzah on the right post going in.
↑
The Rambam (Mezuzah 6:2) holds that an area that is 2x8 amot is obligated in a mezuzah as would any area that is larger than 16 square amot. The Rosh (Mezuzah no. 16) disagrees and holds that unless it is 4x4 amot square it isn’t obligated. Rashba (responsa 5:110) agrees. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:13 holds like the Rambam. Levush 286:13 agrees. The Shach 286:23 holds that it is obligated but the mezuzah should be put up without a bracha. Chayei Adam 15:6, Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:21, Halichot Olam v. 8. p. 282, and Yalkut Yosef 285:24 agree. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi p. 129) agrees. Eliya Rabba 366:5 also seems to agree with the Shach.
- The Taz OC 634:1 argues that everyone holds it is exempt. Shulchan Aruch Harav OC 366:5, Chazon Ish OC 110:28, YD 169:5, Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 82), Steipler (Orchot Rabbenu v. 4 p. 239), Rav Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 2:52, and Rabbi Baruch Simon accept the Taz. Mishna Brurah 366:22 cites the dispute and in Shaar Hatziyun 366:13 he favors the opinion of the Taz.
- Chatom Sofer YD 280 and Maamar Mordechai 634:2 defend the Shulchan Aruch against the Taz. Gra 286:13 understands the Rambam like the Rosh but holds like the Rosh. Maharalbach 110 rules like the Rambam. Magen Avraham 366:6 assumes like the Shulchan Aruch, while Magen Avraham 398:6 assumes like the Taz. Additionally, according to the Chamudei Doniel obviously an area that is 2x8 is obligated if it is usable since according to his opinion if it is usable it is obligated even if it is less than 4x4.
↑ In light of the Rabbi Akiva Eiger the closet should have a mezuzah on the right going out of the closet, but since according to the Rambam this closet needs a mezuzah going into the closet and the Chamudei Doniel would also have the mezuzah placed going in, many poskim hold that the mezuzah is placed going into the closet. This is the opinion of Rav Shlomo Zalman (cited by Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19), Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:653, and Agur Bohalecha 19:7.
↑ Rishon Letzion Sukkah 3a and 8a writes that obviously even for the Rambam it has to be usable. Therefore, a 1x16 amot house isn't obligated in a mezuzah since it is unusable, however, a 2x8 house is obligated. He also has a nuance that for a rectangle we calculate total area, but for a circle or other shapes we have to inscribe a rectangle inside that shape and use the area of that rectangle. However, the other poskim quoted in the previous footnote in understanding the Rambam did not make such a distinction.
↑
Chamudei Doniel (Pitchei Teshuva 286:11) writes that an area that is meant to be used the way it is even if it is less than 4x4 amot is obligated in a mezuzah. Rashash Sukkah 3b s.v. may agrees. Maharam Shik 287 accepts the Chamudei Doniel. Agur Bohalecha quotes Minchat Yitzchak 1:8, 3:103, Even Yisrael 7:34, and Chovat Hadar 8:6 as being concerned for the opinion of the Chamudei Doniel. Or Letzion 1:14 only accepts the Chamudei Doniel regarding a small room open to a house.
- On the other hand, Mikdash Me’at 286:39 strongly disagrees with the Chamudei Doniel. Yabia Omer 4:23:4-5 quotes Rav Shlomo Kluger (Kinat Sofrim 118), Teshuvot Lshoel 16, and Rav Chaim Zonenfeld in Salmat Chaim YD 105 disagreed with the Chamudei Doniel, while the Maharsham 3:154 agreed with the Chamudei Doniel. He concludes that the primary halacha is that the room is exempt. Shevet Halevi 2:152 and Agur Bohalecha 18:28 rule against the Chamudei Doniel.
- Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quotes the Chazon Ish as holding that we do not hold like the Chamudei Doniel. See Agur Bohalecha who discusses this further but generally agrees that the Chazon Ish disregarded the Chamudei Doniel. Rabbi Simon in an article on mezuzot agrees.
↑
Rabbi Akiva Eiger 286:13 writes that since the area is exempt from a mezuzah it can still be considered an entrance into the room. Shiltei Giborim (Hilchot Mezuzah 6b) cites the Riaz who holds of the same concept. The Chazon Ish YD 168:5 and 169:2 agrees and adds that accordingly the mezuzah should be placed on the left side, which is the right side going from the exempt area into the room. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (cited by Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19), Rav Wosner (Shevet Halevi 2:152, 2:156:286:13), Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 2:6:3), Rav Shternbuch (Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:653), Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42), Rav Aharon Lichtenstein (cited by Rabbi Jachter), Binyan Tzion 99, and Rav Heinemann (Star-K Kashrut Kurrents Winter 5779 p. 2; Guide to Halachos p. 101) agree.
- In disagreement with Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Chikrei Lev YD 129 posits that since the area is exempt in it of itself it is never considered an entrance just because you can enter it and then while exiting it enter into another room. That is considered an exit and not entering. Or Letzion YD 1:14 isn’t certain if the Chikrei Lev is correct but he certainly considers his opinion significant. Yabia Omer 4:23:6 is also uncertain of Rabbi Akiva Eiger and cites Tzur Yakov and Tarshish Shoham quoting Lechem Hapanim who disagree with Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181, Agur Bohalecha 19:6, Chesed Lavraham YD 91, Yalkut Yosef 286:21, and Rabbi Baruch Simon all agree with Chikrei Lev and reject Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Therefore, strictly speaking the closet is exempt from a mezuzah.
- Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quotes the Steipler ruled like the Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Shevet Halevi 2:152 understands that the Bet Meir 289 agrees with Rabbi Akiva Eiger.
- There is a possibility that the mezuzah should be placed from the big room into the small room. That is an idea Sfat Emet YD 289 suggested and Agur Bohalecha 19:6 in fact posits is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva Eiger. In practice, he agrees with the Chazon Ish to put the mezuzah going into the big room.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 19:6 and Teshuvot Vehanahgot 1:653 unlike Shevet Halevi 2:152 who writes that one can recite a bracha following Rabbi Akiva Eiger.
↑ Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 282 and Yalkut Yosef 285:21 writes that a room that is less than 4x4 amot is exempt. Therefore, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha writes that a walk-in closet that isn't 4x4 amot is completely exempt for Sephardim. If one wanted to be strict, this could be related to the discussion of a balcony that is less than 4x4. Or Letzion YD 1:14 writes that he partially rejects the Chamudei Doniel, but through his understanding of the topic, agrees in practice to place a mezuzah on the right going into a balcony that is exempt because it is less than 4x4 amot or isn't roofed. His reasoning is that according to the Rosh the balcony should be obligated since it is useful and the Chikrei Lev argues with Rabbi Akiva Eiger that the mezuzah is not place on the right side coming off the balcony. Yabia Omer 4:23:6 also writes that strictly speaking the balcony that is less than 16 square amot is exempt, but if one wants to be strict one should put it on the right side. going into the house.
↑ Shaarei Hamezuzah 10:16, Agur Bohalecha 19:10, Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 3:8
↑ Yoma 11a, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:25, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:92. Kol Yakov 291:3 quotes a practice to check one's mezuzot when there is a mice infestation.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 39:4 cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Elyashiv as holding that it isn't necessary to check one's mezuzot if they're sealed. Agur Bohalecha himself disagrees and holds that it is necessary to check even if it is completely sealed since the classic poskim didn't make such a distinction.
↑ Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:22)
↑ Yoma 11a, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:1
↑ Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 13:24 p. 123 citing Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 202-5. See Shulchan Aruch 288:13 and Yachava Daat 4:3 regarding the break between the paragraphs which for mezuzot doesn't invalidate.
↑ Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Stam 11:32) writes that a Sephardi should have Sephardi mezuzot according to the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch, however, if he is found in a house with mezuzot that are written according to the Taz and it would be a large loss to replace them he can leave them as is. Yachava Daat 4:3 quotes many achonrim who disagree with the Taz and concludes that Sephardim don't follow the Taz. Agur Bohalecha p. 98 quotes the minhag Ashkenazim is like the Taz for tefillin and Rav Elyashiv advised doing the same for mezuzot. He also explains that the Bet Yosef doesn't disagree with the Taz.
↑ Rivevot Efraim 5:548 quoting Rav Dovid Feinstein about the practice of his father, Rav Moshe Feinstein. Agur Bohalecha is strict.
↑ Agur Bohalecha 1:4 quoting Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:58 and Aruch Hashulchan 285:5
↑ Menachot 44a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:22, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:114
↑ Yalkut Yosef (Sava Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza", n. 108)
↑ Igrot Moshe 1:179
↑ The Menachem Meishiv YD 83 clarifies that it should be put up after 30 days and not on the 30th day itself. We do apply miksat hayom kkulo to say that it can be put up at the beginning of the 31st day even at night. One proof is Nodeh Beyehuda YD 1 and Ginat Veradim YD 6:14 cited in fnt. there.
↑ Agur Bohalecha ch. 30 fnt. 15, Igrot Moshe YD 1:179, Torah Mtzion p. 278
↑ Igrot Moshe YD 1:179
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:115. Yad Haketana ch. 2 fnt. 25 learns from the Shach 286:25 that if you take down a mezuzah and put it back up you shouldn't recite a new bracha even if it was originally not put up with a bracha. Rabbi Akiva Eiger on Shach seems to agree and explains that it is like it was never removed since you intended to return it. Chamudei Doniel 286:15 reads the Shach differently; only if it was put up with another door exempting it from a bracha should it be put up again without a bracha, otherwise a bracha could be recited the second time. Agur Bohalecha p. 108 quotes many who agree with the Chamudei Doniel and concludes that you can put it back up with a bracha since the first time it was put up without a bracha. Minchat Yitzchak 10:93 and Yalkut Yosef are concerned for the Yad Haketana.
↑ Aruch Hashulchan YD 285:49, Chovat Hadar 3:2, and Yalkut Yosef YD 285:114. In the footnotes he cites Meiri Shabbat 148b s.v. vyesh, Nemukei Yosef, Yosef Ometz 30, Nachal Eshkol (v. 2 p. 80), Ikrei Hadaat 31:1, Mateh Yosef 2:30, Harei Besamim 2:219, Aryeh Dvei Iylay 17, Sheilat Dovid YD 8, Mekor Chaim 19, Pnei Mavin YD 212, Aruch Hashulchan 286:49, and Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Ki Tavo n. 23) who support this position. Nachalat Tzvi 286 argues that even if one is renting for more than 30 days it doesn't need a mezuzah for the first 30 days. Meishiv Dvar 4:16 agrees. Agur Bohalecha 30:4 also holds that strictly speaking it isn't necessary to put up within 30 days. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe 1:179 writes that most disagree with the Aruch Hashulchan, but still one should be strict for that opinion.
↑ Pitchei Teshuva 285:17 quoting Eshel Avraham and Sh"t Rav Meshulam that one could recite a bracha within 30 days based on Tosfot Chullin 110b s.v. talit and Rosh. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 276 quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein as holding that it is acceptable to recite a bracha within 30 days. However, Yalkut Yosef 285:114 disagrees and he cites many who disagree including the Ramban, Ritva, Nemukei Yosef, Birkei Yosef 286:7, Chikrei Lev 2:128, and Torat Chesed 53.
↑ Pitchei Teshuva 281:18. Yalkut Yosef cites many others who agree with this position including Mishcha Drabuta v. 2 p. 86b, Mishpat Katuv YD 29, Chikrei Lev 3:128, Tzur Yakov 194, Daat Kedoshim 286:22, and Beer Moshe 3:182:3.
↑ Ohel Aryeh 5:3 writes that a bungalow rented for more than 30 days requires a mezuzah, some say with a bracha and some argue. He cites the Tarshish Shoham 52 who holds that the mezuzah should be put up on the 31st day without a bracha since the bungalow colony is a temporary dwelling just to escape the city for the summer.
↑ Ohel Aryeh 4:15 explains that since the yeshiva bachur can be kicked out of his room and it isn't really a rental but a payment for a place to stay the yeshiva needs to put up the mezuzot in the dormitory.
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:24 writes that one should kiss the mezuzah in order to remind oneself of Hashem's unity. Kav HaYashar (ch. 1) writes that touching the mezuzah and offering a short prayer when one leaves one's house affords oneself protection from spiritual dangers. Orchos Rabbeinu (v. 3, p. 164) writes that the Chazon Ish looked at the mezuzah without kissing it when he passed by one.
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:23
↑ Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:23
↑ Rama YD 286:1
↑ Birkei Yosef 286:1, Yalkut Yosef 285:65, Otzrot Hahalacha Mezuzah 8:6
↑ Yalkut Yosef 285:65
↑ Rama Y.D. 291:2. Igrot Moshe 1:184 explains that the Rama means that if there is a concern of a non-Jew hating a Jew, even though there isn't any concern of mortal danger it is permitted to give him a mezuzah. However, just to avoid a loss of money, Rav Moshe is not lenient unless it is an extremely significant loss. Even though the Yerushalmi Peah implies it is permitted to give a non-Jew a mezuzah, the Maharil (cited by Darkei Moshe 291) and Rama are strict. Beer Sheva 36 explains how the Maharil would explain the Yerushalmi. See further the Yavetz 2:121-122. Agur Bohaleha 4:11 argues with Rav Moshe that it is forbidden even for a significant loss
↑ The Gemara Kiddushin 34a explains that since women can also use the reward of long life, written next to the parsha of mezuzah, the mitzvah of mezuzah also applies to them. The same appears in Yoma 11b. This is codified by the Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 5:10, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:3, and Shach 291:4.
↑ Shevet Halevi 2:158:3, Kinyan Torah 2:58 and Chovat Hadar 9:3 write that women can put them up even ideally. Rav Hershel Schachter (Be'ikvei HaTzon p. 9) writes that the halacha follows the opinion that says women may put up mezuzot. Beer Moshe 2:100 and 6:79:5 as well as Teshuvot Vihanhagot 4:238:6 write that it is ideal for a man to put up the mezuzot, however, if a women did put them up, it need not be removed.
↑ Tzitz Eliezer 14:75, Chanoch Lanaar 35:4
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:15
↑ Shulchan Aruch YD 291:3
↑ Yalkut Yosef (Sovah Semachot v. 1 ch. Mekomot Hachayvim Bmezuzah no. 39)
↑ Yalkut Yosef YD 285:7
↑ Bava Metsia 101b-102a, Rambam Tefillin 5:11, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:2.
↑ Tosfot Shabbat 22a s.v. rav. The Rishon Letzion 291:1 explains that whenever one leaves a house that was obligated in mezuzah, the demons move in and will damage the next tenant. Even though the next tenant will put up his own mezuzah, that doesn't remove the demons sufficiently. However, before anyone ever lived in the house, the demons don't enter.
↑ Ritva Bava Metsia 102a s.v. lo
↑ Rama Y.D. 291:2. Birkei Yosef 291:4 notes that the Rabbenu Manoach, the source for the Rama, wrote that it is good for the new tenant to pay for the mezuzot but they don't have to. However, the language of the Rama 291:2 is that it is required. He notes, though, that the Ritva and Rabbenu Yonatan (Shita Mikubeset b"m 102a) who write the next tenant owes the money and in fact the Ritva meyuchasot holds that if the new tenant doesn't want to pay the previous tenant can take his mezuzot with him.
↑ Aruch Hashulchan YD 291:3, Igrot Moshe YD 4:44, Igrot Vreishmot Hakehilat Yakov v. 5 p. 287. Agur Bohalecha is lenient. Ritva meyuchasot b"m 102a writes that if the new tenant doesn't want to pay he can take the mezuzot with him, but according to Rabbenu Manoach the new tenant doesn't actually have to pay but it is good for him to pay.
↑ Daat Kedoshim 291:2. Yabia Omer YD 3:18 and Hamezuzah VeHilchata p. 127 hold like the Daat Kedoshim. See Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 who doesn’t offer this solution. Teshuvot Vehanahgot 1:549 isn't sure if it is permitted. He quotes from the Chazon Ish who advised not switching more mehudar mezuzot for less mehudar mezuzot when leaving a house. He is lenient, however, to switch the mezuzot after leaving and the new tenant moved in. Then one can offer the tenant to either pay for the more mehudar mezuzot or to just pay for the less mehudar mezuzot and switch the mezuzot.
↑ Chida in Birkei Yosef YD 291:2 writes that according to one answer of Tosfot one can take the mezuzot with you if you'll put it up right away, but according to the Ritva you can't. He says that we hold that one shouldn't take them down even if you'll put them up in another house right away, yet in an extenuating circumstance where you can't find mezuzot to buy for the new house you can take down the mezuzot. Aruch Hashulchan 291:3 cites this but is hesitant about it.
↑ Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 quoting Rav Henkin. See Agur Bohalecha 40:12 who seems to disagree and establishes says that after painting one has to put up the mezuzot again.
↑ Pri Megadim M"Z 15:2
↑ Agur Bohalecha 24:14
↑ Aruch Hashulchan 286:38, Igrot Moshe YD 1:177
↑ Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:177

[1] Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Positive Commandment 15, Sefer HaChinuch Mitzvah 423, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 from Devarim 6:9 and 11:20. Shulchan Aruch YD 285:1, Chayei Adam 15:13, Aruch Hashulchan 285:2 say that one should be very meticulous with this mitzva.

[2] Tur YD 285 writes based on the pasuk that follows in Parashat Ekev, 11:21, that one who is meticulous in this mitzva merits long life. Bach YD 285 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 285:3 write that a house with a mezuzah has extra protection. Shabbat 23b states that someone who is careful with mezuzah merits to have a nice house.

[3] Rosh end of Hilchot Mezuzah

[4] Agur Bohalecha 1:8

[5] Agur Bohalecha 1:10

[6] Agur Bohalecha 1:33

[7] Bava Metsia 102a, Agur Bohalecha 9:1

[8] Agur Bohalecha 9:4-5

[9] Agur Bohalecha 9:12

[10] Agur Bohalecha 9:18, 10:15

[11] Agur Bohalecha 1:15, 8:15

[12] Agur Bohalecha 1:18

[13] Rambam Brachot 11:13 writes that an agent who puts up a mezuzah writes the bracha על קביעת מזוזה. Agur Bohalecha 7:9 rules like the Rambam, but cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha edition 3) and Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 4) that even an agent should recite לקבוע מזוזה based on the Rama 265:2 regarding milah.

[14] Agur Bohalecha 8:22. He rejects the Chikrei Lev 128 and others who invalidate a mezuzah put up by a non-Jew. There are four reasons it could be invalid: 1) We learn from tzitzit that just like tzitzit made by a non-Jew is invalid so too mezuzah. 2) There needs to be shelichut and there is no shelichut for a non-Jew. 3) The putting up has to be done lishma. 4) We should learn from Tefillin that just as non-Jews don't have the mitzvah of tefillin they may not write a mezuzah.

[15] No bracha is recited for living in a house with mezuzot that were already put up (Birkei Yosef 19 in disagreement with the Magen Avraham 19:1). Agur Bohalecha 7:3 rules like the Birkei Yosef.

[16] Gemara Menachot 42b, Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 5:7, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Aruch Hashulchan 289:3

[17] Rabbi Reuvain Mendlowitz (cited at Mezuzah Blessing - The Seven Most FAQ)

[18] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Aruch Hashulchan YD 289:4, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:160, Rivevot Ephraim 3:508, Az Nidberu 3:61

[19] Mezuzat Baitecha 289:6, Rivevot Ephraim 2:29:21, Pitchei Mezuzot 289:10, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:8

[20] Chovat Hadar 11:9, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:8. Mikdash Miat 289:6 and Birchot Habayis 59:1 disagree.

[21] Agur Bohalecha 1:19, 24

[22] Agur Bohalecha 1:57

[23] Shulchan Aruch YD 296:15 writes that a doorway that doesn't have a door is obligated in a mezuzah, however, some disagree. The Shach YD 296:25 writes that because of this dispute one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha, or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in another doorway that is obligated, and afterwards put up this mezuzah as well. Similarly, Shulchan Aruch YD 296:13 writes the opinion of the Rambam that if the room has an area of 4 by 4 amot even if it isn't a square it is obligated in a mezuzah. The Shach 296:23 notes that the opinion of the Rosh is that the doorway isn't obligated unless there is a 4 by 4 amot square area. Due to this dispute, the Shach concludes that one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah.

[24] Rambam Mezuzah 6:1

[25] Chovat Hadar ch. 7 fnt. 41 has a doubt about the case and leaves it unresolved. Mezuzah Vhilchoteha ch. 10 fnt. 22 cites this Chovat Hadar and adds regarding a curtain the sefer Mezuzat Beytecha says it requires a bracha, but the sefer Pitchei Mezuzot argues that a curtain isn't a door.

[26] Chovat Hadar 11:2, Mezuzat Baitecha 289:3, Agur Bohalecha 1:43

[27] Yabia Omer YD 8:27 disagrees with Rav Massas in Tevuot Shamesh YD 96 who holds that if one forgot to recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah one can't make the bracha afterwards. Yabia Omer holds that there is an ongoing mitzvah of having the mezuzah up and so a bracha can be recite afterwards. He also holds that it is better to take down the mezuzot, get them checked, and put them back up with a bracha. Agur Bohalecha p. 106 quotes the son of the Rambam in Maspik Ldvar Hashem v. 2 ch. 30 as a support for Rav Massas.

[28] Agur Bohalecha 7:7

[29] Maharam Shik YD 285, Rivevot Ephraim 7:239, Beer Moshe 2:92, Avnei Yashfei 1:207:1, Doleh Umashke (p. 275, footnote 69) quoting Rav Elyashiv and Rav Nissim Karelitz.

[30] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Beer Moshe 6:6, Chovat Hadar (11:15:footnote 29), Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:7, Avnei Yashfei 1:207:3-4, Rivevos Ephraim 2:28:5. Orchos Rabbeinu (v. 3, p. 178 #38) however, disagrees.

[31] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7 writes that there's a doubt if one should make a bracha if a mezuzah was taken down to check it.

[32] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:93 writes that one should recite a bracha if they were taken down to be checked by a sofer.

[33] Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 8, Pitchei Teshuva 289:1, Aruch Hashulchan 289:4, Chovat Hadar 11:14

[34] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3,5, Rivevot Ephraim 1:19, Beer Moshe 2:92:13, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:6, Chovat Hador 11:11:footnote 20, Yabia Omer YD 3:17

[35] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:94, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha p. 109 citing Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo 8, Halichot Olam p. 261

[36] Beer Moshe 2:92 writes that it is obvious that when putting up a mezuzah after it was taken down for two or three days that a new bracha is necessary. He says that it is obvious that a person had a hesech hadaat. He compares it to Shulchan Aruch 8:14 by tzitzit that was removed and put back on. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha p. 110 concludes like the Divrei Shalom 4:167 that one can recite a bracha when putting it back up but it is better to have them checked and make a bracha when putting them up. Agur Bohalecha 7:23 holds that one can recite a new bracha if it was done for a few hours, however, he cites the practice of Yerushalayim only to recite a new bracha if it was down for one night.

