הלכות תפילין ומזוזה וספר תורה פרק ה

Rambam Laws of Mezuzah Chapter 5 — Two Passages, One Page, and One Sheet

Introduction to Chapter 5

Speaker 1: Good, we are learning Rambam Laws of Sefer Torah, Tefillin and Mezuzah, Chapter 5. This chapter is the first one that discusses the laws of mezuzah. There is something that is common to all three; all three have the same laws regarding what type of parchment one writes on, and with what sanctity one writes. And we have here particular laws for the three, and now we are going to learn the particular laws of mezuzah.

Good, we need to learn, he says two things about mezuzah: the details of writing the mezuzah, how one places it you could say, and then the next chapter will be about which places are obligated in mezuzah, or which house is obligated in mezuzah. More or less the two chapters of the laws of mezuzah that we are learning here.

Note About the Name "Mezuzah"

Now good, first we need to learn what a mezuzah is. How does one write the mezuzah? How does one write the parchment that one places on the... It's interesting that the mezuzah is called mezuzah. Mezuzah means in lashon hakodesh, mezuzah means the doorpost, the board at the side of the door. And on this one places a parchment, or a prayer as it was called earlier, or a piece from a Sefer Torah, a piece that is similar to a Sefer Torah, which is rolled up the Rambam said, and one places it on the doorpost, and this received the name "the mezuzah."

The next chapter, Chapter 6, is also all laws of "the mezuzah," but now they are the laws of the doorpost, which types of doorposts are obligated in mezuzah. There it also involves more the house. Yes, the house. Also the doorpost. It seems that the house is half of the mitzvah, just as it's a combination, there is here a house with a parchment, which come together and they make a mitzvah, because both are called mezuzah here. Mezuzah is the translation of mezuzah. A Jew only has a doorpost so that he can place on it a mezuzah. So the mezuzah is more the mezuzah than the mezuzah, understand? Just as a Jew is obligated to eat a piece of cake, he says, make a blessing, make a mezonot. Very good. One buys a new house in order to be able to put up a new mezuzah. Ah, in order to put up a new mezuzah one needs to buy a house? Okay, one buys a house.

Law 1 — Writing Two Passages on One Page in One Sheet

In short, the question is what does one write on the mezuzah? Which passages is the first thing? Says the Rambam, one writes two passages, Shema and Vehaya im shamoa, on one page in one sheet. We know that Chazal said that tefillin should have four passages and mezuzah only two, because in "Kadesh" and "Vehaya ki yeviacha" mezuzah is not mentioned, only tefillin is mentioned. Very good.

It must be written, he is not concerned about our conventions. There are some that by tefillin they are not concerned about our conventions with which passages to write, and also here he simply says the law, he says what one does. He says one must do it "on one page in one sheet," on the same format, "in one sheet." What does "and this is this" mean? It should not be two columns, it should be written one after the other like "one sheet." He learns that what we call a column, in a Sefer Torah it is always called a daf, daf means a column of text. It should be on one piece of hide, and it should be one column, one line straight down.

Space Above and Below Like Half a Fingernail

Says the Rambam further, "and space above and space below like half a fingernail." One doesn't begin writing right at the top of the parchment, and one doesn't finish right at the bottom, rather one leaves a bit of space above and below. The measure is like half a fingernail.

Discussion: Why Is There a Difference Between Tefillin and Mezuzah Regarding Space?

Speaker 2: I don't remember, but I don't remember if in the laws of tefillin we also had such a thing "space above and below" stated.

Speaker 1: No, no, tefillin doesn't need any space. Presumably there is a difference. There is such a thing that there must be space between all letters, there must be the basic space, it shouldn't be all holes packed together.

Speaker 2: Do you mean to say mukaf gevil?

Speaker 1: Yes, but the boxes themselves I don't see. Apparently the reasoning is that the space is a matter of beauty, but it could also be that it holds. Imagine it begins right away the text, right away the words, it can tear more easily, the text is already rubbed off.

Why is tefillin different from mezuzah? Ah, because mezuzah lies open. A Sefer Torah is usually larger, a Sefer Torah yes there is a law of space, we haven't yet learned about Sefer Torah. But now we're learning by tefillin, you can understand that it's not missing, because it lies in a box. We already learned that one doesn't need to check it because of this, because the box protects it well. A mezuzah doesn't even have a law, it's not a cloth, it has nothing around it, so one needs to make it so that it will be nicely surrounded a bit. That's what I think, but I haven't thought out the reason. I don't know if it's true.

Bedieved: Two or Three Pages Are Kosher

Yes. And if he wrote them in two or three pages, it is yes kosher. That means, pages doesn't mean sheets. He made two columns on the same piece of parchment, it is kosher, two or three. But there are yes laws that one may not do.

Law — One May Not Make It Like a Tail, Like a Circle, or Like a Tent

For example, one may not make it like a tail. There are other types of ways how people used to write, and one can see it often on old ketubot, on documents, the type of fonts, the design. There is such a design like a tail. A tail means a triangle. It begins wide and then it becomes like a tail. Or like a circle, one wrote it like a ball. One sees it on old ketubot one sees it often, that the text of the page is organized as if from above smaller and then it becomes larger, and so forth. Or like a tent, what exactly is a tent? A tent he says is an ohel. It's the opposite, a tent is wide from below, an upside down triangle. A tail is a triangle wide from above. A tent means a tent is a pyramid, a triangle the opposite other way, and one begins from the narrow side.

And if one did so from above it is invalid. If the Torah would have wanted one to write in a manner that is entertaining, yes, it's no problem. Forget it, one does it for a reason, one does it because it's beautiful. It's not for an audience, it's not a way. One cannot read it that way. It's not made for things that one wants to read. It's beautiful for a ketubah, perhaps for a ketubah it's also not beautiful, I don't know.

In short, it's not a way. It's not a way. It didn't occur. The first question that I asked you is it didn't occur to anyone. It has to do with the law that mezuzah was an open thing, therefore people perhaps wanted to make beautiful designs and things about this. Or the opposite, by tefillin one must be able to read, soon we will see one covers it. Anyway, we have already seen more than one law that it seems that tefillin basically one can somehow read, one argues about this. But somehow it is made that if one wants one can open it and read, so one must be able to read it. It's hard to read when it's circular etc.

Law — If Written Out of Order It Is Invalid

Yes. If he wrote it not in order, such as if he put one passage before another passage, he began writing "Vehaya im shamoa" before "Shema."

Discussion: What Does "Not in Order" Mean — On the Parchment or in Time?

Speaker 2: Apparently this means not in order doesn't mean that he wrote before it, it means that he...this I ask you, does it mean that he wrote the next day on "Shema"? He went backwards?

Speaker 1: It means that he wrote "Vehaya im shamoa," and the next day he wrote "Shema." He went backwards. Not the days, the order with time.

Speaker 2: Who says that order means time? I mean that not in order means simply...preceded means simply...he wrote above...

Speaker 1: No, he writes from above. The law is that one must write first "Shema" on the paper. I don't know, I don't know why one should begin, one must write in time. What is the difference which time one writes it? It's like learning Torah? There isn't any real reason to think that it's a difference which time one writes it. We learned by tefillin also, there are those the poskim assume that one must write it in time, but it's not clear, the law is not stated clearly in the Rambam.

I mean that here, I don't see that anyone says, I mean that presumably it means that one writes it upside-down. It can't be. Why should one learn that it means in time? Yes, not in order, it means simply that one should write straight. What should I tell you? I don't know. Perhaps yes in time? I don't know. Check what the Kesef Mishneh says. People say all kinds of things. Now, let's go further.

Speaker 2: What does the Kesef Mishneh say? One may not look in a book we said. I mean, say go on anyway.

Speaker 1: Okay, say further meanwhile. It doesn't say! He brings nothing the Kesef Mishneh, it doesn't say! I already told you, it doesn't say! It says not in order! But what is the translation of not in order, that we don't know. The same language that it says simply by Rabbi Shmuel Alter, or whatever.

Law — Two Hides Are Invalid

Okay. Here he says two hides, even in two tablets, and even if he sewed them together and they are now connected. Ah, two pages, lechatchila it must be on one page and on one hide, one sheet. But for columns it's okay. Bedieved. But two hides, even if one bound them together and now they are as if they read together, but it's invalid, it cannot be two hides.

Law — One Elevates in Holiness and Does Not Lower: A Sefer Torah That Wore Out

Now, he says a new law of honor, should I think that it has to do with honor of Sefer Torah to have a new one? Actually a continuation, I can be that they already learned the laws by the laws of Beit Haknesset. Yes, one may not be descending from holiness to holiness. One may not be descending from lesser holiness. A person may not fall from his level. Very good. Motzaei Shabbat in general, it may not become from Shabbat motzaei Shabbat. Therefore one makes a blessing "Ata chonantanu," don't remain so made, what can one do. Motzaei Shabbat one must strengthen oneself that a new Shabbat will come. But a Sefer Torah that wore out is not a time. Here one sees that the time is not a novelty of holiness, because it never becomes motzaei Shabbat.

No, I say, when a Sefer Torah that wore out would be refreshed a week later, one noticed that a Sefer Torah that wore out now goes a way, it's more like a Torah scholar who passed away, it's not like motzaei Shabbat.

Discussion: What Does "Balah" Mean?

Okay, in short, the novelty is apparently a Sefer Torah that wore out, that means a Torah tore, perhaps one should take that piece... Not tore, "balah" means that it became old. Ah, it became old. Very good, it's not... It can be holes, it can be different ways apparently. Each will be with all others... It became invalid. It became old, it became too worn, it's no longer good. What do you mean not good? I will explain to you.

