More cases of mezuzot are brought regarding whether or not certain types of entrances require mezuzot. Can mezuzot be written on other materials beside parchment? Details of the laws of tefillin are brought – how is the tefillin of the head different from the tefillin on the arm? Can one be used for the other?
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Menachot 34
אדעתא דגינה הוא דעבידא
area is made for the purpose of reaching the garden, not for entering the house, and therefore even with regard to the entrance between the gatehouse and small room, one is exempt from placing a mezuza at the entrance of the small room.
אביי ורבא עבדי כרבה ורב יוסף ורב אשי עביד כרב ושמואל לחומרא והילכתא כרב ושמואל לחומרא
The Gemara relates that Abaye and Rava would act in accordance with the explanation of Rabba and Rav Yosef, i.e., they would not place a mezuza on the two entrances of a gatehouse, neither to the garden nor to the small room, in accordance with the ruling of the Rabbis. And Rav Ashi would act in accordance with the explanation of Rav and Shmuel, stringently, i.e., following the ruling of Rabbi Yosei that both entrances require a mezuza. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is in accordance with the explanation of Rav and Shmuel, stringently.
איתמר לול פתוח מן הבית לעלייה אמר רב הונא אם יש לו פתח אחד חייב במזוזה אחת אם יש לו ב’ פתחין חייב בשתי מזוזות אמר רב פפא שמע מינה מדרב הונא האי אינדרונא דאית ליה ארבעה באבי חייב בארבע מזוזות פשיטא לא צריכא אף על גב דרגיל בחד
§ It was stated: With regard to an aperture that opens from the ceiling of a house occupied by one person to a loft occupied by another, with a walled staircase leading from the lower floor to the loft, Rav Huna says: If the staircase has one entrance, i.e., one doorway, either from the house or from the upper story, one is obligated to affix one mezuza; if it has two entrances, both from below and above, one is obligated to affix two mezuzot. Rav Pappa says: One can learn from that statement of Rav Huna that with regard to this type of room that has four gates, one is obligated to affix four mezuzot. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it obvious? The Gemara explains: No, it is necessary to teach that even though one is accustomed to using one particular gate, nevertheless, all four require a mezuza.
אמר אמימר האי פיתחא דאקרנא חייב במזוזה אמר ליה רב אשי לאמימר והא לית ליה פצימין א”ל עדי פצימי
Ameimar said: With regard to this entrance which is located at the corner of a house, one is obligated to affix a mezuza. Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: But it does not have doorposts. Ameimar said to him: These [adei] are its doorposts, i.e., the end of the walls serve as its doorposts.
רב פפא איקלע לבי מר שמואל חזא ההוא פיתחא דלא הוה ליה אלא פצים אחד משמאלא ועבידא ליה מזוזה א”ל כמאן כר”מ אימר דאמר ר”מ מימין משמאל מי אמר
The Gemara relates: Rav Pappa happened to come to the house of Mar Shmuel, where he saw a certain entrance that had only one doorpost to the left of the entrance, and yet Mar Shmuel had affixed a mezuza to that doorpost. Rav Pappa said to him: In accordance with whose opinion did you do this? Did you act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who deems one obligated to affix a mezuza to an entrance that has only one doorpost? But one can say that Rabbi Meir says that one must do so only in a case where the doorpost is to the right of the entrance. Does he say that it requires a mezuza if the entrance is to the left?
מאי היא דתניא ביתך ביאתך מן הימין אתה אומר מן הימין או אינו אלא משמאל ת”ל ביתך מאי תלמודא אמר רבה דרך ביאתך מן הימין דכי עקר איניש כרעיה דימינא עקר
The Gemara asks: What is the source for this requirement that the mezuza be affixed to the right side? As it is taught in a baraita: When the verse states: “And you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house [beitekha]” (Deuteronomy 6:9), the word beitekha is interpreted as biatekha, your entry, i.e., the mezuza must be affixed to the side by which you enter, which is from the right. Do you say it is from the right, or is it only from the left? Therefore, the verse states: Your house [beitekha]. The Gemara asks: What is the biblical derivation here? Rabba says: The mezuza is affixed in the way that you enter the house, which is from the right, as when a person lifts his foot to begin walking, he lifts his right foot first. Therefore, the mezuza is affixed to the right side of the doorway.
רב שמואל בר אחא קמיה דרב פפא משמיה דרבא בר עולא אמר מהכא (מלכים ב יב, י) ויקח יהוידע הכהן ארון אחד ויקב חור בדלתו ויתן אותו אצל המזבח מימין בבוא איש בית ה’ ונתנו שמה הכהנים שומרי הסף את כל הכסף המובא בית ה’
Rav Shmuel bar Aḥa said before Rav Pappa in the name of Rava bar Ulla that the requirement that the mezuza be affixed to the right of the entrance is derived from here: “And Jehoiada the priest took a chest, and bored a hole in the lid of it, and set it beside the altar, on the right side as one comes into the House of the Lord; and the priests that kept the threshold put in there all the money that was brought into the House of the Lord” (II Kings 12:10). This indicates that an object designed for those entering a house is placed to the right of the one entering.
מאי ר”מ דתניא בית שאין לו אלא פצים אחד ר”מ מחייב במזוזה וחכמים פוטרין מאי טעמא דרבנן (דברים ו, ט) מזוזות כתיב
The Gemara further inquires: What is this statement of Rabbi Meir, referred to by Rav Pappa, that he deems one obligated to place a mezuza on an entrance that has only one doorpost? As it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a house that has only one doorpost, Rabbi Meir deems one obligated to affix a mezuza, and the Rabbis deem him exempt from affixing a mezuza. The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of the Rabbis? It is written: “And you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house” (Deuteronomy 6:9), in the plural, which indicates that there must be two doorposts.
