ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafYoma 11
YOMA 11 (27 Teves) - dedicated to the memory of Chana Elka Krieger, Z"L,
wife of Hagaon Rav Yisrael Avraham Abba Krieger (author of Yad Yisrael on
Rambam and other Sefarim), by their son, Benayahu Krieger.
(a) From "u'vi'She'arecha", we learn that the gate of the Chatzer requires a
Mezuzah, the gate of a country (that is surrounded by mountains and forests,
and which therefore requires a wall and gates as protection (see Rashash,
who disagrees with Rashi), and the gate of a city.
(b) The gates of a town in which some of its residents are non-Jews require
a Mezuzah - provided the majority of its residents are Jews.
(c) The inhabitants of Mechuza did not fix a Mezuzah to the archways on
which the Akra de'Kubi were built - because they were only built in order to
strengthen the building which was built on top of them.
(d) They should nevertheless have been obligated to fix a Mezuzah - because
they contained a built-in residence for the guard. They were exempted
however, on the grounds that the gentiles would accuse them of witchcraft,
and this could cause a pogrom (which could have a fatal ending).
(a) One is obligated to examine the Mezuzos of ...
(b) A Shul is obligated to fix a Mezuzah when it has a built-in residence
for the Shamash. Otherwise, it does not.
- ... a private individual - twice every seven years.
- ... a community - twice every fifty years.
(a) The officer who caught Artavin fixing a Mezuzah to the gates of the
upper-market of Tzipori - fined him one thousand Zuz.
(b) Although he was a Sheli'ach Mitzvah, he was not immune to danger,
because 'She'liach Mitzvah Einan Nizokin' does not apply when the danger is
(c) We learn that from Shmuel, who was afraid to go and crown David Hamelech
- because Shaul might get to know about it and kill him (in spite of the
fact that he was carrying out Hashem's instructions).
(a) Rav Kahana interprets 'Mipnei she'ha'Nashim Ne'osos Bahen' to mean
'because women bathe there' - in other words, storehouses are exempt from
Mezuzah only because women tend to use them as bath-houses; otherwise, they
would be Chayav. Rav Yehudah disagrees with him on the basis of a Beraisa,
which exempts storehouses from Mezuzah, anyway.
(b) Rav Yehudah therefore, explains 'Mipnei she'ha'Nashim Ne'osos Bahen' -
to mean 'although women tend to use them as make-up rooms (nevertheless,
they are Patur from Mezuzah)'.
(c) According to Rav Kahana, a storehouse *requires* a Mezuzah, according to
Rav Yehudah, it does *not*.
(a) Rav Yehudah reconciles his opinion with the Beraisa, which obligates the
fixing of a Mezuzah to a stable if it is used by women as a make-up room -
by making it a Machlokes Tana'im.
(b) According to Rav Kahana, the Beraisa repeats the exemption of a bath-
house, in order to add even a private bath-house to the list of exemptions -
to teach us that the reason is not because of the sweat and brine that are
inevitable in a public-bath-house, but because it is not respectful to afix
a Mezuzah to a door where people stand unclothed.
(c) Rav Yehudah maintains that there is no Machlokes regarding store-houses
and stables, that all Tana'im agree that they are Patur. He was obviously
not aware of the Beraisa which explicitly obligates a Mezuzah to be fixed to
stables, chicken-coops, and various kinds of store-houses.
(a) Even the Tana who obligates store-houses and stables to have a Mezuzah,
1. ... a 'Beis-Sha'ar - which is a guard's hut that stands at the entrance
of the courtyard and which is used as a short-cut.
(b) It is unanimously agreed that a bathroom, a tannery, a bathe-house and a
Mikveh do not require a Mezuzah - because they are not residences of
2. ... an Achsadra - an anteroom in front of the main-room.
3. ... a Mirpeset' - a balcony whose main purpose is to climb up from it by
means of ladders to rooms on the upper floor. They are all Patur (min
ha'Torah) because they are not built to reside in.
(c) The Tana's source for exempting the Har ha'Bayis, the Lishkos and the
Azaros from a Mezuzah - is the fact that the Torah obligates 'Bayis', and,
due to their sanctity, these are not called Bayis (this is unclear, since,
in a number of places, the Beis Hamikdash is referred to as Bayis).
(a) Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah cited a Beraisa which exempts six types of doors
from Mezuzah: the four types of storehouses discussed earlier, a Sha'ar
ha'Madi, a gate which has no ceiling or lintel above it, and one which is
less than ten Tefachim tall.
(b) A Sha'ar ha'Madi is a Median gate i.e. an arch.
(c) Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah explains the fact that the Tana begins with six,
and then goes on to list seven - because it is in fact, a Machlokes Tana'im,
six according to the Rabbanan (who hold that it is Patur), and seven,
according to Rebbi Meir (who holds Chayav).
(d) The Rabbanan will agree that a Sha'ar ha'Madi is Chayav Mezuzah if the
legs have reached a height of ten Tefachim before the arch begins - because
it can hardly be any worse than if, instead of the arch, the space was
(a) Rebbi Meir requires a block of at least ten Tefachim by four from which
to carve out the required Shiur (e.g. the curve is confined to the inside,
but the outside is square-shaped). And he also requires that the legs reach
a height of at least three Tefachim before the curve becomes narrower than
(b) Rebbi Meir obligated such an archway - because he holds that, since
there is already an opening of three Tefachim [high] by four [wide],
'Chokekin Lehashlim' (we consider as if the four Tefachim wide section was
extended from *three* Tefachim to *ten*). The Rabbanan do not hold of
(a) If not for the Beraisa, we would have thought that a Shul, a house
belonging to a woman or one that belongs to two partners, is Patur from
Mezuzah - because the Torah writes "Beisecha" using both the masculine and
the singular forms, to preclude both a house belonging to a woman and one
that belongs to partners (incorporating a Shul).
(b) We learn from the Pasuk "Lema'an Yirbu Yemeichem ..." - that even a
woman is Chayav Mezuzah, because she too, wants to live. And we know that a
house belonging to partners is Chayav because of the plural of "Yemeichem"
and "Beneichem" (Rashash). (Note: With regard to the obligation to afix a
Mezuzah to the door of a Shul, see 10c. and d.)
(c) Rava finally learns from "Beisecha" - that the Mezuzah must be fixed on
the right-hand side of the door (because he Darshens 'Beisecha - Derech
Bi'ascha', and people tend to step into the house with the right foot
(a) In another Beraisa, we learned that a Shul, a house belonging to
partners or that of a woman *are* all subject to Nega'im (Tzara'as Batim).
We would have thought that they are *not* - because the Torah writes "u'Va
Asher *Lo ha'Bayis*", using both the masculine and the singular forms.
(b) The Torah write "u'Va Asher *Lo ha'Bayis*" - to teach us that someone
who restricts his belongings to his own personal use (telling whoever asked
him to borrow a vessel that he does not possess it), will eventually find
his house stricken with Tzara'as. As a result, he will be forced to take all
his belongings outside for everyone to see what he really owns, and to
discover that he is a miser.
(c) The first answer to reconcile this Beraisa with another Beraisa which
precludes a Shul from Nega'im is that the author of this Beraisa is Rebbi
Meir (who includes a Shul in the Din of Tzara'as); whereas the author of the
second Beraisa is the Rabbanan, who *precludes* it.
(d) We establish even the first Beraisa like the Rabbanan, be establishing
it by a Shul with a built-in residence for the Shamash.