[37] Magen Avraham 19:1 assumes a person puts up a mezuzah once he starts to live there.

[38] Agur Bohalecha 1:1 and 8:1 writes that if one started to live in the house one should put the mezuzah right away. But he adds that it is better to put it up in advance right before one starts to live there, even though one is only obligated after he started to live there. In ch. 7 fnt. 1 he cites that Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo Tefilla ch. 23 fnt. 54) ruled to put up the mezuzah with a bracha even before beginning to live there. Nonetheless, he also cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 288:78) who is concerned for the Mishna Brurah 19:4 that the mezuzah should be put up immediately before starting to live there or right after beginning to live there.

[39] Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:10), Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2: Halacha 4, Shevet Hakehati 1:277, Mezuzat Baitecha 289:6, Rivevot Ephraim 7:369.

[40] Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 14) accepts the minhag to place it on the right doorpost even though it is more than a tefach from the entranceway. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 3:328 and Otzrot Piskei Igrot Moshe p. 11 quoting Ohalei Yeshurun fnt. 175 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:15 agree. Chut Shani p. 121 seems to agree. Teshuvot Vehanagot reasons that the door itself can't nullify part of the doorway since it is part of the function of the doorway. Chovat Hadar 8:3 fnt. 8 holds that an accordion door needs a post placed next to where the folds end so that the mezuzah is within a tefach of the passageway of the door.

[41] Agur Bohalecha 22:11

[42] Rashba (teshuva 4:91) writes that double doors with a pole in the middle, with the doors that are attached to the pole in the middle should have two mezuzot, but if they're attached to the side doorposts it should have one mezuzah since the pole in the middle is only for decoration and not to create two doorways. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 codifies the Rashba. The Tur Y.D. 286:21, although similar in formulation to the Rashba, writes that if there is a single door that opens for two doorways it only needs one mezuzah, implying that if there are two doors that can open separately they need two mezuzot. Yad Ketana ch. 3 fnt. 9 makes this point but finds the opinion of the Tur very difficult to sustain in this case since the door functions as one doorway. He concludes that we follow the Rashba and Shulchan Aruch in that case and one mezuzah suffices.

[43] Agur Bohalecha 15:6

[44] Agur Bohalecha 26:8, Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Daat Noteh Mezuzah p. 570) defending the Yad Ketana, Birur Halacha Hakatzar p. 79 202:3

[45] Pitchei Mezuzot 296:109 writes that we shouldn't be lenient like the Yad Ketana that anytime they're functioning the same room they're considered one doorway, rather we should follow the implication of the Tur. He understands that the Rashba agrees with the Tur that a pole in the middle isn't just for decorative purposes if it is used to hold the hinges of one of the doors. This also seems to be the understanding of the Chayei Adam 15:13.

[46] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 based on Rashba, Agur Bohalecha 26:10

[47] Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 7)

[48] Agur Bohalecha 13:16, Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:15, Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 121

[49] Shulchan Aruch YD 287:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11

[50] Pitchei Mezuzot 19:10-1 (p. 257), Minchat Yitzchak 3:103, 4:92:3, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 60)

[51] The Gemara Yoma 11a cites a dispute between Rav Kahana and Rav Yehuda if a storage room needs a mezuzah if it isn't used for anything else. Rav Kahana held that this was a dispute in the tenayim. The Rif (Mezuzah 6b) and Rosh (Mezuzah no. 15) hold that it is obligated, while the Rambam Mezuzah 6:7 holds it is not. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:2 accepts the opinion of the Rif. Yalkut Yosef YD 285:30 writes that one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha. Aruch Hashulchan 286:9 agrees. There are a number of Acharonim who suggest that it is best to avoid making a beracha since there are Rishonim who rule that a storage room does not require a mezuzah at all. Rav Wosner in Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127 also writes to put up a mezuzah on a storage room without a bracha. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Parsha Sedura n. 16 organizes the rishonim. He summarizes that the Rambam, Ritva, Meiri, Riaz, Smag, Tosfot Rid, Lekach Tov, Seda Lderech, and Tosfot Menachot hold it is exempt, but the Shiltot, Bahag, Rabbenu Chananel, Rif, Rosh, eshkol, Yereyim, Smag, Chinuch, Mordechai, Rabbenu Yerucham, Tur, Rabbenu Yohanatan, Hashlama, Piskei Rid, Orchot Chaim, and Shulchan Aruch hold it is obligated. Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:66 holds it is obligated with a bracha.

[52] Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 0-2). See Rama 286:18 and Shach 286:26. This is also the opinion of Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127). Chovat Hadar ch. 2 fnt. 12 writes that it seems from the poskim that a storage room is only obligated because frequently a person goes in an out but if a person doesn't use it regularly he shouldn't be obligated. However, he admits that he didn't find the poskim who said this and instead it seems that they obligate a storage room in all cases. Igrot Moshe YD 2:141 holds that a storage room is obligated in a mezuzah even if it isn't used frequently even if it is only used once every few years. Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quoting Rav Shlomo Zalman said that the minhag of Yerushalayim is to put up a mezuzah for a storage room even if it is only used twice a year (as explained by Arugot Bosem Menachot p. 334). Rav Elyashiv in Kovetz Teshuvot 1:117 implies that a storage room is always obligated as long as you have access to enter. Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 60) agrees that a storage area is obligated even if you don't enter. Mezuzah Vehilchoteh 3:4 writes that a room that is used even once a year needs a mezuzah.
Rabbi Akiva Eiger (sh"t 9, cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 291:4) writes that a person is only obligated in mezuzah while he is living at home, but once he leaves even to go to work he isn't fulfilling the mitzvah of mezuzah. Nachalat Tzvi 291, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Ayin Yitzchak YD 1:31), and Dvar Avraham 1:37 disagree. Rav Elchanan holds that it is considered dwelling in the house even though one is coming in and out. Dvar Avraham explains that the obligation of mezuzah doesn't change when one left since one intended on returning. Rabbenu Yohatan (shitah mikubeset b"m 101b) also holds that the area is obligated even if one only goes in once a year and isn't currently dwelling there.

[53] Rabbi Akiva Eiger (sh"t 9, cited by Pitchei Teshuva YD 291:4) writes that a person is only obligated in mezuzah while he is living at home, but once he leaves even to go to work he isn't fulfilling the mitzvah of mezuzah. Nachalat Tzvi 291, Rav Yitzchak Elchanan (Ayin Yitzchak YD 1:31), and Dvar Avraham 1:37 disagree. Rav Elchanan holds that it is considered dwelling in the house even though one is coming in and out. Dvar Avraham explains that the obligation of mezuzah doesn't change when one left since one intended on returning. Rabbenu Yohatan (shitah mikubeset b"m 101b) also holds that the area is obligated even if one only goes in once a year and isn't currently dwelling there.

[53] Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:647, Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 4:7 citing Az Nidbaru 3:58 and Minchat Yitzchak 10:97, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 50)

[54] Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127)

[55] Yoma 11b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:4, Aruch HaShulchan YD 286:5, Yalkut Yosef 285:43

[56] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 285:5, Aruch Hashulchan 286:13

[57] Aruch Hashulchan 286:12-15 proves that the Bet Yosef's opinion that the bedroom needs a mezuzah and it is sufficient to have it covered with one covering. Yalkut Yosef YD 285:41 and Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 302 agree for additional reasons such as the Smag who holds that if the mezuzah is ten tefachim from the ground it is considered in another domain. Zivchei Tzedek OC 38 and Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Ki Tavo, no. 16) are lenient and write that such is the minhag. Kaf Hachayim on Shulchan Arukh Orach Chayim 40:13 agrees but adds that initially one should be strict for the Magen Avraham.

[58] Magen Avraham 40:2 holds that a mezuzah that is facing the inside of the room needs to be covered with a double covering to permit having tashmish in the room. Divrei Chamudot (Mezuzah no. 46), Eliya Rabba 40:2, Mishna Brurah 40:7, Ginzei Hakodesh 4:14, and Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Ki Tavo, no. 16) citing the Yad Ketana 13 agree.

[59] Chachmat Adam 128:10, Mishna Brurah 40:7, Kaf Hachayim 40:19. Ahava Achva Vshalom p. 121 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding like Chachmat Adam. Maharsham in Daat Torah 40:2 cites the Chachmat Adam.

[60] Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 175 n. 34 quotes the Chazon Ish and Steipler as disagreeing with the Chachmat Adam. If there's a double covering that is the usually there it is considered like a single covering even if it was put there intentionally to be a double cover. This can also be found in Igrot Vereshimot Kehilat Yakov v. 5 p. 266 of the Steipler. It also quotes this from Meorer Yeshenim. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh v. 3 p. 461 agrees. Mechzeh Eliyahu 1:8:28 p. 74 is strict and quotes many who are strict including: Gidulei Hekdesh 4, Mateh Yehuda 40, Chesed Lalafim, Divrei Chamudot n. 46, Derech Hachayim, Yad Ketana, and Pri Megadim OC EA 240:17.

[61] See above notes. Rav Schachter (Laws of Mezuzah min 55-6) cites both opinions but seems to be strict to cover the mezuzah with a cloth if it is on the inside and the couple is going to be together. Mishna Brurah 40:7 clarifies that it is sufficient if one of the covers is not designated for the mezuzah. (Avnei Nezer YD 383:1 explains that something inside a double covering is like it isn't in the house at all.)

[62] Rav Moshe Feinstein (Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 277) explains that a laundry room is obligated even though it isn't a very honorable room since generally it doesn't have uncovered feces or a bad smell. Shaarei Mezuzah 2:12 quotes Rav Elyashiv (Sefer Habayit 20:25), Rav Nissim Karelitz (Leket Hilchot Mezuzah ch. 3), and Shevet Hakehati 2:296 as holding that laundry rooms today require a mezuzah since generally the rooms are clean. In conclusion, Shaarei Mezuzah writes to put up a mezuzah without a bracha like Yalkut Yosef 286. Az Nidbaru 10:32 favors the approach that a laundry room needs a mezuzah if it is a clean room such as an apartment building laundry room or drycleaner.

[63] Agur Bohalecha 32:18-9 writes that a room that is used exclusively as a passageway to a bathroom is exempt from mezuzah. However, if it is used also for honorable activities it would be obligated in mezuzah. He clarifies in fnt. 42 that a room used for washing one's hands outside of a bathroom is obligated if it is also used to wash one's hands for a meal or another honorable activity. However, if it is just used to wash one's hands on one's way out of the bathroom that is exempt. Shaarei Hamezuzah 2:26, Or Yitzchak YD 1:55, and Ohalei Shem (Mezuzah 286 siman 15) all agree with Agur Bohalecha. Chovat Hadar 2:10 is a good proof that he agrees with Agur Bohalecha as well.

[64] Pitchei Shaarim p. 136 quotes Rav Belsky in name of Rav Moshe Feinstein that it is exempt even in this case. Mishnat Yehoshua 6:11 agrees. Az Nidbaru 3:63 seems to agree with Rav Moshe. Also, Minchat Yitzchak 4:90's quote of Rav Horowitz seems to agree as well. Minchat Yitzchak's actual opinion there isn't relevant to this case. Chayey Halevi 2:67:14 isn't sure if it is chayav when it is used for other purposes besides washing after going to the bathroom, but says that it isn't 4x4 amot it is exempt on left side. He says that in the house of the Squever Rebbe they have such a room and it doesn't have a mezuzah.

[65] Mishna Brurah 84:7 quoting Pri Megadim, Az Nidbaru 3:63

[66] The Gemara Yoma 11a establishes that a shul that no one lives in doesn't need a mezuzah. The Gemara 11b implies that the reason for this is that only a house that belongs to clearly designated owners needs a mezuzah excluding a shul that belongs to the community or public. Tosfot 11b s.v. shein accepts this understanding and says that a privately owned shul would require a mezuzah. He uses this idea to explain the Yerushalmi Megillah which speaks about a mezuzah on a shul unlike the Gemara Yoma and Brachot 47a that assumed that a shul doesn't need a mezuzah. The Rif (Hilchot Mezuzah 6b), Rosh (Mezuzah 6b), and Rambam (Mezuzah 6:6) distinguish between a shul in a city is exempt but in a village it is obligated because most likely people live in the shul building. The Shulchan Aruch YD 286:3 concludes that a shul does not require a mezuzah.
The Rambam Mezuzah 6:6 writes that a shul doesn't need a mezuzah since it is an area of kedusha. There is a difficulty regarding the Rambam's opinion regarding its source from the Gemara Yoma 11b which seems only to apply this reason to the bet hamikdash. The Chatom Sofer YD 291 however explains that the Rambam means that even though the shechina dwells in the shul it isn't considered as though it is a house used for dwelling since it needs to be used for human dwelling to be obligated in mezuzah.

Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a shul is exempt and not obligated like a storage house for the siddurim or other items left there since it isn't built in order to be a storage house. Shaarei Hamezuzah p. 110 writes that the minhag of the world is to put up a mezuzah on a shul, but Rav Willig disagrees and doesn't have a mezuzah on his shul to indicate that people shouldn't eat in the shul.

[68] The Rambam Mezuzah 6:6 writes that a shul doesn't need a mezuzah since it is an area of kedusha. There is a difficulty regarding the Rambam's opinion regarding its source from the Gemara Yoma 11b which seems only to apply this reason to the bet hamikdash. The Chatom Sofer YD 291 however explains that the Rambam means that even though the shechina dwells in the shul it isn't considered as though it is a house used for dwelling since it needs to be used for human dwelling to be obligated in mezuzah.

[69] Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20) quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a shul is exempt and not obligated like a storage house for the siddurim or other items left there since it isn't built in order to be a storage house. Shaarei Hamezuzah p. 110 writes that the minhag of the world is to put up a mezuzah on a shul, but Rav Willig disagrees and doesn't have a mezuzah on his shul to indicate that people shouldn't eat in the shul.

[67] The Gemara Yoma 11b treats a shul and bet midrash equally regarding mezuzah. Tosfot Yoma 11b writes that based on Yoma it sounds like there is no obligation to have a mezuzah for a bet midash, but Menachot 33a implies otherwise. Tosfot concludes that if it is privately owned or if it has a door from the bet midrash that opens into someone's private house then that door is obligated in a mezuzah. The Rosh (Mezuzah no. 10) writes that the Maharam Rotenberg learned from the Yerushalmi that a bet midrash should have a mezuzah. He added that a evil spirit bothered him when he slept in the bet midrash during the day until put up a mezuzah. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:10 concludes that a bet midrash does not need a mezuzah but since some say it should have one it is proper to put up one without a bracha. The Shach 286:19 explains that the reason to distinguish between a shul and bet midrash is that the talmidei chachamim live in the bet midrash day and night.

[68] The Gemara Yoma 10a establishes that according to the rabbis a sukkah does not require a mezuzah since it is a temporary dwelling. The Tur YD 286:11 extends this to a boat and store that are also considered a temporary dwelling which doesn't require a mezuzah. The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:11 concurs. The Taz 286:10 explains that even if the store is used every day it is exempt since no one lives in it at night. He adds obviously that if someone has a store in their house they require a mezuzah. However, the Perisha 286:22 wonders if store nowadays are exempt since they are permanent. In fact, the Pitchei Teshuva 286:14 cites the Yad HaKetana 2:21 who argues that a store that is set up for a temporary marketplace for a week or so is exempt from a mezuzah, but an established store requires a mezuzah. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:14, Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:647, Rav Poalim YD 2:36, Yabia Omer YD 10:58:28, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:36, Rav Chaim Kanievsky on Masechet Mezuzah 1:16 agree with the Yad HaKetana. See further Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 302. Yabia Omer YD 10:58:28 holds that a mezuzah can be put up with a bracha. Yalkut Yosef writes that a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha because of the dispute but if someone recites a bracha they have what to rely upon. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 4:1 agrees. Teshuvot Vehanhagot and Rav Wosner in Kovetz Mbet Levi (5753 v. 2 p. 127) hold that a mezuzah is put up without a bracha. The Ohel Aryeh 4:8 writes that perhaps the Taz would agree nowadays since the stores are open partially into the night and since it is used by day and night it is considered permanent.

[69] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:37

[70] Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 127)

[71] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:38

[72] Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:4 writes that if a Jew has a room for his non-Jewish worker that room needs a mezuzah. See Daat Kedoshim 285:17. Beero Shel Avraham YD 1:33 writes that a non-Jewish worker in a yeshiva who has a private room to stay if the worker works at any time when he's needed such as to fix things his room requires a mezuzah. However, if he works specific hours and part of his salary is his private room then it is exempt from a mezuzah.

[73] Lehorot Natan 3:72, Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish YD 286), Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 129). Minchat Yitzchak 4:93 holds one should put up a mezuzah on the elevator cab itself on the right side going in and not each floor. Teshuvot Vehanahgot 2:547 agrees. Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Tuvcha Yabiu - Hilchot Shecheinim 34) also holds that even if the elevator itself is not 4 by 4 amot, the doorpost from the hallway that leads into the elevator requires a mezuzah.
Lehorot Natan 3:72 writes that there should be a mezuzah from the elevator to the building. He explains that it is like a foyer (bet shaar) that leads to a house. Additionally, he adds that according to Rabbi Akiva Eiger 286:13 even if it doesn't require a mezuzah itself, it needs a mezuzah since it opens to a room that requires a mezuzah. Minchat Yitzchak 4:93 agrees with his first point that it requires a mezuzah since it opens up to a house, but disagrees with the application to Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

Regarding the first point, there is a nuanced difference between the Lehorot Natan and Minchat Yitzchak. Minchat Yitzchak thinks that fundamentally the elevator should be exempt since it isn't meant for significant dwelling as it continually moves. However, since it allows passageway to houses it is obligated like a bet shaar, which doesn't meet the criteria for mezuzah but is obligated since it allows entrance to houses. This is the opinion of the Chamudei Doniel who obligates a bet shaar even though it lacks the area of 4x4 amot. Lehorot Natan responds that he believes the Chamudei Doniel is incorrect. However, if the elevator is 4x4 amot it is considered a bet shaar because of its function to enable passage from floor to floor and ultimately to houses.

Minchat Yitzchak writes that Rabbi Akiva Eiger is only relevant to a small room attached to a bigger room, such that if the bigger room were removed it would be open to the street and require a mezuzah. But since the elevator is in a shaft even if it were removed the bigger room would be open to an unusable area. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 129) holds like the Lhorot Natan that one should put up a mezuza going out on every floor. Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish YD 286, Dinei Habayit Hameshutaf p. 123) agrees. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchat Shlomo 2:100:5) held that it was exempt but good to put up a mezuzah going out on every floor like Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

Chovat Hadar 5:11 writes that the entrances all require a mezuzah, but the lobby floor should have it on the right going into the elevator, while on the other floors should have it on the right going out to the floors. His reasoning is that the elevator is like a bet shaar since it allows entranceway to houses. However, the cab itself he writes is exempt since it isn't meant for dwelling. Shvut Yitzchak (v. 16 p. 29 2:2) quotes Rav Elyashiv as agreeing that the mezuzah is place on the right side going out besides on the lobby where it should be on the right going in. Rabbi Elchanan Lewis quotes the Chovat Hadar and Minchat Yitzchak.

[77] Lehorot Natan 3:72 writes that there should be a mezuzah from the elevator to the building. He explains that it is like a foyer (bet shaar) that leads to a house. Additionally, he adds that according to Rabbi Akiva Eiger 286:13 even if it doesn't require a mezuzah itself, it needs a mezuzah since it opens to a room that requires a mezuzah. Minchat Yitzchak 4:93 agrees with his first point that it requires a mezuzah since it opens up to a house, but disagrees with the application to Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

[78] Regarding the first point, there is a nuanced difference between the Lehorot Natan and Minchat Yitzchak. Minchat Yitzchak thinks that fundamentally the elevator should be exempt since it isn't meant for significant dwelling as it continually moves. However, since it allows passageway to houses it is obligated like a bet shaar, which doesn't meet the criteria for mezuzah but is obligated since it allows entrance to houses. This is the opinion of the Chamudei Doniel who obligates a bet shaar even though it lacks the area of 4x4 amot. Lehorot Natan responds that he believes the Chamudei Doniel is incorrect. However, if the elevator is 4x4 amot it is considered a bet shaar because of its function to enable passage from floor to floor and ultimately to houses.

[79] Minchat Yitzchak writes that Rabbi Akiva Eiger is only relevant to a small room attached to a bigger room, such that if the bigger room were removed it would be open to the street and require a mezuzah. But since the elevator is in a shaft even if it were removed the bigger room would be open to an unusable area. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 129) holds like the Lhorot Natan that one should put up a mezuza going out on every floor. Rav Elyashiv (Ashrei Haish YD 286, Dinei Habayit Hameshutaf p. 123) agrees. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchat Shlomo 2:100:5) held that it was exempt but good to put up a mezuzah going out on every floor like Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

[80] Chovat Hadar 5:11 writes that the entrances all require a mezuzah, but the lobby floor should have it on the right going into the elevator, while on the other floors should have it on the right going out to the floors. His reasoning is that the elevator is like a bet shaar since it allows entranceway to houses. However, the cab itself he writes is exempt since it isn't meant for dwelling. Shvut Yitzchak (v. 16 p. 29 2:2) quotes Rav Elyashiv as agreeing that the mezuzah is place on the right side going out besides on the lobby where it should be on the right going in. Rabbi Elchanan Lewis quotes the Chovat Hadar and Minchat Yitzchak.

[74] Beer Moshe 2:88 thinks that an elevator and the entrances are exempt since the elevator isn't suited for living and the shaft isn't either. Betzel Hachachma 3:80-82 agrees. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 n. 44) and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 277) agree. He also cites this from his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, in Halichot Olam v. 8. Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 3) explained that the minhag is that elevators are completely exempt from mezuzah. Rav Yerucham Erlinger quotes that the Steipler (Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 172) and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Yesodei Yeshurun v. 2 fnt. 66) also held that an elevator are exempt from a mezuzah.

[75] Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 6:10 quoting Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 300, Az Nidbaru 3:30:2, Chovat Hadar 4:6. Regarding airplanes he quotes Halichot Olam and Shevet Halevi 2:156

[76] Rivevot Efraim 3:505

[77] Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 6:5 citing Aruch Hashulchan 286:26, Minchat Yitzchak 2:82

[78] Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 6:7

[79] Yoma 11a, Shitah Mikubeset b”m 102, Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 0-2)

[80] Yoma 12a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:2-3

[81] Yoma 11a. Rama YD 286:1 quoting the Aguda that even if some non-Jews live in the city they are exempt from mezuzah on the city gate. The Taz 286:3 explains that the exemption is based on a danger.

[82] Chazon Ish YD 172:3 writes that even though the electrical posts with the wires on top can serve as doorways to enclose an eruv for Shabbat (under certain conditions) they do not need a mezuzah since the mezuzah won't be guarded and also it might be a partially owned by non-Jews which would be exempt. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 48-53) explained that the factors why we don’t put up a mezuzah for a communal eruv are both because it might get ruined by weather or stolen. Additionally, it is because the Derech Hachaim Siddur writes that since the poles don’t divide the way the area is used (tashmisho echad) and it is more open than it is closed (omed murebeh al haparutz) for mezuzah purposes the poles don’t create a doorway. Therefore, an eruv doesn't require a mezuzah even in a Jewish community.