מ”ט דר’ מאיר דתניא מזוזות שומע אני מיעוט מזוזות שתים כשהוא אומר (דברים יא, כ) מזוזות בפרשה שניה שאין תלמוד לומר הוי ריבוי אחר ריבוי ואין ריבוי אחר ריבוי אלא למעט מעטו הכתוב למזוזה אחת דברי ר’ ישמעאל
The Gemara asks: What is the reason of Rabbi Meir, that one doorpost suffices to obligate one to affix a mezuza? As it is taught in a baraita: When it states “doorposts” (Deuteronomy 6:9), I would derive the minimum number of doorposts, which is two. When it says “doorposts” in the second passage (Deuteronomy 11:20), this also serves to teach a halakha, as otherwise there is no need for the verse to state this. This is one amplification following another amplification, and the principle is that an amplification following an amplification is stated only in order to restrict its extent. In this manner the verse restricted the minimum number to one doorpost. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.
ר”ע אומר אינו צריך כשהוא אומר (שמות יב, כג) על המשקוף ועל שתי המזוזות שאין ת”ל שתי מה ת”ל שתי זה בנה אב כל מקום שנאמר מזוזות אינו אלא אחת עד שיפרט לך הכתוב שתים
Rabbi Akiva says: This proof is not necessary. Rather, when the verse states: “And strike the lintel and the two doorposts” (Exodus 12:22), one can claim that there is a superfluous word in this verse, as there is no need for the verse to state “two,” since the minimum of doorposts is two. What is the meaning when the verse states “two”? This established a paradigm that anywhere where it is stated “doorposts,” it means only one doorpost, unless the verse specifies that it is referring to two doorposts.
ת”ר וכתבתם יכול יכתבנה על האבנים נאמר כאן כתיבה ונאמר להלן כתיבה מה להלן על הספר אף כאן על הספר
The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house, and upon your gates” (Deuteronomy 6:9). One might have thought that one writes a mezuza on the stones of the entrance. To counter this, an expression of writing is stated here, with regard to a mezuza, and an expression of writing is stated there. Just as there the mitzva of writing means on a book, i.e., parchment, so too, a mezuza must be written on a book.
או כלך לדרך זו נאמר כאן כתיבה ונאמר להלן כתיבה מה להלן על האבנים אף כאן על האבנים
The baraita suggests: Or perhaps, go [kalekh] this way, i.e., one can suggest a different interpretation: An expression of writing is stated here, with regard to a mezuza, and writing is stated there, with regard to the mitzva of writing the words of the Torah on stones upon the entry to Eretz Yisrael (Deuteronomy 27:3). Just as there, the words are written on the stones themselves, so too here, the mezuza should be written on the stones.
נראה למי דומה דנין כתיבה הנוהגת לדורות מכתיבה הנוהגת לדורות ואין דנין כתיבה הנוהגת לדורות מכתיבה שאינה נוהגת לדורות וכמו שנאמר להלן (ירמיהו לו, יח) ויאמר להם ברוך מפיו יקרא אלי את הדברים האלה ואני כותב על הספר בדיו
The baraita continues: Let us see to which it is similar, i.e., which comparison appears more apt. We derive writing that is performed in all generations, i.e., that of a mezuza, from another writing that is performed in all generations, but we do not derive writing that is performed in all generations from writing that is not performed in all generations. And furthermore, a mezuza must be written with ink, as it is stated below: “And Baruch said to them: He dictated all these words to me, and I wrote them with ink in the scroll” (Jeremiah 36:18).
אמר ליה רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי רחמנא אמר על מזוזות ואת אמרת נילף כתיבה כתיבה אמר קרא (דברים ו, ט) וכתבתם כתיבה תמה והדר על המזוזות
Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: The Merciful One states: “Upon the doorposts,” which indicates that a mezuza should be written on the doorposts themselves, and yet you say: Let us derive a verbal analogy between “writing” and “writing,” to teach that one writes it on parchment. Why isn’t the verse interpreted in accordance with its straightforward meaning? Rav Ashi said to him: The verse states: “And you shall write them [ukhtavtam],” which means that it should first be complete writing [ketiva tamma], i.e., the full passages written down, and only then should one place them “upon the doorposts” of the house.
ומאחר דכתיב [וכתבתם] האי גזירה שוה למה לי אי לאו גזירה שוה הוה אמינא ליכתבא אאבנא וליקבעה אסיפא קמ”ל:
The Gemara asks: And since it is written: “And you shall write them,” from which it is derived that the mezuza should be written first and then placed on the doorpost, why do I need this verbal analogy between “writing” and “writing”? The Gemara explains that were it not for the verbal analogy, I would say that one should write the passages of a mezuza on a stone, and afterward affix the stone to the doorpost. To counter this, the verbal analogy teaches us that a mezuza must be written on a scroll.
ארבע פרשיות שבתפילין מעכבות זו את זו ואפילו כתב אחד מעכבן: פשיטא
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to the four passages that are in the phylacteries, i.e., the two passages that are written in the mezuza and two additional passages (Exodus 13:1–9, 11–16), the absence of each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, and the absence of even one letter prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the rest of them. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it obvious that the inclusion of every letter is necessary?
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב לא נצרכא אלא לקוצו של יו”ד והא נמי פשיטא לא נצרכא אלא לאידך דרב יהודה דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב כל אות שאין גויל מוקף לה מארבע רוחותיה פסולה:
Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is necessary to state this ruling only to teach that even the absence of the thorn, i.e., a small stroke, of a letter yod prevents fulfillment of the mitzva. The Gemara asks: But isn’t this also obvious, since the letter is not formed properly? Rather, it is necessary only according to another statement that Rav Yehuda says. As Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Any letter that is not encircled with blank parchment on all four of its sides, as its ink connects to the letter above it, below it, preceding it, or succeeding it, is unfit.
