1) TOSFOS DH Kasvah Al Shnei Dapin Pesulah
úåñôåú ã"ä ëúáä òì ùðé ãôéï ôñåìä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that this is on two parchments.)
ôé' á÷åðèøñ ùäðéç âåéì çì÷ áéï ãó ìãó
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): He placed empty margin between one Daf and another.
åìôéøåùå éù ìééùá áãåç÷ äðéçå áùðé ñéôéï
(b) Consequence: According to this, it is difficult to resolve the case of putting it in two doorposts.
àìà òì á' ãôéï áùúé çúéëåú ÷àîø ëé ääéà ãô''á ãñåèä (ãó éç.) ãàîø áùðé ãôéï ôñåìä ñôø àçã àîø øçîðà åìà ùðéí
(c) Explanation #2: Rather, in two Dapim is on two pieces [of parchment], like in Sotah (18a) it says "in two Dapim it is Pasul - the Torah said one Sefer, and not two";
åäééðå áùúé çúéëåú ãåîéà ãâè áô''á ãâéèéï (ãó ë:) ãáòé øáà áéï ùéèä ìùéèä áéï úéáä ìúéáä îäå
1. This means in two pieces, similar to a Get, in Gitin (20b). Rava asked [if the husband gave a Get, but stipulated that he keeps the margin] between one line and another, or between one word and another, what is the law?
åôøéê úéôå÷ ìé ãñôø àçã àîø øçîðà åìà ùðéí åâ' ñôøéí åîùðé ìà öøéëà ãîòåøä
2. [The Gemara] asks that I should already know this because the Torah said one Sefer, and not two or three Seforim! It answers that the case is, it is Me'urah (letters go from one line to another or from one word to another).
åòì ëøçéê ìà îéôñéì ìâè áùðé ãôéï áçúéëä àçú ãäà àîøéðï áôø÷ áúøà ãâéèéï (ãó ôæ:) ùééø î÷öú äâè åëúáå áãó äùðé ëùø åìà àîøéðï ãäåé ëùðé ñôøéí åôñåì
(d) Proof: You are forced to say that a Get is not disqualified in two columns in one piece, for we say in Gitin (87b) that if he left over part of the Get and wrote it in a second column, it is Kosher. We do not say that it is like two Seforim, and it is Pasul!
åéù ìãçåú îùåí ãâáé âè ëúåá ñôø àáì áñåèä ëúåá áñôø ãîùîò áñôø äîáåøø åîéåçã ìîòåèé á' ãôéï àôéìå áçúéëä àçú
(e) Rejection: About a Get it says "Sefer", but about Sotah it says "ba'Sefer", which connotes the one that is clarified and special, to exclude two columns, even in one piece;
åáéøåùìîé îùîò ãáùðé òåøåú ôñåìä ãôøéê åìîä ìà úðéðï ùäñôøéí ðëúáéï áùðé òåøåú åäúôéìéï åîæåæåú àéï ðëúáéï àìà áòåø à'. î''ø
1. The Yerushalmi connotes that in two parchments it is Pasul, for it asks "why was it not taught that Seforim are written in two hides, and Tefilin and Mezuzos are written only on one hide?" This is from my Rebbi.
2) TOSFOS DH Tali Dasha b'Reisha
úåñôåú ã"ä úìé ãùà áøéùà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos concludes that this was to know where to put the Mezuzah.)
ôé' á÷åðèøñ äòîéã äñéôéï úçéìä ùàí ìà ëï ä''ì úòùä åìà îï äòùåé
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): He erected the doorposts first, for if not, it is [Pasul due to] Ta'aseh v'Lo Min ha'Asuy (one must put a Mezuzah on the doorpost. It does not suffice to affix a Mezuzah and put a doorpost there.)
å÷ùä ãäåä ìéä ìîéîø ÷áò ñéôé áøéùà
(b) Question #1: [If so,] it should have said "he fixes the doorposts first"!
åòåã ì÷îï äåä ìéä ìàéúðåéé âáé ìà ùðå àìà ùäòîéã åìáñåó çúê ëå'
(c) Question #2: Below (33b), it should have stipulated regarding "we learned [that in a doorframe made of reeds, one may cut a tube-shaped opening and insert the Mezuzah] only if he erected the doorposts, and then cut..."!
åðøàä ìôøù ãäàé áéúà ãáðä øéù âìåúà äééðå ëâåï ôéúçà áéï âáøé ìáéï ðùé ãñìé÷ îéðä åîùåí äéëø öéø ÷àîø ìéä úìé ãùà áøéùà. î''ø
(d) Explanation #2: This house that the Reish Galusa built, it was like an opening between [two halves of a house. One side was for] men, and [one side for] women, like was just discussed. Due to the indication of the hinge (whichever side it is on is considered the primary house), first he erected the door (to know on which side to put the Mezuzah). This is from my Rebbi.