[83] Shulchan Aruch and Rama Y.D. 286:1, Rav Shmuel Eliyahu, Rav Yosef Eliyahu, Rav Shmuel Shapira

[84] Rav Yaakov Ariel

[85] Maharil (responsa 94) bemoans the fact that many people think that it is sufficient to have one mezuzah per house when in fact every doorway requires its own mezuzah. The Darkei Moshe 286:4 cites the Maharil. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 concurs.

[86] Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 3) explained based on Chazon Ish OC 73:9 that if it is less than 22.6 degrees, which is the measure of a slope in eruvin that counts as a wall, it is exempt from mezuzah.

[87] Chaye Adam 15:15 writes that a cellar door on the floor is exempt from mezuzah based on Kiddushin 22b that states that a doorpost lying on the ground isn't considered a doorpost. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:20 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:41 concur.

[88] Minchat Shlomo 2:100:5, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 2)

[89] Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20-22) explains that a hospital is like a hotel that even though people live there temporarily since the Jewish owner has people living there he is obligated in a mezuzah. He also cited Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.

[90] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:10 records a dispute between the Rambam and Rosh on this matter. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:13 writes the opinion of the Rambam that if the room has an area of 4 by 4 amot even if it isn't a square it is obligated in a mezuzah. The Shach 286:23 notes that the opinion of the Rosh is that the doorway isn't obligated unless there is a 4 by 4 amot square area. Due to this dispute, the Shach concludes that one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. Binyan Tzion 99 follows Shulchan Aruch.

[91] Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 9:3 writes that if there are large items in a room such as a refrigerator or oven they don't minimize the space of the room and count towards the four by four amot since they are normally there and enhance the use of the room. His sources include: Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 285, Maharsham 3:263, Shevet Halevi 2:187, and Chovat Hadar 4 fnt. 22. Chut Shani p. 83 suggests that the cabinets do not minimize the space since they aid use of the kitchen. He is certain though that the refrigerator and oven which are moveable do not minimize the space. Even the oven which is attached to a gas line doesn't minimize the space since it is moveable within the kitchen.

[92] Chazon Ish YD 169:6 learns from Eruvin 88b that for the Rambam two rooms that adjacent and only overlap in one area they combine for the requisite measure for mezuzah. Agur Bohalecha 18:9 cites this but disagrees. He holds that only a rectangle combines for the Rambam but not a L or T shape, but also cites in the opinion of the Chazon Ish. Chovat Hadar (ch. 4 fnt. 17) cites this Chazon Ish.

[93] The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a doorway is only obligated in a mezuzah if it has two doorposts and a lintel. Shach 287:1 quotes the Rosh and Rabbenu Yerucham who are strict if there's one doorpost on the right side and concludes that one should put up a mezuzah in such a case without a bracha. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11, Yalkut Yosef Sovah Semachot p. 546 no. 19, and HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 10:4 agree.

[94] Rosh (Halachot Ketanot n. 14), Tur Y.D. 287:1

[95] Chazon Ish YD 172:2

[96] Mikdash Me'at 287:3-4

[97] Chovat Hadar 7:7 in fnt.

[98] Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 based on Mikdash Me'at 287:3-4

[99] Chovat Hadar 7:7 in fnt.

[100] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a door isn't obligated in a mezuzah unless the doorway has a lintel. Shulchan Aruch implies that a roof isn't a lintel. Accordingly, the Chazon Ish YD 172:3 s.v. mah writes that if the lintel doesn't extend downward to block part of the opening it isn't considered a lintel but just part of the roof. Shevet Halevi 2:150 agrees and proves this from Rashi Menachot 33b s.v. achsadra. This is also the ruling of Rav Moshe Heinemann (Guide to Halachos v. 1 p. 100).
However, the Mikdash Me'at 287:1:5 suggests that perhaps a roof can function as a lintel. Also, the Chovat Hadar 7:5 fnt. 8 equates the issue with that of having the edge of a roof function as a lintel to the opinion of the Rosh who holds that the edge of a wall can function as a doorpost. The Netivot in Derech Hachaim Siddur 239:1 also holds that a roof can serve as a lintel. Minchat Yitzchak 10:91 explains that a roof doesn't function as a lintel but if the roof has an edge where the door is, according to some opinions, it functions as a lintel. Yet, if the roof extends beyond the door in both directions it doesn't function as a lintel. He compares it to the dispute between the Rama 630:2 and Magen Avraham 630:2 if there's doorposts and no lintel if that can serve as a tzurat hapetach. He admits that it seems not to be a proof though from further analysis. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Somachot v. 1, Mekomot Hachayavim n. 16) agrees.

Adoney Paz 2:121:1 sides with the Chazon Ish though he recommends being strict for all opinions to put up a mezuzah without a bracha. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 10:3 concurs.

Chazon Ish 172:2 in explaining the Ravyah writes that having two posts making the part of the roof to be like a recognizable lintel since the posts are recognizable. Then he compares it to the opinion of the Rosh that the end of a wall can function as a post. If so, it seems just like we're strict for the Rosh we should follow the Ravyah. This is the opinion of the Agur Bohalecha. However, the Chazon Ish 172:3 implies that the halacha is you need a recognizable lintel to be obligated like the Riaz against the Ravyah. Minchat Yitzchak rejects the proof from the Ravyah based on the Eliya Rabba that is only relevant to sukkah.

[108] However, the Mikdash Me'at 287:1:5 suggests that perhaps a roof can function as a lintel. Also, the Chovat Hadar 7:5 fnt. 8 equates the issue with that of having the edge of a roof function as a lintel to the opinion of the Rosh who holds that the edge of a wall can function as a doorpost. The Netivot in Derech Hachaim Siddur 239:1 also holds that a roof can serve as a lintel. Minchat Yitzchak 10:91 explains that a roof doesn't function as a lintel but if the roof has an edge where the door is, according to some opinions, it functions as a lintel. Yet, if the roof extends beyond the door in both directions it doesn't function as a lintel. He compares it to the dispute between the Rama 630:2 and Magen Avraham 630:2 if there's doorposts and no lintel if that can serve as a tzurat hapetach. He admits that it seems not to be a proof though from further analysis. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Somachot v. 1, Mekomot Hachayavim n. 16) agrees.

[109] Adoney Paz 2:121:1 sides with the Chazon Ish though he recommends being strict for all opinions to put up a mezuzah without a bracha. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 10:3 concurs.

[110] Chazon Ish 172:2 in explaining the Ravyah writes that having two posts making the part of the roof to be like a recognizable lintel since the posts are recognizable. Then he compares it to the opinion of the Rosh that the end of a wall can function as a post. If so, it seems just like we're strict for the Rosh we should follow the Ravyah. This is the opinion of the Agur Bohalecha. However, the Chazon Ish 172:3 implies that the halacha is you need a recognizable lintel to be obligated like the Riaz against the Ravyah. Minchat Yitzchak rejects the proof from the Ravyah based on the Eliya Rabba that is only relevant to sukkah.

[101] Chovat Hadar 7:7, Agur Bohalecha 21:25. Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding that it is exempt from a mezuzah. His reasoning is that the ends of the walls of the big room aren't doorposts for the small room since they are really one wall with a break. The end of a wall serving as a doorpost is only if there's no continuation of that wall on the opposite side continuing the wall.

[102] Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 107) holds that it is obligated to put up a mezuzah with a bracha since from the inside of the big room it is recognizable as a doorway. Pitchei Mezuzot p. 154-5 holds that it requires a mezuzah according to the Rosh since it is the end of a wall and can be seen as a doorpost. According to him, it doesn't matter if it is from the small room to the big room or otherwise. Pitchei Shaarim 287:1:12 p. 215 agrees.

[103] Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:11 writes that this case of a big room into a small room is a big dispute and unresolved one should put up a mezuzah there without a bracha. Madanei Asher (Mezuzah 30:3 p. 88) agrees.

[104] Another picture of this case can be found in Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata p. 430.

[105] Chovat Hadar 7:7 writes that if there's a small room which opens into a big room if the big room is an entrance to the small room it is considered exempt. If the small room is an entrance to the big room it is obligated since the walls of the big room serve as the mezuzot for the entrance going into the big room. Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 107) originally writes that this is exempt but then seems to agree that it is obligated to put up a mezuzah. Pitchei Shaarim 287:1:12 p. 215 agrees.

[106] Agur Bohalecha 21:26. Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 says that it is clearly exempt since there are no noticeable doorposts from inside the small room. Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:11 writes that this case of a small room into a big room is an unresolved question and should have a mezuzah without a bracha. Madanei Asher (Mezuzah 30:3 p. 88) agrees. Madenei Asher cites Maaseh Nissim ch. 24 who says that in the Ben Ish Chai's house he didn't have a mezuzah on a room that was just three walls and the fourth was completely open (e.g. [1]), though he is puzzled about why he didn't put up a mezuzah in light of Ben Ish Chai (Ki Tavo n. 13).

[107] Chovat Hadar 8:3:1 fnt. 3 writes that if there are two doorframes one in front of the other if they're within 1 amah of each other it is considered one doorway and one mezuzah on the outermost tefach suffices. However, if there is a space of more than 1 amah, they each require a separate mezuzah. Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:8 agrees. Hatorah Vehamitzvah (v. 2 ch. 137 pp. 611-612) distinguishes whether or not it is possible to use the area between the doorways in which case it is two doorframes, otherwise it is one long entrance and only one mezuzah is necessary.

[108] Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 48-53) quoting the Derech Hachaim Siddur

[109] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5, Rashi Menachot 33a s.v. “bitechila,” Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 6:12, Tur 289, Prisha 289:6, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Bet Halevi (on Chumash, Menachot 33a s.v. amar Shmuel), Pitchei Mezuzah 289:24, Chovat Hadar 8:2:4, Teshuvot Vihanhagot 2:539. Agur Bohalecha 12:2 follows the Rambam since there's nothing to lose by following the Rambam.
See Yabia Omer YD 2:21 where Chacham Ovadia Yosef quotes poskim who say that if it was placed higher than the beginning of the top third it should be moved without a beracha to there, but himself disagrees. Agur Bohalecha ch. 12 fnt. 4 writes that one does not need to change it.

Nekudat Hakesef 289 supports the minhag is just to put it within the top third, like Rashi and Tosfot, and not specifically at the beginning of the top third, like the Rambam.

[120] See Yabia Omer YD 2:21 where Chacham Ovadia Yosef quotes poskim who say that if it was placed higher than the beginning of the top third it should be moved without a beracha to there, but himself disagrees. Agur Bohalecha ch. 12 fnt. 4 writes that one does not need to change it.

[121] Nekudat Hakesef 289 supports the minhag is just to put it within the top third, like Rashi and Tosfot, and not specifically at the beginning of the top third, like the Rambam.

[110] Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5

[111] Beit Yosef 289, Shach 289:4, Taz 289:3.

[112] Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:8 quotes Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 251 who writes that according to Shulchan Aruch if the mezuzah is within a tefach of the ceiling it needs to be fixed. He says that it is in disagreement with the Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo n. 7 who writes that after the fact it is kosher.

[113] Agur Bohalecha 12:16

[114] Agur Bohalecha 12:17

[115] Agur Bohalecha 12:11-13

[116] Yerushalmi Megillah 4:12, Tosfot Yoma 11b s.v. shein, Shach 289:4, Agur Bohalecha 12:7

[117] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:77

[118] Agur Bohalecha 12:8

[119] Derech Hachaim 240:2

[120] Chovat Hadar (p. 59, n. 35)

[121] According to the opinion that the arched section is included the mezuzah should be placed at 60 inches (2/3 of 90) and above and according to the opinion that the arched section isn't included the mezuzah should be placed at 52 inches (2/3 of 78) and above. To satisfy both opinions one can place it at 60 inches where the doorpost is still vertical.

[122] Chovat Hadar p. 60 n. 35 writes that the Taz 287:2 in such a case says to place the mezuzah in the arched part like Rashi. He explains that even Rambam could agree since anyway there is a vertical doorway that is 10 tefachim. Chovat Hadar quotes achronim who disagree and side with Rambam. Shulchan Aruch YD 287:2 holds like the Rambam. Igrot Moshe OC 4:105:2 explains the Taz. More details about how to affix a mezuzah on an archway.

[123] Derech Hachaim 240:8, Pitchei Teshuva 286:10, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:12, Chovat Hadar 8:2:2, Agur Bohalecha 22:24, Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 22).
Derech Hachayim 240:8 writes that if a doorpost doesn't reach the ceiling the mezuzah should be placed on that doorpost as long as it is ten tefachim tall. The Mikdash Me'at 286:36 establishes the case of the Derech Hachaim to only when the door reaches within a third of the entire doorway. However, the Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata p. 389 points out that this Mikdash Me'at is a very difficult explanation of the Derech Hachaim. He agrees with the Derech Hachaim. Also, Chovat Hadar 8:2:2 p. 73 writes that if there are doorposts which are ten tefachim they are considered the right place for the mezuzah even though they do not reach the ceiling and there is a wall which does reach the ceiling. Sechel Tov 289:73 quotes others who agree with the Chovat Hadar. However, Rabbi Simon discusses this case at length and comes to the conclusion that it should be placed on the wall if the doorposts aren't shoulder height (spot א in the picture).

In theory, Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:4 writes that there's two reasons why such a doorway would require a mezuzah. 1) The ten tefach posts are viewed as though they are extended up to the ceiling based on gud asik (Meiri Eruvin 11b, Sh"t Rav Eliyahu Mizrachi 2:26). 2) The posts don't need to touch the roof (Chesed Lavraham 16, Chazon Ish 170:3). Seemingly according to the first approach the mezuzah would be placed a third of the way to the ceiling, whereas the second approach would say to put it a third of the way up the post itself. He points out that another factor to consider is whether the mezuzah needs to be within a third of the height of the post or the doorway.

[136] Derech Hachayim 240:8 writes that if a doorpost doesn't reach the ceiling the mezuzah should be placed on that doorpost as long as it is ten tefachim tall. The Mikdash Me'at 286:36 establishes the case of the Derech Hachaim to only when the door reaches within a third of the entire doorway. However, the Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata p. 389 points out that this Mikdash Me'at is a very difficult explanation of the Derech Hachaim. He agrees with the Derech Hachaim. Also, Chovat Hadar 8:2:2 p. 73 writes that if there are doorposts which are ten tefachim they are considered the right place for the mezuzah even though they do not reach the ceiling and there is a wall which does reach the ceiling. Sechel Tov 289:73 quotes others who agree with the Chovat Hadar. However, Rabbi Simon discusses this case at length and comes to the conclusion that it should be placed on the wall if the doorposts aren't shoulder height (spot א in the picture).

[137] In theory, Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:4 writes that there's two reasons why such a doorway would require a mezuzah. 1) The ten tefach posts are viewed as though they are extended up to the ceiling based on gud asik (Meiri Eruvin 11b, Sh"t Rav Eliyahu Mizrachi 2:26). 2) The posts don't need to touch the roof (Chesed Lavraham 16, Chazon Ish 170:3). Seemingly according to the first approach the mezuzah would be placed a third of the way to the ceiling, whereas the second approach would say to put it a third of the way up the post itself. He points out that another factor to consider is whether the mezuzah needs to be within a third of the height of the post or the doorway.

[124] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1, Agur Bohalecha 14:1. Agur Bohalecha 14:9 writes that the entire mezuzah should be within the doorframe, though he cites the Shevet Halevi 3:151 who holds that it is sufficient if part is in the doorframe.

[125] Yad Haketana (ch. 3 fnt. 25) explains that it is critical to the mezuzah that a person be able to see the mezuzah and thinking about Hashem. If it is inserted into the post there must be a symbol engraved on the outside of the post to indicate that there is a mezuzah there.

[126] Agur Bohalecha 14:6

[127] The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant based on Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:4

[128] Agur Bohalecha 14:15

[129] According to the Shach's understanding the Rama 289:1 rules like the Tur that after the fact a mezuzah is kosher if it is behind the door outside of the doorframe. Agur Bohalecha siman 44-46 discusses at length whether having the mezuzah in front of the doorframe is the equivalent of behind the doorframe or better. Either way, in a case where it is impossible to put it in the doorframe it is best to put it in front of the doorframe. The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant agrees.

[130] Shulchan Aruch, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70). Yalkut Yosef clarifies that having the mezuzah within the doorframe behind the door is also called in the doorway and kosher for Shulchan Aruch. Agur Bohalecha siman 43 agrees.

[131] Agur Bohalecha 13:6

[132] Chovat Hadar 8:3:1 fnt. 3 explaining the position of Rav Dovid Yungreis

[133] Agur Bohalecha 13:13 quoting Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 285:20), Daat Kedoshim (285:1), Chovat Hadar 8:3:3, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Hatorah Vehamitzvah v. 2 p. 663)

[134] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1 holds that it is invalid. Shach 291:3 explains while the Tur and Rama hold it is valid after the fact, the Bet Yosef and Levush hold otherwise. He is strict for the Bet Yosef. Nishmat Adam 15:1 shows that most rishonim hold it is valid and in extenuating circumstances it is permitted to place it there without a bracha.

[135] Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70), Agur Bohalecha 14:2

[136] Gemara Menachot 32b, Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Aruch Hashulchan 289:9. Taz 289:3 writes that the mezuzah is still kosher if the mezuzah isn't within the outer tefach.

[137] Agur Bohalecha 13:5

[138] Agur Bohalecha 13:3. He suggests that as long as it isn't very difficult one should fix it. If it would cost more than a third of the cost of a basic mezuzah one is exempt from fixing this.

[139] Agur Bohalecha 13:4. He observes that this is how it was placed in Rav Elyashiv's house.

[140] Agur Bohalecha 13:8

[141] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1. Bach understands the reason that the halacha insists that a mezuzah should be put up with nails is so that it doesn't fall down. One should establish it in a way that even in the unlikely scenario it won't fall down. The Chayei Adam 15:19 implies that the reason that it should be put up with two nails is because if one only uses one mezuzah on top, the mezuzah is like it is hanging and the mezuzah should not be hanging.

[142] Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1, Chayei Adam 15:19

[143] Agur Bohalecha 10:4

[144] Agur Bohalecha 10:5-6, Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 123. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472 writes that initially one should not put up a mezuzah with glue.

[145] Agur Bohalecha 10:18 quoting Rav Elyashiv

[146] Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472

[147] Maaseh Rav n. 98 cites the practice of the Gra to place the mezuzah directly onto the post with no case specifically so that there’s no interposition between the mezuzah and the post. Pitchei Teshuva 289:2 quotes this but questions it. However, Aruch Hashulchan 289:19 and Yabia Omer YD 8:29 strongly disagree with this citation and think that the Gra never said it. Agur Bohalecha (ch. 9 fnt. 3) writes that the minhag is not concerned for this citation of the Gra and it isn’t recommended since it will make the mezuzot invalid much more quickly. He also records the practice of Brisk to follow this citation of the Gra.

[148] Rashi Menachot 33a s.v. pesula, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:6, Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 7. This was also the minhag of the Gr"a (Biurei Hagra 289:14 and Maaseh Rav n. 97). Also see Orchos Rabbeinu 1:page 378:27 who quotes that the Chazon Ish and Steipler put their mezuzot on a small slant because if it would be on a diagonal one doesn't fulfill the opinion of Rashi or Tosfot. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Mezuzot Beytecha (Shaarei Tzion 289:22) also records this practice of the Chazon Ish.

[149] Rabbenu Tam cited by Tosfot Menachot 33a s.v. ha, Rama 289:6, Levush 289:6, Chayei Adam 15:19, Minchas Elazar 1:36:1, Pitchei Mezuzahs 289:57, Chovat Hadar 9:footnote 20. Chovat Hadar 9:footnote 20 explains that the reason for this is that the opinion of Rashi says if you place it sideways it is not kosher, while Rabbenu Tam Menachot 33a s.v. ha holds that if it is straight up it is not kosher, so Ashkenazim try to fulfill the mitzvah according to both opinions. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 131) holds that it isn't put up on a 45 degree angle, rather it is put on a small slant. Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 173 writes that the Chazon Ish put his mezuzah on a slight slant, with the top of the mezuzah 3 cm from the bottom of the mezuzah (approximately at a 75 degree angle).

[150] *According to Rav Hershel Schachter the rules are ordered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. This is repeated in another shiur.
According to Igrot Moshe YD 4:43 the rules are ordered 2, 4, 3, 5. Teshuva M'ahava 1:61, Mikdash Me'at 289:18. Minchat Yitzchak 1:89 and 3:47, Chovat Hadar 8:1:4, Aruch Hashulchan 289:8, and Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 Makom Vseder Keviyut Mezuzah fnt. 76) agree.

According to Chelkat Yakov YD 161 the rules are ordered 2, 3, 5. Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:12 agrees. Chelkat Yakov doesn't hold of majority of walking (#4) at all. According to Agur Bohalecha 27:3 the rules are 2, 3, 5, 4.

According to Daat Kedoshim YD 289:11 the rules are ordered 2, 5, 3, 4.

According to Bet Meir YD 289 the rules are ordered 3, 2, 5. Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 16 p. 6 fnt. 21) agreed. Chazon Ish YD 168:1 and 168:7 hold that the rules are ordered 2, 3, 5. The Bet Meir places his emphasis on which side is important. That rule trumps all others even if it is going from the inner to outer room. The Chazon Ish agrees with the Bet Meir that which side is more important determines the mezuzah but only if it isn't going from an inner to outer room, in which case the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the inner room.

[165] According to Igrot Moshe YD 4:43 the rules are ordered 2, 4, 3, 5. Teshuva M'ahava 1:61, Mikdash Me'at 289:18. Minchat Yitzchak 1:89 and 3:47, Chovat Hadar 8:1:4, Aruch Hashulchan 289:8, and Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 Makom Vseder Keviyut Mezuzah fnt. 76) agree.

[166] According to Chelkat Yakov YD 161 the rules are ordered 2, 3, 5. Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:12 agrees. Chelkat Yakov doesn't hold of majority of walking (#4) at all. According to Agur Bohalecha 27:3 the rules are 2, 3, 5, 4.

[167] According to Daat Kedoshim YD 289:11 the rules are ordered 2, 5, 3, 4.

[168] According to Bet Meir YD 289 the rules are ordered 3, 2, 5. Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 16 p. 6 fnt. 21) agreed. Chazon Ish YD 168:1 and 168:7 hold that the rules are ordered 2, 3, 5. The Bet Meir places his emphasis on which side is important. That rule trumps all others even if it is going from the inner to outer room. The Chazon Ish agrees with the Bet Meir that which side is more important determines the mezuzah but only if it isn't going from an inner to outer room, in which case the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the inner room.