ת”ר לטטפת לטטפת לטוטפת הרי כאן ד’ דברי רבי ישמעאל
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to the number of compartments in the phylacteries of the head, the verse states: “It shall be for a sign upon your hand, and for totafot between your eyes” (Exodus 13:16), with the word totafot spelled deficient, without a vav before the final letter, in a way that can be read as singular; and again: “They shall be for totafot between your eyes” (Deuteronomy 6:8), spelled as a singular word; and again: “They shall be for totafot between your eyes” (Deuteronomy 11:18), this time spelled plene, with a vav before the final letter, in a manner that must be plural. There are four mentions of totafot here, as the third one is written in the plural and therefore counts as two. Consequently, it is derived that the phylacteries of the head must have four compartments. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.
ר”ע אומר אינו צריך טט בכתפי שתים פת באפריקי שתים
Rabbi Akiva says: There is no need for this proof, as the requirement of four compartments can be derived from the word totafot itself: The word tot in the language of Katfei means two, and the word pat in the language of Afriki also means two, and therefore totafot can be understood as a compound word meaning four.
ת”ר יכול יכתבם על ד’ עורות ויניחם בד’ בתים בד’ עורות ת”ל (שמות יג, ט) ולזכרון בין עיניך זכרון אחד אמרתי לך ולא ב’ וג’ זכרונות הא כיצד כותבן על ד’ עורות ומניחן בד’ בתים בעור אחד
The Sages taught in a baraita: One might have thought that a scribe should write the passages of the phylacteries of the head on four separate hides, i.e., parchments, and place them in four compartments of four hides, one passage in each compartment. Therefore, the verse states: “And for a memorial between your eyes” (Exodus 13:9). This teaches: I said to you that the phylacteries are one memorial, but not that they are two or three memorials, i.e., the phylacteries themselves must be one unit. How so? One writes the passages on four hides and places them in four compartments fashioned of one hide.
ואם כתבן בעור אחד והניחן בד’ בתים יצא וצריך שיהא ריוח ביניהן דברי רבי וחכ”א אינו צריך ושוין שנותן חוט או משיחה בין כל אחת ואחת ואם אין חריצן ניכר פסולות
And if a scribe wrote all four of them on one hide and placed them in four compartments by slitting the parchment between each of the passages, one who dons these phylacteries has fulfilled his obligation. And in such a case it is necessary for there to be a space between each of the passages, so that each can be placed in a separate compartment; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: It is not necessary for there to be a space between them. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis agree that one places a string or a thicker band between each and every one of the four compartments. The baraita adds: And if their furrows, i.e., the lines marking the separation between the compartments, are not noticeable from the outside, the phylacteries are unfit.
תנו רבנן כיצד כותבן תפלה של יד כותבה על עור אחד ואם כתבה בארבע עורות והניחה בבית אחד יצא וצריך לדבק שנאמר (שמות יג, ט) והיה לך לאות על ידך כשם שאות אחת מבחוץ כך אות אחת מבפנים דברי ר’ יהודה ר’ יוסי אומר אינו צריך
The Sages taught in a baraita: How does a scribe write them? With regard to the phylacteries of the arm, he writes it on one hide. But if he wrote it on four separate hides and placed it in one compartment, one who wears it has fulfilled his obligation. And in such a case it is necessary to attach the four parchments, as it is stated: “And it shall be for a sign for you upon your arm” (Exodus 13:9). This teaches that just as the phylacteries of the arm are one sign on the outside, as the compartment is fashioned from a single hide, so too, they must be one sign on the inside, i.e., the four passages must be on a single parchment. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: It is not necessary to attach the passages.
א”ר יוסי ומודה לי ר’ יהודה ברבי שאם אין לו תפילין של יד ויש לו שתי תפילין של ראש שטולה עור על אחת מהן ומניחה מודה היינו פלוגתייהו אמר רבא מדבריו של ר’ יוסי חזר בו ר’ יהודה
Rabbi Yosei says: And Rabbi Yehuda the Distinguished [Beribbi] concedes to me that if one does not have phylacteries of the arm but has two phylacteries of the head, that he covers one of them with patches of hide, to render it like one compartment, and places it on his arm. The Gemara asks: How can Rabbi Yosei say that Rabbi Yehuda concedes to him in this case? This is the very situation in which their dispute applies, as they disagree over whether or not the passages of the phylacteries of the arm may be written on separate parchments. Rava said: From Rabbi Yosei’s statement one can infer that Rabbi Yehuda retracted his opinion and accepted Rabbi Yosei’s ruling.
איני והא שלח רב חנניה משמיה דר’ יוחנן תפלה של יד עושין אותה של ראש ושל ראש אין עושין אותה של יד לפי שאין מורידין מקדושה חמור’ לקדושה קלה
Rabbi Yosei said that all agree that one can convert phylacteries of the head into phylacteries of the arm. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But Rav Ḥananya sent the following ruling in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: If one has phylacteries of the arm, he can convert it to phylacteries of the head, but if one has phylacteries of the head, he cannot convert it to phylacteries of the arm, because one does not reduce the sanctity of an item from a level of greater sanctity of phylacteries of the head to a level of lesser sanctity of phylacteries of the arm.
ל”ק הא בעתיקתא הא בחדתתא ולמ”ד הזמנה מילתא היא דאתני עלייהו מעיקרא
The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as this ruling is stated with regard to old phylacteries, which have already been worn on one’s head and therefore have a greater level of sanctity, whereas that ruling is stated with regard to new phylacteries, which have not yet been used. The Gemara adds: And according to the one who says that designation is significant, i.e., once one designates an item for use in fulfilling a particular mitzva, it assumes the sanctity of an item used for mitzvot, this ruling is stated with regard to a case where he stipulated with regard to them from the outset that he may convert it from phylacteries of the head to phylacteries of the arm, and only in this circumstance it is permitted to convert them.
ת”ר כיצד סדרן קדש לי והי’ כי יביאך מימין שמע והי’ אם שמוע משמאל
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: How does one arrange the four passages inside the phylacteries? The passage of: “Sanctify unto Me” (Exodus 13:1–10), and the passage of: “And it shall be when He shall bring you” (Exodus 13:11–16), are placed on the right; the passage of: “Listen, O Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4–9), and the passage of: “And it shall come to pass, if you shall hearken diligently” (Deuteronomy 11:13–21), are placed on the left.