3) TOSFOS DH Ha d'Avida k'Sichsa Ha d'Avida k'Istavira
úåñôåú ã"ä äà ãòáéãà ëñéëúà äà ãòáéãà ëàéñúåéøà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses whether lying down or vertical is the Kosher way.)
ôé' á÷åðèøñ ãñéëúà ôñåìä ùúçåáä áñó ëðâø ùúåçáéí áëåúì àéñúåéøà î÷åí çéáåø äùå÷ åäøâì åîòåîã äåà ëùéøä
(a) Explanation #1 (Rashi): Like a bolt is Pasul. It is inserted in the doorpost like a bolt. Istavira is the place where the lower leg and foot join. It is vertical, and it is Kosher.
åäùúà áéï îòåîã áéï îåùëá úøååééäå îé÷øééï ëîéï ðâø
(b) Consequence: (Rav Yehudah taught that like a bolt is Pasul. We asked that Mezuzos in Rebbi's house were like bolts, and answered that one of these refers to like Istavira.) Now, whether it is standing or lying, both are called like a bolt. (Therefore, we must rely on reasoning, i.e. which way is honorable.)
å÷ùéà ìø''ú ãîòåîã ìàå ãøê ëáåã äåà å÷áåøú çîåø ÷øé ìéä áäîåëø ôéøåú (á''á ãó ÷à.)
(c) Question #1 (R. Tam): Standing is not honorable. It is called [the way of] burial of a donkey in Bava Basra (101a)!
åñôø úåøä åìåçåú ùáàøåï îåùëá åìà îòåîã ëãîùîò áô''÷ ãááà áúøà (ãó éã.) àò''ô ùäéå éëåìéï ìäðéçå îòåîã ãàøåï øåîå ëøçáå
1. The Sefer Torah and Luchos in the Aron were lying and not standing, like it connotes in Bava Basra (14a), even though they could have placed it stolen, for the Aron's height equaled its width.
åòåã àîøéðï áñîåê äòîéã ìä îìáï ùì ÷ðéí çåúê ùôåôøú åîðéçä
(d) Question #2: We say below (33b) that if he erected a doorframe of reeds, he cuts a tube-shaped opening and places [the Mezuzah in it].
åàé îòåîã éðéçðä áàçú îï ä÷ðéí ùì îìáï
1. If it is placed standing, he should place it in one of the reeds of the doorframe!
åò''ë ôø''ú ëé ñéëúà îòåîã ëéúéãåú äîùëï äðåòöåú áàøõ ôñåìä ëàéñúåéøà äðúåï áùå÷ ìøçáä áìò''æ ÷áéìé''à ëùøä
(e) Explanation #2 (R. Tam): Like a bolt, i.e. standing, like pegs of the Mishkan inserted in the ground, it is Pasul. Like Istavira (ankle), which is in the width of the thigh, it is Kosher.
åîéäå áôø÷ îöåú çìéöä (éáîåú ãó ÷â.) ãàîøéðï äàé àéñúåéøà òã àøòà ðçéú òì ëøçéï äééðå òöí äéåøã îï äùå÷ òã äøâì åìà ÷áéìéà
(f) Observation: However, in Yevamos (103a) we say that Istavira descends to the ground. You are forced to say that it is the bone that descends from the lower leg to the foot (the shin), and not the ankle!
1. Note: Tosfos can hold like R. Tam l'Halachah, but explain oppositely. Like a bolt, i.e. horizontal, it is Kosher. Like Istavira (the shin), which is vertical, it is Pasul.
åîéäå äà ãàîø áô''á ãîâéìä éøåùìîé öøéê ùéäà ùîò ùìä øåàä àú äôúç àéï øàéä ìôé' ä÷åðèøñ
(g) Implied suggestion: It says in the Yerushalmi in Megilah that Shma [of the Mezuzah] must face the opening. This is like Rashi (the Mezuzah is vertical. Shma could face the opening or the doorpost. R. Tam holds that it is horizontal. Shma faces up or down!)
ãìôéøåù ø''ú éù ìééùá ëâåï ãùéèä àçøåðä ìöã øùåú äøáéí äéà (åøàùåðä) [ö"ì àçã - ùéèä î÷åáöú] ìöã ôðéí åäåôê ùîò ìöã àåéø äôúç
(h) Rebuttal: We can resolve this also according to R. Tam. The case is, the bottom line faces Reshus ha'Rabim, and "Echad" faces inside [the opening]. He turns Shma to face the airspace of the opening.
