OPINIONS: The Gemara discusses the writing of the Parshiyos of Mezuzos and whether they are to be written "Pesuchos" or "Setumos."

What constitutes a Parshah Pesuchah and a Parshah Setumah?

(a) TOSFOS and the ROSH maintain that a Parshah Pesuchah refers to any section of the Torah that ends with space left at the end of the last line of the preceding section (#1 in Graphic), or that has blank space at the beginning of the new section (#2 in Graphic), or both (#3 in Graphic).

A Parshah Setumah refers to any section that ends on the same line on which the next section begins (#4 in Graphic), such that the empty space is in the middle of a line.

(b) The RAMBAM explains that a Parshah Pesuchah refers only to a section that ends with space at the end of the line (#1 in Graphic).

A Parshah Setumah is a section that is followed by empty space at the beginning of the next line, whether the section ends at the end of the line before the line with the empty space (#2 in Graphic) or whether it ends in the middle of the line before the line with the empty space (#3 in Graphic). In addition, a Parshah is considered Setumah when the Parshah ends on the same line on which the next section begins (#4 in Graphic), such that the empty space is in the middle of a line.

The Rosh's opinion is easy to understand. A Parshah is Pesuchah when it is "open" from either side. When it is "closed" from both sides, it is Setumah.

The Rambam's opinion is that a Parshah is Pesuchah only when there is space left at the end of the line. If it is closed at the end, it is Setumah, and making it "open" at the beginning of the next line will not make it a Pesuchah. Why, though, according to the opinion of the Rambam, is it considered Setumah when the last line of the section, and the first line of the next section, are both "open" (#3 in Graphic)?

Apparently, the answer is that when the next section starts at the beginning of the line (after the end of the last line of the previous section was left open), it is clearly recognizable that the break in the previous line is there in order to make it a Pesuchah. If, however, the next line also starts after a break (which is not necessary in order to make it a Pesuchah), then the break at the end of the previous line is also understood to make a break between Parshiyos (and not necessarily to make it a Pesuchah).

However, the CHAZON ISH (Hilchos Tefilin 10:2, DH v'Nir'eh) has a different understanding of the Rambam. He explains that only when there was not enough room at the end of the first line to start the new section is it not considered Pesuchah. It is considered Setumah in such a case because it looks as though the space at the beginning of the following line is there only to complete the amount of space that must be left between Setumos. If, however, there was enough room on the line before the open space to leave a break and start the next Parshah on the same line (as is the case in #4 in Graphic), and, nevertheless, the end of the line was left open, then even if the next section starts in the middle of the line, it is still considered Pesuchah. This is because the space left at the end of the previous section must have been left in order to make it a Pesuchah, because in order to make it a Setumah the Sofer simply could have started writing the new section at the end of the same line.

QUESTION: The Gemara attempts to bring support for the opinion that maintains that the Parshiyos of a Mezuzah are written Setumos from the Halachah that the Parshiyos of a Sefer Torah, or of Tefilin, that became worn out cannot be used for a Mezuzah because of the rule of "Ma'alin b'Kodesh v'Ein Moridin." This implies that if not for the problem of "Ma'alin b'Kodesh," one could use the Parshiyos of a Sefer Torah for a Mezuzah. This implies that the Parshiyos of a Mezuzah are supposed to be Setumos, because the Parshiyos of a Sefer Torah are Setumos. If the Parshiyos of the Mezuzah must be Pesuchos, then how could the Parshiyos be taken from a Sefer Torah in which they are Setumos?

The Gemara refutes this proof by saying that if not for the problem of "Ma'alin b'Kodesh," the Parshiyos of the Sefer Torah could be used to complete ("l'Hashlim") the Mezuzah (such as when part of the Parshah of the Mezuzah was already written in the Sefer Torah and it just needs to be completed).

