Anonymous

Mezuzah: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
No change in size ,  2 December 2020
m
Text replacement - " Biblical" to " biblical"
m (Text replacement - " Biblical" to " biblical")
Line 110: Line 110:


#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.</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 to the house.<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.</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 to the house.<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.</ref>


===Walk-in Closet===
===Walk-in Closet===
Anonymous user