והתניא איפכא אמר אביי ל”ק כאן מימינו של קורא כאן מימינו של מניח והקורא קורא כסדרן:
The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that one places them in the opposite manner, with the first two passages on the left and the latter two on the right? Abaye said that it is not difficult: Here it means to the right of the reader, i.e., one who is standing opposite the one donning the phylacteries, whereas there it means to the right of the one who is donning the phylacteries. And in this manner the reader reads the passages in their order, as they appear in the Torah, starting with Exodus 13:1–10 to his right.
אמר רב חננאל אמר רב החליף פרשיותיה פסולות אמר אביי לא אמרן
Rav Ḥananel says that Rav says: If one exchanged its passages, i.e., placed them in a different order within the compartment, the phylacteries are unfit. Abaye said: We did not say this
Follow 
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Phyllis Hecht
Hashmonaim, Israel
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Caroline Ben-Ari
Karmiel, Israel
I heard the new Daf Yomi cycle was starting and I was curious, so I searched online for a women’s class and was pleasently surprised to find Rabanit Michelle’s great class reviews in many online articles. It has been a splendid journey. It is a way to fill my days with Torah, learning so many amazing things I have never heard before during my Tanach learning at High School. Thanks so much .
Martha Tarazi
Panama, Panama
I am grateful for the structure of the Daf Yomi. When I am freer to learn to my heart’s content, I learn other passages in addition. But even in times of difficulty, I always know that I can rely on the structure and social support of Daf Yomi learners all over the world.
I am also grateful for this forum. It is very helpful to learn with a group of enthusiastic and committed women.
Janice Block
Beit Shemesh, Israel
In January 2020, my teaching partner at IDC suggested we do daf yomi. Thanks to her challenge, I started learning daily from Rabbanit Michelle. It’s a joy to be part of the Hadran community. (It’s also a tikkun: in 7th grade, my best friend and I tied for first place in a citywide gemara exam, but we weren’t invited to the celebration because girls weren’t supposed to be learning gemara).
Sara Averick
Jerusalem, Israel
A beautiful world of Talmudic sages now fill my daily life with discussion and debate.
bringing alive our traditions and texts that has brought new meaning to my life.
I am a מגילת אסתר reader for women . the words in the Mishna of מסכת megillah 17a
הקורא את המגילה למפרע לא יצא were powerful to me.
I hope to have the zchut to complete the cycle for my 70th birthday.
Sheila Hauser
Jerusalem, Israel
I started learning at the beginning of this Daf Yomi cycle because I heard a lot about the previous cycle coming to an end and thought it would be a good thing to start doing. My husband had already bought several of the Koren Talmud Bavli books and they were just sitting on the shelf, not being used, so here was an opportunity to start using them and find out exactly what was in them. Loving it!
Caroline Levison
Borehamwood, United Kingdom
Hadran entered my life after the last Siyum Hashaas, January 2020. I was inspired and challenged simultaneously, having never thought of learning Gemara. With my family’s encouragement, I googled “daf yomi for women”. A perfecr fit!
I especially enjoy when Rabbanit Michelle connects the daf to contemporary issues to share at the shabbat table e.g: looking at the Kohen during duchaning. Toda rabba
Marsha Wasserman
Jerusalem, Israel
See video
Susan Fisher
Raanana, Israel
I decided to give daf yomi a try when I heard about the siyum hashas in 2020. Once the pandemic hit, the daily commitment gave my days some much-needed structure. There have been times when I’ve felt like quitting- especially when encountering very technical details in the text. But then I tell myself, “Look how much you’ve done. You can’t stop now!” So I keep going & my Koren bookshelf grows…
Miriam Eckstein-Koas
Huntington, United States
I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!
Roslyn Jaffe
Florida, United States
A few years back, after reading Ilana Kurshan’s book, “If All The Seas Were Ink,” I began pondering the crazy, outlandish idea of beginning the Daf Yomi cycle. Beginning in December, 2019, a month before the previous cycle ended, I “auditioned” 30 different podcasts in 30 days, and ultimately chose to take the plunge with Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle. Such joy!
Cindy Dolgin
HUNTINGTON, United States
I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.
Jenifer Nech
Houston, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi inspired by תָּפַסְתָּ מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַסְתָּ, תָּפַסְתָּ מוּעָט תָּפַסְתָּ. I thought I’d start the first page, and then see. I was swept up into the enthusiasm of the Hadran Siyum, and from there the momentum kept building. Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur gives me an anchor, a connection to an incredible virtual community, and an energy to face whatever the day brings.
Medinah Korn
בית שמש, Israel
My first Talmud class experience was a weekly group in 1971 studying Taanit. In 2007 I resumed Talmud study with a weekly group I continue learning with. January 2020, I was inspired to try learning Daf Yomi. A friend introduced me to Daf Yomi for Women and Rabbanit Michelle Farber, I have kept with this program and look forward, G- willing, to complete the entire Shas with Hadran.
Lorri Lewis
Palo Alto, CA, United States
It has been a pleasure keeping pace with this wonderful and scholarly group of women.
Janice Block
Beit Shemesh, Israel
I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.
Caroline Ben-Ari
Karmiel, Israel
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Sharon Mink
Haifa, Israel
I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Wendy Rozov
Phoenix, AZ, United States
In my Shana bet at Migdal Oz I attended the Hadran siyum hash”as. Witnessing so many women so passionate about their Torah learning and connection to God, I knew I had to begin with the coming cycle. My wedding (June 24) was two weeks before the siyum of mesechet yoma so I went a little ahead and was able to make a speech and siyum at my kiseh kallah on my wedding day!
Sharona Guggenheim Plumb
Givat Shmuel, Israel
Menachot 34
ืืืขืชื ืืืื ื ืืื ืืขืืืื
area is made for the purpose of reaching the garden, not for entering the house, and therefore even with regard to the entrance between the gatehouse and small room, one is exempt from placing a mezuza at the entrance of the small room.