No, because I thought, when our shul has an old Torah, and the witnesses begin to say that it's perhaps invalid... I don't know if it's invalid. It can be that it's a nice thing to make a new one. One sees here an order that every period of time one writes a new one. He's not talking here about an invalid Sefer Torah. He wants to say here about the note. When a person decided that the Sefer Torah is already too old, and they want to... for practical reasons. Because it doesn't say if a piece tore. He's not talking here the law of... It can be simply that it means... Usually "balah" means... The Sefer Torah will stand later.

I say, but I say "balah," they perhaps saw more there. But "balah" apparently is the translation just like the worn clothes that one learned in the laws of women. One gives to a woman... One will learn... Yes, one gives to a woman clothes, and the pieces of clothes that have two... It's already worn out... "Worn clothes" means, you can wear. It says "covered with worn clothes and wrapped in heat." Yes? It's used.

"From abundant goodness" says Yitro to Moshe. All the same things, they become old and worn out, it becomes rubbed off, yes? So the tefillin and Sefer Torah become rubbed off, one uses it, it becomes a bit rubbed off, it becomes a bit weaker. One says, Master of the Universe, one doesn't want to use it for holy matters. A person will think, instead of placing it in the bag of the genizah, one should make from it at least cut down and save from it the maximum. This is a clever Jew, and why did worse happen, and from this became a law.

Laws of Mezuzah: Laws of Worn Out, Genizah, Closed Passage, and Crowns

Law: Law of Worn Out — Rubbed Off Parchment

Speaker 1: Right, I said worn out should perhaps be divided and one sees more, but worn out apparently is the translation just like the worn clothes when one learned in women's laws and one gives to a woman clothes and the... the little pieces of clothes that have worn out. It's already worn out... Worn clothes means you can wear, it says covered with worn clothes and wrapped in heat, yes? By a woman, one gives her in the winter new clothes and she wears the... worn out! Worn clothes doesn't mean torn, they are not exactly the translation. I translate rubbed off. Rubbed off. After worn out was removed and still. Became old. Very good. Old. Rubbed off. Right. It's a year's worth of use, says Yitro to Moshe, all the same things, they become old and worn out. Rubbed off. So the tefillin and Sefer Torah become rubbed off, it becomes a bit rubbed off, it becomes a bit rubbed off, it becomes a bit rubbed off.

Discussion: Genizah vs. Recycling of Old Sifrei Torah

Speaker 1: One doesn't want but not what not for holy matters, a person will think instead we should place it in the bag of the genizah. In the genizah. One should make from it at least cut down and save from it the maximum, which it is a clever Jew, and simply it happened somewhere, and from this became a law. There was one rabbi who was not a businessman, and he sold mezuzot and tefillin from this. They were, he could say that the stringent holiness in lesser holiness. Here you mean simply cutting out the passage with a knife, cutting off the passage.

Speaker 2: But I ask you actually a good question, it is a greater honor for the Sefer Torah, when one places it in genizah entirely, one buries it, I have an important thing.

Speaker 1: Listen but saved, you know that one goes there. You're asking the same question about a person who dies, and one should take his organs and we put in other people. Taking off what these holy things, the pieces that one says from before, that we have a recycling business of an old Sefer Torah. On this actually speaks the law of the recycling.

Speaker 2: No, let's say, the genizah is more honor, it can be a yes, it's an old Sefer Torah, let's say a Torah scholar's student, seven qualities, one places it in the bag, one dances for the Sefer Torah, but one doesn't read it.

Speaker 1: No, it means also for example that a rabbi who became very old, one shouldn't make him now he's no longer capable. What can't he? One shouldn't make him now to see that he becomes the head of the community. The garden downgraded! Something else it's a Torah scholar, and one places him in.

And one sees clearly, by Kohen Gadol it says "go yes Kohen Gadol borrowed", in, he cannot go up.

Speaker 2: No, I tell you, there is perhaps a status for the Sefer Torah that wore out. One takes it even when one wants to check how one once wrote or what. And the same thing, a Torah scholar after holding, it has something a genizah. I mean, apparently it goes into genizah later, one places it in genizah. But can be, have you ever seen that one takes an old Sefer Torah and one places it in genizah?

Speaker 1: No, one leaves it in the ark, one dances with it on Simchat Torah.

Speaker 2: But most went into genizah, because otherwise one would have had millions of Sifrei Torah from throughout the generations, or hundreds of thousands. The shuls have a lot, the Nazis burned it, I don't know, what always there are such answers, nu?

Speaker 1: Perhaps, I mean that it ends up in genizah when it's really completely fallen apart. Think, when it no longer holds on the two wooden poles. That's not the most convenient way of holding it permanently, standing in an ark on two wooden poles. When it becomes very old, it becomes torn, it gets holes. If one doesn't use it, it doesn't get holes. But one places it in somehow, and one places it in in a minute.

Speaker 2: Okay, I mean, the essence of the Torah can hold very long if one keeps it well. But if one uses it, it becomes used up, because it becomes rubbed off, and then it becomes worn out.

Halacha: Not from the Margin of a Sefer — The Margin of a Sefer Torah

Speaker 1: Okay, no, the laws of nature are that somewhere... I mean, there isn't any format from thousands of years ago. There is in a museum, they preserve it well.

Speaker 2: No, there actually is. They kept it in a museum with a freezer, I know how they preserve it. I really don't know what you're talking about.

Speaker 1: Okay, in short, we simply make a museum.

Halacha: Not from the Margin of a Sefer — The Margin of a Sefer Torah

Speaker 1: The same thing, and not... another thing, not from the margin of a sefer, even the margin of the sefer is pure (tahor). The top and bottom that was mentioned earlier, the rechav milma'alah umilmatah (width from above and below). Ah, in kol shehu oleh limezuzah (anything that can be used for a mezuzah).

Speaker 2: Yes good, although it's not the writing, it's just a piece that was for a sefer Torah. Just as the names in the sefer Torah are more important than the mezuzah.

Speaker 1: It's not the names, it's the parchment of a sefer Torah. Although it's not the... now it's going to be upgraded that on it will actually stand the parsha (section), but there it's such a tail and not a head. Otherwise here you have a tail and not a head and not a head for foxes, when we descend from a stricter sanctity to a lighter sanctity.

Speaker 2: Very good. No, I also mean that we don't cut up Torah scrolls, but this is one to cut the old Torah, taking pieces. We don't cut. It appears here that it's very symbolic that even when it's worn out and even when it's the margin it's still a sefer Torah and sanctity.

Speaker 1: Interesting, he brings that the Noda BiYehuda spoke about this question, whether the Rama means that we don't cut, it must have already been cut before everything. We wouldn't not. But you're both right. It's very good.

Halacha: Closed Section (Parsha Setumah) in Mezuzah

Speaker 1: Now without any, we learned about the writing, yes the parchment, how we make it is the mezuzah. It's good. Now another halacha about how we write it is the parsha setumah. Similar was stated in Beit Tana'el, but this is different and not me'akev (invalidating). The Rama, it's a mitzvah that there should be a space between the parsha of Shema, and the space of a parsha setumah.

Speaker 2: Yes they learned, parsha setumah means that there is an empty line, so we do, if I would see it according to the Rama. We also hold this way. And for setumah we begin on the next, on the same line. So therefore. It's a mitzvah that the parsha of Vehaya im shamo'a should also begin on the same line as it ends. Like the end of Shema.

Speaker 1: Yes, so do we do in the mezuzah?

Speaker 2: But... but would it be done in petucha (open section)? In a line? Like it's not on the Torah?

Speaker 1: No, good. It shouldn't be one after the other in the Torah. Only since Vehaya im shamo'a is a parsha setumah there where it is, we say that when we write it we mean that we should also do it this way. So lechatchila (ideally), but it's not me'akev bedi'eved (invalidating after the fact). That's how it is. And we are stringent to do this with tefillin.

Discussion: Parsha Setumah in Tefillin

Speaker 2: In tefillin it appears in the Rambam that we must also do it, because there it's also not adjacent with the letter. It's the same parshiyot (sections), yes? But it's not clear. So that it should be light with adjacent. No parshiyot is not... because there it says Yosef me'akev and more? It sounds like that there. I mean perhaps it's stated explicitly, I don't remember. I remember that we struggled there why it's stated that way.

Halacha: Tagin (Crowns) in Mezuzah — "And One Must Be Careful with the Tagin"

The Rambam's Position on Tagin

Speaker 1: Okay. The Rambam says further, "And one must be careful with the tagin." We must make the tagin, the little crowns that we see on top of the letters of the tefillin. "And these are the tagin that we make in a mezuzah." The Rambam goes on to enumerate which letters in the mezuzah... very interesting, here I discovered what I searched for then and I forgot. I discovered what is the history of the tagin.

According to our custom, every time the letters sha'atnez getz appear in the Torah, we make three tagin. That's our custom. I mean that Tosafot or others learned this way. But the Rambam understood, that what's stated in the Gemara in Menachot, "sha'atnez getz require three crowns," and so it states "Rava said" in Menachot 29b, "seven letters require three three zayin, and these are sha'atnez getz," the Rambam understood that Rava means to say that when we write a mezuzah, and he now goes on to enumerate a shin and an ayin and a tav and so forth from the mezuzah, on those letters we need three tagin. Not in the entire Torah at all, and not in tefillin. Tefillin has other letters that need tagin. And in a mezuzah sha'atnez getz needs them, but the rest of the Torah the Rambam didn't hear at all about this thing that it needs tagin.

Now you've caught what the story is. The Rambam says, and he goes on to enumerate for you in the two parshiyot all the letters that have tagin.

Rashi's Position vs. Rambam

Speaker 2: No, but last week we added another level of interest, that according to Rashi's position the tagin aren't entire crowns higher than the letter like the Rambam says, like zayin, rather it's the manner in which we make the letter sharp. An extra law that the letters should be such a beautiful letter, that they should be sharp, the crown of the shin, the corner of the shin should be beautiful, that sort of thing. If we went with Rashi that sha'atnez getz means everywhere, because after all the stringency must be how we write that letter, not any tagin higher than it.

