Mezuzah: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Back Door to Backyard
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 195: | Line 195: | ||
#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> | #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=== | ===Ends of Walls Serving as Doorposts=== | ||
<center><gallery> | <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 | 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 | No_ends_of_wall.png|Picture #2: Both end of walls serves as walls for other rooms | ||
| Line 258: | Line 258: | ||
#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 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==== | ====Posts that Don't Reach the Ceiling==== | ||
| Line 333: | Line 333: | ||
====Back Door to Backyard==== | ====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 | #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> | *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)] | #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. 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==== | ====Balcony or Porch==== | ||
| Line 342: | 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 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 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> | #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 393: | Line 392: | ||
==Non-Jew== | ==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 | #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> | #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> | ||