ืืืื ืืจืื ืขืืื ืืจืื ืืจื ืืืกืฃ ืืจื ืืฉื ืขืืื ืืจื ืืฉืืืื ืืืืืจื ืืืืืืชื ืืจื ืืฉืืืื ืืืืืจื
The Gemara relates that Abaye and Rava would act in accordance with the explanation of Rabba and Rav Yosef, i.e., they would not place a mezuza on the two entrances of a gatehouse, neither to the garden nor to the small room, in accordance with the ruling of the Rabbis. And Rav Ashi would act in accordance with the explanation of Rav and Shmuel, stringently, i.e., following the ruling of Rabbi Yosei that both entrances require a mezuza. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is in accordance with the explanation of Rav and Shmuel, stringently.
ืืืชืืจ ืืื ืคืชืื ืื ืืืืช ืืขืืืื ืืืจ ืจื ืืื ื ืื ืืฉ ืื ืคืชื ืืื ืืืื ืืืืืื ืืืช ืื ืืฉ ืื ื’ ืคืชืืื ืืืื ืืฉืชื ืืืืืืช ืืืจ ืจื ืคืคื ืฉืืข ืืื ื ืืืจื ืืื ื ืืื ืืื ืืจืื ื ืืืืช ืืื ืืจืืขื ืืืื ืืืื ืืืจืืข ืืืืืืช ืคืฉืืื ืื ืฆืจืืื ืืฃ ืขื ืื ืืจืืื ืืื
ยง It was stated: With regard to an aperture that opens from the ceiling of a house occupied by one person to a loft occupied by another, with a walled staircase leading from the lower floor to the loft, Rav Huna says: If the staircase has one entrance, i.e., one doorway, either from the house or from the upper story, one is obligated to affix one mezuza; if it has two entrances, both from below and above, one is obligated to affix two mezuzot. Rav Pappa says: One can learn from that statement of Rav Huna that with regard to this type of room that has four gates, one is obligated to affix four mezuzot. The Gemara asks: Isnโt it obvious? The Gemara explains: No, it is necessary to teach that even though one is accustomed to using one particular gate, nevertheless, all four require a mezuza.
ืืืจ ืืืืืจ ืืื ืคืืชืื ืืืงืจื ื ืืืื ืืืืืื ืืืจ ืืื ืจื ืืฉื ืืืืืืจ ืืื ืืืช ืืื ืคืฆืืืื ื”ื ืขืื ืคืฆืืื
Ameimar said: With regard to this entrance which is located at the corner of a house, one is obligated to affix a mezuza. Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: But it does not have doorposts. Ameimar said to him: These [adei] are its doorposts, i.e., the end of the walls serve as its doorposts.
ืจื ืคืคื ืืืงืืข ืืื ืืจ ืฉืืืื ืืื ืืืื ืคืืชืื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืคืฆืื ืืื ืืฉืืืื ืืขืืืื ืืื ืืืืื ื”ื ืืืื ืืจ”ื ืืืืจ ืืืืจ ืจ”ื ืืืืื ืืฉืืื ืื ืืืจ
The Gemara relates: Rav Pappa happened to come to the house of Mar Shmuel, where he saw a certain entrance that had only one doorpost to the left of the entrance, and yet Mar Shmuel had affixed a mezuza to that doorpost. Rav Pappa said to him: In accordance with whose opinion did you do this? Did you act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who deems one obligated to affix a mezuza to an entrance that has only one doorpost? But one can say that Rabbi Meir says that one must do so only in a case where the doorpost is to the right of the entrance. Does he say that it requires a mezuza if the entrance is to the left?
ืืื ืืื ืืชื ืื ืืืชื ืืืืชื ืื ืืืืื ืืชื ืืืืจ ืื ืืืืื ืื ืืื ื ืืื ืืฉืืื ืช”ื ืืืชื ืืื ืชืืืืื ืืืจ ืจืื ืืจื ืืืืชื ืื ืืืืื ืืื ืขืงืจ ืืื ืืฉ ืืจืขืื ืืืืื ื ืขืงืจ
The Gemara asks: What is the source for this requirement that the mezuza be affixed to the right side? As it is taught in a baraita: When the verse states: โAnd you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house [beitekha]โ (Deuteronomy 6:9), the word beitekha is interpreted as biatekha, your entry, i.e., the mezuza must be affixed to the side by which you enter, which is from the right. Do you say it is from the right, or is it only from the left? Therefore, the verse states: Your house [beitekha]. The Gemara asks: What is the biblical derivation here? Rabba says: The mezuza is affixed in the way that you enter the house, which is from the right, as when a person lifts his foot to begin walking, he lifts his right foot first. Therefore, the mezuza is affixed to the right side of the doorway.
ืจื ืฉืืืื ืืจ ืืื ืงืืื ืืจื ืคืคื ืืฉืืื ืืจืื ืืจ ืขืืื ืืืจ ืืืื (ืืืืื ื ืื, ื) ืืืงื ืืืืืืข ืืืื ืืจืื ืืื ืืืงื ืืืจ ืืืืชื ืืืชื ืืืชื ืืฆื ืืืืื ืืืืื ืืืื ืืืฉ ืืืช ื’ ืื ืชื ื ืฉืื ืืืื ืื ืฉืืืจื ืืกืฃ ืืช ืื ืืืกืฃ ืืืืื ืืืช ื’
Rav Shmuel bar Aแธฅa said before Rav Pappa in the name of Rava bar Ulla that the requirement that the mezuza be affixed to the right of the entrance is derived from here: โAnd Jehoiada the priest took a chest, and bored a hole in the lid of it, and set it beside the altar, on the right side as one comes into the House of the Lord; and the priests that kept the threshold put in there all the money that was brought into the House of the Lordโ (IIย Kings 12:10). This indicates that an object designed for those entering a house is placed to the right of the one entering.