Our Custom — Both Positions Together

Speaker 1: What we have, we have both customs together. We take the zayin like the Rambam, and we take the sha'atnez getz according to Rashi's position. Okay, that's how Rav Yechiel Meir explained it.

Speaker 2: Yes. We need to see if you agree, but yes. That's certainly the... yes. The Hagahot Maimoniyot we always say to look in chapter 2, there is a great note there.

Speaker 1: Okay. In short, that's the story.

Specific Letters in Mezuzah with Tagin

Speaker 1: Okay, the Rambam says, on which letters? The Rambam says thus, in the first parsha there are seven letters that each one has seven zayin, and that is the shin and ayin of "Shema." Why does he explain to say the ayin? I don't know. Vav and nun of "uvnafshecha" (and with your soul).

Speaker 2: Yes, but the shin of "Shema" and the ayin must have three zayin.

Speaker 1: Shin and ayin, nun of "uvnafshecha," chet and the two dalets of "mezuzot."

Speaker 2: Very good. By mezuzot, here by the way you see that it makes sense a bit. The dalets by mezuzot, the hearing and the soul, like two things that remind the person or what? And why does he enumerate mezuzot?

Speaker 1: Because that's mezuzot, and we make... mezuzah and tefillin are close brothers. Right. And by mezuzah, to remember, by mezuzah it was stated that we make the tagin on the same parsha. I just want to see if the same. Which parsha is the parsha of mezuzah, of tefillin?

The Difference Between Mezuzah and Tefillin in Tagin

Speaker 2: Yes, the Rambam says, there it's different, there we write by "komemiyut" (upright) and by "ukshartam" (and you shall bind them). Why? Because there... it has a different tradition by mezuzah and a different one by tefillin.

Speaker 1: Yes, it's not... the zayin is not a law in the Torah, it's a law in the mezuzah, because in the tefillin we emphasize what's stated "ukshartam," and here we emphasize what's stated "mezuzot." You see that the zayin...

Speaker 2: And in tefillin we don't emphasize the mezuzot?

Speaker 1: No.

Speaker 2: But in mezuzot we do emphasize the totafot?

Speaker 1: Yes. Interesting.

Speaker 2: Okay. But you see that the mezuzah is nicer. Nicer, a friend. In any case, you see that it has something to do with it.

Speaker 1: Interesting. The "uvnafshecha" is "Shema" once, and "titnach" is the second parsha, there are six letters, each one is on three lines. The gimmel of the "ganach" is interesting, there we made "ve'asafta" on the tefillin, and here there is the "ganach."

Mezuzah: Tagin, Sirtut, and the Rambam's View on Segulot (Charms)

Halacha 7 (Continued) — Tagin on Mezuzot and Totafot

Speaker 1: No. But in mezuzot we do emphasize the totafot.

Speaker 2: Yes, interesting.

Speaker 1: Okay. The mezuzot is ma'aser. Ma'aser. In any case, we see clearly that it has something to do with it. Interesting.

And here nafshecha, Shema once in totafot, and also in the second parsha there are six letters, each one on three zayin, the gimmel of degancha. It's interesting, in the... there we made ve'asafta, on the ve'asafta, and here there is the gancha. It's interesting. There is simplicity in this, we can't understand the secrets today.

Speaker 2: No, you're starting to catch, some approach is here from the two zayin of mezuzot, the two tavs of the totafot, and the tzadik of "al ha'aretz" (on the land). There wasn't the "al ha'aretz" there either. Okay, interesting.

Speaker 1: It's also interesting which letter of a word. The gimmel is the most dominant letter of degancha. I don't know. The gancha, it's the most alluded to the gimmel, but I don't know why we can't think about the dalet, the first letter of degancha. I don't know why. Perhaps simply because that's the mezuzah, and that's the word. It could be that it's simple, it could be simple that the letters you can fit in a tag. I don't know. Perhaps there's a practical thing in this, that you fit in a tag in an alef, who knows how you'll make the tag, for example. I don't know. Tzadik is "al ha'aretz."

Anyway, "And if he didn't add tagin or added tagin not according to their law, it's not invalid." It's not invalid. Our custom is not to make the tagin. We only make on a sefer Torah. Right?

Speaker 2: No, we make sha'atnez getz, that's generally. But the Rambam's things, I don't know if we make it according to the Rambam. Is there a market for this?

Speaker 1: You can make what you want, it doesn't invalidate either way. Okay, I have a business idea, let's talk after the shiur.

Speaker 2: No, there is, there is, I remember that it could be a part is done. Yes, there are certainly things that we need to see what we do in practice. Why shouldn't we call a sofer? You'll call a sofer to say the shiur.

Speaker 1: And here also by the way, you see that the Rambam will already see in a sefer Torah, there are other things that they used to make. Today most Torahs today everything goes standard. But once, every sofer had his customs how he makes a zayin, how he makes a gimmel, and the like. Diversity. But today we are one community with unity. Today we have more unity.

Speaker 2: Unity shiur lechem. Good.

Halacha 8 — Sirtut, Adding and Subtracting Letters

Speaker 1: Okay, simple custom, I'll tell you. Ah, again, whom do you call "shelo besirtut" (without ruling)? Shelo besirtut... ah, sirtut he already told us in the laws of tefillin, that everything, whether sefer Torah, whether tefillin, that everything needs sirtut. A letter that he wasn't careful with... we also already learned in the laws of tefillin that it must be... correct. Or he added even one letter inside, or removed even one letter, behold it is invalid.

Discussion: What is Sirtut?

Speaker 2: How does it make sense that he added a letter? I can't say that all sirtut is for the good of the reader, we could add sirtut afterwards. So it appears that sirtut is that the sofer should write it. Sirtut means that the... yes, good, that we should be able to read straight. But if it's written without a ruler, but it's crooked, it's not straight, isn't it the word "shelo beshura" (not in a line)?

Speaker 1: Certainly, so that we should write straight. We must make the scratch beforehand.

Speaker 2: No, we can't add afterwards. That's what I'm asking. We can't add. Sirtut means "shelo beshura," that it's one straightness.

Speaker 1: Yes, certainly! Certainly! Certainly! Certainly! The real point of the sirtut is that we should write on it. If you wrote crooked, what does the lines help you? It helps you nothing.

The point is that we learned, tefillin doesn't need sirtut, but yes, sefer Torah does need sirtut. If he wrote straight, but he didn't make beforehand the scratched line. That's called sirtut. I don't know what sirtut means to make a line. Sirtut means to write straight.

Speaker 2: What does the Rambam say?

Speaker 1: I'm telling you, I'm a rav. I told you "shelo besirtut." I'm telling you what I know to say. That's the translation, I don't understand the question. Sirtut doesn't mean the line itself. The point of the sirtut is that I should write straight.

We learned earlier, earlier, earlier, it was the manner that we scratch beforehand. If he didn't scratch, even if the person learned to write straight.

Speaker 2: Sirtut and shura (line) is not the same thing.

Speaker 1: Yes, that's the same thing. That's the same thing. We learn clearly in the... sirtut is the act of scratching.

Speaker 2: I don't agree. If someone scratches and he doesn't write straight, he's not yotzei (fulfilled).

Speaker 1: I don't agree. That could be, because the entire purpose of sirtut is that we should write on it. So what you're saying that sirtut is a synonym for shura, is not correct. We write on the lines. That's the translation. If you write lines and you don't write on the lines, that's the point. I agree for stringency, but I don't agree that if someone wrote straight and there's no line, he didn't make the... we can't write straight without a line. Is that kosher bedi'eved? I wouldn't have agreed.

Speaker 2: Can't. It doesn't look that way at home. The cheder rebbe already said like us, that we can't add mind with the covering. Ah, we must with the drops. Because it was a ship. I ask, when it's straight is straight is straight.

Speaker 1: No, it won't that it was a ship. The war didn't enter that it would be straight. It's simple, that this is the mind. I don't know why you're looking for trouble here. Okay. How do we hold?

Speaker 2: Yes. It's invalid.

Speaker 1: Ah, also removed sometimes, that we learned. But we make a chaser (missing) sometimes, is it like removed or added. Or just, a lie. Why would someone add?

Speaker 2: No, I don't know, it becomes a question. Okay, we already see why one adds. Ah, look, say at home. One adds. It's a simple custom there is a custom that is widespread. Okay.

The Name Sha-dai on the Outside

Speaker 1: Yes. He doesn't say, in Chutz Yisrael (outside Israel), it's not obligatory. He only says that it's widespread. Shekezen elements on the outside, opposite the space, like heaven. Parshei parshei. Okay. Okay. By the piece that was made setumah, we write Sha-dai, the name Sha-dai outside. Once it's a loss, it doesn't matter, according to what's written outside. Once inside it's not. He doesn't say, he doesn't begrudge. He doesn't say that we can do it, or we should do it, because anywhere outside. Once it's a loss, the four we write outside.

But all straight Kosman but from him, once we started writing that, people would think that we can add here names. Outside of this, you have two powers. If we write it on a get (divorce document), I'm not sure, Rebbe, yes, but I want to understand clearly. From one, this is the Rebbe, we say add a lot, that it means that it adds to the parsha. He writes the ganach with two powers, I know what. But it writes on the side.

Speaker 2: Yes, the Rebbe doesn't mean that it writes into the parsha. No one means that the names of kings are part of the mezuzah. Perhaps between the lines, just as he did outside, he does. Okay, but that's not necessary. The Rebbe, don't say that it invalidates. Look, can you see? Go, say, I say, I say worse.

Holy Names, Names of Angels, Seals — Invalid

Speaker 1: Yes. Even if he added holy ones. But the Rebbe is good angels. Names of holy ones, means holy people.

Speaker 2: Ah, and names of the holy ones means that we write there names of the Holy One Blessed Be He, names.