åëï ôøùéåú ùì úôéìéï ðîé äéä àåø''ú ùîðéç îåùëá åìà îòåîã
(i) Pesak: Also Parshiyos of Tefilin, R. Tam used to say that one places them [in the boxes] lying down, and not standing.
åîéäå äà ãàîøéðï ì÷îï (ãó ìã:) ëúá òì òåø àçú åäðéç áàøáò áúéí éöà
(j) Implied support: It says below (34b) that if he wrote [all four Parshiyos] on one hide and put it in four boxes [of head Tefilin], he was Yotzei. (Granted, if they are lying, a small fold between Parshiyos divides between one Parshah and the next.)
ìà ÷ùéà îéãé ãîòåîã ðîé éù ìééùá
(k) Rebuttal: This is not difficult at all [for Rashi]. Also if they are vertical, we can resolve this. (Below (34b), Rashi explains that he cuts from the top but leaves them connected below, like four fingers. Each Parshah stands in one box.)
å÷ùä ìôé' ø''ú îäà ãúðéà áúåñôúà ãëìéí ùôåôøú ùçúëä åðúï áä àú äîæåæä åàç''ë ðúðä áëåúì àò''ô ùìà ëãøê ÷áìúä èîàä
(l) Question (against R. Tam): A Tosefta in Kelim (Bava Metzi'a 7:3) teaches that if a tube was cut and one put a Mezuzah in it, and afterwards he put it in the wall, even though this is not the way it receives (holds things), it is Tamei [like a Kli Etz with a receptacle];
ðúðä áëåúì åàç''ë ÷áò áä äîæåæä ëãøê ÷áìúä èîàä ùìà ëãøê ÷áìúä èäåøä
1. If he put [the tube] in the wall and afterwards affixed the Mezuzah in it, if it is the way it receives, it is Tamei. If it is not the way it receives, it is Tahor.
îùîò ùäùôåôøú ñúåîä îöã à' åìôé' ø''ú ãîôøù ëîéï ðâø ôñåìä îòåîã àáì îéåùá ëùéøä îàé ëãøê ÷áìúä
2. Inference: The tube is sealed on one side. According to R. Tam, who says that like a bolt is Pasul vertical, but horizontal is Kosher, what is "the way it receives"? (Since it must be horizontal, in any case the tube properly holds it! If it is vertical, if the opening faces down, this is not the way it receives. Even so, since the Mezuzah is rolled up and presses against the tube, it does not fall out.)
åéù ìééùá ùäùôåôøú ôúåçä ìàåøëä (îùðé) [ö"ì åîùðé - öàï ÷ãùéí] øàùéä ñúåîä åùìà ëãøê ÷áìúä äééðå ãëôàä òì ôéä
(m) Answer: The tube is open along its length, and sealed on both ends. "Not the way it receives" is if he turned it over on its opening (the opening faces down).
åö''ò äàé ã÷àîø ëåìäå îæåæúà ãáé øáé ëîéï ðâø òáéãï îùîò àáì ùàø îæåæúà ãòìîà ìà òáéãà ëîéï ðâø
(n) Question: It says "all Mezuzos of Rebbi's house are like a bolt." This implies that other Mezuzos are not like a bolt!
äìëê ðøàä áéï ìôé' ä÷åðèøñ áéï ìôé' ø''ú ãëàéñúåéøà ãëùéøä äééðå áàìëñåï ìà ùåëá åìà æ÷åó
(o) Answer #1: Both according to Rashi and R. Tam, k'Istavira is Kosher, i.e. on a diagonal. It is not lying and not vertical.
àé ðîé ëîéï ðåï îçöä ùåëá åîçöä æ÷åó åëï ôé' á÷åðèøñ áìùåï àçø
(p) Answer #2: It is like a Nun - it is half lying and half vertical. Rashi explained like this in his second Perush.
àáì ùàø îæåæúà ãòìîà ìàå äëé òáéãï àìà ìôø''ú äåééï îéåùá åìôé' ä÷åðèøñ îòåîã
(q) Distinction: Other Mezuzos were not like this. Rather, according to R. Tam they were lying, and according to Rashi they were vertical.
åàåîø ø''ú öà åìîã ãäà îòùä áëì éåí ëùñôø úåøä òåîã òì äáéîä äëì òåîãéï åëùùìéç öéáåø îåùéáå äëì éåùáéï. î''ø
(r) Support (R. Tam, for himself): We can learn from what people do every day. When the Sefer Torah is upright on the Bimah, everyone stands, and when the Shali'ach Tzibur lies it down on the table, everyone sits (for this is its normal position). This is from my Rebbi.