ืืื ืจ”ื ืืชื ืื ืืืช ืฉืืื ืื ืืื ืคืฆืื ืืื ืจ”ื ืืืืื ืืืืืื ืืืืืื ืคืืืจืื ืืื ืืขืื ืืจืื ื (ืืืจืื ื, ื) ืืืืืืช ืืชืื
The Gemara further inquires: What is this statement of Rabbi Meir, referred to by Rav Pappa, that he deems one obligated to place a mezuza on an entrance that has only one doorpost? As it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a house that has only one doorpost, Rabbi Meir deems one obligated to affix a mezuza, and the Rabbis deem him exempt from affixing a mezuza. The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of the Rabbis? It is written: โAnd you shall write them upon the doorposts of your houseโ (Deuteronomy 6:9), in the plural, which indicates that there must be two doorposts.
ื”ื ืืจ’ ืืืืจ ืืชื ืื ืืืืืืช ืฉืืืข ืื ื ืืืขืื ืืืืืืช ืฉืชืื ืืฉืืื ืืืืจ (ืืืจืื ืื, ื) ืืืืืืช ืืคืจืฉื ืฉื ืื ืฉืืื ืชืืืื ืืืืจ ืืื ืจืืืื ืืืจ ืจืืืื ืืืื ืจืืืื ืืืจ ืจืืืื ืืื ืืืขื ืืขืื ืืืชืื ืืืืืื ืืืช ืืืจื ืจ’ ืืฉืืขืื
The Gemara asks: What is the reason of Rabbi Meir, that one doorpost suffices to obligate one to affix a mezuza? As it is taught in a baraita: When it states โdoorpostsโ (Deuteronomy 6:9), I would derive the minimum number of doorposts, which is two. When it says โdoorpostsโ in the second passage (Deuteronomy 11:20), this also serves to teach a halakha, as otherwise there is no need for the verse to state this. This is one amplification following another amplification, and the principle is that an amplification following an amplification is stated only in order to restrict its extent. In this manner the verse restricted the minimum number to one doorpost. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.
ืจ”ืข ืืืืจ ืืื ื ืฆืจืื ืืฉืืื ืืืืจ (ืฉืืืช ืื, ืื) ืขื ืืืฉืงืืฃ ืืขื ืฉืชื ืืืืืืืช ืฉืืื ืช”ื ืฉืชื ืื ืช”ื ืฉืชื ืื ืื ื ืื ืื ืืงืื ืฉื ืืืจ ืืืืืืช ืืื ื ืืื ืืืช ืขื ืฉืืคืจื ืื ืืืชืื ืฉืชืื
Rabbi Akiva says: This proof is not necessary. Rather, when the verse states: โAnd strike the lintel and the two doorpostsโ (Exodus 12:22), one can claim that there is a superfluous word in this verse, as there is no need for the verse to state โtwo,โ since the minimum of doorposts is two. What is the meaning when the verse states โtwoโ? This established a paradigm that anywhere where it is stated โdoorposts,โ it means only one doorpost, unless the verse specifies that it is referring to two doorposts.
ืช”ืจ ืืืชืืชื ืืืื ืืืชืื ื ืขื ืืืื ืื ื ืืืจ ืืื ืืชืืื ืื ืืืจ ืืืื ืืชืืื ืื ืืืื ืขื ืืกืคืจ ืืฃ ืืื ืขื ืืกืคืจ
The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: โAnd you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house, and upon your gatesโ (Deuteronomy 6:9). One might have thought that one writes a mezuza on the stones of the entrance. To counter this, an expression of writing is stated here, with regard to a mezuza, and an expression of writing is stated there. Just as there the mitzva of writing means on a book, i.e., parchment, so too, a mezuza must be written on a book.
ืื ืืื ืืืจื ืื ื ืืืจ ืืื ืืชืืื ืื ืืืจ ืืืื ืืชืืื ืื ืืืื ืขื ืืืื ืื ืืฃ ืืื ืขื ืืืื ืื
The baraita suggests: Or perhaps, go [kalekh] this way, i.e., one can suggest a different interpretation: An expression of writing is stated here, with regard to a mezuza, and writing is stated there, with regard to the mitzva of writing the words of the Torah on stones upon the entry to Eretz Yisrael (Deuteronomy 27:3). Just as there, the words are written on the stones themselves, so too here, the mezuza should be written on the stones.
ื ืจืื ืืื ืืืื ืื ืื ืืชืืื ืื ืืืืช ืืืืจืืช ืืืชืืื ืื ืืืืช ืืืืจืืช ืืืื ืื ืื ืืชืืื ืื ืืืืช ืืืืจืืช ืืืชืืื ืฉืืื ื ื ืืืืช ืืืืจืืช ืืืื ืฉื ืืืจ ืืืื (ืืจืืืื ืื, ืื) ืืืืืจ ืืื ืืจืื ืืคืื ืืงืจื ืืื ืืช ืืืืจืื ืืืื ืืื ื ืืืชื ืขื ืืกืคืจ ืืืื
The baraita continues: Let us see to which it is similar, i.e., which comparison appears more apt. We derive writing that is performed in all generations, i.e., that of a mezuza, from another writing that is performed in all generations, but we do not derive writing that is performed in all generations from writing that is not performed in all generations. And furthermore, a mezuza must be written with ink, as it is stated below: โAnd Baruch said to them: He dictated all these words to me, and I wrote them with ink in the scrollโ (Jeremiah 36:18).
ืืืจ ืืื ืจื ืืื ืืจืื ืืจืื ืืจื ืืฉื ืจืืื ื ืืืจ ืขื ืืืืืืช ืืืช ืืืจืช ื ืืืฃ ืืชืืื ืืชืืื ืืืจ ืงืจื (ืืืจืื ื, ื) ืืืชืืชื ืืชืืื ืชืื ืืืืจ ืขื ืืืืืืืช
Rav Aแธฅa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: The Merciful One states: โUpon the doorposts,โ which indicates that a mezuza should be written on the doorposts themselves, and yet you say: Let us derive a verbal analogy between โwritingโ and โwriting,โ to teach that one writes it on parchment. Why isnโt the verse interpreted in accordance with its straightforward meaning? Rav Ashi said to him: The verse states: โAnd you shall write them [ukhtavtam],โ which means that it should first be complete writing [ketiva tamma], i.e., the full passages written down, and only then should one place them โupon the doorpostsโ of the house.