Speaker 1: No, no, I didn't enumerate that, nor names of angels.

Speaker 2: Yes, yes. Names it already states, yasher koach (well done), it already states, yes, Elokim. Names of the holy ones, names of holy people. Please, don't write it for the scribes strongly. Like angels, why not? Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Moshe?

Speaker 1: Yes, yes, but Rabbi Shimon is the holy one. It didn't even occur to the Rambam to write Rabbi Shimon, Rabbi Moshe that's not written in the Torah. For that it states "commandments of the righteous."

Oh invalid, also seals. Someone put in a... seals were a kind of... a seal doesn't mean a seal, it means... beauty or a design or something? There were such... it's called a kamea (amulet), and the kamea is business. There are things called the chosamos (seals). It's like little seals, but it's such designs that mean that this is how each angel looks, such little pictures, such things. The Sephardim had this type... the Magen David for example, is a signature that has the whole... yes, yes, true, but it has nothing to do with now. Chosamos is a word for a certain type of things that one makes in kameios (amulets). Why it's called a chosem I don't know. I'm telling you, someone will get the idea that he's going to put in there, write something about anything he supports. Satmar, the State.

The Rambam's Hashkafa — A Mezuzah Is Not an Amulet

Speaker 1: He says here, he says that it's invalid. But he says, he's an old man, and he didn't get into the topic at all. He says yes, it's invalid. In the next line he says: "These fools don't know that they've nullified the mitzvah, because we say that adding one letter invalidates it, those who make a great mitzvah of unifying the Name of the Holy One Blessed Be He and His love and His service as if it were an amulet for their own benefit."

The fools make it a sign as if the mezuzah is an amulet for their own benefit. And in truth it's a matter, the true great mitzvah is the unification of His Name of the Holy One Blessed Be He and His love and His service, as it says in "Shema" and "Vehaya im shamoa." And that's what it depends on. But the person also puts in there additional segulos (mystical remedies), because he thinks that the whole thing is a segulah, so let's add more segulos. What is the segulah for? For their own benefit. As arose in their foolish heart, that this thing helps in worldly matters.

So, because people thought about the kamea itself that this can help for their own benefit, now the Rambam tears down the very custom that any segulah or any names can help, holy names can help for worldly vanity, can help a person for their own benefit, worldly vanity. As arose in their foolish heart, as they thought in their foolish heart that writing holy names or names of angels and the like can make a person's life more comfortable, that he will have benefit from his worldly vanity better, that he will have more money or more honor or something from worldly vanity.

Now he also thinks that the mezuzah is also like that. But it's interesting, it's actually another level more. Basically, he has replaced the mezuzah with worldly vanity, because the mezuzah has now become invalid. What do you have here? The names of angels.

Speaker 2: Not both. He makes... okay, that's the Rambam. I understand that he replaced it. The Rambam says it's invalid, I know. Would I have known that it's really invalid? I'm afraid that the Rambam knows better.

A Question from the Gemara — Onkelos the Convert and Mezuzah as Protection

Speaker 1: Now comes a great question. There was a Jew named Rabbi Onkelos. He was a prince in the Roman kingdom, and he ran away to the sages and he began learning Torah. And they sent after him, so he told the soldiers various beautiful things that he found in Judaism, beautiful talking points, various mitzvos that show the beauty of the Torah and mitzvos. So the Gemara relates. And he said such a thing: By you kings, your kings, who guards whom? The soldiers guard the king. By us, the King guards the soldiers, that's why we have our mezuzah that guards our door.

Yes. What does the Rambam say about this? Let's understand, let's first... let's first say the question. Let's first remember the hashkafic problem of thinking that reality helps for this world, and then comes another teacher in honor of the higher level.

The Rambam's Approach to Mezuzah as Amulet — And the Hashkafic Foundations

The Story with Onkelos the Convert and the Roman Soldiers

So the Gemara relates, and he said such a thing: By you kings, by you kings, who guards whom? The soldiers guard the king. By us, the King guards the soldiers, that's why we have a mezuzah that guards our door.

How the Rambam Would Understand This Story

Yes, how would the Rambam explain this to us? Let's understand, let's first remember. The problem is the hashkafic problem of thinking that the mezuzah helps for worldly vanities, and then comes another teacher, in honor of that one writes additional names and things. That's the opposite.

Onkelos says the opposite. Onkelos, first of all there's a verse in the mezuzah, he squeezes into the mezuzah a verse that I've never even seen. That's serious objections, and that's the correct hashkafa. Let's not go so strongly.

But what Onkelos says, he says that the reward that one shouldn't think to... wait, wait, wait, let's think for a second.

Parallel to Hilchos Avodah Zarah — Those Who Whisper Over a Wound

What the Rambam says in Hilchos Tefillin is apparently the same thing that he already said in Hilchos Avodah Zarah about those who whisper over a wound, because that's a Mishnah, it's not a chiddush (novelty) of the Rambam. The Mishnah says, someone says a whisper over a wound, he says "kol hamachalah asher samti b'Mitzrayim," he says a verse, he's in Hilchos Tefillin. Why? The Rambam explained, that those words of Torah are healing for the body, but these are healing for the soul. The Torah is made so you should know the correct beliefs, not in order to... a holy verse in the Torah, certainly.

Someone asked the Rambam, doesn't the Torah promise reward in this world? Doesn't the Torah protect? Certainly. But how does it protect? Through the fact that you do the mitzvah of mezuzah, and in the mezuzah it says what is ultimately good. If you serve the Almighty...

The Rabbeinu Menuach's Explanation

There the Rabbeinu Menuach or Rama"k, R"M K', I don't remember who he brings. He says, that according to the Rambam, what guards the house is that the mezuzah reminds one of the Almighty, reminds of the unification of His Name and His service, and one who is a servant of Hashem has Divine Providence etc. etc., that guards. But if you think it's the shortcut, that the tefillin itself guards, that's the problem.

So Onkelos is in distinctions. Onkelos only said it for the Romans, because the Romans could understand, but the Rambam said the truth.

The Problem of Worldly Vanity — When Protection Works and When It Doesn't

It's also not just the shortcut, and also for segulos. He says that what bothers him here is worldly vanity. In other words, certainly if someone serves the Almighty which is not worldly vanity, he also won't be concerned with the world that way. But if someone thinks that a mezuzah is some kind of segulah in order to have a good livelihood, and he doesn't grasp at all the whole topic of "know Hashem and serve Him," he doesn't grasp the whole thing, he also won't have the protection.

The Paradox: Protection Works Only When You Don't Need It

Because the protection works only when you don't need it. Because that's not the "end goal." You can't make it the "end goal." When it's the "end goal," you won't have it. When it's a good "side effect" of the "goal," like all things, you'll have it. Like the reward of the World to Come, like the reward that we learned, like the reward that the Rambam taught in Hilchos Teshuvah.

The Rambam's Approach to Amulets and Names of Angels

And it's also true that the Rambam holds that an amulet doesn't work at all. It's certain that he holds that writing names of angels doesn't do anything at all. But it's interesting, because there the Rambam said the next thing that one may do certain things.

Writing Shin-Dalet-Yud on the Outside

And here too, Shin-Dalet-Yud he does have, one may write Shin-Dalet-Yud. Even a whole Rambam, one doesn't have to. Yes, like the Name from outside. What is that? Simply to remember the Almighty. He says, apparently think about it, one writes Shin-Dalet-Yud from outside, simply to remember the Almighty.

It's a problem, the mezuzah, think about it, the holy Names are inside somewhere. Listen, don't people consider it a segulah? No, one doesn't write it as a segulah, one writes it to remember the Almighty. There's a problem that the mezuzah is crumpled, one doesn't see anything, so one writes something outside to remember the Almighty.

So he'll say. It was said that it's clear that this is not part of the mitzvah. Therefore it's also not a segulah, and the Almighty won't give any loss because of it. Ah, could also be. But the one who writes inside, he thinks that what's written as a name on my house, that will be a protection. That's what the Rambam says that someone recites verses to fall asleep and the like, if he means it so that it will protect him and that's the purpose, it's the same thing.

The Type Who Seeks Segulos

It's very interesting, because you see here another very interesting thing. The type who thinks it's a segulah, but he's not satisfied, it's still not a good enough segulah. He'll also write names and things. He has a concern, he won't write more beautiful "quotes." That's not there, because it's very beautiful, "listen heavens and listen," he remembers the Almighty. The fool needs to add, he says, officially, he has here an amulet, he's not happy with the amulet. Maybe the amulet won't work? It doesn't work.

The Custom of Israel — Kuzu Bemuchsaz Kuzu

The custom of Israel, but as it's brought here in Hagahos Maimoniyos, that one should add something more on the mezuzah, and we add on the outside, opposite where it says "Hashem Elokeinu," we write the words, the letters after "Hashem Elokeinu," yes? Kuzu, what one puts here, kuzu, and so on. Apparently here is a segulah.

Simple explanation, it says here in Hagahos Maimoniyos, it also says in other places, yes, my custom, yes, the Name is exchanged. He simply brings that the custom is to seal names, he brings here the Ashkenazic custom. He says that it was, it seems that once there was the custom to write the seals and names of angels, and afterwards it was minimized and said that one should be able to put in the Name, the hint. It was the letters, that the Rabbeinu Menuach says that one puts the letters that come after "Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad," that comes out kuzu bemuchsaz, kuzu. So, people themselves, it sounds something like mysterious words.

The Meaning of Kuzu — Another Hint to "Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad"

Or perhaps it's another hint that the only thing we want to focus on is "Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad." Think, think what happens here. People who think that "Shema Yisrael Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad" and "Ve'ahavta" is not good enough, they want to write something more. And someone, ah, finally he found that one writes a creation, and he'll now shout it to the book. And what will he find? That it's another hint to "Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad." There's nothing on the side except this. Do you see the point of writing? Yes, that's an interpretation.