[151] Binyan Tzion 99 writes that a door from a place that isn't obligated in a mezuzah to a place that is obligated in a mezuzah should have a mezuzah on the right side going from the place that is exempt to the place that is obligated. His example is the closet that is less than 4x4 amot which is seen as an entrance from the closet to the room. Also, a front door to the street certainly has a mezuzah from the street to the house. Chovat Hadar 8:1:2 agrees. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) explained that this is the first factor by which a person determines on which side of the door the mezuzah is placed. Agur Bohalecha ch. 27 fnt. 10 argues with the Binyan Tzion.

[152] Gemara Menachot 33b, Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 6:12, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Taz 289:3, Levush 289:2, Aruch Hashulchan 289:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu 11:3, Igrot Moshe Y.D. 1:181.

[153] Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:4

[154] Ben Ish Chai (Ki Tavo, Shana Sheniya no. 6) writes that if there’s a room that’s a dead end then it is obvious that we put the mezuzah on the right going into that room. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) agreed. Based on the Maharil (responsa 94) regarding courtyards and balconies this rule is obvious. See below.

[155] *The Levush 289:3 writes that the side rooms of a house which open to the main room which was warm in the winter should have a mezuzah going into the main room since it is used more than the side room. This rule trumps the direction of the door. This is accepted by the Shach 289:6 who comments that it is obvious. The Derech Hachaim 240:5, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:4, Chayei Adam 15:18, Chelkat Yakov YD 161, Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42), Igrot Moshe 4:43:4 and Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:11 agree.
The Chelkat Yakov YD 161 proves that the Mordechai is the source for the Levush. The Mordechai cited by Bet Yosef YD 289 writes that the gemara needed a doorway to resolve the question of a man's room and a woman's room next to one another because they are both equally used and open to the public. However, between a vestibule or foyer and the main room of the house that is used commonly certainly the mezuzah is placed going from the vestibule and the main room since it is used more. He adds that this is also true even if the main room is also open to the public and the vestibule is open to a courtyard.

The Chelkat Yakov explains the Mordechai to mean to add that even though when the vestibule is open to a courtyard and the main room to the public people will use the vestibule more often as an exit than an entrance, nonetheless, since the main room is used more than the vestibule, we view the entrance between the vestibule and the main room as an entrance and not an exit. In this he is proving that the rule of majority of walking is trumped by majority of usage.

Igrot Moshe 4:43:4 writes that rule of majority of walking trumps the rule of usage and also the rule of doorway. His logic is that the room that is used more is only an indication of which way people walk a majority of the time but the main factor is the way people walk. He holds that the way people enter a majority of the time is an application of the deoritta halacha to put a mezuzah on the right as a person enters.

[174] The Chelkat Yakov YD 161 proves that the Mordechai is the source for the Levush. The Mordechai cited by Bet Yosef YD 289 writes that the gemara needed a doorway to resolve the question of a man's room and a woman's room next to one another because they are both equally used and open to the public. However, between a vestibule or foyer and the main room of the house that is used commonly certainly the mezuzah is placed going from the vestibule and the main room since it is used more. He adds that this is also true even if the main room is also open to the public and the vestibule is open to a courtyard.

[175] The Chelkat Yakov explains the Mordechai to mean to add that even though when the vestibule is open to a courtyard and the main room to the public people will use the vestibule more often as an exit than an entrance, nonetheless, since the main room is used more than the vestibule, we view the entrance between the vestibule and the main room as an entrance and not an exit. In this he is proving that the rule of majority of walking is trumped by majority of usage.

[176] Igrot Moshe 4:43:4 writes that rule of majority of walking trumps the rule of usage and also the rule of doorway. His logic is that the room that is used more is only an indication of which way people walk a majority of the time but the main factor is the way people walk. He holds that the way people enter a majority of the time is an application of the deoritta halacha to put a mezuzah on the right as a person enters.

[156] Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) holds that the factor of looking at the majority of the way people walk one room to another trumps the rule of the way the door is placed. Aruch Hashulchan 289:8 and Igrot Moshe YD 1:176 agree. Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:12 holds that this factor is to be used after the door rule. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 agrees.
Daat Kedoshim 289:12 holds that we only count the walking of the homeowner, while the Gidulei Hekdesh 289:7 and Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:2 argue that it depends on whoever walks through the house including all the family members and even guests.

[178] Daat Kedoshim 289:12 holds that we only count the walking of the homeowner, while the Gidulei Hekdesh 289:7 and Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:2 argue that it depends on whoever walks through the house including all the family members and even guests.

[157] Menachot 33a, Shulchan Aruch YD 289:3, Aruch Hashulchan 289:6. Chayei Adam 15:18 writes that היכר ציר depends on which way the door swings. Chovat Hadar (ch. 8 fnt. 10) agrees. See Rashi and Tur, however, who describe it as depending on whicch side the post upon which the door hangs is placed. Today the description of Rashi and Tur is irrelevant to most of our doors.

[158] Mordechai cited by Bet Yosef YD 289, Shach 289:6, Aruch Hashulchan 289:7, Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:3, Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:11

[159] The Yavetz 70 held that in a case of doubt that can't be resolved should have a mezuzah on both sides. The Maharam Shik YD 287 argues that this would violate the prohibition of adding a mitzvah, Bal Tosif.
Strict: HaMezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:13 citing Mezuzat Beytecha 289:16 quoting the Chazon Ish and Minchat Yitzchak 1:9 agree with the Maharam Shik. Chelkat Yakov 162 holds that it is a rabbinic form of Bal Tosif.

Lenient: Yabia Omer 6:2:6 cites the Binyan Tzion 100 and Rav Shlomo Kluger in Kinat Sofrim 40 who say that it isn't since one is pasul and one is kosher (Shulchan Aruch OC 34:2 and Magen Avraham 34:3). Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) explained it was not Bal Tosif since one was only trying to be fulfill the mitzvah according to all opinions similar to wearing Rashi and Rabbenu Tam's tefillin simultaneously. See Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:4 where he rights that if there is a doubt as to which side the mezuzah should be placed there is a safek as to what one should do.

Exempt: Igrot Moshe YD 1:176 holds that if the direction in which the mezuzah should be put because it isn't used more for entry than exiting, the rooms it connects are used equally, and there is no door, then there is obligation to put up a mezuzah at all. He quotes the Yavetz who says to put up a mezuzah on both posts out of doubt but he disagrees. He also rejects the opinion of the questioner to put up a mezuzah on the side of his choice.

Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 16 p. 4), Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani, and Shevet Halevi 2:152:2 hold that the mezuzah can be put on whichever side you want. Agur Bohalecha 27:36 agrees. This is also the opinion of the Peni Moshe and Korban Haedah on Yerushalmi (Megillah 4:12).

[182] Strict: HaMezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:13 citing Mezuzat Beytecha 289:16 quoting the Chazon Ish and Minchat Yitzchak 1:9 agree with the Maharam Shik. Chelkat Yakov 162 holds that it is a rabbinic form of Bal Tosif.

[183] Lenient: Yabia Omer 6:2:6 cites the Binyan Tzion 100 and Rav Shlomo Kluger in Kinat Sofrim 40 who say that it isn't since one is pasul and one is kosher (Shulchan Aruch OC 34:2 and Magen Avraham 34:3). Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) explained it was not Bal Tosif since one was only trying to be fulfill the mitzvah according to all opinions similar to wearing Rashi and Rabbenu Tam's tefillin simultaneously. See Rav Mordechai Eliyahu's comment to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:4 where he rights that if there is a doubt as to which side the mezuzah should be placed there is a safek as to what one should do.

[184] Exempt: Igrot Moshe YD 1:176 holds that if the direction in which the mezuzah should be put because it isn't used more for entry than exiting, the rooms it connects are used equally, and there is no door, then there is obligation to put up a mezuzah at all. He quotes the Yavetz who says to put up a mezuzah on both posts out of doubt but he disagrees. He also rejects the opinion of the questioner to put up a mezuzah on the side of his choice.

[185] Rav Elyashiv (Shvut Yitzchak v. 16 p. 4), Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani, and Shevet Halevi 2:152:2 hold that the mezuzah can be put on whichever side you want. Agur Bohalecha 27:36 agrees. This is also the opinion of the Peni Moshe and Korban Haedah on Yerushalmi (Megillah 4:12).

[160] Mordechai Halachot Ketanot 962, Bach 289:5, Shach 289:5, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3, Aruch Hashulchan 289:5, Derech Hachaim 240:3, Kuntres Hamezuzah (page 102, note 22).

[161] Igrot Moshe YD 4:43:2 unlike the opinion of the Daat Kedoshim 289:11

[162] Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:10, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3

[163] Maharil (responsa 94), Bet Yosef 289:3, Taz 289:3, Chelkat Yakov YD 161, Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6. The Chelkat Yakov writes that even though the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat ask on the Maharil since most poskim accept the Maharil we follow his opinion. His opinion is based on the concept that you walk from the house to the backyard and since the back door is an entrance to the backyard which has no other entrance then the mezuzah must be on the right entering the backyard. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) agreed.
Chazon Ish YD 168:4-6 argues with the Maharil that the mezuzah should be on the right going into the house even when there is no gate out of the courtyard. He explains that since the courtyard is only obligated because it is open to the house, the mezuzah must be placed on the right side going into the house. Bet Meir 289 agrees for another reason. However, Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 defends the Maharil and explains that once the courtyard is obligated when it opens to houses, it is obligated in it of itself.

[190] Chazon Ish YD 168:4-6 argues with the Maharil that the mezuzah should be on the right going into the house even when there is no gate out of the courtyard. He explains that since the courtyard is only obligated because it is open to the house, the mezuzah must be placed on the right side going into the house. Bet Meir 289 agrees for another reason. However, Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 defends the Maharil and explains that once the courtyard is obligated when it opens to houses, it is obligated in it of itself.

[164] The Maharil (responsa 94) wrote that if the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a street then the direction of the mezuzah is determined by which way the door opens. Taz 289:3 quotes it. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 writes that even though the Maharil writes that when there are two doors to a backyard the mezuzah is determined by the way the door opens, the Levush holds that we would put up the mezuzah going into the house since it is used more than the backyard. Furthermore, the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat disagree with the Maharil altogether even when the backyard has no other exit. Therefore, the Chelkat Yakov concludes that since the house is used more than the courtyard that trumps the rule of the fact that the majority of the walking is from the house to the courtyard. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 and Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) agreed with the distinction of the Chelkat Yakov of accepting the Maharil where the courtyard is not open to the street, but not when the courtyard is open to the street. In that case the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the house. Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42) and Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 125) agree.

[165] In summary, when the house opens to a backyard and there’s another entrance from the backyard to the street, according to Bet Meir (YD 289), Chazon Ish (YD 168:4-6), and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe YD 1:181) the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the house. However, according to Maharil 94 and Taz (YD 289:4) the mezuzah is placed in the direction of the heker tzir. According to this approach, some poskim hold that we only follow heker tzir if each side is used equally. However, if the majority of the time people walk one direction, the mezuzah is placed on the right side going in that direction. Keviyut Mezuzah Vhilchoteha (10:7 p. 138) and Lev Shome’a (2:13 p. 25) quote both of these opinions.

[166] HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 3:10

[167] Chovat Hadar ch. 1 p. 15, Or Letzion YD 1:14, Yabia Omer YD 4:23, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 3:11. However, the Chazon Ish YD 168:6 held that a porch is exempt since we don't use porches today like they used to. They used to be used as one of the rooms of the house, but today they are used for temporary uses to eat a snack or take a short nap.

[168] The Maharil quoted by the Taz 289:4 writes that if a house opens to enclosed courtyard and it doesn't have any other opening then certainly the doorway to the courtyard is considered an entrance to the courtyard since there's no other way in. However, the Bet Meir 289 argues with the Maharil and says that since the house is used more than the courtyard it is considered an entrance into the house. Chazon Ish YD 168:5 (cited by Yabia Omer) and Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) agree with the Bet Meir. Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, and Chelkat Yakov YD 162 agree with the Maharil against the Bet Meir. The Daat Kedoshim agrees with the Bet Meir unless it is an area less than 4x4 amot which might not be obligated at all in which case he follows the Maharil. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 cites the Masechet Mezuzah ch. 2 which amazingly has an explicit dispute between the Tana Kama and Rabbi Yosi about this exact case where a house opens to a courtyard that doesn't have another entrance. Rav Ovadia quotes dozens of sources whether we generally follow Rabbi Yosi over Tana Kama or not and additionally if it is possible to disregard this source since it is post-talmudic. In any event, he is convinced of the argument of the Bet Meir but still follows the opinion of the Maharil being that he was quoted by the Bet Yosef and is an earlier source. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 p. 330 n. 26) writes that if the porch is enclosed completely the mezuzah is placed on the right side going out from the house, but if the porch has an entrance or gate from the yard which can be accessed from the street, the mezuzah is placed on the right side going in from the porch to the house.

[169] Yabia Omer 4:23:6, Or Letzion 1:14, Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 3:11. Or Letzion 1:14 writes that the minhag is to put a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the balcony. He explains that if the balcony is less than 4x4 amot it isn't considered obligated in a mezuzah in it of itself. Additionally, if it doesn't have a roof it isn't obligated in it of itself. However, since the balcony opens to the house which is obligated we can treat the balcony like a foyer (bet shaar) before the house which is obligated even if it is less than 4x4. However, the dispute is why the foyer is obligated. According to the Tosfot and Rosh it is only obligated rabbinically but it is obligated as a structure that is useful for its designated purpose. However, according to the Rambam, it is obligated biblically because it opens to a house. According to the Rambam the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going in from the balcony since the balcony is only obligated as it serves the house. However, according to the Tosfot and Rosh the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going from the house to the balcony as it is obligated in it of itself. Yet, the minhag is just to put a mezuzah on the right side going from the house to the balcony like the Rosh since perhaps we follow the Rosh and even if we don't we follow the opinion of the Chikrei Lev who holds that the balcony door can't be considered an entrance for the house since you can only use it if you first exited through it. He quotes that this was also the opinion of the Rosh Yeshiva of Porat Yosef, Rav Ezra Attiyah.

[170] Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19 cites the Chiko Mamtakim p. 359 who quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach has holding that a balcony that is 4x4 amot square or the equivalent should have the mezuzah from the house to the balcony like the Maharil, but if the balcony is smaller than that it should have a mezuzah on the right side from the balcony to the house like the Bet Meir, Chazon Ish, and Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Inside Stam p. 212 quotes that Rav Moshe Feinstein, Or Letzion 1:14, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:8-9 that the mezuzah should be put on the right side going out. He also quotes that Rav Elyashiv, Rav Wosner, and Rav Nissim Karelitz held that the mezuzah should be put on the left side going out.

[171] Shulchan Aruch Y.D.286:2 obligates a storage area in mezuzah if it is 4x4 amot.

[172] Once the closet is obligated in mezuzah which way should the mezuzah be? Should it be on the right side since it is a dead end or should it have a mezuzah on the left side since the room is used more than the closet? Most poskim hold that the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going into a closet if the closet is obligated in mezuzah.
Background: The Maharil (responsa 94) holds that the mezuzah is placed on the right side going to an enclosed courtyard since the courtyard is closed and the only way to enter it is from the house so the entrance is from the house to the courtyard. The Bet Meir 289 argues since the house is used more than the closet. The Chavot Daat cited by the Bet Meir agrees with Bet Meir but doesn’t feel he is entitled to disagree with the Maharil. Our case is analogous to that of the Maharil.

Majority of achronim accept the Maharil. Taz 289:3, Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, Chelkat Yakov YD 162, Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1), Igrot Moshe YD 1:181, Or Letzion YD 1:14, and Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 agree with Maharil in this case. Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) and Chazon Ish YD 168:5 agree with Bet Meir.

Or Letzion YD 1:14 write that the opinion of the Maharil depends on the dispute between the Rambam and Rosh. According to the Rambam that a bet shaar is obligated because of the house that it is attached to the mezuzah should be on the left side and according to the Rosh the rabbinic obligation is for the bet shaar itself and accordingly the mezuzah should be on the right. Or Letzion concludes to place the mezuzah on the right because either we follow the Rosh or the Chikrei Lev. Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) advances the same argument. However, both Or Letzion and Yeshuot Malko conclude that we accept the Maharil. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 rejects the entire question and explains that the Rambam would hold that the bet shaar is obligated in it of itself once it is attached to a place that is used for living. He accepts the Maharil. Our summary is that most accept the Maharil in this case and would hold to put up the mezuzah on the right side. Rav Heinemann in Guide to Halachos p. 105 writes that a walk-in closet that has 50ft sq area should have a mezuzah on the right post going in.

[200] Background: The Maharil (responsa 94) holds that the mezuzah is placed on the right side going to an enclosed courtyard since the courtyard is closed and the only way to enter it is from the house so the entrance is from the house to the courtyard. The Bet Meir 289 argues since the house is used more than the closet. The Chavot Daat cited by the Bet Meir agrees with Bet Meir but doesn’t feel he is entitled to disagree with the Maharil. Our case is analogous to that of the Maharil.

[201] Majority of achronim accept the Maharil. Taz 289:3, Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, Chelkat Yakov YD 162, Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1), Igrot Moshe YD 1:181, Or Letzion YD 1:14, and Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 agree with Maharil in this case. Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) and Chazon Ish YD 168:5 agree with Bet Meir.

[202] Or Letzion YD 1:14 write that the opinion of the Maharil depends on the dispute between the Rambam and Rosh. According to the Rambam that a bet shaar is obligated because of the house that it is attached to the mezuzah should be on the left side and according to the Rosh the rabbinic obligation is for the bet shaar itself and accordingly the mezuzah should be on the right. Or Letzion concludes to place the mezuzah on the right because either we follow the Rosh or the Chikrei Lev. Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) advances the same argument. However, both Or Letzion and Yeshuot Malko conclude that we accept the Maharil. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 rejects the entire question and explains that the Rambam would hold that the bet shaar is obligated in it of itself once it is attached to a place that is used for living. He accepts the Maharil. Our summary is that most accept the Maharil in this case and would hold to put up the mezuzah on the right side. Rav Heinemann in Guide to Halachos p. 105 writes that a walk-in closet that has 50ft sq area should have a mezuzah on the right post going in.

[173] The Rambam (Mezuzah 6:2) holds that an area that is 2x8 amot is obligated in a mezuzah as would any area that is larger than 16 square amot. The Rosh (Mezuzah no. 16) disagrees and holds that unless it is 4x4 amot square it isn’t obligated. Rashba (responsa 5:110) agrees. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:13 holds like the Rambam. Levush 286:13 agrees. The Shach 286:23 holds that it is obligated but the mezuzah should be put up without a bracha. Chayei Adam 15:6, Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:21, Halichot Olam v. 8. p. 282, and Yalkut Yosef 285:24 agree. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi p. 129) agrees. Eliya Rabba 366:5 also seems to agree with the Shach.
The Taz OC 634:1 argues that everyone holds it is exempt. Shulchan Aruch Harav OC 366:5, Chazon Ish OC 110:28, YD 169:5, Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 82), Steipler (Orchot Rabbenu v. 4 p. 239), Rav Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 2:52, and Rabbi Baruch Simon accept the Taz. Mishna Brurah 366:22 cites the dispute and in Shaar Hatziyun 366:13 he favors the opinion of the Taz.

Chatom Sofer YD 280 and Maamar Mordechai 634:2 defend the Shulchan Aruch against the Taz. Gra 286:13 understands the Rambam like the Rosh but holds like the Rosh. Maharalbach 110 rules like the Rambam. Magen Avraham 366:6 assumes like the Shulchan Aruch, while Magen Avraham 398:6 assumes like the Taz. Additionally, according to the Chamudei Doniel obviously an area that is 2x8 is obligated if it is usable since according to his opinion if it is usable it is obligated even if it is less than 4x4.

[204] The Taz OC 634:1 argues that everyone holds it is exempt. Shulchan Aruch Harav OC 366:5, Chazon Ish OC 110:28, YD 169:5, Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 82), Steipler (Orchot Rabbenu v. 4 p. 239), Rav Yitzchak Abadi in Or Yitzchak 2:52, and Rabbi Baruch Simon accept the Taz. Mishna Brurah 366:22 cites the dispute and in Shaar Hatziyun 366:13 he favors the opinion of the Taz.

[205] Chatom Sofer YD 280 and Maamar Mordechai 634:2 defend the Shulchan Aruch against the Taz. Gra 286:13 understands the Rambam like the Rosh but holds like the Rosh. Maharalbach 110 rules like the Rambam. Magen Avraham 366:6 assumes like the Shulchan Aruch, while Magen Avraham 398:6 assumes like the Taz. Additionally, according to the Chamudei Doniel obviously an area that is 2x8 is obligated if it is usable since according to his opinion if it is usable it is obligated even if it is less than 4x4.

[174] In light of the Rabbi Akiva Eiger the closet should have a mezuzah on the right going out of the closet, but since according to the Rambam this closet needs a mezuzah going into the closet and the Chamudei Doniel would also have the mezuzah placed going in, many poskim hold that the mezuzah is placed going into the closet. This is the opinion of Rav Shlomo Zalman (cited by Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19), Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:653, and Agur Bohalecha 19:7.

[175] Rishon Letzion Sukkah 3a and 8a writes that obviously even for the Rambam it has to be usable. Therefore, a 1x16 amot house isn't obligated in a mezuzah since it is unusable, however, a 2x8 house is obligated. He also has a nuance that for a rectangle we calculate total area, but for a circle or other shapes we have to inscribe a rectangle inside that shape and use the area of that rectangle. However, the other poskim quoted in the previous footnote in understanding the Rambam did not make such a distinction.

[176] Chamudei Doniel (Pitchei Teshuva 286:11) writes that an area that is meant to be used the way it is even if it is less than 4x4 amot is obligated in a mezuzah. Rashash Sukkah 3b s.v. may agrees. Maharam Shik 287 accepts the Chamudei Doniel. Agur Bohalecha quotes Minchat Yitzchak 1:8, 3:103, Even Yisrael 7:34, and Chovat Hadar 8:6 as being concerned for the opinion of the Chamudei Doniel. Or Letzion 1:14 only accepts the Chamudei Doniel regarding a small room open to a house.
On the other hand, Mikdash Me’at 286:39 strongly disagrees with the Chamudei Doniel. Yabia Omer 4:23:4-5 quotes Rav Shlomo Kluger (Kinat Sofrim 118), Teshuvot Lshoel 16, and Rav Chaim Zonenfeld in Salmat Chaim YD 105 disagreed with the Chamudei Doniel, while the Maharsham 3:154 agreed with the Chamudei Doniel. He concludes that the primary halacha is that the room is exempt. Shevet Halevi 2:152 and Agur Bohalecha 18:28 rule against the Chamudei Doniel.

Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quotes the Chazon Ish as holding that we do not hold like the Chamudei Doniel. See Agur Bohalecha who discusses this further but generally agrees that the Chazon Ish disregarded the Chamudei Doniel. Rabbi Simon in an article on mezuzot agrees.