ืืืืืจ ืืืชืื [ืืืชืืชื] ืืื ืืืืจื ืฉืื ืืื ืื ืื ืืื ืืืืจื ืฉืื ืืื ืืืื ื ืืืืชืื ืืืื ื ืืืืงืืขื ืืกืืคื ืงื”ื:
The Gemara asks: And since it is written: โAnd you shall write them,โ from which it is derived that the mezuza should be written first and then placed on the doorpost, why do I need this verbal analogy between โwritingโ and โwritingโ? The Gemara explains that were it not for the verbal analogy, I would say that one should write the passages of a mezuza on a stone, and afterward affix the stone to the doorpost. To counter this, the verbal analogy teaches us that a mezuza must be written on a scroll.
ืืจืืข ืคืจืฉืืืช ืฉืืชืคืืืื ืืขืืืืช ืื ืืช ืื ืืืคืืื ืืชื ืืื ืืขืืื: ืคืฉืืื
ยง The mishna teaches: With regard to the four passages that are in the phylacteries, i.e., the two passages that are written in the mezuza and two additional passages (Exodus 13:1โ9, 11โ16), the absence of each prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the others, and the absence of even one letter prevents fulfillment of the mitzva with the rest of them. The Gemara asks: Isnโt it obvious that the inclusion of every letter is necessary?
ืืืจ ืจื ืืืืื ืืืจ ืจื ืื ื ืฆืจืื ืืื ืืงืืฆื ืฉื ืื”ื ืืื ื ืื ืคืฉืืื ืื ื ืฆืจืื ืืื ืืืืื ืืจื ืืืืื ืืืืจ ืจื ืืืืื ืืืจ ืจื ืื ืืืช ืฉืืื ืืืื ืืืงืฃ ืื ืืืจืืข ืจืืืืชืื ืคืกืืื:
Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is necessary to state this ruling only to teach that even the absence of the thorn, i.e., a small stroke, of a letter yod prevents fulfillment of the mitzva. The Gemara asks: But isnโt this also obvious, since the letter is not formed properly? Rather, it is necessary only according to another statement that Rav Yehuda says. As Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Any letter that is not encircled with blank parchment on all four of its sides, as its ink connects to the letter above it, below it, preceding it, or succeeding it, is unfit.
ืช”ืจ ืืืืคืช ืืืืคืช ืืืืืคืช ืืจื ืืื ื’ ืืืจื ืจืื ืืฉืืขืื
ยง The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to the number of compartments in the phylacteries of the head, the verse states: โIt shall be for a sign upon your hand, and for totafot between your eyesโ (Exodus 13:16), with the word totafot spelled deficient, without a vav before the final letter, in a way that can be read as singular; and again: โThey shall be for totafot between your eyesโ (Deuteronomy 6:8), spelled as a singular word; and again: โThey shall be for totafot between your eyesโ (Deuteronomy 11:18), this time spelled plene, with a vav before the final letter, in a manner that must be plural. There are four mentions of totafot here, as the third one is written in the plural and therefore counts as two. Consequently, it is derived that the phylacteries of the head must have four compartments. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.
ืจ”ืข ืืืืจ ืืื ื ืฆืจืื ืื ืืืชืคื ืฉืชืื ืคืช ืืืคืจืืงื ืฉืชืื
Rabbi Akiva says: There is no need for this proof, as the requirement of four compartments can be derived from the word totafot itself: The word tot in the language of Katfei means two, and the word pat in the language of Afriki also means two, and therefore totafot can be understood as a compound word meaning four.
ืช”ืจ ืืืื ืืืชืื ืขื ื’ ืขืืจืืช ืืื ืืื ืื’ ืืชืื ืื’ ืขืืจืืช ืช”ื (ืฉืืืช ืื, ื) ืืืืืจืื ืืื ืขืื ืื ืืืจืื ืืื ืืืจืชื ืื ืืื ื’ ืื’ ืืืจืื ืืช ืื ืืืฆื ืืืชืื ืขื ื’ ืขืืจืืช ืืื ืืื ืื’ ืืชืื ืืขืืจ ืืื
The Sages taught in a baraita: One might have thought that a scribe should write the passages of the phylacteries of the head on four separate hides, i.e., parchments, and place them in four compartments of four hides, one passage in each compartment. Therefore, the verse states: โAnd for a memorial between your eyesโ (Exodus 13:9). This teaches: I said to you that the phylacteries are one memorial, but not that they are two or three memorials, i.e., the phylacteries themselves must be one unit. How so? One writes the passages on four hides and places them in four compartments fashioned of one hide.
ืืื ืืชืื ืืขืืจ ืืื ืืื ืืื ืื’ ืืชืื ืืฆื ืืฆืจืื ืฉืืื ืจืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืจื ืจืื ืืื”ื ืืื ื ืฆืจืื ืืฉืืื ืฉื ืืชื ืืื ืื ืืฉืืื ืืื ืื ืืืช ืืืืช ืืื ืืื ืืจืืฆื ื ืืืจ ืคืกืืืืช
And if a scribe wrote all four of them on one hide and placed them in four compartments by slitting the parchment between each of the passages, one who dons these phylacteries has fulfilled his obligation. And in such a case it is necessary for there to be a space between each of the passages, so that each can be placed in a separate compartment; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: It is not necessary for there to be a space between them. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the Rabbis agree that one places a string or a thicker band between each and every one of the four compartments. The baraita adds: And if their furrows, i.e., the lines marking the separation between the compartments, are not noticeable from the outside, the phylacteries are unfit.