The Rambam's Influence on the Custom

But it seems that the fact is that the custom to write names and angels and so on is an old custom from before the Rambam, it was quite a significant custom. The Rambam apparently canceled it. In honor of the Rambam, people stopped doing it, and only a little remained.

It could be the Rambam actually understood that the one who writes the names, you only say to remember, and the same thing must be learned about the obligations not. But the truth is, that on the tefillin one must write the names, not such a modern code that one needs to decipher. Usually the codes, the names don't stand already, no, I say that it's a fact that it was put in for the people who sought to become.

The fact is, that all these codes do come from the ideas of segulos and amulets and so on. It could be that one wanted, that you're right, perhaps that's why one makes it minimized, not like it was... amulets, I don't know. Like sacrifices. If someone doesn't have it anymore, it's certainly a kosher mezuzah. Like the Rambam's sacrifices, a little. Yes, because the world wants it, and the Rambam says many times this thought. The world wants very much to put names, okay, here it's not names anymore, from outside I let you.

The Main Distinction: Mezuzah Versus Amulet

No, to understand, the Rambam is bothered by the main idea of putting a Name to protect you, not all the names. The Rambam is bothered that you think that a mezuzah is an amulet. He's against the idea. A mezuzah is not an amulet. An amulet? The Rambam doesn't say it's a sin to make an amulet. There's such a thing as an expert amulet that the Rambam brings in Hilchos Shabbos. A mezuzah is not an amulet, a mezuzah is service of Hashem.

What Is the Distinction?

An amulet serves you, and a mezuzah you serve the Almighty. That's the main distinction.

We discussed that there's a sign on the totafos that's written in mezuzah. What you mean to say that this is the amulet, you have the totafos, that's the messenger of the amulet. No, you don't need an amulet, you need to remember, you don't need to have according to him at all. It means both, the mezuzah and the tefillin, are vessels that use the same passage, once it's in the manner of an amulet, once it's more in an open manner.

I say, tefillin are also called an amulet. Yes yes yes, but only in this way, not in the physical way. When they said that tefillin means amulet, they said that tefillin is a protection like an amulet. When the Rambam says here amulet, he doesn't mean that, he means that they said then technically what sort of thing it is.

The Problem with Segulos — Worldly Vanity

But I think there's another thing, that there's a problem with people who make segulos. It's very interesting, sometimes one thinks that someone a bit more enlightened, he doesn't believe in amulets and in graves and such things, but a religious person, he believes in this. Then one asks him, why do you go to all the segulos? Ah, so I should have good children, so I should make money, it turns out that he lies completely in worldly vanity. All his service of Hashem is really how to make salvations. Salvations is worldly vanity.

Livelihood is money. Livelihood, says the holy Melitzer, or I don't know who, is money.

The Rambam's Hashkafa on Judaism

So this bothers the Rambam very much. The Rambam looks at it that the whole point of Judaism is that one should care a little less about worldly vanity, a little less. And here you come and tell me that Judaism is a segulah to become a bigger glutton? I'm doing exactly the opposite. So besides what he says that it doesn't help, it also goes into this that you think it helps for worldly vanity. As if the Almighty gave an amulet so that one should eat more. That can't be.

Summary: The Rambam's Approach and the Custom of Israel

So, until here the Rambam's approach. It could be simple, it could actually be that we don't rule like the Rambam, and we should write yes, because we hold yes that it's a segulah, I don't know. One won't answer everything.

If someone seeks a good segulah for livelihood, gentlemen, the best segulah for livelihood is learning every day a chapter of Rambam. We have for healing, for whatever. But the Torah wasn't given as a segulah. The custom of Israel is that one may. The Rambam would... our class can certainly help also for livelihood, for segulos, for healings, as strongly as traveling to a grave of a tzaddik.

Discussion: Learning Rambam "For the Merit" — Does It Bother the Rambam?

Says the next Rambam... ay ay ay ay... you know Meir, that the Rambam wouldn't allow learning Rambam for merit? No, what bothers him? Again, if the Rambam went up to graves of tzaddikim, and one didn't exactly follow what the Rambam actually did. I say, learning the class is dedicated in honor of, for the merit of, for the healing of... I think it's a problem, yes. One needs to remember a bit because the Rambam was a sharp Jew, he wasn't... one needs to remember his approach.

But today there are already lenient sages. All of us learn Tanya and the holy book. One needs to remember the strict ones. Everything is... we know, we're aware of the reward of mitzvah in this world there isn't, that here one isn't aware. Most of the world isn't aware yet.

The Rambam's Strictness

He's not... you turn around fine, a great tzaddik, people only saw that they become rich because they're his Jews, they do Jewish things, they're obligated to halacha. But it would bother, I think it would bother him. One must do it because it's "fear of God." One needs to remember a bit the... it would bother the Rambam when ah, you learn Torah in order to have more money?

In short, you're an even bigger... not only are you a glutton, but you bring in the Almighty into your gluttony. Hello, you want to eat? Eat alone. Why do you need to owe the Almighty?

The Correct Approach

Translation

And the Rambam would sit with this Jew for a few minutes, and he would explain that he wants the money so that he can do even better avodas Hashem (service of God). Ah, okay, okay, no problem. True, but then you need to do it.

Laws of Mezuzah: Affixing the Mezuzah and Its Details

Digression: Learning Torah in Order to Receive Money

Speaker 1: But it would indeed be disturbing. I mean that it would be disturbing. It could be that one must do it because it's a "v'haya im shamoa" (and it shall be if you listen). One must remember a bit the... It would be disturbing for the Rebbes, ah, that you learn Torah in order to have more money. In short, you're an even greater... Not only are you a glutton, but you're bringing the Almighty into your gluttony. Hello, you want to be a glutton? Be a glutton alone. Why do you need to involve the Almighty?

The Rebbe would sit with this Jew for a few minutes and explain to him that he wants the money so that he can do even better avodas Hashem. Ah, okay, okay, no problem. True. But then you don't need to do avodas Hashem in order to receive money. You get it anyway. You don't need the Rebbe to tell you the Torah. You want avodas Hashem? You can already have money too.

Okay, fine. Now let's go back to learning. Interesting how they called it. Ah, we continue learning with God's help.

Law: "Al Ha'aretz" in the Last Line

Speaker 1: Okay. It is a mitzvah to write "al ha'aretz" (upon the land) in the last line. The last line at the end of the mezuzah should be "al ha'aretz". Not at the beginning of the line, not at the end of the line. Whether at the beginning of the line or in the middle of the line. I don't understand exactly what this is. How do I think it can be? Yes, that it must be at the end, I understand clearly. Perhaps that there can be another small line after it? It seems that no, this is indeed the end. I don't quite grasp it.

Speaker 2: You mean that the two words "al ha'aretz" should be on a line by themselves and end with that?

Speaker 1: That's how it sounds. That's how one does it, right?

Discussion: What Does a Mezuzah Look Like

Speaker 2: Do you have a picture of a mezuzah perhaps, how it looks?

Speaker 1: Today I think they conduct themselves that they close it up and they put it up. It's a problem.

Speaker 2: What do you mean they close it up?

Speaker 1: No, they do it that way. That perhaps how one hangs a mezuzah.

Speaker 2: No, not that.

Speaker 1: Yes yes, but just look at a mezuzah how a contemporary mezuzah looks. It looks like this, "al ha'aretz", and after that one makes here a closed paragraph, open, whatever. That's a different question. We don't make... We'll see. Ah, is there the diamond of his?

Speaker 2: Lines.

Speaker 1: He doesn't do that. We make on everything. Here, here, here, here, here, here. One simple comfort there to place is good. Okay.

Come, I know, this is now not the picture which is the problem now. Let's say the Rambam... But the Rambam says, "but all the scribes have the custom", the custom is, the essential law itself is not to have "al ha'aretz" at the beginning of a line. Although I don't understand how it can be in the middle of a line.

Speaker 2: Ah, there can be more words on that line.

Speaker 1: More words can be written, but the custom is to write 22 lines, it seems indeed that a line is actually a line.

Speaker 2: Yes, "and the letter at the beginning of the last line", that's the last line.

The Rambam's Order of the Lines

Speaker 1: There is a Rambam, "and the letter at the beginning of each and every line in order", with which letters each line should begin according to the Rambam, until he goes to write later in the Laws of a Torah Scroll, he will say similar laws there, as there is a law "Shema Hashem Elokeinu Hashem echad" (Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One), this is the custom of the scribes, "Shema Hashem Elokeinu Hashem echad", "words upon your heart", "today upon your heart", "commandment every day", "which I command you today", "and you shall teach them to your children", "and you shall speak of them", "when you sit in your house", "and when you walk on the way", "and when you rise", "and you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand", "and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes", "and you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates", "and it shall be if you listen to my commandments which I command you today to love the Lord your God and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul", there are simply great secrets remembered in this, here everything must be, all mezuzos are written this way anyway, but there is the "totafos between your eyes", 22 lines corresponding to the 22 letters of the Torah.

Law: Rolling the Mezuzah and Inserting It in a Case

Speaker 1: Until here we have learned how one writes the mezuzah, now we will learn how one places the mezuzah, how one places the piece of parchment. "Folds it", "rolls it", the way how one closes it is through... Not folding it by putting together, but rolling it, and one does it from the end of the line to its beginning. This means, that it came out written, yes, verse, roll, to write, essentially, from the beginning of the line to its end. It should not be crumpled on the left side, but on the contrary, it should be crumpled on the right side.

"And after rolling it, one inserts it into a tube of reed or of wood or of anything", this would have been the equivalent by tefillin it was placed in such a small cloth that it was inserted into, a cloth.

Speaker 2: No, tefillin is not an equivalent, no, the parchment is placed into a cloth and that is placed into the tefillin, now we're talking about the tube of reed and of wood, also that is not an obligation, then it was halacha l'Moshe miSinai (law given to Moses at Sinai), that is I think just a practical thing.