[209] On the other hand, Mikdash Me’at 286:39 strongly disagrees with the Chamudei Doniel. Yabia Omer 4:23:4-5 quotes Rav Shlomo Kluger (Kinat Sofrim 118), Teshuvot Lshoel 16, and Rav Chaim Zonenfeld in Salmat Chaim YD 105 disagreed with the Chamudei Doniel, while the Maharsham 3:154 agreed with the Chamudei Doniel. He concludes that the primary halacha is that the room is exempt. Shevet Halevi 2:152 and Agur Bohalecha 18:28 rule against the Chamudei Doniel.

[210] Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quotes the Chazon Ish as holding that we do not hold like the Chamudei Doniel. See Agur Bohalecha who discusses this further but generally agrees that the Chazon Ish disregarded the Chamudei Doniel. Rabbi Simon in an article on mezuzot agrees.

[177] Rabbi Akiva Eiger 286:13 writes that since the area is exempt from a mezuzah it can still be considered an entrance into the room. Shiltei Giborim (Hilchot Mezuzah 6b) cites the Riaz who holds of the same concept. The Chazon Ish YD 168:5 and 169:2 agrees and adds that accordingly the mezuzah should be placed on the left side, which is the right side going from the exempt area into the room. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (cited by Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19), Rav Wosner (Shevet Halevi 2:152, 2:156:286:13), Rav Elyashiv (Kovetz Teshuvot 2:6:3), Rav Shternbuch (Teshuvot Vehanhagot 1:653), Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42), Rav Aharon Lichtenstein (cited by Rabbi Jachter), Binyan Tzion 99, and Rav Heinemann (Star-K Kashrut Kurrents Winter 5779 p. 2; Guide to Halachos p. 101) agree.
In disagreement with Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Chikrei Lev YD 129 posits that since the area is exempt in it of itself it is never considered an entrance just because you can enter it and then while exiting it enter into another room. That is considered an exit and not entering. Or Letzion YD 1:14 isn’t certain if the Chikrei Lev is correct but he certainly considers his opinion significant. Yabia Omer 4:23:6 is also uncertain of Rabbi Akiva Eiger and cites Tzur Yakov and Tarshish Shoham quoting Lechem Hapanim who disagree with Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181, Agur Bohalecha 19:6, Chesed Lavraham YD 91, Yalkut Yosef 286:21, and Rabbi Baruch Simon all agree with Chikrei Lev and reject Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Therefore, strictly speaking the closet is exempt from a mezuzah.

Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quotes the Steipler ruled like the Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Shevet Halevi 2:152 understands that the Bet Meir 289 agrees with Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

There is a possibility that the mezuzah should be placed from the big room into the small room. That is an idea Sfat Emet YD 289 suggested and Agur Bohalecha 19:6 in fact posits is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva Eiger. In practice, he agrees with the Chazon Ish to put the mezuzah going into the big room.

[212] In disagreement with Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Chikrei Lev YD 129 posits that since the area is exempt in it of itself it is never considered an entrance just because you can enter it and then while exiting it enter into another room. That is considered an exit and not entering. Or Letzion YD 1:14 isn’t certain if the Chikrei Lev is correct but he certainly considers his opinion significant. Yabia Omer 4:23:6 is also uncertain of Rabbi Akiva Eiger and cites Tzur Yakov and Tarshish Shoham quoting Lechem Hapanim who disagree with Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181, Agur Bohalecha 19:6, Chesed Lavraham YD 91, Yalkut Yosef 286:21, and Rabbi Baruch Simon all agree with Chikrei Lev and reject Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Therefore, strictly speaking the closet is exempt from a mezuzah.

[213] Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 165 quotes the Steipler ruled like the Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Shevet Halevi 2:152 understands that the Bet Meir 289 agrees with Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

[214] There is a possibility that the mezuzah should be placed from the big room into the small room. That is an idea Sfat Emet YD 289 suggested and Agur Bohalecha 19:6 in fact posits is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva Eiger. In practice, he agrees with the Chazon Ish to put the mezuzah going into the big room.

[178] Agur Bohalecha 19:6 and Teshuvot Vehanahgot 1:653 unlike Shevet Halevi 2:152 who writes that one can recite a bracha following Rabbi Akiva Eiger.

[179] Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 282 and Yalkut Yosef 285:21 writes that a room that is less than 4x4 amot is exempt. Therefore, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha writes that a walk-in closet that isn't 4x4 amot is completely exempt for Sephardim. If one wanted to be strict, this could be related to the discussion of a balcony that is less than 4x4. Or Letzion YD 1:14 writes that he partially rejects the Chamudei Doniel, but through his understanding of the topic, agrees in practice to place a mezuzah on the right going into a balcony that is exempt because it is less than 4x4 amot or isn't roofed. His reasoning is that according to the Rosh the balcony should be obligated since it is useful and the Chikrei Lev argues with Rabbi Akiva Eiger that the mezuzah is not place on the right side coming off the balcony. Yabia Omer 4:23:6 also writes that strictly speaking the balcony that is less than 16 square amot is exempt, but if one wants to be strict one should put it on the right side. going into the house.

[180] Shaarei Hamezuzah 10:16, Agur Bohalecha 19:10, Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 3:8

[181] Yoma 11a, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:25, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:92. Kol Yakov 291:3 quotes a practice to check one's mezuzot when there is a mice infestation.

[182] Agur Bohalecha 39:4 cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Elyashiv as holding that it isn't necessary to check one's mezuzot if they're sealed. Agur Bohalecha himself disagrees and holds that it is necessary to check even if it is completely sealed since the classic poskim didn't make such a distinction.

[183] Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:22)

[184] Yoma 11a, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:1

[185] Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 13:24 p. 123 citing Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 202-5. See Shulchan Aruch 288:13 and Yachava Daat 4:3 regarding the break between the paragraphs which for mezuzot doesn't invalidate.

[186] Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (Stam 11:32) writes that a Sephardi should have Sephardi mezuzot according to the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch, however, if he is found in a house with mezuzot that are written according to the Taz and it would be a large loss to replace them he can leave them as is. Yachava Daat 4:3 quotes many achonrim who disagree with the Taz and concludes that Sephardim don't follow the Taz. Agur Bohalecha p. 98 quotes the minhag Ashkenazim is like the Taz for tefillin and Rav Elyashiv advised doing the same for mezuzot. He also explains that the Bet Yosef doesn't disagree with the Taz.

[187] Rivevot Efraim 5:548 quoting Rav Dovid Feinstein about the practice of his father, Rav Moshe Feinstein. Agur Bohalecha is strict.

[188] Agur Bohalecha 1:4 quoting Rabbi Akiva Eiger 1:58 and Aruch Hashulchan 285:5

[189] Menachot 44a, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:22, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:114

[190] Yalkut Yosef (Sava Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza", n. 108)

[191] Igrot Moshe 1:179

[192] The Menachem Meishiv YD 83 clarifies that it should be put up after 30 days and not on the 30th day itself. We do apply miksat hayom kkulo to say that it can be put up at the beginning of the 31st day even at night. One proof is Nodeh Beyehuda YD 1 and Ginat Veradim YD 6:14 cited in fnt. there.

[193] Agur Bohalecha ch. 30 fnt. 15, Igrot Moshe YD 1:179, Torah Mtzion p. 278

[194] Igrot Moshe YD 1:179

[195] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:115. Yad Haketana ch. 2 fnt. 25 learns from the Shach 286:25 that if you take down a mezuzah and put it back up you shouldn't recite a new bracha even if it was originally not put up with a bracha. Rabbi Akiva Eiger on Shach seems to agree and explains that it is like it was never removed since you intended to return it. Chamudei Doniel 286:15 reads the Shach differently; only if it was put up with another door exempting it from a bracha should it be put up again without a bracha, otherwise a bracha could be recited the second time. Agur Bohalecha p. 108 quotes many who agree with the Chamudei Doniel and concludes that you can put it back up with a bracha since the first time it was put up without a bracha. Minchat Yitzchak 10:93 and Yalkut Yosef are concerned for the Yad Haketana.

[196] Aruch Hashulchan YD 285:49, Chovat Hadar 3:2, and Yalkut Yosef YD 285:114. In the footnotes he cites Meiri Shabbat 148b s.v. vyesh, Nemukei Yosef, Yosef Ometz 30, Nachal Eshkol (v. 2 p. 80), Ikrei Hadaat 31:1, Mateh Yosef 2:30, Harei Besamim 2:219, Aryeh Dvei Iylay 17, Sheilat Dovid YD 8, Mekor Chaim 19, Pnei Mavin YD 212, Aruch Hashulchan 286:49, and Ben Ish Chai (Shana Sheniya, Ki Tavo n. 23) who support this position. Nachalat Tzvi 286 argues that even if one is renting for more than 30 days it doesn't need a mezuzah for the first 30 days. Meishiv Dvar 4:16 agrees. Agur Bohalecha 30:4 also holds that strictly speaking it isn't necessary to put up within 30 days. Rav Moshe in Igrot Moshe 1:179 writes that most disagree with the Aruch Hashulchan, but still one should be strict for that opinion.

[197] Pitchei Teshuva 285:17 quoting Eshel Avraham and Sh"t Rav Meshulam that one could recite a bracha within 30 days based on Tosfot Chullin 110b s.v. talit and Rosh. Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 276 quotes Rav Moshe Feinstein as holding that it is acceptable to recite a bracha within 30 days. However, Yalkut Yosef 285:114 disagrees and he cites many who disagree including the Ramban, Ritva, Nemukei Yosef, Birkei Yosef 286:7, Chikrei Lev 2:128, and Torat Chesed 53.

[198] Pitchei Teshuva 281:18. Yalkut Yosef cites many others who agree with this position including Mishcha Drabuta v. 2 p. 86b, Mishpat Katuv YD 29, Chikrei Lev 3:128, Tzur Yakov 194, Daat Kedoshim 286:22, and Beer Moshe 3:182:3.

[199] Ohel Aryeh 5:3 writes that a bungalow rented for more than 30 days requires a mezuzah, some say with a bracha and some argue. He cites the Tarshish Shoham 52 who holds that the mezuzah should be put up on the 31st day without a bracha since the bungalow colony is a temporary dwelling just to escape the city for the summer.

[200] Ohel Aryeh 4:15 explains that since the yeshiva bachur can be kicked out of his room and it isn't really a rental but a payment for a place to stay the yeshiva needs to put up the mezuzot in the dormitory.

[201] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:24 writes that one should kiss the mezuzah in order to remind oneself of Hashem's unity. Kav HaYashar (ch. 1) writes that touching the mezuzah and offering a short prayer when one leaves one's house affords oneself protection from spiritual dangers. Orchos Rabbeinu (v. 3, p. 164) writes that the Chazon Ish looked at the mezuzah without kissing it when he passed by one.

[202] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:23

[203] Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:23

[204] Rama YD 286:1

[205] Birkei Yosef 286:1, Yalkut Yosef 285:65, Otzrot Hahalacha Mezuzah 8:6

[206] Yalkut Yosef 285:65

[207] Rama Y.D. 291:2. Igrot Moshe 1:184 explains that the Rama means that if there is a concern of a non-Jew hating a Jew, even though there isn't any concern of mortal danger it is permitted to give him a mezuzah. However, just to avoid a loss of money, Rav Moshe is not lenient unless it is an extremely significant loss. Even though the Yerushalmi Peah implies it is permitted to give a non-Jew a mezuzah, the Maharil (cited by Darkei Moshe 291) and Rama are strict. Beer Sheva 36 explains how the Maharil would explain the Yerushalmi. See further the Yavetz 2:121-122. Agur Bohaleha 4:11 argues with Rav Moshe that it is forbidden even for a significant loss

[208] The Gemara Kiddushin 34a explains that since women can also use the reward of long life, written next to the parsha of mezuzah, the mitzvah of mezuzah also applies to them. The same appears in Yoma 11b. This is codified by the Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 5:10, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:3, and Shach 291:4.

[209] Shevet Halevi 2:158:3, Kinyan Torah 2:58 and Chovat Hadar 9:3 write that women can put them up even ideally. Rav Hershel Schachter (Be'ikvei HaTzon p. 9) writes that the halacha follows the opinion that says women may put up mezuzot. Beer Moshe 2:100 and 6:79:5 as well as Teshuvot Vihanhagot 4:238:6 write that it is ideal for a man to put up the mezuzot, however, if a women did put them up, it need not be removed.

[210] Tzitz Eliezer 14:75, Chanoch Lanaar 35:4

[211] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:15

[212] Shulchan Aruch YD 291:3

[213] Yalkut Yosef (Sovah Semachot v. 1 ch. Mekomot Hachayvim Bmezuzah no. 39)

[214] Yalkut Yosef YD 285:7

[215] Bava Metsia 101b-102a, Rambam Tefillin 5:11, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:2.

[216] Tosfot Shabbat 22a s.v. rav. The Rishon Letzion 291:1 explains that whenever one leaves a house that was obligated in mezuzah, the demons move in and will damage the next tenant. Even though the next tenant will put up his own mezuzah, that doesn't remove the demons sufficiently. However, before anyone ever lived in the house, the demons don't enter.

[217] Ritva Bava Metsia 102a s.v. lo

[218] Rama Y.D. 291:2. Birkei Yosef 291:4 notes that the Rabbenu Manoach, the source for the Rama, wrote that it is good for the new tenant to pay for the mezuzot but they don't have to. However, the language of the Rama 291:2 is that it is required. He notes, though, that the Ritva and Rabbenu Yonatan (Shita Mikubeset b"m 102a) who write the next tenant owes the money and in fact the Ritva meyuchasot holds that if the new tenant doesn't want to pay the previous tenant can take his mezuzot with him.

[219] Aruch Hashulchan YD 291:3, Igrot Moshe YD 4:44, Igrot Vreishmot Hakehilat Yakov v. 5 p. 287. Agur Bohalecha is lenient. Ritva meyuchasot b"m 102a writes that if the new tenant doesn't want to pay he can take the mezuzot with him, but according to Rabbenu Manoach the new tenant doesn't actually have to pay but it is good for him to pay.

[220] Daat Kedoshim 291:2. Yabia Omer YD 3:18 and Hamezuzah VeHilchata p. 127 hold like the Daat Kedoshim. See Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 who doesn’t offer this solution. Teshuvot Vehanahgot 1:549 isn't sure if it is permitted. He quotes from the Chazon Ish who advised not switching more mehudar mezuzot for less mehudar mezuzot when leaving a house. He is lenient, however, to switch the mezuzot after leaving and the new tenant moved in. Then one can offer the tenant to either pay for the more mehudar mezuzot or to just pay for the less mehudar mezuzot and switch the mezuzot.

[221] Chida in Birkei Yosef YD 291:2 writes that according to one answer of Tosfot one can take the mezuzot with you if you'll put it up right away, but according to the Ritva you can't. He says that we hold that one shouldn't take them down even if you'll put them up in another house right away, yet in an extenuating circumstance where you can't find mezuzot to buy for the new house you can take down the mezuzot. Aruch Hashulchan 291:3 cites this but is hesitant about it.

[222] Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 quoting Rav Henkin. See Agur Bohalecha 40:12 who seems to disagree and establishes says that after painting one has to put up the mezuzot again.

[223] Pri Megadim M"Z 15:2

[224] Agur Bohalecha 24:14

[225] Aruch Hashulchan 286:38, Igrot Moshe YD 1:177

[226] Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:177

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79]

[80]

[81]

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86]

[87]

[88]

[89]

[90]

[91]

[92]

[93]

[94]

[95]

[96]

[97]

[98]

[99]