4) TOSFOS DH v'Ha ha'Hu Pischa d'Havah Bei Rav Huna v'Havya Lei Mezuzah
úåñôåú ã"ä åäà ääåà ôéúçà ãäåä áé øá äåðà åäåéà ìéä îæåæä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses whether a Beis ha'Keneses or Beis Midrash needs a Mezuzah.)
îúåê äìùåï îùîò ãåå÷à ôúç äáéú ùäéä éåöà îîðå ìáéú äîãøù àáì ôúç áéú äîãøù òöîå ìà áòé îæåæä
(a) Inference: The words connote that only Pesach ha'Bayis, from which he went out to the Beis Midrash [had a Mezuzah], but the Pesach of the Beis Midrash itself does not need a Mezuzah.
åáô' ÷îà ãéåîà (ãó éà:) àéëà ôìåâúà ãúðéà éëåì éäå áúé ëðñéåú åáúé îãøùåú îèîàéï áðâòéí ú''ì åáà àùø ìå äáéú îé ùîéåçã ìå áéú
(b) Remark: In Yoma (11b) there is an argument about this. A Beraisa teaches 'one might have thought that Batei Kenesiyos and Batei Midrash receive Tum'as Nega'im. It says "u'Va Asher Lo ha'Bayis" - the house is all his';
åîñé÷ äà øáé îàéø äà øáðï ãôìéâé ìòðéï îæåæä ìáéú äëðñú ùàéï áä ãéøä ìçæï äëðñú
1. It concludes "this is R. Meir, and this is Rabanan", who argue about a Mezuzah for a Beis ha'Keneses which has no residence for the Gabai;
åáîñëú áøëåú (ãó îæ.) ðîé îùîò ãäìëä ëîàï ãôèø âáé àáéé åøáéï ãäåå àæìé áàåøçà åëé îèå ìáé ëðéùúà àîø ìéä øáéï ìàáéé ìéòåì îø àîø ìéä òã äùúà ìàå îø àðà
(c) Support (of Inference): Also in Brachos (47a) it connotes that the Halachah follows the one who exempts, regarding Abaye and Ravin who were going on the road. When they came to a Beis ha'Keneses, Ravin said to Abaye "may the master enter!" Abaye said to him "until now I was not a master (you did not honor me)?!"
à''ì äëé àîø øáé éåçðï àéï îëáãéï àìà áôúç ùéù áå îæåæä éù áå îæåæä ñ''ã àìà áôúç äøàåé ìîæåæä
1. Citation (47a) Ravin replied that R. Yochanan said that we honor only at an opening with a Mezuzah. Do you really think that [he truly meant that] it has a Mezuzah?! Rather, [he meant] an opening proper for a Mezuzah.
îùîò ãôúç áéú äëðñú ôèåø
2. Inference: The Pesach of a Beis ha'Keneses is exempt.
åáéøåùìîé áôø÷ ùðé ãîâéìä îùîò ãáé îãøùà ãøáé çðéðà äéä áå îæåæä åîåðçú ëðâã ëúéôåúéå ùì àãí î''ø:
(d) Remark: In the Yerushalmi in Megilah it connotes that R. Chanina's Beis Midrash had a Mezuzah, and it was placed [at a height] even with a person's shoulder. This is from my Rebbi.
33b----------------------------------------33b
5) TOSFOS DH u'Mai Techilas Shelish ha'Elyon deka'Amar Leharchikah
úåñôåú ã"ä åîàé úçéìú ùìéù äòìéåï ã÷àîø ìäøçé÷ä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that it must be in the top third.)
ùéåúø ìà éøçé÷ðä îï äú÷øä
(a) Explanation: He does not distance it more [than a third] from the ceiling.
åáéøåùìîé îùîò áô''á ãîâéìä ãëùäôúç âáåä äøáä îðéçä ëðâã ëúôéå åçåì÷ òì äù''ñ ùìðå. î''ø
(b) Observation: The Yerushalmi in Megilah connotes that when the opening is tall, he places it even with his shoulder. It argues with the Bavli. This is from my Rebbi.
6) TOSFOS DH d'Leis Lehu Tikrah
úåñôåú ã"ä ãìéú ìäå ú÷øä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that the doorposts are not even.)
ôéøåù î÷åí ùäôúç ùå÷ó ùí îìîòìä àéðå ùåä àìà äàáðéí îï äëéôä àáï ðëðñú åàáï éåöàú
(a) Explanation #1: The place where the door bangs above (lest it leave the doorway) is not even. Rather, the rocks of the arch, a rock is recessed and a rock juts out.