Speaker 1: No, I'm talking about the part of the cloth still.

Speaker 2: He doesn't say here any cloth.

Speaker 1: No, there is no cloth, one places the mezuzah into a box and that is placed on the wall.

Speaker 2: Yes, "or of wood or of anything", it has today become completely closed up.

Discussion: How One Affixes the Mezuzah

Speaker 1: "And attaches it to the doorpost with a nail", or "digs into the doorpost and inserts the mezuzah into it", it's closed up in the sense that it lies in a box, but one must place it with a seal. It's not a sealed box, it's simply a tube.

Speaker 2: What is a tube?

Speaker 1: A holder, such a... a tube is such a straw, I don't know, a reed.

Speaker 2: Yes, a reed, it's something that grows.

Speaker 1: How easy is it to take out and read?

Speaker 2: He tells us.

Speaker 1: Very easy. I give it a knock, and I take it out. Obviously one places it in a way that it should be strong, it shouldn't fall out, but it's not stuck, it's not pressed from all sides. Today there are other materials. One can pull it out if you want, take it down from the wall.

Criticism of Contemporary Practice

Speaker 1: Today one places it into a large plastic that one cannot normally open. That's the main thing that prevents opening. Today's mezuzos, when you go to mezuzos one places it into such a plastic. Apparently one holds that it should be preserved better, but on the other hand one cannot open it at all. And you learned earlier that a mezuzah may not be covered.

Speaker 2: Don't they do with tefillin that the tefillin should be very strongly hard, there should be no way to open it.

Speaker 1: But tefillin is not made to be opened. There is nothing in the Torah that one should open it. "Four garments placed on Aaron's head". Here by mezuzah there is a law that one must be able to open it. There is a law of "grasping by hand". One must be able to open it. Today one conducts oneself to place it in such a plastic which is very difficult to open.

Speaker 2: Okay, one can open it.

Question: Whether One Needs Strong Affixing

Speaker 1: Another question is whether one needs to place something stronger than a strong glue. Apparently any glue or sticker is enough. It doesn't seem that one needs to... You see here a nail or digging. The digging also doesn't need to be so strong. He makes a small place in the door and one can insert it. It's like a practical thing. I don't see that it's a matter of affixing. There certainly needs to be a certain strength, but one doesn't see from where the later authorities took the innovations. One doesn't see. The Rambam is clear that one can place it in a hole. He digs, he makes a small hole, and he places it in. It's such a small... He digs a bit into the wood.

Speaker 2: Yes, so one doesn't see that it's an issue of Pesach that is not fit for nails.

Speaker 1: Yes good.

Law: Blessing for Affixing a Mezuzah

Speaker 1: Further the Rambam says, "and anyone who is not affixed with a mezuzah is exempt". Now he's going to talk about the blessing for the mitzvah from the first time when one places a mezuzah. "And anyone who is not affixed with a mezuzah is exempt". The blessing is "Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to affix a mezuzah".

Speaker 2: Yes, good.

Speaker 1: The Rambam says, why does one say the blessing at the time... Also the text of the blessing, the mitzvah is the affixing, not the actual writing, and they indeed say "to affix", as you say.

Speaker 2: Yes, you don't say at the time of its writing, that its affixing is the mitzvah.

Speaker 1: The mitzvah is affixing the mezuzah on the door, not the actual writing.

Discussion: "U'chtavtam" vs. "Likboa"

Speaker 2: Although in the Torah, the language of the Torah says "u'chtavtam" (and you shall write them). It doesn't say "u'kvatem" (and you shall affix them).

Speaker 1: You mean the Torah "u'chtavtam" and "u'kvatem". But there was once a certain time when one wrote it on the wall, on the door, before there was parchment. One didn't have any parchment.

Speaker 2: You know what I'll tell you? Writing, writing apparently must be on a... It says indeed "u'chtavtam", not any apparently. And why did the Sages say that one writes on parchment? There was no way of writing on the wall? That's not called writing? Like a book, like I don't know what. I don't know.

Speaker 1: Yes, in the Laws of Shabbos, yes. I tell you, if you think that earlier Jews had houses possessively in the Land of Israel, in the desert they already wrote on the... If one lives in a tent of leather. Like a tent. I don't know.

Speaker 2: So you understand already why they forbade making any affixing? Because where would you do it? They were indeed in a tent. It doesn't say "u'chtavtam ba'ohel" (and you shall write them in the tent).

Speaker 1: Ah, then I understand why it's called mezuzah, because once that used to be the mezuzah. I don't know. I don't know. There are matters, there are... I think there were Sadducees or Karaites who wrote straight, but... On the...

Speaker 2: No, the "u'chtavtam" is the issue. You see, here is indeed the essence of the mitzvah of affixing.

Speaker 1: Yes, the "u'chtavtam" you should write and have what to place. It's indeed simple, we live in a reality where there is a system, there are scribes, there are...

Speaker 2: Yes, I ask you, why can't you take a pen and go write on the wall? One writes and one makes the... One makes affixing the mezuzah. You need to write and affix. Do you understand what I'm saying?

Speaker 1: Yes, I don't know. It could be that once there was something.

Law: Invalid Ways of Affixing a Mezuzah

Speaker 1: Fine. He now says, how does one hang it up? "Hung it on a stick", interesting. "Hanging on a stick is invalid, because this is not affixing." Apparently stick means that it's not connected to the door. He has some stick that lies by the door, and he places it on the stick. That's how I think is the meaning.

Speaker 2: Not that there is a stick on the door.

Speaker 1: On the door, what's the difference? It says so. It must be built into the door, into the mezuzah. Fine, a hole in the door, they did nothing. Further, he simply placed it, that's the word, yes? He simply plain placed it, he didn't do it, because that's simple, because one needs to place it.

Law: Inserting Like a Bolt

Speaker 1: Again, he made a hole in the doorpost, and he inserted the mezuzah like a bolt, like a bar that is attached with a ring. He made a small hole in the doorpost and inserted the mezuzah like a bolt, like a bar that is attached with a ring. That means, he placed it straight in stretched. A bar is like a nail, like a bar was in the Tabernacle, yes, like the bars inside, and he placed the mezuzah before it, he inserted the mezuzah there. It's not placed on it, but he inserted it straight in a way. The mezuzah must hang as one places in a doorpost of the entrance, but you cannot insert it completely into the door like a bar.

Law: Deepened a Tefach

Speaker 1: Deepened a tefach (handbreadth), if he dug into the wall and he made very deep this, it's also invalid. What is this different from the digging earlier?

Speaker 2: No, digging you cannot make a whole tefach.

Speaker 1: Here he says, if he made a whole tefach in, it's already invalid, because it must be by the door, not that one should search and one should need to insert a hand and dig for a mezuzah. That's what it means, not to be too deep and far.

Speaker 2: What? I hear.

Speaker 1: Yes, a tefach.

Speaker 2: No, he says that it has to do with the reason from the meal offerings, he brings.

Speaker 1: What does it mean? I have what? Deepened a tefach? How does this come in today?

Speaker 2: No, the reason from the meal offerings is perhaps the next piece.

Speaker 1: Ah, the next piece is the reason from the meal offerings.

The Levush's Reason: "Al Mezuzos" Not "Toch Mezuzos"

Speaker 1: He says that the obligation of beautification is by mezuzah, that it must be "al mezuzos" (on the doorposts), not "toch mezuzos" (inside the doorposts). He made his own interpretations, the Levush.

Speaker 2: Really? Al mezuzos.

Speaker 1: The Levush had a system of rules, just as the Rambam brings already even in the Laws of Vows, one doesn't need to go back to the Gemara to say the reason. One can look at the law and think one's own reason. One does it all the time. He says his own reasons, even though I'm not relying that many people learn the Rambam and I don't know exactly what the Gemara says the reason, one can say oneself because the Rambam didn't bring the reason. One can understand from the opinion what it looks like that it makes sense.

Speaker 2: Anyway, it seemed to me that he has a strong Torah opinion.

Speaker 1: Yes, yes, like us.

Okay, it's not only... Yes, because good. The last piece because it's strong in the reason.

Checking Mezuzos and Tefillin — Laws, Measurements, and Questions

Law 1: Cut Reeds and Affixed Them as a Mezuzah

Speaker 1: One can look at the law and think oneself the reason. One does it all the time, he says his own reasons. All the more so when one learns the Rambam and I don't know from where the Gemara says the reason, one can say oneself, because the Rambam didn't bring the reason. One can understand from the opinion that he says, it makes sense.

Anyway, this means to me that he has a strong Torah opinion.

Speaker 2: Yes, yes, like us.

Speaker 1: Okay, there is a Mishnah, yes, that's how it goes. The next piece is chapter nine, law 51. Cut reeds and affixed them as a mezuzah. He took a bunch of reeds, and he wants to make from this a frame. One binds them together, one sets it up, and that becomes a mezuzah. On this one can place a door. And likewise joined the reeds and made from them a mezuzah, it's invalid, because any mezuzah that cannot stand by itself is not a mezuzah.

Why? Because there was already a mezuzah there, and it became invalid as a door. That means the mezuzah served two purposes: to be a mezuzah, to be a piece of parchment that has the mitzvah of mezuzah, and to be the mezuzah, the doorpost. So one must first make a mezuzah, and on the mezuzah place a mezuzah. One cannot make a mezuzah and use it for a mezuzah.

Question: Whether One Must Take Down and Put Back Up?

Speaker 1: Okay. But apparently, even if you served it, you need to take it down and put it back up. It's not simple.

Speaker 2: Yes, it's simple, there was no affixing of a mezuzah.

Speaker 1: It's very interesting, it has a law of affixing a mezuzah. I don't know where this came from.

Now one can learn that one must check it.

Speaker 2: Yes?

Speaker 1: Yes.