[100]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[Image:mezuzah2.jpg|right|100px]]
-There is a positive commandment to set up a mezuzah on every doorpost.<ref>Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Positive Commandment 15, Sefer HaChinuch Mitzvah 423, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 from Devarim 6:9 and 11:20. Shulchan Aruch YD 285:1, Chayei Adam 15:13, Aruch Hashulchan 285:2 say that one should be very meticulous with this mitzva.</ref> A person who is careful with this mitzvah merits a long life and the house is protected.<ref> Tur YD 285 writes based on the pasuk that follows in Parashat Ekev, 11:21, that one who is meticulous in this mitzva merits long life. Bach YD 285 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 285:3 write that a house with a mezuzah has extra protection. Shabbat 23b states that someone who is careful with mezuzah merits to have a nice house.</ref> Even though the mezuzah affords a person protection he shouldn't put it up for that reason; he should do it because that is Hashem's will.<Ref>Rosh end of Hilchot Mezuzah</ref> The details as to which doorways, how the mezuzah should be placed, and the bracha are described below.
+There is a positive commandment to set up a mezuzah on every doorpost.<ref>Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Positive Commandment 15, Sefer HaChinuch Mitzvah 423, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 from Devarim 6:9 and 11:20. Shulchan Aruch YD 285:1, Chayei Adam 15:13, Aruch Hashulchan 285:2 say that one should be very meticulous with this mitzva.</ref> A person who is careful with this mitzvah merits a long life and the house is protected.<ref>Tur YD 285 writes based on the pasuk that follows in Parashat Ekev, 11:21, that one who is meticulous in this mitzva merits long life. Bach YD 285 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 285:3 write that a house with a mezuzah has extra protection. Shabbat 23b states that someone who is careful with mezuzah merits to have a nice house.</ref> Even though the mezuzah affords a person protection he shouldn't put it up for that reason; he should do it because that is Hashem's will.<ref>Rosh end of Hilchot Mezuzah</ref> The details as to which doorways, how the mezuzah should be placed, and the bracha are described below.
 ==How to Put Up a Mezuzah==
 ===Preparing the Klaf===
-# The klaf should be rolled from left to right. It should be rolled tightly so that the klaf almost but doesn't actually cover the word שדי on the outside of the klaf.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:8</ref>
-# The klaf should be wrapped well, usually with saran wrap or the like, so that it doesn't get ruined by the elements.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:10</ref>
+#The klaf should be rolled from left to right. It should be rolled tightly so that the klaf almost but doesn't actually cover the word שדי on the outside of the klaf.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:8</ref>
-# It is proper that the klaf should be positions so that the שדי is facing outward towards the opposite doorpost.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:33</ref>
+#The klaf should be wrapped well, usually with saran wrap or the like, so that it doesn't get ruined by the elements.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:10</ref>
+#It is proper that the klaf should be positions so that the שדי is facing outward towards the opposite doorpost.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:33</ref>
 See the [[Acquiring and Maintaining Stam]] page for more details about maintaining the klaf.
 ===The Case===
-# The klaf should be placed inside a case or a plastic wrap to preserve it and not simply attached to the wall without any case.<ref>Bava Metsia 102a, Agur Bohalecha 9:1</ref>
+#The klaf should be placed inside a case or a plastic wrap to preserve it and not simply attached to the wall without any case.<ref>Bava Metsia 102a, Agur Bohalecha 9:1</ref>
 #Ideally the case should be clear so that the word שדי is visible from the outside. If the area is going to be used for changing diapers or getting changed, the case should not be clear.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 9:4-5</ref>
-# There is a mitzvah to get a nice mezuzah case to beautify the mitzvah of mezuzah.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 9:12</ref>
+#There is a mitzvah to get a nice mezuzah case to beautify the mitzvah of mezuzah.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 9:12</ref>
-# A mezuzah case in which the klaf is inside a container that is separated from the wall by some airspace is valid.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 9:18, 10:15</ref>
+#A mezuzah case in which the klaf is inside a container that is separated from the wall by some airspace is valid.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 9:18, 10:15</ref>
 ===Who Should Put it Up===
-# Initially, the homeowner should put it up himself. If he can't do it, he should appoint a Jew to do it in his stead.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:15, 8:15</ref>
+#Initially, the homeowner should put it up himself. If he can't do it, he should appoint a Jew to do it in his stead.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:15, 8:15</ref>
 #The bracha only after everything, such as the tape or nails, is prepared so that one can put it up without delay after the bracha.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:18</ref> If an agent (heb. שליח; transl. shaliach) is putting up a mezuzah, some say that he should recite the bracha על קביעת מזוזה, while others say that an agent recites the same text as the homeowner, לקבוע מזוזה.<ref>Rambam Brachot 11:13 writes that an agent who puts up a mezuzah writes the bracha על קביעת מזוזה. Agur Bohalecha 7:9 rules like the Rambam, but cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha edition 3) and Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 4) that even an agent should recite לקבוע מזוזה based on the Rama 265:2 regarding milah.</ref>
 #Initially one should not have a child or non-Jew put up a mezuzah. After the fact it is valid.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 8:22. He rejects the Chikrei Lev 128 and others who invalidate a mezuzah put up by a non-Jew. There are four reasons it could be invalid: 1) We learn from tzitzit that just like tzitzit made by a non-Jew is invalid so too mezuzah. 2) There needs to be shelichut and there is no shelichut for a non-Jew. 3) The putting up has to be done lishma. 4) We should learn from Tefillin that just as non-Jews don't have the mitzvah of tefillin they may not write a mezuzah.</ref>
@@ Line 24: / Line 28: @@
 |
 #Before putting up<ref>No bracha is recited for living in a house with mezuzot that were already put up (Birkei Yosef 19 in disagreement with the Magen Avraham 19:1). Agur Bohalecha 7:3 rules like the Birkei Yosef.</ref> a mezuzah one should recite the bracha of "Asher Kideshanu Bemizvotav vetzivanu likboah Mezuzah" - " אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לקבוע מזוזה" . <ref>Gemara Menachot 42b, Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 5:7, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Aruch Hashulchan 289:3 </ref> Ideally, the homeowner should put up the mezuzos and recite the blessing.<ref>Rabbi Reuvain Mendlowitz (cited at [https://www.vaadmhk.org/mezuzah-blessing-faq/ Mezuzah Blessing - The Seven Most FAQ])</ref> If one puts up several [[mezuzot]] at one time one bracha suffices for all of them. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Aruch Hashulchan YD 289:4, Shevet Ha’Levi 6:160, Rivevot Ephraim 3:508, Az Nidberu 3:61 </ref> In a situation like this one should be careful not to make a [[hefsek]] (pause) between [[mezuzot]] by talking.<ref>Mezuzat Baitecha 289:6, Rivevot Ephraim 2:29:21, Pitchei Mezuzot 289:10, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:8 </ref> If one did speak some poskim would require you to say a new beracha.<ref>Chovat Hadar 11:9, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:8. Mikdash Miat 289:6 and Birchot Habayis 59:1 disagree. </ref>
-# If he is using double sided tape or glue he should take the mezuzah in his right hand and recite the bracha. If he is using nails and a hammer he should take the mezuzah with his right hand and place it against the doorpost in the correct spot. Then he should hold it with his left hand and hold the hammer with his right hand. Before the bracha he should begin to put in the bottom nail to minimize the delay after the bracha until it is put up.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:19, 24</ref>
+#If he is using double sided tape or glue he should take the mezuzah in his right hand and recite the bracha. If he is using nails and a hammer he should take the mezuzah with his right hand and place it against the doorpost in the correct spot. Then he should hold it with his left hand and hold the hammer with his right hand. Before the bracha he should begin to put in the bottom nail to minimize the delay after the bracha until it is put up.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:19, 24</ref>
 ||
 {{#ev:youtube|0qrIzk43dpE|400}}
@@ Line 30: / Line 34: @@
 ====Which Doorposts Require a Mezuzah with a Bracha====
-# A person should recite the bracha upon putting up the mezuzah that indisputably needs a mezuzah with a bracha and then without interruption put up the other mezuzot. There is no need to put up the front door one first.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:57</ref>
+#A person should recite the bracha upon putting up the mezuzah that indisputably needs a mezuzah with a bracha and then without interruption put up the other mezuzot. There is no need to put up the front door one first.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:57</ref>
 #In general, before putting up a Mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated in a mezuzah, one should recite the bracha. However, if one is putting up a mezuzah on a doorway that doesn't have a door or a doorway that leads into an area that doesn't have 4 by 4 [[amot]] square, no bracha is recited.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 296:15 writes that a doorway that doesn't have a door is obligated in a mezuzah, however, some disagree. The Shach YD 296:25 writes that because of this dispute one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha, or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in another doorway that is obligated, and afterwards put up this mezuzah as well. Similarly, Shulchan Aruch YD 296:13 writes the opinion of the Rambam that if the room has an area of 4 by 4 [[amot]] even if it isn't a square it is obligated in a mezuzah. The Shach 296:23 notes that the opinion of the Rosh is that the doorway isn't obligated unless there is a 4 by 4 [[amot]] square area. Due to this dispute, the Shach concludes that one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. </ref>
 #In order to be certainly obligated in order to put up the mezuzah with a bracha the doorway would need to meet all ten conditions: The doorway has (1) two side posts, that are (2) at least ten [[tefachim]] tall, (3) has a lintel on top, and (4) has a door in it. The room has (5) at least 4x4 amot square space, (6) a roof, (7) is for a private use and not a shul or bet midrash, (8) is suitable for human dwelling, (9) the room is used for honorable activities and not for a bathroom or bathhouse, and (10) it is a permanent structure.<ref>Rambam Mezuzah 6:1</ref>
@@ Line 36: / Line 41: @@
 ====Shehechiyanu====
 #A [[shehecheyanu]] isn't recited when putting up a mezuzah on the doorpost even if it is the first time one is putting up a mezuzah.<ref>Chovat Hadar 11:2, Mezuzat Baitecha 289:3, Agur Bohalecha 1:43 </ref>
 ====Forgot to Recite Bracha Beforehand====
 #If someone forgot to recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah, some say that you can recite a bracha afterwards, while others hold that you can't unless you take it down and put it back up.<ref>Yabia Omer YD 8:27 disagrees with Rav Massas in Tevuot Shamesh YD 96 who holds that if one forgot to recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah one can't make the bracha afterwards. Yabia Omer holds that there is an ongoing mitzvah of having the mezuzah up and so a bracha can be recite afterwards. He also holds that it is better to take down the mezuzot, get them checked, and put them back up with a bracha. Agur Bohalecha p. 106 quotes the son of the Rambam in Maspik Ldvar Hashem v. 2 ch. 30 as a support for Rav Massas.</ref> Some say that one shouldn't take them down in order to put them back up with a bracha.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 7:7</ref>
 ====Replacing Mezuzot====
 #When replacing the [[mezuzot]], a new beracha is recited.<ref>Maharam Shik YD 285, Rivevot Ephraim 7:239, Beer Moshe 2:92, Avnei
 Yashfei 1:207:1, Doleh Umashke (p. 275, footnote 69) quoting Rav Elyashiv and Rav Nissim Karelitz. </ref>
 ====Replacing a Fallen Mezuzah====
 #If a mezuzah fell down and one is putting it up again one must recite a bracha before putting it up again if the doorway has a door and the room is at least 4 by 4 [[amot]] in size. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7, Beer Moshe 6:6, Chovat Hadar (11:15:footnote 29), Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:7, Avnei Yashfei 1:207:3-4, Rivevos Ephraim 2:28:5. Orchos Rabbeinu (v. 3, p. 178 #38) however, disagrees. </ref>
 ====Returning a Mezuzah After It Was Checked====
-#If one took down one's [[Mezuzot]] in order to have them checked by the sofer and they were found to be kosher, according to Ashkenazim one should put them back up without a Bracha of Lekvoh Mezuzah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7 writes that there's a doubt if one should make a bracha if a mezuzah was taken down to check it.</ref> According to Sephardim, one should make a bracha upon putting them back up after being checked by the sofer.<ref>Yalkut Yosef YD 285:93 writes that one should recite a bracha if they were taken down to be checked by a sofer.</ref> If one checks the mezuzah by himself, he need not say a new beracha. <ref>Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 8, Pitchei Teshuva 289:1, Aruch Hashulchan 289:4, Chovat Hadar 11:14 </ref> If a mezuzah was found to be not kosher, then a beracha is recited when it is replaced with a kosher one. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3,5, Rivevot Ephraim 1:19, Beer Moshe 2:92:13, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:6, Chovat Hador 11:11:footnote 20, Yabia Omer YD 3:17 </ref> Please note that a bracha is only said when replacing the mezuzah if the doorway has a door and the room is at least 4 by 4 [[amot]] in size. (See above [[#The Bracha on putting up a Mezuzah]]).
+#If one took down one's [[Mezuzot]] in order to have them checked by the sofer and they were found to be kosher, according to Ashkenazim one should put them back up without a Bracha of Lekvoah Mezuzah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:7 writes that there's a doubt if one should make a bracha if a mezuzah was taken down to check it.</ref> According to Sephardim, one should make a bracha upon putting them back up after being checked by the sofer.<ref>Yalkut Yosef YD 285:93 writes that one should recite a bracha if they were taken down to be checked by a sofer.</ref> If one checks the mezuzah by himself, he need not say a new beracha. <ref>Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 8, Pitchei Teshuva 289:1, Aruch Hashulchan 289:4, Chovat Hadar 11:14 </ref> If a mezuzah was found to be not kosher, then a beracha is recited when it is replaced with a kosher one. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:3,5, Rivevot Ephraim 1:19, Beer Moshe 2:92:13, Kuntres Hamezuzah 289:6, Chovat Hador 11:11:footnote 20, Yabia Omer YD 3:17 </ref> Please note that a bracha is only said when replacing the mezuzah if the doorway has a door and the room is at least 4 by 4 [[amot]] in size. (See above [[#The Bracha on putting up a Mezuzah]]).
 ====Replacing a Case====
 #However, if one took down one's Mezuzah just to put it in a nicer case, one doesn't need to make a new Bracha when putting it up unless it was taken down for several hours so that one stopped thinking about the Mezuzah.<ref>Yalkut Yosef YD 285:94, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha p. 109 citing Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo 8, Halichot Olam p. 261 </ref>
 ====Replacing After Painting====
 #If a mezuzah was taken down for plastering or repainting the door for a few days it should be put up again with a bracha.<ref>[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14709&pgnum=422 Beer Moshe 2:92] writes that it is obvious that when putting up a mezuzah after it was taken down for two or three days that a new bracha is necessary. He says that it is obvious that a person had a hesech hadaat. He compares it to Shulchan Aruch 8:14 by tzitzit that was removed and put back on. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha p. 110 concludes like the Divrei Shalom 4:167 that one can recite a bracha when putting it back up but it is better to have them checked and make a bracha when putting them up. Agur Bohalecha 7:23 holds that one can recite a new bracha if it was done for a few hours, however, he cites the practice of Yerushalayim only to recite a new bracha if it was down for one night. </ref>
-===When to Put It Up ===
+===When to Put It Up===
-# Some say that a person should put up a mezuzah right when he starts to live there.<Ref>Magen Avraham 19:1 assumes a person puts up a mezuzah once he starts to live there.</ref> However, others hold that one should put it up before one begins to live there.<ref> Agur Bohalecha 1:1 and 8:1 writes that if one started to live in the house one should put the mezuzah right away. But he adds that it is better to put it up in advance right before one starts to live there, even though one is only obligated after he started to live there. In ch. 7 fnt. 1 he cites that Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo Tefilla ch. 23 fnt. 54) ruled to put up the mezuzah with a bracha even before beginning to live there. Nonetheless, he also cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 288:78) who is concerned for the Mishna Brurah 19:4 that the mezuzah should be put up immediately before starting to live there or right after beginning to live there.</ref>
+#Some say that a person should put up a mezuzah right when he starts to live there.<ref>Magen Avraham 19:1 assumes a person puts up a mezuzah once he starts to live there.</ref> However, others hold that one should put it up before one begins to live there.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 1:1 and 8:1 writes that if one started to live in the house one should put the mezuzah right away. But he adds that it is better to put it up in advance right before one starts to live there, even though one is only obligated after he started to live there. In ch. 7 fnt. 1 he cites that Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo Tefilla ch. 23 fnt. 54) ruled to put up the mezuzah with a bracha even before beginning to live there. Nonetheless, he also cites Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 288:78) who is concerned for the Mishna Brurah 19:4 that the mezuzah should be put up immediately before starting to live there or right after beginning to live there.</ref>
 #One may put up a mezuzah at night.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:10), Ben Ish Chai Parashat Ki Tavo Year 2: Halacha 4, Shevet Hakehati 1:277, Mezuzat Baitecha 289:6, Rivevot Ephraim 7:369.  </ref>
 ==Types of Doors==
+===Accordion Door===
+#An accordion door where the accordion door opens to the left certainly should have a mezuzah on the right doorpost. If the door opens to the right or both sides if after folding the door there is a tefach between the post and the area of passage, some hold that it is necessary to set up a new post next to the end of where the door folds, some hold it is exempt, and the minhag is to put the mezuzah on the right doorpost.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037727/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2028%20-%20Elevators,%20Accordion%20Doors,%20Garages,%20Hospitals Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 14)] accepts the minhag to place it on the right doorpost even though it is more than a tefach from the entranceway. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 3:328 and Otzrot Piskei Igrot Moshe p. 11 quoting Ohalei Yeshurun fnt. 175 in the name of Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:15 agree. Chut Shani p. 121 seems to agree. Teshuvot Vehanagot reasons that the door itself can't nullify part of the doorway since it is part of the function of the doorway. Chovat Hadar 8:3 fnt. 8 holds that an accordion door needs a post placed next to where the folds end so that the mezuzah is within a tefach of the passageway of the door.</ref>
+#If there is a part of the accordion door with a thickness of a tefach that doesn't move next to the right doorpost, the mezuzah can be placed on this fixed area.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 22:11</ref>
 ===Double Doors===
 [[Image:Double doors with poll.jpg|200px|right]]
-#Double doors with or without a poll in between is considered a single doorway and needs only one mezuzah on the right.<ref>Rashba (teshuva 4:91) writes that double doors with a poll in the middle, with the doors that are attached to the poll in the middle should have two mezuzot, but if they're attached to the side doorposts it should have one mezuzah since the poll in the middle is only for decoration and not to create two doorways. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 codifies the Rashba. The Tur Y.D. 286:21, although similar in formulation to the Rashba, writes that if there is a single door that opens for two doorways it only needs one mezuzah, implying that if there are two doors that can open separately they need two mezuzot. [https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14428&st=&pgnum=49 Yad Ketana ch. 3 fnt. 9] makes this point but finds the opinion of the Tur very difficult to sustain in this case since the door functions as one doorway. He concludes that we follow the Rashba and Shulchan Aruch in that case and one mezuzah suffices.</ref>
-===Accordion Door===
+#Double doors with or without a pole in between is considered a single doorway and needs only one mezuzah on the right.<ref>Rashba (teshuva 4:91) writes that double doors with a pole in the middle, with the doors that are attached to the pole in the middle should have two mezuzot, but if they're attached to the side doorposts it should have one mezuzah since the pole in the middle is only for decoration and not to create two doorways. Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 codifies the Rashba. The Tur Y.D. 286:21, although similar in formulation to the Rashba, writes that if there is a single door that opens for two doorways it only needs one mezuzah, implying that if there are two doors that can open separately they need two mezuzot. [https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14428&st=&pgnum=49 Yad Ketana ch. 3 fnt. 9] makes this point but finds the opinion of the Tur very difficult to sustain in this case since the door functions as one doorway. He concludes that we follow the Rashba and Shulchan Aruch in that case and one mezuzah suffices.</ref>
-# An accordion door where the accordion door opens to the left certainly should have a mezuzah on the right doorpost. If the door opens to the right or both sides if after folding the door there is a tefach between the post and the area of passage, some hold that it is necessary to set up a new post next to the end of where the door folds, some hold it is exempt, and the minhag is to put the mezuzah on the right doorpost.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037727/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2028%20-%20Elevators,%20Accordion%20Doors,%20Garages,%20Hospitals Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 14)]. Chovat Hadar 8:3 fnt. 8 holds that an accordion door needs a post placed next to where the folds end so that the mezuzah is within a tefach of the passageway of the door.</ref>
+##Some say that putting up an extra mezuzah when a door is split with a pole and really only needs one mezuzah is a violation of baal tosif.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 15:6</ref>
+#Two doorways next to one another that function the same room and people use one door or the other randomly, they are considered one need and only need one mezuzah on the rightmost post.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 26:8, Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Daat Noteh Mezuzah p. 570) defending the Yad Ketana, Birur Halacha Hakatzar p. 79 202:3</ref> Some hold that they are both obligated in mezuzot as long as there are two different doors.<ref>Pitchei Mezuzot 296:109 writes that we shouldn't be lenient like the Yad Ketana that anytime they're functioning the same room they're considered one doorway, rather we should follow the implication of the Tur. He understands that the Rashba agrees with the Tur that a pole in the middle isn't just for decorative purposes if it is used to hold the hinges of one of the doors. This also seems to be the understanding of the Chayei Adam 15:13.</ref>
+#Two doorways next to one another with doors that are attached to the middle pole and the pole is a tefach wide are obligated in two mezuzot.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 286:21 based on Rashba, Agur Bohalecha 26:10</ref>
 ===Revolving Door===
-# A revolving door should have a mezuzah on the right side whether the revolving door turns counter-clockwise or clockwise.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037727/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2028%20-%20Elevators,%20Accordion%20Doors,%20Garages,%20Hospitals Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 7)]</ref>
+#A revolving door should have a mezuzah on the right side whether the revolving door turns counter-clockwise or clockwise.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037727/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2028%20-%20Elevators,%20Accordion%20Doors,%20Garages,%20Hospitals Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 7)]</ref>
+===Sliding Door===
+#A sliding door should have the mezuzah on the right doorpost even if the sliding door on the right side always remains in place.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:16, Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:15, Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 121</ref>
 ==Type of Rooms and Buildings==
 ===Closets, Pantries, and Storage Rooms===
 #A doorway is usually obligated in a mezuzah if it has two doorposts that are 10 [[Tefachim]] tall and a lintel on top.<ref>Shulchan Aruch YD 287:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11</ref> Here an exception:
 #A small closet, such as a linen closet or electricity closet, that a person doesn't enter and only uses by takes things out of it isn't obligated in a mezuzah. However, if it is a large closet that is 4 by 4 [[amot]] and a person enters is obligated in a mezuzah without a bracha.<ref>Pitchei [[Mezuzot]] 19:10-1 (p. 257), Minchat Yitzchak 3:103, 4:92:3, [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037727/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2028%20-%20Elevators,%20Accordion%20Doors,%20Garages,%20Hospitals Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 28 min 60)] </ref>
@@ Line 85: / Line 116: @@
 #Accordingly, if the mezuzah wasn't wrapped before it was put in the case or if you follow the stringent opinions above, before the couple is together the mezuzah should be covered with an external covering such as a piece of clothing. Even if the case is clear it counts as a single cover.<ref>See above notes. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/788640/rabbi-hershel-schachter/the-laws-of-mezuzah/ Rav Schachter (Laws of Mezuzah min 55-6)] cites both opinions but seems to be strict to cover the mezuzah with a cloth if it is on the inside and the couple is going to be together. Mishna Brurah 40:7 clarifies that it is sufficient if one of the covers is not designated for the mezuzah. (Avnei Nezer YD 383:1 explains that something inside a double covering is like it isn't in the house at all.)</ref>
 #A laundry room should have a mezuzah.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein (Mesoret Moshe v. 3 p. 277) explains that a laundry room is obligated even though it isn't a very honorable room since generally it doesn't have uncovered feces or a bad smell. Shaarei Mezuzah 2:12 quotes Rav Elyashiv (Sefer Habayit 20:25), Rav Nissim Karelitz (Leket Hilchot Mezuzah ch. 3), and Shevet Hakehati 2:296 as holding that laundry rooms today require a mezuzah since generally the rooms are clean. In conclusion, Shaarei Mezuzah writes to put up a mezuzah without a bracha like Yalkut Yosef 286. Az Nidbaru 10:32 favors the approach that a laundry room needs a mezuzah if it is a clean room such as an apartment building laundry room or drycleaner.</ref>
+#A washing room before a bathroom, if it is used exclusively for washing one's hands when leaving the bathroom it is exempt. If it is used also for other functions such as storage of items or washing one's hands for a meal, and it is the size of 16 square amot, then according to most poskim it is obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 32:18-9 writes that a room that is used exclusively as a passageway to a bathroom is exempt from mezuzah. However, if it is used also for honorable activities it would be obligated in mezuzah. He clarifies in fnt. 42 that a room used for washing one's hands outside of a bathroom is obligated if it is also used to wash one's hands for a meal or another honorable activity. However, if it is just used to wash one's hands on one's way out of the bathroom that is exempt. Shaarei Hamezuzah 2:26, Or Yitzchak YD 1:55, and Ohalei Shem (Mezuzah 286 siman 15) all agree with Agur Bohalecha. Chovat Hadar 2:10 is a good proof that he agrees with Agur Bohalecha as well. </ref> Some poskim hold even in such a case it is exempt from a mezuzah.<ref>Pitchei Shaarim p. 136 quotes Rav Belsky in name of Rav Moshe Feinstein that it is exempt even in this case. Mishnat Yehoshua 6:11 agrees. Az Nidbaru 3:63 seems to agree with Rav Moshe. Also, Minchat Yitzchak 4:90's quote of Rav Horowitz seems to agree as well. Minchat Yitzchak's actual opinion there isn't relevant to this case. Chayey Halevi 2:67:14 isn't sure if it is chayav when it is used for other purposes besides washing after going to the bathroom, but says that it isn't 4x4 amot it is exempt on left side. He says that in the house of the Squever Rebbe they have such a room and it doesn't have a mezuzah.</ref> If sometimes people get undressed in this outer room it is exempt.<ref>Mishna Brurah 84:7 quoting Pri Megadim, Az Nidbaru 3:63</ref>