How, though, practically, would the Parshiyos of a Sefer Torah (that is, the Parshah of "Shema" and the Parshah of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a") be able to be used for a Mezuzah? In the Sefer Torah, the paragraph of "Shema" is in Parshas Va'eschanan, while the paragraph of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" is in Parshas Ekev. In the Mezuzah, however, the paragraph of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" is written immediately after the paragraph of "Shema"! Apparently, the Gemara is suggesting that the Parshiyos of "Shema" and "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" may be cut out of a Sefer Torah and sewn together to make a Mezuzah. (See RASHI, DH v'Dilma, as cited by TOSFOS and SHITAH MEKUBETZES #13.)

However, it is still not clear how the Parshiyos of a Sefer Torah can be used for a Mezuzah. RASHI explains that "Setumos" refers to any section that ends on the same line on which the next section begins, such that the empty space is in the middle of a line. The last line of Shema, as written in the Sefer Torah, is Setumah, and includes the first words of the next paragraph in Parshas Va'eschanan, "v'Hayah Ki Yevi'acha." How, then, can a Mezuzah be made by sewing together the Parshiyos cut out from a Sefer Torah? The last line of the Parshah of "Shema" in the Sefer Torah includes the first words of the next Parshah, which do not belong in the Mezuzah! (SEFAS EMES)

(a) The PERUSH HA'MEYUCHAS LA'RASHBA suggests a simple answer. Instead of cutting the Parshah from the Sefer Torah with a straight cut between the lines of text, it may be cut in such a way that the beginning of the last line of Shema is included in the cut, but the end of the line (the first words of the next Parshah) are not included in the cut. Similarly, the paragraph of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" may be cut in such a way that the first words on the line are not included. When they are sewn together along the edges where they were cut, the Parshiyos will be Setumos, since there are words at the beginning of the line (the last words of "Shema") and at the end of the line (the first words of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a").

The SEFAS EMES points out that the first word of the Parshah that follows "Shema" in the Sefer Torah is "v'Hayah," the same word that begins the second Parshah of the Mezuzah. If that word is the only word written at the end of the line after "Shema," and the word "v'Hayah" of the Parshah of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" is the only word at the end of a line, then the Parshiyos can be cut out of the Sefer Torah and sewn together in such a way that the Parshiyos remain Setumos.

This answer is acceptable according to Rashi, and according to the first answer of TOSFOS (DH Dilma), who maintain that one is permitted to write a Mezuzah on two pages of parchment and then attach them (by sewing them with Gidin), as is done with a Sefer Torah. Tosfos, however, cites a Yerushalmi that states that it is prohibited to sew together the Parshiyos of a Mezuzah. The RAMBAM (Hilchos Mezuzah 5:1) rules in accordance with the Yerushalmi and writes that a Mezuzah may not be written on two pages of parchment that are then sewn together. According to the Rambam, how can the Gemara here suggest the possibility of taking the Parshiyos of a Mezuzah from a Sefer Torah?

(b) The Perush ha'Meyuchas la'Rashba suggests further that perhaps the entire folio page of the Sefer Torah, which includes the paragraphs of "Shema" and "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a," can be used for the Mezuzah. The passages between "Shema" and "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" that do not belong in the Mezuzah will be ignored, and it will be considered as though there is blank space between the two paragraphs. (Alternatively, the words between the two paragraphs can be erased; see Sefas Emes.) Even though the words at the end of the last line of the Parshah of "Shema" will be ignored, and the words at the beginning of the first line of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" will be ignored, they nevertheless are considered Setumos, since one Parshah ends at the beginning of the line and the next Parshah begins at the end of the same line, with empty space in the middle. This seems to be the intention of Rashi in Shabbos (79b, DH Sefer Torah).

(c) The RAMBAM defines Setumos differently from Rashi and Tosfos. According to the Rambam, a Parshah that ends at the end of a line, even when the following Parshah begins in the middle of the next line, is considered Setumah. A Parshah is defined as Pesuchah only when space is left at the end of the line, and the next Parshah starts at the beginning of the following line (see previous Insight).