Digression: Individual's Mezuzah and Blessing on Tefillin Shel Rosh

Speaker 1: An individual's mezuzah, that's something for example, there is no such thing for example, but will one make a blessing when one finishes making the tefillin shel rosh (head tefillin), because one is going to place it in the proper place? Because the mitzvah is the binding, the mitzvah is the placing each day on the head. But here there is no something daily, but there must indeed be a certain time. Or the mitzvah is the placing, the one who places it. The one who places it, when he enters the house, he doesn't have the mitzvah, because... He has the fulfillment of the mitzvah, but he doesn't do the action of the mitzvah.

Law 9: Checking Mezuzos — Twice in Seven Years

Speaker 1: The Rambam says, simply a law of checking the mezuzah. And in tefillin the Rambam said that Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, the master of the Mishnah, inherited old mezuzos from his... Hillel, excuse me, Hillel the Elder inherited the grandfather of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, inherited tefillin from his grandfather, and the Rambam says one doesn't need to check, but mezuzos one does indeed need to check.

Is this according to Rabbi Yitzchak, because it lies in some weak place where one can open it. But the Rambam doesn't say so. The Rambam says why? Mezuzah is an individual, you check twice in seven years. The Rambam says twice in a jubilee. Interesting.

Question: Twice in a Shemittah or Twice in a Jubilee?

Speaker 1: Twice a shemittah (sabbatical year) or twice a yovel (jubilee)? It depends. An individual - every shemittah, and for the public - every yovel. Okay.

Twice a week is also an interesting shiur (measure). Why would you give away for the public when you're going to leave the most common one? It's very interesting. What is the shiur of twice a week? Instead of saying once in three years, he says twice in seven years. It's also hard to carry out. It doesn't mean once in three years. What does it mean? Once in three and a half years?

Speaker 2: Yes, but then what does twice a shemittah mean? Perhaps in every shemittah three times?

The Aruch HaShulchan's Approach

Speaker 1: He brings from the Aruch HaShulchan, whom I hold very highly, he's a beautiful posek (halachic decisor), that this is a thing, this is a medium, that a person needs to sometimes be concerned if it's a damp place, or it's located in a hot place often. Whatever, if a person has finally a place to think about, one needs to check once a year.

The Reason for Checking - Perhaps a Letter Was Uprooted or Erased

Speaker 1: But also the opposite, let's see. Look, you look in - why does one need to check it? Perhaps a letter was uprooted or erased. It can tear a bit or get erased. Why? Because of proximity to walls it rots, mold forms.

So, seemingly, today's mezuzos for example that one buys, one puts it in well in a strong plastic, and one can even see a lot that is clear, one can see through it that it's whole. So one doesn't need to check. This is only in a manner where it forms and becomes moldy. I don't believe it.

What Does the Sofer Actually Check?

Speaker 1: On the other hand, I want to tell you this. Even most, I have a fact. Let's think of a fact. You go to the sofer. People aren't keeping the halachos. They were told to check the mezuzos. How often does one find a pasul (invalidation)? What does the sofer check? No, what does he check at all? He usually checks if the pesulim (invalidations) that the original sofer made is not the halacha. That's not the halacha. The halacha is to check perhaps it deteriorated and lost its kashrus. That's not the topic.

I ask the sofer, does it happen at all in all of Lakewood that the mezuzah tore? He says yes, it happens. I don't know if it happens so much that one should make from this an obligation.

Does One Even Need a Sofer for Checking?

Speaker 1: I ask if it's good for me. It can already mean that one doesn't need a sofer at all to check, rather for the same money the homeowner can open and see. There was some mold.

Speaker 2: A sofer one doesn't need to see, look, the Rav says that one needs a sofer. The sofer checks it perfectly.

Speaker 1: Okay, okay.

Speaker 2: The chacham (sage) says that one doesn't need a sofer at all, he has no doubts. Even the checking that the sofer checks, you can also check yourself. Look at this, all the words are missing, look at all these letters are whole. A question is missing, the Rav asks, what the sofer does the same thing, he also asks the Rav.

Speaker 1: Oh, I don't want to dare say this, because I don't want to be angry. No, this isn't... People think that a Sefer Torah or a mezuzah is something that no one can know what it is. Every Jew can do it himself, he can see if the letters make sense, if a letter is missing, if it's... But this isn't the main thing, the obligation isn't to say that one missed a letter, the obligation is to check if it became rotten. Can you give a check, take it down, look if it's good, put it back. Seemingly on top of it.

Discussion: Obligation of Checking for What?

Speaker 2: I believe that there are poskim who will say that once a decree was made it already became a... what, that one should check that one missed a... I missed a letter when I wrote it.

Speaker 1: No, an obligation of checking one needs.

Speaker 2: An obligation of checking on that.

Speaker 1: I agree, I agree.

Speaker 2: It doesn't make sense that one should have an obligation to check that someone missed a letter when he wrote it.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe's Custom to Check Tefillin and Mezuzos

Speaker 2: The Lubavitcher Rebbe always said to check the tefillin and mezuzos.

Speaker 1: Yes, I don't know why.

Speaker 2: Perhaps this isn't the same mitzvah as theft?

Speaker 1: I don't agree with you.

Speaker 2: No, but it's a halacha, the Torah says that there is such a thing. How does this come into logic?

Speaker 1: One must always check the tzitzis that the tzitzis haven't torn off something.

Speaker 2: Tzitzis one actually needs to check, because it tears off a lot.

Speaker 1: And this isn't revelation.

Speaker 2: One would see in the laws of tzitzis.

Speaker 1: No, I don't know. Presumably he had an answer to my question, I wasn't such a scholar who told him things. Presumably he asked me.

Speaker 2: No, but I'm telling you something, that if he would have done it only on mezuzos you would have been right, but he said it on tefillin too.

Speaker 1: Tefillin is a much greater question, yes. Chabad, what happened, sends me that one should check the tefillin and mezuzos.

Speaker 2: Actually I don't understand, I don't know why.

Possible Answers

Speaker 1: I think that the Lubavitcher Rebbe perhaps spoke more about mezuzos, that one needs to place them properly as well. Perhaps he meant to say that if he wants to make himself mehudar (beautified) in mezuzos, he wasn't a... If one of our listeners to the shiur is a Chabadnik, he can send in the inside information. He should send in the matter of why the Rebbe said these matters.

Speaker 2: But this is the twenty-four years, the Lubavitcher Rebbe takes.

Speaker 1: But this is you.

Speaker 2: Twice in seven clearly means, not that... Actually a very interesting shiur, but what tells me once what does this have to do with shemittah or with yovel? Okay, this is a way of saying a shiur, I don't know if this is difficult, but twice in seven years sounds like... But what brought the Rebbe a whole day? I mean, I'm afraid that the Rebbe meant that...

Searching for the Sources

Speaker 1: Here it says checking tefillin, ah, this is checking tefillin, this is the discussion, this is the top discussion. Yes, but I don't see any special source, one needs to search in the... And this is all the same thing, he brings that the Rebbe said one should check every year, there's also a second posek, when every Elul one should check the mezuzos and the tefillin. It also doesn't look clear why... why... where does it say the thing that one should do it in the month of Elul? All as a chumra (stringency) like this? Okay, this is just, like the month of Elul one remembers Jewishness. But... yes, it's such a chumra, but I don't see why...

I'm afraid that the Lubavitcher Rebbe was simply concerned that many people have invalid tefillin, or they don't put on tefillin at all, and this was such a nice way how... yes, it's more such a nice way that will remind them.

I see different ones here, and I don't see anyone who brings the sources. It's also a way of making such emissaries, one should have dealings with Jews everywhere, should sell covers for mezuzos. Or I need to have a business.

Speaker 2: Yes, good. And livelihoods.

Speaker 1: Ah, but people who really don't know what a mezuzah means, can certainly be. But... actually, but it's not clear, perhaps this was simply such a way of maintaining his wonders, I don't know. I don't know what the Rebbe had to say, I have no idea. He used to say many times one should check the mezuzos and the tefillin.

The Rema's Law When a Jew Has Trouble

Speaker 1: What does the Rema say when a Jew has trouble? He doesn't bring any source here. Can one say, when a person has trouble, he needs to say that it's not a coincidence, and he should do teshuvah (repentance).

Speaker 2: Yes, exactly, the Rema wouldn't have liked this so strongly, because the main thing of the mezuzah is to remind, it should remind you of the unity of Hashem. Ah, but how can you say this to a Jew? Check your service of Hashem.

Speaker 1: The Lubavitcher Rebbe actually meant this, you should care more about the mezuzos and tefillin, you should do an action. What should he do with you? He needs to remind you to check the mezuzos and tefillin? No, you should... You have trouble? Perhaps check your service of Hashem, how do you say this to a Jew? Imagine for example what a woman writes here to the Lubavitcher Rebbe, he says, do you check that you believe in the Almighty? No, this is a way, so the Torah gave the advice how to write the tefillin. Okay, certainly it needs no proof, that you see that not all other great scholars of Israel don't conduct themselves this way anymore nowadays, so I don't know.

Checking Tefillin - The Rambam and Hillel the Elder

Speaker 1: Anyway, back to the topic, everyone is obligated. Okay, until now we've learned about the, okay, one more halacha.

The Kozhnitzer Rebbe says a bit more, that from the Rambam it's implied by tefillin you read that it's a virtue not to check at all. Such a refined language there is, why does the Rambam bring that Hillel the Elder was in doubt that it's his grandfather's tefillin? It's not so, it's actually a virtue. The Rambam would like, no, the Rambam wouldn't have written such a story just like that. It's not that it's not just a simple story. It's certain, this I agree, it's certain that one can use the grandfather's tefillin, but the holy Tanna Hillel the Elder put them on, he put on every day his grandfather's tefillin, he didn't think to check. No, the Rambam brings it for a reason, that he wants to say that it's highly recommended as it were, he doesn't say the word, but there's the other side too, if there's a concern from inside in the grandfather's tefillin, one needs to check it, if it became wet, I know what.