 ===Shul and Bet Midrash===
@@ Line 91: / Line 123: @@
 *The Rambam Mezuzah 6:6 writes that a shul doesn't need a mezuzah since it is an area of kedusha. There is a difficulty regarding the Rambam's opinion regarding its source from the Gemara Yoma 11b which seems only to apply this reason to the bet hamikdash. The Chatom Sofer YD 291 however explains that the Rambam means that even though the shechina dwells in the shul it isn't considered as though it is a house used for dwelling since it needs to be used for human dwelling to be obligated in mezuzah.
-* [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20)] quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a shul is exempt and not obligated like a storage house for the siddurim or other items left there since it isn't built in order to be a storage house. Shaarei Hamezuzah p. 110 writes that the minhag of the world is to put up a mezuzah on a shul, but Rav Willig disagrees and doesn't have a mezuzah on his shul to indicate that people shouldn't eat in the shul.</ref>
+*[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20)] quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a shul is exempt and not obligated like a storage house for the siddurim or other items left there since it isn't built in order to be a storage house. Shaarei Hamezuzah p. 110 writes that the minhag of the world is to put up a mezuzah on a shul, but Rav Willig disagrees and doesn't have a mezuzah on his shul to indicate that people shouldn't eat in the shul.</ref>
 #A bet midrash doesn't need a mezuzah but because some rishonim hold that it should have a mezuzah it is proper to put up a mezuzah on a bet midrash without a bracha. The reason that the bet midrash is different than a shul is since talmidei chachamim use it day and night they consider it like their home.<ref>The Gemara Yoma 11b treats a shul and bet midrash equally regarding mezuzah. Tosfot Yoma 11b writes that based on Yoma it sounds like there is no obligation to have a mezuzah for a bet midash, but Menachot 33a implies otherwise. Tosfot concludes that if it is privately owned or if it has a door from the bet midrash that opens into someone's private house then that door is obligated in a mezuzah. The Rosh (Mezuzah no. 10) writes that the Maharam Rotenberg learned from the Yerushalmi that a bet midrash should have a mezuzah. He added that a evil spirit bothered him when he slept in the bet midrash during the day until put up a mezuzah. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:10 concludes that a bet midrash does not need a mezuzah but since some say it should have one it is proper to put up one without a bracha. The Shach 286:19 explains that the reason to distinguish between a shul and bet midrash is that the talmidei chachamim live in the bet midrash day and night.</ref>
@@ Line 131: / Line 163: @@
 ===Inner Rooms===
 #Every doorway of one's house is obligated in mezuzah. Even if a room has several doorways, each one is obligated in having a mezuzah. If a doorway isn't used for entering it doesn't need a mezuzah.<ref>Maharil (responsa 94) bemoans the fact that many people think that it is sufficient to have one mezuzah per house when in fact every doorway requires its own mezuzah. The Darkei Moshe 286:4 cites the Maharil. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:1 concurs.</ref>
 ===Cellar Doors===
-#The doorpost of a cellar that is lying flat or nearly flat<ref> [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 3)] explained based on Chazon Ish OC 73:9 that if it is less than 22.6 degrees, which is the measure of a slope in eruvin that counts as a wall, it is exempt from mezuzah.</ref> on the ground is not obligated in having a mezuzah.<ref>Chaye Adam 15:15 writes that a cellar door on the floor is exempt from mezuzah based on Kiddushin 22b that states that a doorpost lying on the ground isn't considered a doorpost. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:20 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:41 concur.</ref>
+#The doorpost of a cellar that is lying flat or nearly flat<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 3)] explained based on Chazon Ish OC 73:9 that if it is less than 22.6 degrees, which is the measure of a slope in eruvin that counts as a wall, it is exempt from mezuzah.</ref> on the ground is not obligated in having a mezuzah.<ref>Chaye Adam 15:15 writes that a cellar door on the floor is exempt from mezuzah based on Kiddushin 22b that states that a doorpost lying on the ground isn't considered a doorpost. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:20 and Aruch Hashulchan YD 286:41 concur.</ref>
 ===Emergency Exits===
 #An emergency exit or any door only used to exit is not obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>Minchat Shlomo 2:100:5, [https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 2)]</ref>
 ===Hospitals===
-# A Jewish hospital should have a mezuzah without a bracha.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20-22)] explains that a hospital is like a hotel that even though people live there temporarily since the Jewish owner has people living there he is obligated in a mezuzah. He also cited Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.</ref>
+#A Jewish hospital should have a mezuzah without a bracha.<ref>[https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/1037812/Rabbi%20Mordechai%20I.%20Willig/Mezuzah%20Shiur%2029%20-%20Emergency%20Exits,%20Cellars,%20Hospitals,%20Safek%20Safeka%20in%20Hilchos%20Mezuzah Rav Mordechai Willig (Mezuzah Shiur 29, min 20-22)] explains that a hospital is like a hotel that even though people live there temporarily since the Jewish owner has people living there he is obligated in a mezuzah. He also cited Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo Tefillah 19:8) that a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.</ref>
 ==Structure of Doorframe and Room==
@@ Line 144: / Line 182: @@
 ===Minimum Size of Room===
 [[Image:T shaped room.png|200px|right]]
 #A doorway is only obligated in a mezuzah if the room has 4 by 4 [[amot]] of space. If there's not 4 by 4 square [[amot]] but there is the same amount of area, such as 2 by 8 [[amot]], there is a dispute whether the doorway is obligated in a mezuzah. In such a case one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha, or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:10 records a dispute between the Rambam and Rosh on this matter. Shulchan Aruch YD 286:13 writes the opinion of the Rambam that if the room has an area of 4 by 4 [[amot]] even if it isn't a square it is obligated in a mezuzah. The Shach 286:23 notes that the opinion of the Rosh is that the doorway isn't obligated unless there is a 4 by 4 [[amot]] square area. Due to this dispute, the Shach concludes that one should put up the mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. Binyan Tzion 99 follows Shulchan Aruch.</ref>
 #If a room is four by four amot even if there large items such as a refrigerator or oven in that room and it is normally there and enables the room to be used normally it is obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 9:3 writes that if there are large items in a room such as a refrigerator or oven they don't minimize the space of the room and count towards the four by four amot since they are normally there and enhance the use of the room. His sources include: Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 285, Maharsham 3:263, Shevet Halevi 2:187, and Chovat Hadar 4 fnt. 22. Chut Shani p. 83 suggests that the cabinets do not minimize the space since they aid use of the kitchen. He is certain though that the refrigerator and oven which are moveable do not minimize the space. Even the oven which is attached to a gas line doesn't minimize the space since it is moveable within the kitchen.</ref>
 #A room in the shape of a T or L is obligated in a mezuzah if has an area of a rectangle of 16 square amot (either areas A, B, and C OR B and D in picture). If there is only 16 square amot of area when total the area of the shape it is a dispute if it is obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>Chazon Ish YD 169:6 learns from Eruvin 88b that for the Rambam two rooms that adjacent and only overlap in one area they combine for the requisite measure for mezuzah. Agur Bohalecha 18:9 cites this but disagrees. He holds that only a rectangle combines for the Rambam but not a L or T shape, but also cites in the opinion of the Chazon Ish. Chovat Hadar (ch. 4 fnt. 17) cites this Chazon Ish.</ref>
-===Only One Doorpost===
+===One Doorpost===
 <center><gallery>
 one-doorpost.png|Picture #1:End of wall on right side functions as right doorpost
 Small into big with no right side.png|Picture #2: End of wall on left side without a right doorpost
 </gallery></center>
-#If a doorway only has one doorpost, such as if the lintel is connected to a wall, then if the standing doorpost is on the right (picture #1), one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. If the standing doorpost is on the left (picture #2), that doorway isn't obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a doorway is only obligated in a mezuzah if it has two doorposts and a lintel. Shach 287:1 quotes the Rosh and Rabbenu Yerucham who are strict if there's one doorpost on the right side and concludes that one should put up a mezuzah in such a case without a bracha. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11, Yalkut Yosef Sovah Semachot p. 546 no. 19, and HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 10:4 agree.</ref>
-<center><gallery>
+#If a doorway only has one doorpost, such as if the lintel is connected to a wall, if the doorpost is on the right (picture #1), one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha or recite a bracha when putting up a mezuzah in a doorway that is obligated and then put up this mezuzah. If the doorpost is on the left (picture #2), that doorway isn't obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>The Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a doorway is only obligated in a mezuzah if it has two doorposts and a lintel. Shach 287:1 quotes the Rosh and Rabbenu Yerucham who are strict if there's one doorpost on the right side and concludes that one should put up a mezuzah in such a case without a bracha. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:11, Yalkut Yosef Sovah Semachot p. 546 no. 19, and HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 10:4 agree.</ref>
+===Ends of Walls Serving as Doorposts===
+<center><gallery widths="225px" heights="200px" mode="nolines">
+Left_and_right_corner_end_of_wall.png|Picture #1: Two ends of walls serving as doorposts
+No_ends_of_wall.png|Picture #2: Both end of walls serves as walls for other rooms
 Left corner right end of wall.png|Picture #3: Room with right doorpost as end of wall
 Right corner left end of wall.png|Picture #4: Room with left doorpost as end of wall
 </gallery></center>
+#A room that has two walls coming to an end to serve as its entrance (picture #1) is obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>Rosh (Halachot Ketanot n. 14), Tur Y.D. 287:1</ref> Because it is a dispute one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.<Ref>Chazon Ish YD 172:2</ref>
+#A room that has two walls which turn a corner and serve as walls for other rooms (picture #2) is not obligated in a mezuzah.<ref>Mikdash Me'at 287:3-4</ref>
 #If the left doorpost is the end of a wall that extends to the left and the right doorpost is the end of a wall (picture #3) that is considered as though there is a right doorpost without a left one and one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.<ref>Chovat Hadar 7:7 in fnt.</ref> Others hold that this case is exempt altogether.<ref>Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 based on Mikdash Me'at 287:3-4</ref>
 #If the right doorpost is the end of a wall that extends to the right and the left doorpost is the end of a wall (picture #4) that is considered as though there is a left doorpost without a right one and the entrance is completely exempt from a mezuzah.<ref>Chovat Hadar 7:7 in fnt.</ref>
@@ Line 166: / Line 211: @@
 no-mashkof.png|Picture #2: Door with two posts and no lintel
 </gallery></center>
 #A regular doorway has two doorposts and a lintel (picture #1). If the doorway has two doorposts and there is no lintel but the area has a roof (picture #2), if the roof comes to an edge at the point of the door some say that one should put up a mezuzah, while others hold that doesn't require a mezuzah. Therefore, a mezuzah should be put up without a bracha.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 287:1 writes that a door isn't obligated in a mezuzah unless the doorway has a lintel. Shulchan Aruch implies that a roof isn't a lintel. Accordingly, the Chazon Ish YD 172:3 s.v. mah writes that if the lintel doesn't extend downward to block part of the opening it isn't considered a lintel but just part of the roof. Shevet Halevi 2:150 agrees and proves this from Rashi Menachot 33b s.v. achsadra. This is also the ruling of Rav Moshe Heinemann (Guide to Halachos v. 1 p. 100).
 *However, the [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37191&pgnum=18 Mikdash Me'at 287:1:5] suggests that perhaps a roof can function as a lintel. Also, the Chovat Hadar 7:5 fnt. 8 equates the issue with that of having the edge of a roof function as a lintel to the opinion of the Rosh who holds that the edge of a wall can function as a doorpost. The Netivot in [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=31812&st=&pgnum=49 Derech Hachaim Siddur 239:1] also holds that a roof can serve as a lintel. Minchat Yitzchak 10:91 explains that a roof doesn't function as a lintel but if the roof has an edge where the door is, according to some opinions, it functions as a lintel. Yet, if the roof extends beyond the door in both directions it doesn't function as a lintel. He compares it to the dispute between the Rama 630:2 and Magen Avraham 630:2 if there's doorposts and no lintel if that can serve as a tzurat hapetach. He admits that it seems not to be a proof though from further analysis. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Somachot v. 1, Mekomot Hachayavim n. 16) agrees.
 *Adoney Paz 2:121:1 sides with the Chazon Ish though he recommends being strict for all opinions to put up a mezuzah without a bracha. Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 10:3 concurs.
@@ Line 178: / Line 225: @@
 Hallway to room.png|Picture #2*: Hallway that leads into wide room
 </gallery></center>
 #If the big room is an entrance into the small room (picture #1), if that entrance is created by the ends of walls and not doorposts, some poskim hold that the entrance is exempt from mezuzah.<ref>Chovat Hadar 7:7, Agur Bohalecha 21:25. Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding that it is exempt from a mezuzah. His reasoning is that the ends of the walls of the big room aren't doorposts for the small room since they are really one wall with a break. The end of a wall serving as a doorpost is only if there's no continuation of that wall on the opposite side continuing the wall.</ref> Some disagree.<ref>Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 107) holds that it is obligated to put up a mezuzah with a bracha since from the inside of the big room it is recognizable as a doorway. Pitchei Mezuzot p. 154-5 holds that it requires a mezuzah according to the Rosh since it is the end of a wall and can be seen as a doorpost. According to him, it doesn't matter if it is from the small room to the big room or otherwise. Pitchei Shaarim 287:1:12 p. 215 agrees.</ref> To avoid the dispute one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49139&pgnum=122 Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:11] writes that this case of a big room into a small room is a big dispute and unresolved one should put up a mezuzah there without a bracha. Madanei Asher (Mezuzah 30:3 p. 88) agrees.</ref>
 #If the small room is an entrance into the big room (picture #2)<ref>Another picture of this case can be found [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49139&pgnum=430 in Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata p. 430].</ref> that entrance is obligated even if the doorpost is created by the ends of the walls.<ref>Chovat Hadar 7:7 writes that if there's a small room which opens into a big room if the big room is an entrance to the small room it is considered exempt. If the small room is an entrance to the big room it is obligated since the walls of the big room serve as the mezuzot for the entrance going into the big room. Chut Shani (Mezuzah p. 107) originally writes that this is exempt but then seems to agree that it is obligated to put up a mezuzah. Pitchei Shaarim 287:1:12 p. 215 agrees.</ref> Other argue that it is exempt from having a mezuzah.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 21:26. Avnei Yishpa 3:95:1 says that it is clearly exempt since there are no noticeable doorposts from inside the small room. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=49139&pgnum=122 Keviyut Mezuzah Khilchata 9:11] writes that this case of a small room into a big room is an unresolved question and should have a mezuzah without a bracha. Madanei Asher (Mezuzah 30:3 p. 88) agrees. Madenei Asher cites Maaseh Nissim ch. 24 who says that in the Ben Ish Chai's house he didn't have a mezuzah on a room that was just three walls and the fourth was completely open  (e.g. [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%95%D7%95%D7%90%D7%9F#/media/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:Liwan-He.png]), though he is puzzled about why he didn't put up a mezuzah in light of Ben Ish Chai (Ki Tavo n. 13).</ref>
 ===Screen Door Before the Front Door===
 #If there are two doorframes one in front of the other if they're within 1 amah of each other it is considered one doorway and one mezuzah on the outermost tefach suffices. However, if there is a space of more than 1 amah, they each require a separate mezuzah.<ref>Chovat Hadar 8:3:1 fnt. 3 writes that if there are two doorframes one in front of the other if they're within 1 amah of each other it is considered one doorway and one mezuzah on the outermost tefach suffices. However, if there is a space of more than 1 amah, they each require a separate mezuzah. Shaarei Hamezuzah 12:8 agrees. Hatorah Vehamitzvah (v. 2 ch. 137 pp. 611-612) distinguishes whether or not it is possible to use the area between the doorways in which case it is two doorframes, otherwise it is one long entrance and only one mezuzah is necessary.</ref>
@@ Line 193: / Line 242: @@
 #The mezuzah should be placed at the beginning of the upper third of the height of the doorway<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5, Rashi Menachot 33a s.v. “bitechila,” Rambam Hilchot Mezuzah 6:12, Tur 289, Prisha 289:6, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=65893&st=&pgnum=72 Bet Halevi (on Chumash, Menachot 33a s.v. amar Shmuel)], Pitchei Mezuzah 289:24, Chovat Hadar 8:2:4, Teshuvot Vihanhagot 2:539. Agur Bohalecha 12:2 follows the Rambam since there's nothing to lose by following the Rambam.
-* See Yabia Omer YD 2:21 where Chacham Ovadia Yosef quotes poskim who say that if it was placed higher than the beginning of the top third it should be moved without a beracha to there, but himself disagrees. Agur Bohalecha ch. 12 fnt. 4 writes that one does not need to change it.
-* Nekudat Hakesef 289 supports the minhag is just to put it within the top third, like Rashi and Tosfot, and not specifically at the beginning of the top third, like the Rambam.</ref> but it should be placed at least a [[Tefach]] from the top of the doorway. <ref>Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5 </ref> If it is not in the top third it isn't kosher. <ref>Beit Yosef 289, Shach 289:4, Taz 289:3. </ref> If it isn't a tefach from the top of the door it should be fixed.<ref>Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:8 quotes Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 251 who writes that according to Shulchan Aruch if the mezuzah is within a tefach of the ceiling it needs to be fixed. He says that it is in disagreement with the Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo n. 7 who writes that after the fact it is kosher.</ref>
+*See Yabia Omer YD 2:21 where Chacham Ovadia Yosef quotes poskim who say that if it was placed higher than the beginning of the top third it should be moved without a beracha to there, but himself disagrees. Agur Bohalecha ch. 12 fnt. 4 writes that one does not need to change it.
+*Nekudat Hakesef 289 supports the minhag is just to put it within the top third, like Rashi and Tosfot, and not specifically at the beginning of the top third, like the Rambam.</ref> but it should be placed at least a [[Tefach]] from the top of the doorway. <ref>Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:5 </ref> If it is not in the top third it isn't kosher. <ref>Beit Yosef 289, Shach 289:4, Taz 289:3. </ref> If it isn't a tefach from the top of the door it should be fixed.<ref>Mezuzah Vehilchoteha 11:8 quotes Halichot Olam v. 8 p. 251 who writes that according to Shulchan Aruch if the mezuzah is within a tefach of the ceiling it needs to be fixed. He says that it is in disagreement with the Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo n. 7 who writes that after the fact it is kosher.</ref>
+#If the floor or the lintel are uneven, how do you measure the height of the doorway to put it at 2/3 of the height?
+##If there is a step within the doorway, the height of the doorway is determined by the place where you put the mezuzah. If the mezuzah is placed in the outer tefach and the step doesn't begin at that point, the height doorway is determined without the step.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 12:16</ref>
+##If the floor on the left side is lower than the right side, if that area is at least 4 tefachim wide, the height is determined by the left side.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 12:17</ref>
+##If there is a window beginning in the middle of the doorway the height of the doorway is determined by where the mezuzah is placed. If the mezuzah is placed in the outer tefach and the window doesn't begin at that point, the height of the doorway is determined without the window. However, to avoid any dispute one should put it within the top third of the door if it is determined with and without the window. If the mezuzah is placed under the part with the window the height is determined with the window.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 12:11-13</ref>
 ====Very Tall Doorways====
 #If a doorway is very tall, according to Ashkenazim, one should put up the mezuzah at shoulder height.<ref>Yerushalmi Megillah 4:12, Tosfot Yoma 11b s.v. shein, Shach 289:4, Agur Bohalecha 12:7</ref> However, according to Sephardim, one should place it in the upper third in all circumstances.<ref>Yalkut Yosef YD 285:77</ref>
-#What is considered a very tall doorway for this halacha? Some say that as long as the mezuzah is visible within the normal eyesight it isn't considered too high. Accordingly, some estimate that if the door is less than 8.86 feet (106 inches) it should have the mezuzah at the height of 2/3, but if it is taller than it should have it at shoulder height.<Ref>Agur Bohalecha 12:8</ref> Some say that anytime that the beginning of 2/3 of the doorway is taller than one's shoulders, one should put it at one's shoulder height.<ref>Derech Hachaim 240:2</ref>
+#What is considered a very tall doorway for this halacha? Some say that as long as the mezuzah is visible within the normal eyesight it isn't considered too high. Accordingly, some estimate that if the door is less than 8.86 feet (106 inches) it should have the mezuzah at the height of 2/3, but if it is taller than it should have it at shoulder height.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 12:8</ref> Some say that anytime that the beginning of 2/3 of the doorway is taller than one's shoulders, one should put it at one's shoulder height.<ref>Derech Hachaim 240:2</ref>
 ====Arched Doorway====
 #If the doorway is arched there is a dispute whether the height of the doorposts includes the arched section where the doorway has a width of 4 tefachim. Therefore, if there is a small area which is arched and the doorway has a width of greater than 4 tefachim, it is possible to satisfy both opinions by placing it on the vertical section of the door but still within the top third of the doorway.<ref>Chovat Hadar (p. 59, n. 35)</ref> (For example, if a doorway is 90 inches and the top 12 inches are arched and still has a width of tefachim, one should place the mezuzah in the vertical section above 60 inches.<ref>According to the opinion that the arched section is included the mezuzah should be placed at 60 inches (2/3 of 90) and above and according to the opinion that the arched section isn't included the mezuzah should be placed at 52 inches (2/3 of 78) and above. To satisfy both opinions one can place it at 60 inches where the doorpost is still vertical. </ref>)
-#If the height of the arch is more than one third of the height of the entire doorway so that it isn't possible to satisfy both opinions the primary opinion is to place the mezuzah two thirds up the vertical part of the doorway excluding the arch.<ref>Chovat Hadar p. 60 n. 35 writes that the Taz 287:2 in such a case says to place the mezuzah in the arched part like Rashi. He explains that even Rambam could agree since anyway there is a vertical doorway that is 10 tefachim. Chovat Hadar quotes achronim who disagree and side with Rambam. Shulchan Aruch YD 287:2 holds like the Rambam. More details about [https://www.vaadmhk.org/mezuzah-archway/ how to affix a mezuzah on an archway].</ref>
+#If the height of the arch is more than one third of the height of the entire doorway so that it isn't possible to satisfy both opinions the primary opinion is to place the mezuzah two thirds up the vertical part of the doorway excluding the arch.<ref>Chovat Hadar p. 60 n. 35 writes that the Taz 287:2 in such a case says to place the mezuzah in the arched part like Rashi. He explains that even Rambam could agree since anyway there is a vertical doorway that is 10 tefachim. Chovat Hadar quotes achronim who disagree and side with Rambam. Shulchan Aruch YD 287:2 holds like the Rambam. Igrot Moshe OC 4:105:2 explains the Taz. More details about [https://www.vaadmhk.org/mezuzah-archway/ how to affix a mezuzah on an archway].</ref>
 ====Posts that Don't Reach the Ceiling====
@@ Line 219: / Line 275: @@
 </gallery></center>
-#The mezuzah is placed on the right side of the doorframe underneath the lintel within a tefach of the outside of the doorframe.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1</ref> The mezuzah must be placed so that it is visible or there is a symbol to indicate that there is a mezuzah.<ref>[https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14428&pgnum=53 Yad Haketana (ch. 3 fnt. 25)] explains that it is critical to the mezuzah that a person be able to see the mezuzah and thinking about Hashem. If it is inserted into the post there must be a symbol engraved on the outside of the post to indicate that there is a mezuzah there.</ref>
+#The mezuzah is placed on the right side of the doorframe underneath the lintel within a tefach of the outside of the doorframe.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1, Agur Bohalecha 14:1. Agur Bohalecha 14:9 writes that the entire mezuzah should be within the doorframe, though he cites the Shevet Halevi 3:151 who holds that it is sufficient if part is in the doorframe.</ref> The mezuzah must be placed so that it is visible or there is a symbol to indicate that there is a mezuzah.<ref>[https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14428&pgnum=53 Yad Haketana (ch. 3 fnt. 25)] explains that it is critical to the mezuzah that a person be able to see the mezuzah and thinking about Hashem. If it is inserted into the post there must be a symbol engraved on the outside of the post to indicate that there is a mezuzah there.</ref> If it can't be placed under the lintel it could be put even before the lintel within the doorframe.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 14:6</ref>
-#If there is no place to put the mezuzah within the doorframe (picture #1), according to Ashkenazim the mezuzah can be placed on the area in front of the doorframe within a tefach of the doorframe.<ref>According to the Shach's understanding the Rama 289:1 rules like the Tur that after the fact a mezuzah is kosher if it is behind the door outside of the doorframe. Agur Bohalecha siman 44-46 discusses at length whether having the mezuzah in front of the doorframe is the equivalent of behind the doorframe or better. Either way, in a case where it is impossible to put it in the doorframe it is best to put it in front of the doorframe.</ref> According to Sephardim it must be placed within the doorframe in front of the door or behind the door (picture #2).<ref>Shulchan Aruch, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70). Yalkut Yosef clarifies that having the mezuzah within the doorframe behind the door is also called in the doorway and kosher for Shulchan Aruch. Agur Bohalecha siman 43 agrees.</ref>
+#If it can't be placed on the doorpost, it should be drilled into the doorpost. If it can't be drilled into the doorpost see the next halacha.<ref>The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant based on Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:4</ref>