ืชื ื ืจืื ื ืืืฆื ืืืชืื ืชืคืื ืฉื ืื ืืืชืื ืขื ืขืืจ ืืื ืืื ืืชืื ืืืจืืข ืขืืจืืช ืืื ืืื ืืืืช ืืื ืืฆื ืืฆืจืื ืืืืง ืฉื ืืืจ (ืฉืืืช ืื, ื) ืืืื ืื ืืืืช ืขื ืืื ืืฉื ืฉืืืช ืืืช ืืืืืฅ ืื ืืืช ืืืช ืืืคื ืื ืืืจื ืจ’ ืืืืื ืจ’ ืืืกื ืืืืจ ืืื ื ืฆืจืื
The Sages taught in a baraita: How does a scribe write them? With regard to the phylacteries of the arm, he writes it on one hide. But if he wrote it on four separate hides and placed it in one compartment, one who wears it has fulfilled his obligation. And in such a case it is necessary to attach the four parchments, as it is stated: โAnd it shall be for a sign for you upon your armโ (Exodus 13:9). This teaches that just as the phylacteries of the arm are one sign on the outside, as the compartment is fashioned from a single hide, so too, they must be one sign on the inside, i.e., the four passages must be on a single parchment. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: It is not necessary to attach the passages.
ื”ืจ ืืืกื ืืืืื ืื ืจ’ ืืืืื ืืจืื ืฉืื ืืื ืื ืชืคืืืื ืฉื ืื ืืืฉ ืื ืฉืชื ืชืคืืืื ืฉื ืจืืฉ ืฉืืืื ืขืืจ ืขื ืืืช ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืื ื ืคืืืืชืืืื ืืืจ ืจืื ืืืืจืื ืฉื ืจ’ ืืืกื ืืืจ ืื ืจ’ ืืืืื
Rabbi Yosei says: And Rabbi Yehuda the Distinguished [Beribbi] concedes to me that if one does not have phylacteries of the arm but has two phylacteries of the head, that he covers one of them with patches of hide, to render it like one compartment, and places it on his arm. The Gemara asks: How can Rabbi Yosei say that Rabbi Yehuda concedes to him in this case? This is the very situation in which their dispute applies, as they disagree over whether or not the passages of the phylacteries of the arm may be written on separate parchments. Rava said: From Rabbi Yoseiโs statement one can infer that Rabbi Yehuda retracted his opinion and accepted Rabbi Yoseiโs ruling.
ืืื ื ืืื ืฉืื ืจื ืื ื ืื ืืฉืืื ืืจ’ ืืืื ื ืชืคืื ืฉื ืื ืขืืฉืื ืืืชื ืฉื ืจืืฉ ืืฉื ืจืืฉ ืืื ืขืืฉืื ืืืชื ืฉื ืื ืืคื ืฉืืื ืืืจืืืื ืืงืืืฉื ืืืืจ’ ืืงืืืฉื ืงืื
Rabbi Yosei said that all agree that one can convert phylacteries of the head into phylacteries of the arm. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But Rav แธคananya sent the following ruling in the name of Rabbi Yoแธฅanan: If one has phylacteries of the arm, he can convert it to phylacteries of the head, but if one has phylacteries of the head, he cannot convert it to phylacteries of the arm, because one does not reduce the sanctity of an item from a level of greater sanctity of phylacteries of the head to a level of lesser sanctity of phylacteries of the arm.
ื”ืง ืื ืืขืชืืงืชื ืื ืืืืชืชื ืืื”ื ืืืื ื ืืืืชื ืืื ืืืชื ื ืขืืืืื ืืขืืงืจื
The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as this ruling is stated with regard to old phylacteries, which have already been worn on oneโs head and therefore have a greater level of sanctity, whereas that ruling is stated with regard to new phylacteries, which have not yet been used. The Gemara adds: And according to the one who says that designation is significant, i.e., once one designates an item for use in fulfilling a particular mitzva, it assumes the sanctity of an item used for mitzvot, this ruling is stated with regard to a case where he stipulated with regard to them from the outset that he may convert it from phylacteries of the head to phylacteries of the arm, and only in this circumstance it is permitted to convert them.
ืช”ืจ ืืืฆื ืกืืจื ืงืืฉ ืื ืืื’ ืื ืืืืื ืืืืื ืฉืืข ืืื’ ืื ืฉืืืข ืืฉืืื
ยง The Sages taught in a baraita: How does one arrange the four passages inside the phylacteries? The passage of: โSanctify unto Meโ (Exodus 13:1โ10), and the passage of: โAnd it shall be when He shall bring youโ (Exodus 13:11โ16), are placed on the right; the passage of: โListen, O Israelโ (Deuteronomy 6:4โ9), and the passage of: โAnd it shall come to pass, if you shall hearken diligentlyโ (Deuteronomy 11:13โ21), are placed on the left.
ืืืชื ืื ืืืคืื ืืืจ ืืืื ื”ืง ืืื ืืืืื ื ืฉื ืงืืจื ืืื ืืืืื ื ืฉื ืื ืื ืืืงืืจื ืงืืจื ืืกืืจื:
The Gemara asks: But isnโt it taught in a baraita that one places them in the opposite manner, with the first two passages on the left and the latter two on the right? Abaye said that it is not difficult: Here it means to the right of the reader, i.e., one who is standing opposite the one donning the phylacteries, whereas there it means to the right of the one who is donning the phylacteries. And in this manner the reader reads the passages in their order, as they appear in the Torah, starting with Exodus 13:1โ10 to his right.
ืืืจ ืจื ืื ื ืื ืืืจ ืจื ืืืืืฃ ืคืจืฉืืืชืื ืคืกืืืืช ืืืจ ืืืื ืื ืืืจื
Rav แธคananel says that Rav says: If one exchanged its passages, i.e., placed them in a different order within the compartment, the phylacteries are unfit. Abaye said: We did not say this
Follow
