Rashi on Menachos 33a explains the gemara's rule "B'Mezuza halach achar haragil" to apply to any room with multiple doors and implies that it is necessary to affix a mezuza to only the doorway that is used most frequently. Is Rashi's opinion a da'as yachid? I thought that any doorway to a regular room, even if used infrequently, requires a mezuza unless it has been boarded up in a permanent manner. Are there other Rishonim that learn this rule applying to the case of a Bais HaMedrash alone?
Aharon Levine, Baltimore, MD. USA
See Rashi later (44a DH Af Al Gav) who cites another interpretation of Ragil, which he himself prefers. According to the other explanation, Eino Ragil means the door was not made to be used by everyone, but by a specific party. This is the Halachic opinion.
The SHULCHAN ARUCH (YD 286:18) writes that a Mezuzah must be affixed to the second door to a house, even if one generally uses another door. However, the REMA adds, citing MAHARIL, mentions that if a storehouse has, besides its normal entrance from the house, another entrance from the street, through which large barrels are periodically brought to the storehouse, the entrance to the street doesn't need a Mezuzah -- apparently because of our Gemara about "Ragil."
Apparently, a doorway qualifies as "not Ragil" only if it is *not used at all* most of the year. In the case of the Shulchan Aruch, presumably the doorway through which large barrels were brought was used only at the time of the harvest, when new barrels were filled, but not during the rest of the year.
Examples of this might be a Sukah Mirpeset, which is entered only on Sukos.
M. Kornfeld, based on discussions with Rabbi Eliyahu Feldman
Rashi on Menachos 33a explains the gemara's rule "B'Mezuza halach achar haragil" to apply to any room with multiple doors and implies that it is necessary to affix a mezuza to only the doorway that is used most frequently. Is Rashi's opinion a da'as yachid? I thought that any doorway to a regular room, even if used infrequently, requires a mezuza unless it has been boarded up in a permanent manner. Are there other Rishonim that learn this rule applying to the case of a Bais HaMedrash alone?
Aharon Levine, Baltimore, MD. USA
The Rambam (Hilchos Mezuzah 6:11), according to the Kesef Mishneh's understanding, explains that the Gemara is saying that a doorway between a house and a Beis Midrash is Chayav only if one regularly uses the doorway. The Shulchan Aruch (YD 286:10) follows this understanding.
For an explanation of the Rambam's view, as well as for an overview of the Halachah, see the D.A.F. Insights to Menachos 34a, Insights 1 and 2.
D. Zupnik
Dear R. Kornfeld.
In light of what the rav answered the previous question, I had a problem
with rashi on daf 33: Dibur hamaschil: bepesach she'achorey hadeles.
Rashi in the second peshat says that the case is of a rich man who has
a large entrance but does not use it, rather he makes another smaller entrance next
to it, and the discussion of the gemoro would than be whether or not the second door
way needs a mezuzah. My question is why is it poshut to the gemoro that the first one is
chayev in mezuzah, it's not used most of the year only for special occasions?
Thanks in advance,
Shmuel Tannenbaum, Lakewood, NJ
"Eino Ragil" exempts a doorway from a Mezuzah, according to the above explanation, only if the doorway is both meant for specific people, and used during a specific season. In the example of the Shulchan Aruch, it is used by barrel-carriers during the harvest season. Presumably the same might be true of the doorway of Rebbi. (However, it is possible that since that doorway was used by *only one* person, even if its use is not seasonal it is exempt from Mezuzah.)
The grand doorway and minor doorways were used by everyone entering the house, during the times that each of them was open. (In addition, there might not have been *set* occasions for the use of the larger door; it might have been opened without a set, predetermined seasonal pattern. Special occassions can occur any time of year.)
If the grand door had been set aside to be used for the queen's yearly Sukkos visit, for example, the door might indeed be exempt from Mezuzah.
M. Kornfeld