According to the Rambam's opinion, the Gemara's proof that the Parshiyos of a Mezuzah are Setumos (from the inference that a Mezuzah may be made from a Sefer Torah) may be understood as follows. In a Sefer Torah, the Parshah of "Shema" can end at the end of a line (since it is Setumah). Also, the line on which "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" starts can begin with half a line of blank space, even though it is Setumah. There is no need to cut off the end of one line and the beginning of the other.

The only problem is getting the two Parshiyos in proximity to each other, so that they can be used for a Mezuzah without having to sew them together. RAV CHAIM KANIEVSKY shlit'a (in MASECHES SEFER TORAH 1:14) proposes that this may be accomplished in the following manner.

He suggests that the Gemara is referring to a Sefer Torah with very long columns. The paragraph of "Shema" is written at the bottom of one column, and the paragraph of "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" is written at the bottom of the immediately adjacent column (that is, the columns are so long that the rest of Parshas Va'eschanan, and the first part of Parshas Ekev, are written in one column after "Shema"). Consequently, the paragraphs of "Shema" and "v'Hayah Im Shamo'a" can be cut out of the Sefer Torah by cutting out a single piece of parchment! In this way, the Parshiyos can be converted for use in a Mezuzah. (Although the Parshiyos of a standard Mezuzah are written all in one column, and cutting the Parshiyos in this proposed manner will leave them in two adjacent columns, the Rambam himself says that when the Parshiyos are written in two separate columns on one parchment, the Mezuzah is valid.)

(The Parshiyos will be considered Setumos because the Parshah of Shema finishes at the end of a line. If it would not finish at the end of a line, the Parshah that follows it would start on the same line. This was the Gemara's proof that a Mezuzah uses Parshiyos Setumos.)

QUESTION: The Gemara attempts to prove from the conduct of Rebbi Elazar that one is prohibited to sit on a couch on which a Sefer Torah is resting. Rebbi Elazar once sat on a couch and realized that a Sefer Torah was resting on the couch. He immediately slipped off the couch and sat on the floor, and he was so distraught that he appeared as though a snake had bit him.

The Gemara refutes the proof and says that in the case of Rebbi Elazar, the Sefer Torah was resting on the floor. RASHI comments that this is why Rebbi Elazar was distraught; it was not because he had sat on a couch with a Sefer Torah. According to Rashi, the Gemara is saying that the incident in which Rebbi Elazar sat on a couch with a Sefer Torah never happened! Why, then, is the incident recorded with mention of a couch, and with mention of Rebbi Elazar slipping off the couch to sit on the floor? The Gemara does not say that the incident never happened, but merely that the Sefer Torah was on the floor. How does Rashi understand the incident as recorded in the Gemara?

(a) RASHI may understand that Rebbi Elazar was sitting on a couch at the moment that he realized that the Sefer Torah was on the floor, and in his anguish he fell to the floor. This is still not entirely consistent with the wording of the Gemara that says that Rebbi Elazar realized that a Sefer Torah "was resting on it," referring to the couch and not to the floor.

(b) The HAGAHOS HA'RADAL explains that Rebbi Elazar sat on a bench, and then he remembered that on this bench a Sefer Torah was usually placed. He immediately noticed that the Sefer Torah -- instead of being in its normal place on the bench -- was on the floor; it had been placed there by someone who did not want the Sefer Torah on the same bench on which Rebbi Elazar was seated! Rebbi Elazar was greatly distressed because of this, "as though a snake had bit him," and he quickly fell to the floor so that the Sefer Torah would be placed back on the bench.

This is how the Gemara refutes the proof, from this incident, that one is prohibited to sit on a couch on which a Sefer Torah is resting. Although the person who put the Sefer Torah on the ground might have maintained that it was prohibited, there is no proof that Rebbi Elazar himself maintained that it was prohibited. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)