+#If there is no place to put the mezuzah within the doorframe (picture #1), according to Ashkenazim the mezuzah can be placed on the area in front of the doorframe, even not on the material of the actual frame,<ref>Agur Bohalecha 14:15</ref> within a tefach of the doorframe.<ref>According to the Shach's understanding the Rama 289:1 rules like the Tur that after the fact a mezuzah is kosher if it is behind the door outside of the doorframe. Agur Bohalecha siman 44-46 discusses at length whether having the mezuzah in front of the doorframe is the equivalent of behind the doorframe or better. Either way, in a case where it is impossible to put it in the doorframe it is best to put it in front of the doorframe. The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant agrees.</ref> According to Sephardim it must be placed within the doorframe in front of the door or behind the door (picture #2).<ref>Shulchan Aruch, Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70). Yalkut Yosef clarifies that having the mezuzah within the doorframe behind the door is also called in the doorway and kosher for Shulchan Aruch. Agur Bohalecha siman 43 agrees.</ref>
 #If a doorpost has a thicker post and a thinner post which is further towards the outside (picture #3), the mezuzah can be placed on the thinner part (gold mezuzah in picture).<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:6</ref> Some hold it should be placed specifically on the thicker part (blue mezuzah in picture).<ref>Chovat Hadar 8:3:1 fnt. 3 explaining the position of Rav Dovid Yungreis</ref>
+#If part of the doorpost is blocking more than a tefach of the entranceway, the mezuzah should be placed on the most extended part of the doorpost blocking the door.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:13 quoting Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Mezuzot Beytecha 285:20), Daat Kedoshim (285:1), Chovat Hadar 8:3:3, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Hatorah Vehamitzvah v. 2 p. 663)</ref>
 #The mezuzah should not be placed behind the door on the wall next to the doorframe. If it is, according to many poskim, the mezuzah is invalid.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1 holds that it is invalid. Shach 291:3 explains while the Tur and Rama hold it is valid after the fact, the Bet Yosef and Levush hold otherwise. He is strict for the Bet Yosef. Nishmat Adam 15:1 shows that most rishonim hold it is valid and in extenuating circumstances it is permitted to place it there without a bracha.</ref>
+#If the door swings out and there is no place in the doorpost to put the mezuzah in front of the door, the mezuzah should be placed behind the door within the doorframe.<ref>Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 "Makom Hamezuza" n. 70), Agur Bohalecha 14:2</ref>
 ===Outer Tefach===
-#The mezuzah should be placed on the outer [[tefach]] of the doorpost. <ref>Gemara Menachot 32b, Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Aruch Hashulchan 289:9. Taz 289:3 writes that the mezuzah is still kosher if the mezuzah isn't on the outer [[tefach]]. </ref>
+#The mezuzah should be placed on the outer [[tefach]] of the doorpost<ref>Gemara Menachot 32b, Tur 289, Shulchan Aruch 289:2, Levush 289:2, Chayei Adam 15:17, Aruch Hashulchan 289:9. Taz 289:3 writes that the mezuzah is still kosher if the mezuzah isn't within the outer [[tefach]]. </ref> both for the front door as well as any other door.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:5</ref>
-#If it can't be placed on the doorpost, it should be drilled into the doorpost. If it can not be drilled into the doorpost it should be attached to the wall within one [[tefach]] of the doorway. It should be on the outside wall as one enters the room and not the inside wall.<ref>The Complete Mezuzah Guide p. 74 by R' Elefant based on Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:4</ref>
+#After the fact it is kosher. If it isn't too difficult one should fix it.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:3. He suggests that as long as it isn't very difficult one should fix it. If it would cost more than a third of the cost of a basic mezuzah one is exempt from fixing this.</ref>
+#When placing the mezuzah on a slant, it is sufficient if part of the mezuzah is within a the outer tefach.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:4. He observes that this is how it was placed in Rav Elyashiv's house.</ref>
+#If the outer tefach is exposed to sun and rain and it might get ruined, it is better not to leave it in the outer tefach.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 13:8</ref>
 ===Fixed to the Doorpost===
 #A mezuzah should be established in a sturdy way so that it won't fall down. Also, it should not be hanging.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1. Bach understands the reason that the halacha insists that a mezuzah should be put up with nails is so that it doesn't fall down. One should establish it in a way that even in the unlikely scenario it won't fall down. The Chayei Adam 15:19 implies that the reason that it should be put up with two nails is because if one only uses one mezuzah on top, the mezuzah is like it is hanging and the mezuzah should not be hanging. </ref>
 #A mezuzah could be put up with nails, one on top and one on bottom, but not with just one nail.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:1, Chayei Adam 15:19</ref> If one put it up with only one nail but it was tightly fastened to the wall and doesn't move it is valid.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 10:4</ref>
-#A mezuzah could be put up with tape or glue.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 10:5-6. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472 writes that initially one should not put up a mezuzah with glue.</ref>
+#A mezuzah could be put up with tape or glue.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 10:5-6, Rav Nissim Karelitz in Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 123. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472 writes that initially one should not put up a mezuzah with glue.</ref>
 #Some say that a mezuzah could be put up with Velcro.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 10:18 quoting Rav Elyashiv</ref>
 #Some say that a mezuzah shouldn't be put up with a magnet.<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Daat Noteh p. 472</ref>
@@ Line 238: / Line 300: @@
 ===Straight or Diagonal===
 #While Sephardim place the mezuzah straight up<ref>Rashi Menachot 33a s.v. pesula, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 289:6, Ben Ish Chai Ki Tavo Year 2 Halacha 7. This was also the minhag of the Gr"a (Biurei Hagra 289:14 and Maaseh Rav n. 97). Also see Orchos Rabbeinu 1:page 378:27 who quotes that the Chazon Ish and Steipler put their mezuzot on a small slant because if it would be on a diagonal one doesn't fulfill the opinion of Rashi or Tosfot. Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Mezuzot Beytecha (Shaarei Tzion 289:22) also records this practice of the Chazon Ish. </ref>, Ashkenazim place it on a slant, with the top leaning towards the inside and the bottom towards the outside.<ref>Rabbenu Tam cited by Tosfot Menachot 33a s.v. ha, Rama 289:6, Levush 289:6, Chayei Adam 15:19, Minchas Elazar 1:36:1, Pitchei Mezuzahs 289:57, Chovat Hadar 9:footnote 20. Chovat Hadar 9:footnote 20 explains that the reason for this is that the opinion of Rashi says if you place it sideways it is not kosher, while Rabbenu Tam Menachot 33a s.v. ha holds that if it is straight up it is not kosher, so Ashkenazim try to fulfill the mitzvah according to both opinions. Rav Wosner (Kovetz Mbet Levi v. 2 p. 131) holds that it isn't put up on a 45 degree angle, rather it is put on a small slant. Orchot Rabbenu v. 3 p. 173 writes that the Chazon Ish put his mezuzah on a slight slant, with the top of the mezuzah 3 cm from the bottom of the mezuzah (approximately at a 75 degree angle).</ref>
@@ Line 270: / Line 333: @@
 ====Back Door to Backyard====
-#If there's a back door that opens to an enclosed backyard that is completely closed then the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going into the backyard.<ref>Maharil (responsa 94), Bet Yosef 289:3, Taz 289:3, Chelkat Yakov YD 161, Yabia Omer 6:23:6. The Chelkat Yakov writes that even though the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat ask on the Maharil since most poskim accept the Maharil we follow his opinion. His opinion is based on the concept that you walk from the house to the backyard and since the back door is an entrance to the backyard which has no other entrance then the mezuzah must be on the right entering the backyard. [http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/788640/rabbi-hershel-schachter/the-laws-of-mezuzah/ Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42)] agreed.
+#If there's a back door that opens to an enclosed backyard that is completely closed then the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going into the backyard.<ref>Maharil (responsa 94), Bet Yosef 289:3, Taz 289:3, Chelkat Yakov YD 161, Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6. The Chelkat Yakov writes that even though the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat ask on the Maharil since most poskim accept the Maharil we follow his opinion. His opinion is based on the concept that you walk from the house to the backyard and since the back door is an entrance to the backyard which has no other entrance then the mezuzah must be on the right entering the backyard. [http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/788640/rabbi-hershel-schachter/the-laws-of-mezuzah/ Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42)] agreed.
 *Chazon Ish YD 168:4-6 argues with the Maharil that the mezuzah should be on the right going into the house even when there is no gate out of the courtyard. He explains that since the courtyard is only obligated because it is open to the house, the mezuzah must be placed on the right side going into the house. Bet Meir 289 agrees for another reason. However, Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 defends the Maharil and explains that once the courtyard is obligated when it opens to houses, it is obligated in it of itself.</ref>
-#If the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a courtyard or street then the back door should have a mezuzah on the right side going into the house because the house is used more than the backyard.<ref>The Maharil (responsa 94) wrote that if the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a street then the direction of the mezuzah is determined by which way the door opens. Taz 289:3 quotes it. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 writes that even though the Maharil writes that when there are two doors to a backyard the mezuzah is determined by the way the door opens, the Levush holds that we would put up the mezuzah going into the house since it is used more than the backyard. Furthermore, the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat disagree with the Maharil altogether even when the backyard has no other exit. Therefore, the Chelkat Yakov concludes that since the house is used more than the courtyard that trumps the rule of the fact that the majority of the walking is from the house to the courtyard. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 and Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) agreed with the distinction of the Chelkat Yakov of accepting the first case of the Maharil but not when the courtyard is open to the street. [http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/788640/rabbi-hershel-schachter/the-laws-of-mezuzah/ Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42)] agreed.</ref>
+#If the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a courtyard or street then the back door should have a mezuzah on the right side going into the house because the house is used more than the backyard.<ref>The Maharil (responsa 94) wrote that if the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a street then the direction of the mezuzah is determined by which way the door opens. Taz 289:3 quotes it. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 writes that even though the Maharil writes that when there are two doors to a backyard the mezuzah is determined by the way the door opens, the Levush holds that we would put up the mezuzah going into the house since it is used more than the backyard. Furthermore, the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat disagree with the Maharil altogether even when the backyard has no other exit. Therefore, the Chelkat Yakov concludes that since the house is used more than the courtyard that trumps the rule of the fact that the majority of the walking is from the house to the courtyard. Igrot Moshe YD 1:181 and Yeshuot Malko (Mezuzah 6:1) agreed with the distinction of the Chelkat Yakov of accepting the Maharil where the courtyard is not open to the street, but not when the courtyard is open to the street. In that case the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the house. [http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/788640/rabbi-hershel-schachter/the-laws-of-mezuzah/ Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42)] and Rav Nissim Karelitz (Chut Shani Mezuzah p. 125) agree.</ref> Some hold that the mezuzah is placed on the right side in the direction of whichever way the majority of the time people enter.<ref>In summary, when the house opens to a backyard and there’s another entrance from the backyard to the street, according to Bet Meir (YD 289), Chazon Ish (YD 168:4-6), and Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igrot Moshe YD 1:181) the mezuzah is placed on the right side going into the house. However, according to Maharil 94 and Taz (YD 289:4) the mezuzah is placed in the direction of the heker tzir. According to this approach, some poskim hold that we only follow heker tzir if each side is used equally. However, if the majority of the time people walk one direction, the mezuzah is placed on the right side going in that direction. Keviyut Mezuzah Vhilchoteha (10:7 p. 138) and Lev Shome’a (2:13 p. 25) quote both of these opinions.</ref>
 ====Balcony or Porch====
@@ Line 279: / Line 341: @@
 #A roofed front porch that is open to the front yard or street and opens up to the house is obligated in a mezuzah. If it has 4 amot by 4 amot of space it is obligated in a mezuzah with a bracha. If the area it surrounds is 16 square amot, one should put up a mezuzah without a bracha.<ref>HaMezuzah VeHilchoteha 3:10</ref>
 #A roofed porch that has 4 amot by amot of space on the side or back of the house is obligated in a mezuzah with a bracha.<ref>Chovat Hadar ch. 1 p. 15, Or Letzion YD 1:14, Yabia Omer YD 4:23, Mezuzah Vhilchoteha 3:11. However, the Chazon Ish YD 168:6 held that a porch is exempt since we don't use porches today like they used to. They used to be used as one of the rooms of the house, but today they are used for temporary uses to eat a snack or take a short nap.</ref>
-#A balcony or deck that opens to a house and has no other entrance or exit should have a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the balcony.<ref>The Maharil quoted by the Taz 289:4 writes that if a house opens to enclosed courtyard and it doesn't have any other opening then certainly the doorway to the courtyard is considered an entrance to the courtyard since there's no other way in. However, the Bet Meir 289 argues with the Maharil and says that since the house is used more than the courtyard it is considered an entrance into the house. Chazon Ish YD 168:5 (cited by Yabia Omer) and Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) agree with the Bet Meir. Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, and Chelkat Yakov YD 162 agree with the Maharil against the Bet Meir. The Daat Kedoshim agrees with the Bet Meir unless it is an area less than 4x4 amot which might not be obligated at all in which case he follows the Maharil. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 cites the Masechet Mezuzah ch. 2 which amazingly has an explicit dispute between the Tana Kama and Rabbi Yosi about this exact case where a house opens to a courtyard that doesn't have another entrance. Rav Ovadia quotes dozens of sources whether we generally follow Rabbi Yosi over Tana Kama or not and additionally if it is possible to disregard this source since it is post-talmudic. In any event, he is convinced of the argument of the Bet Meir but still follows the opinion of the Maharil being that he was quoted by the Bet Yosef and is an earlier source.</ref>
+#A balcony or deck that opens to a house and has no other entrance or exit should have a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the balcony.<ref>The Maharil quoted by the Taz 289:4 writes that if a house opens to enclosed courtyard and it doesn't have any other opening then certainly the doorway to the courtyard is considered an entrance to the courtyard since there's no other way in. However, the Bet Meir 289 argues with the Maharil and says that since the house is used more than the courtyard it is considered an entrance into the house. Chazon Ish YD 168:5 (cited by Yabia Omer) and Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) agree with the Bet Meir. Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, and Chelkat Yakov YD 162 agree with the Maharil against the Bet Meir. The Daat Kedoshim agrees with the Bet Meir unless it is an area less than 4x4 amot which might not be obligated at all in which case he follows the Maharil. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 cites the Masechet Mezuzah ch. 2 which amazingly has an explicit dispute between the Tana Kama and Rabbi Yosi about this exact case where a house opens to a courtyard that doesn't have another entrance. Rav Ovadia quotes dozens of sources whether we generally follow Rabbi Yosi over Tana Kama or not and additionally if it is possible to disregard this source since it is post-talmudic. In any event, he is convinced of the argument of the Bet Meir but still follows the opinion of the Maharil being that he was quoted by the Bet Yosef and is an earlier source. Yalkut Yosef (Sova Semachot v. 1 p. 330 n. 26) writes that if the porch is enclosed completely the mezuzah is placed on the right side going out from the house, but if the porch has an entrance or gate from the yard which can be accessed from the street, the mezuzah is placed on the right side going in from the porch to the house.</ref>
 #Even if the balcony is less than 4x4 amot and isn't roofed, according to Sephardim, the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going from the house to the balcony.<ref>Yabia Omer 4:23:6, Or Letzion 1:14, Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha 3:11. Or Letzion 1:14 writes that the minhag is to put a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the balcony. He explains that if the balcony is less than 4x4 amot it isn't considered obligated in a mezuzah in it of itself. Additionally, if it doesn't have a roof it isn't obligated in it of itself. However, since the balcony opens to the house which is obligated we can treat the balcony like a foyer (bet shaar) before the house which is obligated even if it is less than 4x4. However, the dispute is why the foyer is obligated. According to the Tosfot and Rosh it is only obligated rabbinically but it is obligated as a structure that is useful for its designated purpose. However, according to the Rambam, it is obligated biblically because it opens to a house. According to the Rambam the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going in from the balcony since the balcony is only obligated as it serves the house. However, according to the Tosfot and Rosh the mezuzah should be placed on the right side going from the house to the balcony as it is obligated in it of itself. Yet, the minhag is just to put a mezuzah on the right side going from the house to the balcony like the Rosh since perhaps we follow the Rosh and even if we don't we follow the opinion of the Chikrei Lev who holds that the balcony door can't be considered an entrance for the house since you can only use it if you first exited through it. He quotes that this was also the opinion of the Rosh Yeshiva of Porat Yosef, Rav Ezra Attiyah. </ref> Ashkenazim hold that if the balcony is less than the equivalent of 16 square amot the mezuzah should be put on the right side going from the balcony into the house. But if it is more than the equivalent of 16 square amot the mezuzah is placed on the right side going from the house out to the balcony.<ref>Hamezuzah Vehilchoteha ch. 3 fnt. 19 cites the Chiko Mamtakim p. 359 who quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach has holding that a balcony that is 4x4 amot square or the equivalent should have the mezuzah from the house to the balcony like the Maharil, but if the balcony is smaller than that it should have a mezuzah on the right side from the balcony to the house like the Bet Meir, Chazon Ish, and Rabbi Akiva Eiger. Inside Stam p. 212 quotes that Rav Moshe Feinstein, Or Letzion 1:14, and Minchat Yitzchak 1:8-9 that the mezuzah should be put on the right side going out. He also quotes that Rav Elyashiv, Rav Wosner, and Rav Nissim Karelitz held that the mezuzah should be put on the left side going out.</ref>
@@ Line 307: / Line 369: @@
 #One should have one's [[Mezuzot]] checked by a sofer twice in seven years, or once in every three and a half years, and it is a pious practice to check them every year during [[Elul]].<ref>Yoma 11a, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:25, Yalkut Yosef YD 285:92. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=9357&st=&pgnum=120 Kol Yakov 291:3] quotes a practice to check one's mezuzot when there is a mice infestation.</ref>
-# Some poskim hold that it isn't necessary to get one's mezuzot checked if they are completely sealed.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 39:4 cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Elyashiv as holding that it isn't necessary to check one's mezuzot if they're sealed. Agur Bohalecha himself disagrees and holds that it is necessary to check even if it is completely sealed since the classic poskim didn't make such a distinction.</ref>
+#Some poskim hold that it isn't necessary to get one's mezuzot checked if they are completely sealed.<ref>Agur Bohalecha 39:4 cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Elyashiv as holding that it isn't necessary to check one's mezuzot if they're sealed. Agur Bohalecha himself disagrees and holds that it is necessary to check even if it is completely sealed since the classic poskim didn't make such a distinction.</ref>
 #If one's mezuzah became wet one should check it immediately.<ref>Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comment on Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:22)</ref>
 #The mezuzah's of a publicly owned building only need to be checked twice in fifty years.<ref>Yoma 11a, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:1</ref>
@@ Line 323: / Line 385: @@
 ==Proper Behavior When Passing a Mezuzah==
 #When one leaves one's house should kiss the mezuzah to remind one of the unity of Hashem, as discussed below. There are different opinions as to how exactly one should behave when passing a mezuzah.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:24 writes that one should kiss the mezuzah in order to remind oneself of Hashem's unity. [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=34744&st=&pgnum=4&hilite= Kav HaYashar (ch. 1)] writes that touching the mezuzah and offering a short prayer when one leaves one's house affords oneself protection from spiritual dangers. Orchos Rabbeinu (v. 3, p. 164) writes that the Chazon Ish looked at the mezuzah without kissing it when he passed by one. </ref>
 #When one enters or exits a room one should think about the unity of Hashem, our love for Hashem, and be awakened from the slumber of the vanities of the world. One should think that there's nothing that last forever except knowledge of Hashem, and immediately this will help a person follow the proper path. <ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 11:23</ref>
@@ Line 329: / Line 392: @@
 ==Non-Jew==
-#A Jew who owns a building in partnership with a non-Jew according to Ashkenazim is exempt from mezuzah<ref>Rama YD 286:1</ref>, but according to Sephardim is obligated to put up a mezuzah.<ref>Birkei Yosef 286:1, Otzrot Hahalacha Mezuzah 8:6</ref>
+#A Jew who owns a building in partnership with a non-Jew according to Ashkenazim is exempt from mezuzah<ref>Rama YD 286:1</ref>, but according to Sephardim is obligated to put up a mezuzah<ref>Birkei Yosef 286:1, Yalkut Yosef 285:65, Otzrot Hahalacha Mezuzah 8:6</ref> without a bracha.<ref>Yalkut Yosef 285:65</ref>
 #A person shouldn't give a mezuzah to a non-Jew unless there is a concern that the non-Jew will be hate him for it.<ref>Rama Y.D. 291:2. Igrot Moshe 1:184 explains that the Rama means that if there is a concern of a non-Jew hating a Jew, even though there isn't any concern of mortal danger it is permitted to give him a mezuzah. However, just to avoid a loss of money, Rav Moshe is not lenient unless it is an extremely significant loss. Even though the Yerushalmi Peah implies it is permitted to give a non-Jew a mezuzah, the Maharil (cited by Darkei Moshe 291) and Rama are strict. Beer Sheva 36 explains how the Maharil would explain the Yerushalmi. See further the Yavetz 2:121-122. Agur Bohaleha 4:11 argues with Rav Moshe that it is forbidden even for a significant loss</ref>
@@ Line 345: / Line 408: @@
 ==Moving==
 #If a person is moving and another Jew is moving in one must leave them your mezuzot.<ref>Bava Metsia 101b-102a, Rambam Tefillin 5:11, Shulchan Aruch YD 291:2.</ref> The reasoning is that you shouldn't remove mezuzot is because they are used to serve to protect the house from harm and taking them indicates that you don't care about those moving in<ref>Tosfot Shabbat 22a s.v. rav. The Rishon Letzion 291:1 explains that whenever one leaves a house that was obligated in mezuzah, the demons move in and will damage the next tenant. Even though the next tenant will put up his own mezuzah, that doesn't remove the demons sufficiently. However, before anyone ever lived in the house, the demons don't enter.</ref> or that mezuzot represent that the divine presence resides in the home and that isn't something one should remove.<ref>Ritva Bava Metsia 102a s.v. lo</ref>
 #The one moving can charge the next tenant to pay for the mezuzot<ref>Rama Y.D. 291:2. Birkei Yosef 291:4 notes that the Rabbenu Manoach, the source for the Rama, wrote that it is good for the new tenant to pay for the mezuzot but they don't have to. However, the language of the Rama 291:2 is that it is required. He notes, though, that the Ritva and Rabbenu Yonatan (Shita Mikubeset b"m 102a) who write the next tenant owes the money and in fact the Ritva meyuchasot holds that if the new tenant doesn't want to pay the previous tenant can take his mezuzot with him.</ref>, but even if he isn't willing to pay one still shouldn't take down the mezuzot.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan YD 291:3, Igrot Moshe YD 4:44, Igrot Vreishmot Hakehilat Yakov v. 5 p. 287. Agur Bohalecha is lenient. Ritva meyuchasot b"m 102a writes that if the new tenant doesn't want to pay he can take the mezuzot with him, but according to Rabbenu Manoach the new tenant doesn't actually have to pay but it is good for him to pay.</ref>
 #It is permitted to switch more mehudar mezuzot with less kosher mezuzot. It is better to have them checked before switching them.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=37191&st=&pgnum=32 Daat Kedoshim 291:2]. Yabia Omer YD 3:18 and Hamezuzah VeHilchata p. 127 hold like the Daat Kedoshim. See Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 who doesn’t offer this solution. Teshuvot Vehanahgot 1:549 isn't sure if it is permitted. He quotes from the Chazon Ish who advised not switching more mehudar mezuzot for less mehudar mezuzot when leaving a house. He is lenient, however, to switch the mezuzot after leaving and the new tenant moved in. Then one can offer the tenant to either pay for the more mehudar mezuzot or to just pay for the less mehudar mezuzot and switch the mezuzot.</ref>
 #There is an opinion that you may take down the mezuzot if you're going to put them up in another house, however, that opinion isn't accepted as the halacha.<ref>Chida in Birkei Yosef YD 291:2 writes that according to one answer of Tosfot one can take the mezuzot with you if you'll put it up right away, but according to the Ritva you can't. He says that we hold that one shouldn't take them down even if you'll put them up in another house right away, yet in an extenuating circumstance where you can't find mezuzot to buy for the new house you can take down the mezuzot. Aruch Hashulchan 291:3 cites this but is hesitant about it.</ref>
-#There is what to rely upon to take down the mezuzah if it is going to be painted before the next tenant moves in so that they don’t get ruined.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 quoting Rav Henkin. See Agur Bohalecha 40:12 who seems to disagree and establishes says that after painting one has to put up the mezuzot again/</ref>
+#There is what to rely upon to take down the mezuzah if it is going to be painted before the next tenant moves in so that they don’t get ruined.<ref>Igrot Moshe YD 4:44 quoting Rav Henkin. See Agur Bohalecha 40:12 who seems to disagree and establishes says that after painting one has to put up the mezuzot again.</ref>
 #If the house is going to be closed up and no one is going to move in afterwards for the foreseeable future one can take one's mezuzot.<ref>Pri Megadim M"Z 15:2</ref>
+#If someone has a door which he used to use and decides never to use that door again, some hold it is exempt,<ref>Agur Bohalecha 24:14</ref> while most hold it is obligated.<ref>Aruch Hashulchan 286:38, Igrot Moshe YD 1:177</ref> If that room has another door and one decides not to use one of the doors ever again, some of the poskim who are strict in the first case agree here that it is exempt.<ref>Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 1:177</ref>
 ==Links==

Anonymous

Search