The Story of a Lubavitcher Chassid Who Found Invalid Tefillin

Speaker 1: It's certainly agreed, and there's the story of the Lubavitcher chassid who became aware that he never put on kosher tefillin. There are such stories always, but every story, and the Rambam would have actually liked the story, why? Because if the Lubavitcher chassid was such a level that he didn't lose his joy and his devotion even when he became aware that he did the mitzvah for years, he actually did the maximum of love and fear of Hashem.

Speaker 2: No, it also has to do with teshuvah, the teshuvah between man and his fellow, I remember that he says that he didn't make angry at the other, he found that his tefillin were invalid.

Foundation: We Fulfill the Torah, Not Machines

Speaker 1: It's simple, because the Torah, we fulfill the Torah, we're not machines, the tefillin is to remind. The Torah says that you have a chazakah (presumption), you bought from a God-fearing sofer, established, whatever, all these things. But if you did what the Torah says, it's proper to be that in the course of history you need to imagine that there were in the course of history twenty million tzaddikim (righteous people), I know what, and twenty of them put on invalid tefillin their whole lives because they followed the halacha. Known in the upper wisdoms.

So it goes, that the Almighty made the world this way, what do we know why? It's very funny, you know, one thinks that it's a revelation what it's a... You did properly, and were you yotzei (fulfilled), there's no question at all, and what is the... A person is obligated to do his part... In other words, if someone bought tefillin according to law, and he did his mitzvah, and he put on for seventy years invalid tefillin, and the second one didn't do the mitzvah incumbent to buy with the money, I know what, he didn't do the obligation incumbent upon him to buy tefillin, and he put on all years kosher tefillin, that one still did his mitzvah, and that one didn't do his mitzvah. This one merited every day to have the tremendous thing of kosher tefillin on his head, and he not.

He did yes, because from the side of truth... What did he do? He did it for the sake of His unification. But this isn't an answer, he didn't want from it, he put on for the sake of His unification. But I can't say in learning, he fulfilled all the laws of tefillin every day. No, I say in the case of the above, what did he do there, what could he do? Tell me one thing, that the tefillin opened up, you notice that the tefillin needs to open. Didn't you do it above for the sake of His unification? No, this is already too Chassidic. But not, I mean to say, it's only a remembrance, it should be at least something else perhaps. I don't know, there is a halacha that one should put on tefillin. But who is obligated? The Rambam says. Who is obligated? The Rambam says. One needs to think if there would be a Rebbe who instead of saying one should check the tefillin, every time someone who asks a question he should say he should send an accountant to check all his accounts, if he's not God forbid being stolen from, right? If he wasn't dishonest with the wife, and if he had... an obligation incumbent upon him. Okay, an obligation incumbent upon him, says the Rambam, everyone goes in when learning, who is obligated? The Rambam says, everyone has full women and slaves that it's not my concern or what it's not dear. My principle. From principle, because a mezuzah can... He doesn't put himself an education by the child... But what is the education, even a baby? Newer, a child already notices, or a child that... It doesn't say... Okay perhaps just, from the age of education, weapons clear, and I'm not exempt every time here an exemption the same. Is a Jew obligated and a Jew's heart, because or outside Israel. It happens if someone rents a house outside Israel. Or someone lives outside and lives in a hotel in Israel, the obligation of immediately. Exempt from mezuzah for thirty days. The first thirty days of renting in the exemption. Why does he say thirty days of renting? Because they are father, father, renter of a house, father, renter of a house, Land of Israel, obligated in mezuzos immediately, one who rents out in the Land of Israel is immediately obligated in mezuzos, what is the difference? You're already no outside, the Land of Israel is a Jew, where does a Jew live, a Jew truly lives every Jew in the Land of Israel, when you rent out in the Land of Israel, you're already living there, eh, tomorrow he's going out, and outside Israel is always, everything is temporary. Even a Jew, after thirty days, okay, already has permanence. But before thirty days, he still doesn't have permanence, perhaps tomorrow he'll change his mind.

The Mezuzah Says "Land" - Everything is Land

That we just now learned, that the mezuzos must end with the words all land, but a special line, everything is all land. There is where a Jew belongs, we are here temporarily, here in exile, Thames, Ribver, or wherever. It should say the Rambam, that when a person is still in a manner of entry into a house, it's still not an obligation, when it becomes already more permanent. In the Land of Israel, the dwelling itself is already called permanence.

Temporary Dwelling - Inn in the Land of Israel

But in the Land of Israel there's still a condition, when in a dwelling outside, an outside is such a thing, an outside is on the roads, yes? Hotel is shown on Brazil. Yes, so travelers. I mean an outside means a hotel, or an inn like that. So is the halacha, why I think that there are people who are thinking in the Land of Israel, they go in and they would rent a room, or there such things and he brings with his mezuzos. Seemingly here one sees clearly that it's not an obligation, because a dwelling outside. So travelers. I already know why people aren't making bites. Have you heard of this? I've seen people are somewhat worried. They think that this is a merchant's house. Yes, but seemingly it's not a rental of the house, it's a temporary dwelling, an inn.

Rabbi Domb's Explanation: The Sages Want People to Stay in Their Homes

The Geonim and Rishonim that you mention, he rents a room, perhaps indeed he doesn't - when he goes to the Grand for ten days in the summer, does he go around without a mezuzah? I don't know. Perhaps then he's already called a renter (shokher)? I don't know. He doesn't say the measure of when it becomes a temporary dwelling (diras arai) and an inn (pundak). He explains, the Rav Domb"n, that the simple meaning is that the Chachamim want people to remain in their homes, therefore they established that one should put up a mezuzah, so that he should remain there. But an inn isn't relevant, an inn is made for temporary stays and he's going to leave. According to this, there's no difference even if he rents a house for the summer. Okay, perhaps at some level it already becomes an actual rental (sechirus).

Law: A Renter is Obligated in Mezuzah – Obligation of the Resident, Not Obligation of the House

Okay, another law regarding a renter, an important law. Someone who rents a house in Eretz Yisrael, a renter is obligated to affix a mezuzah, meaning the mitzvah is on the renter, on the one who rents. Even if he gave payment for its affixing, why? Even if he pays that the landlord (mashkir) should do it, even... This means to say that the renter must pay. Does this mean to say that the landlord must obligate the other one to pay for it? No. The money must also be paid by the renter. The mezuzah is an obligation of the resident (chovas hadar), not an obligation of the house (chovas habayis). The mezuzah is one of the earlier laws that we learned, that it has to do with the house, regarding this one doesn't say renter. One says no, it has to do with... It doesn't say something extra, the mezuzah doesn't say that it's an obligation of the house, but yes, okay.

Law: Not to Remove Mezuzos When Leaving

And when he leaves (vechesheyotzei), another interesting law, when a person leaves his rental, he doesn't take his mezuzos. One doesn't empty a house of mezuzos. This goes without saying, the house had mezuzos there, you're not now going to take them down and remove them.

Dispute Among Rishonim: What is the Reason?

What is the reason that it says? You harm the next person who's going to move in. But this doesn't fit so well. The Tosafos says that the reason is that harmful spirits (mazzikin) come into a house where there are no mezuzos, the entire house becomes damaged (kulo beisa mizka havi). It turns out that you're causing damage (pnei heizek), you're doing harm to the next person. The Rambam apparently doesn't hold of this damage. Perhaps he'll say simply, it's not respectful (kavod) to a mezuzah. A Jewish house gets a mezuzah. That's how I would have thought, what's suddenly the idea.

By a Non-Jew – Permitted to Remove

And it's permitted to take from a non-Jew's house (umutar litol mibeis shel goy), granted there is, according to how I learned it, granted there is a concern that one will desecrate (mechalel) the mezuzah, there is a matter that one should remove it when leaving (kesheyotzei), when one leaves.

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein's Enactment: Painting and Replacing

The custom (minhag) in America is that one is very careful about this. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein said that one usually takes when one paints over, one paints over the house, so it's not urgent. No, during the painting one anyway takes down the mezuzos to paint. If one takes down the mezuzos, not God forbid to remove them, one takes them down to paint, then it's already accepted in the law that one is obligated to replace them for the other person. This was Rabbi Moshe Feinstein's answer (teirutz).

You would have to say that to the painting has come something else, that during painting non-Jews are involved, and many times they take down the mezuzos and they throw them away, and one wants to replace them. So it becomes the law of standing in a house for a non-Jew (omeid bebayis legoy), that on the contrary, here you're doing it for the honor (lekavod) of the mezuzah.

Practical Advice: Cheaper Mezuzos and the Landlord's Obligation

There are other people who have a permission (heiter), that if a person has special mezuzos, he puts up weaker, cheaper mezuzos, and he settles accounts with the person who's moving in.

An enactment (takana), one can settle accounts. The truth is that one can settle accounts simply with the Jew who's moving in. Many times it's a problem, until the other one finds a scribe (meseik), who knows. There isn't the obligation that Rabbi Moshe Feinstein says, when he made the enactment, he said that we're talking about a homeowner (baal habayis) who is financially invested. But a matter of honor of the Torah (kavod haTorah), or the mezuzah, it's very reasonable (mesubar) that a long-term owner who takes in every period of time different people, should have a set of mezuzos and he should put them up when someone leaves, simply make it easier for the people, because that's the problem.

Or one says that the landlords where every year a kollel young man changes there, where the starter homes that one keeps exchanging, every landlord should have a whole set of mezuzos. If the landlord puts them up, then he has his permanent (kevuos'dige) mezuzos. It's already part of the rent, whatever. This is indeed what's done, in certain places. That there's an obligation that the neighbors should do. If there's already a Jewish homeowner who already put them up, they're already put up, and they remain there already.