|
||||
|
Daf Yomi
Rabbi Yaakov Klass & Rabbi Gershon Tannenbaum
Posted Jun 14 2006 Moving Mezuzos from One House to Another
"For Therein Was A Residence For The High Priest" (Yoma 10a) Our Daf discusses the absence of mezuzos in the Beth Hamikdash. The Parhedrin chamber, however, did have a mezuzah and the Gemara suggests that it required a mezuzah since it served as the dwelling place for the Kohen Gadol. The Gemara then asks about the other chambers in the Beth Hamikdash which also served as dwelling places. Those, the Gemara determines, did not have mezuzos. The dwelling of the Kohen Gadol did because of a special Rabbinic decree.
The Gemara (Bava Metzia 102a) explains that if a person vacates his premises, he may not remove any mezuzah if the next resident or tenant is Jewish. The Gemara does not tell us if one may demand payment for them. Another point to consider is whether one may remove the mezuzos if the intention is to keep them in storage, or even if one intends to install them in his new premises. Furthermore, if the owner of the mezuzos cannot afford to buy new mezuzos to install in his new premises, does the prohibition still apply? The Rishonim and Acharonim explore these questions at length and we shall try to summarize their views in the next paragraphs.
Advertisement
Tosafos offer two reasons to forbid a vacating tenant to remove mezuzos: (a) harmful spirits (mazikin) enter a house without a mezuzah and removing mezuzos is equivalent to inviting them in (Bava Metzia 101b, s.v. Lo yitlenah veyeitzei); (b) a mezuzah not in its right place on a doorpost is not being used in the performance of a mitzvah, and removing it takes its purpose away from it, which is not allowed; Tosafos (Shabbos 22a s.v. Rav) also express this general idea concerning the removal of tzitzis from one tallis to be placed on another. While removed, the tzitzis are not serving their function. The Gemara (Bava Metzia 102a) stresses the severity of such an act, and tells of a person who moved from his home, took along his mezuzos, and eventually lost his wife and children.
Payment For Mezuzos
Many Rishonim do not clearly rule whether a new tenant must pay for mezuzos left behind. The Ritva, for example, states that "he may have to pay." The Beth Yosef (Y.D. 291) cites Rabbenu Manoach's opinion that "if the previous resident demands it, it is better to pay him, but we must not use coercion." Rema rules (ibid.) that "if the previous tenant demands it, he is to be paid," and later poskim ask whether this means that the departing tenant can demand payment through a beth din or if Rema merely advises a new tenant to do so although he cannot be forced.
The Bach (ibid.) explains the nature of the doubt causing our question. In his opinion, the answer depends on the two possible reasons for leaving the mezuzos on the premises. If the departing tenant is forbidden to take them because, otherwise, the place would invite mazikin, the new resident must pay him for that benefit. If, on the other hand, we consider the other reason - that a mezuzah may not be moved from where it is being used for a mitzvah - then that halacha does not concern the new tenant, who may say, "You left the mezuzos to fulfill your obligation; I owe you nothing" (see Perishah 291:2).
Removing Mezuzos For Installation Elsewhere
The Ritva (Bava Metzia ad loc.) quotes the She'iltos stating that a departing tenant is forbidden to remove his mezuzos if he doesn't need them at his new premises. However, he may do so in order to affix them elsewhere, as they continue to be used for a mitzvah. According to the She'iltos, then, the reason for the prohibition is to prevent keeping an object from serving in its function of mitzvah: had the reason been to repel mazikin, mezuzos would always have to stay where they are.
Someone Who Cannot Afford Mezuzos
If removing mezuzos is forbidden in order to block the entry of mazikin, a vacating tenant may not take them down even if he cannot afford new ones. However, according to the other reason, he may remove them if he intends to use them in his new premises. The Poskim (Birkei Yosef 291, s.k. 3; Peri Megadim, O.C. 13; Mishbetzos Zahav s.k. 2; Da'as Kedoshim by the Rav of Butczacz onY.D., Hilchos Mezuzah 291, s.k. 1) rule that if he absolutely cannot afford new mezuzos, he may rely on the latter reason and take his mezuzos with him. (See Nimukei Yosef, who offers a third reason why one may not remove mezuzos - to avoid disturbing the presence of the Shechinah that dwells in premises graced by a mezuzah.)
"Give Preference To Your Life"According to a clever suggestion in Responsa VaYechi Yaakov (Y.D. 71), even if the reason for the prohibition is to repel mazikin, a departing tenant who can't afford new mezuzos may take his with him. After all, he is not required to live without mezuzos just in order to protect someone else (see Responsa Iggros Moshe, Y.D. 4:44; Responsa Minchas Yitzchak 9:106; Responsa Yabia Omer, Y.D. 3:18). Meoros Hadaf Hayomi Newsletters is published by the Sochachover Kollel of Bnei Brak, led by Rabbi Chaim Dovid Kovalsky. Meoros Hadaf Hayomi Newsletters in Hebrew and/or English, are available for simcha dedications as well as for memorials such as yahrzeit, shloshim, etc., and are distributed in bulk or by personal subscription, by mail, or by email dafyomi@hadaf-yomi.com. A new Meorot Hadaf Hayomi CD ROM in English, Hebrew, Yiddish, and French, is available by calling 888-5 MEOROT (888-563-6768).
|
|
|||
|
Copyright JewishPress.com 2008 Powered By BottomLineMG.com |
Contact Us |
About Us
| ||||
