Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Mezuzah

87 bytes added, 17:29, 24 October 2017
Balcony
# If the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a courtyard or street then the back door should have a mezuzah on the right side going into the house because the house is used more than the backyard.<ref>The Maharil (responsa 94) wrote that if the back door opens into a backyard that has a gate to a street then the direction of the mezuzah is determined by which way the door opens. Taz 289:3 quotes it. Chelkat Yakov YD 161 writes that even though the Maharil writes that when there are two doors to a backyard the mezuzah is determined by the way the door opens, the Levush holds that we would put up the mezuzah going into the house since it is used more than the backyard. Furthermore, the Bet Meir and Chavot Daat disagree with the Maharil altogether even when the backyard has no other exit. Therefore, the Chelkat Yakov concludes that since the house is used more than the courtyard that trumps the rule of the fact that the majority of the walking is from the house to the courtyard. [http://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/788640/rabbi-hershel-schachter/the-laws-of-mezuzah/ Rav Hershel Schachter in “The Laws of Mezuzah” (min 34-42)] agreed.</ref>
===Balcony===
# A balcony or deck that opens to a house and has no other entrance or exit is should have a mezuzah on the right going from the house to the same as a room with only one entrancebalcony.<ref>The Maharil quoted by the Taz 289:4 writes that if a house opens to enclosed courtyard and it doesn't have any other opening then certainly the doorway to the courtyard is considered an entrance to the courtyard since there's no other way in. However, the Bet Meir 289 argues with the Maharil and says that since the house is used more than the courtyard it is considered an entrance into the house. Chazon Ish YD 168:5 (cited by Yabia Omer) and Bnei Tziyon Binyan Tzion (cited by Chelkat Yakov) agree with the Bet Meir. Maharam Shik 287, Maharsham 1:71 and 3:154, and Chelkat Yakov YD 162 agree with the Maharil against the Bet Meir. The Daat Kedoshim agrees with the Bet Meir unless it is an area less than 4x4 amot which might not be obligated at all in which case he follows the Maharil. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Yabia Omer YD 4:23:6 cites the Masechet Mezuzah ch. 2 which amazingly has an explicit dispute between the Tana Kama and Rabbi Yosi about this exact case where a house opens to a courtyard that doesn't have another entrance. Rav Ovadia quotes dozens of sources whether we generally follow Rabbi Yosi over Tana Kama or not and additionally if it is possible to disregard this source since it is post-talmudic. In any event, he is convinced of the argument of the Bet Meir but still follows the opinion of the Maharil being that he was quoted by the Bet Yosef and is an earlier source.</ref>
===Straight or Diagonal===

Navigation menu