åëòðéï æä ãìéú ìéä ùé÷ôé ùàéï ùí îæåæåú àìà äàáðéí áåìèåú ëâåï ùéðé çåîä
(b) Support #1: Similar to this is "it has no Shikfi" - there are no [smooth] doorposts, rather, the rocks jut out like teeth of a wall.
åëòéï æä [àéúà] áô''÷ ãòéøåáéï (ãó éà.) âáé ñåëä
(c) Support #2: It says like this in Eruvin (11a) regarding a Sukah.
åîä ùôé' ä÷åðè' ìùåï àçø ãìéú ìéä úé÷øä ùàéï äáéú î÷åøä
(d) Explanation #2 (Rashi): It has no ceiling. The house is not covered.
÷ùéà îé âøò îùòøé çöéøåú ãçééáéï áîæåæä ëãàîø ôø÷ ÷îà ãéåîà (ãó éà.). î''ø
(e) Question: Is this worse than gates of Chatzeros, which are obligated in a Mezuzah, like it says in Yoma (11a)? This is from my Rebbi.
7) TOSFOS DH Isplidi d'Vei Mar
úåñôåú ã"ä àéñôìéãé ãáé îø
(SUMMARY: Tosfos brings three opinions of what this is.)
ñåâéà ãùîòúéï îåëçà ãäééðå àëñãøà
(a) Explanation #1: The Sugya proves that this is an Achsadra.
åìà ëîå ùôé' á÷åðè' áô''÷ ãááà áúøà (ãó æ.) ãäééðå èø÷ìéï ðàä
(b) Explanation #2: This is unlike Rashi explained in Bava Basra (7a) that it is a nice hall.
åáòøåê ôéøù ãäééðå îòøä ëãîúøâîéðï (úäìéí ðâ) ááøçå îôðé ùàåì áîòøä áàéñôìéãà
(c) Explanation #3: The Aruch explained that it is a cave, like the Targum of "b'Varchu Mipnei Sha'ul bi'M'arah" is b'Isplida.
åñåâéà ãááà áúøà ÷ùéà ìôé' äòøåê ãîùîò äúí ùéù áàéñôìéãà ëùåøé åìéáðé åáîòøä ìéëà ëùåøé åìéáðé
(d) Question #1: the Sugya in Bava Basra (7a) is difficult for the Aruch's Perush. It connotes there that the Isplida has beams and bricks, and a cave does not have beams and bricks!
åòåã ã÷àîøéðï äúí îòé÷øà àéñôìéãà åäùúà àéðãøåðà ôéøåù ìôé ùáðä àùéúà àôåîà ãàéñôìéãà
(e) Question #2: We say there that initially it was Isplida, and now it is Indaruna (a dark room). I.e. because he built a wall on the mouth of the opening of the Isplida;
åàé àéñôìéãà äééðå îòøä àéï ìê çãø àôì îîòøä. î''ø
1. If Isplida is a cave, there is no darker room than a cave!
8) TOSFOS DH Achsadra u'Mirpeses Chayavin bi'Mezuzah
úåñôåú ã"ä àëñãøä åîøôñú çééáéï áîæåæä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves a contradiction about a Beis Sha'ar.)
åëï îùîò áô''÷ ãñåëä (ãó ç:) ãáéú ùòø çééá áîæåæä âáé ùúé ñåëåú ùì éåöøéí æå ìôðéí îæå ãôøéê åúéäåé çéöåðä áéú ùòø ìôðéîéú åúúçééá áîæåæä
(a) Remark: Also in Sukah (8b) it connotes that a Beis Sha'ar is obligated to have a Mezuzah regarding two Sukos of potters, one inside the other. It asks that the outer should be a Beis Sha'ar for the inner, and should be obligated to have a Mezuzah.
åúéîä ãáô''÷ ãéåîà (ãó éà.) úðéà éëåì ùàðé îøáä àó áéú ùòø àëñãøä åîøôñú úìîåã ìåîø áéú ëå'
(b) Question: In Yoma (11a), a Beraisa teaches 'perhaps I include even a Beis Sha'ar, Achsadra or balcony! It says "Bayis"...'
åé''ì ãäúí îãàåøééúà åäëà îãøáðï
(c) Answer #1: There is mid'Oraisa, and here is mid'Rabanan.
åäø''ø éöç÷ àìôñ úéøõ ãäëà áôúåçä ìáéú. î''ø:
(d) Answer #2 (Rif): Here it is open to the house. This is from my Rebbi.