Why should we do this? Is it an amulet? Is it a protective measure?
Well, Rambam states rather clearly that one should not regard the mezuzah as an amulet:
Yet, there are clearly those who so regard it, or else the Rambam would not have to make such a strong contrary statement. Indeed, in the gemara in Menachot 33, there are two positions, one (Rabanan) which stresses the psychological impact of encountering it as one enters one's home, while the other (R' Chanina of Sura) regards it as a protective measure of the entire home. They thus had both 'rationalists' and non-rationalists even in the days of the gemara. Of course, one can explain that it is Hashem who protects the house, and in the merit of keeping his commandments.
… אבל אלו שכותבין מבפנים שמות המלאכים או שמות קדושים או פסוק או חותמות הרי הן בכלל מי שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא, שאלו הטפשים לא די להם שבטלו המצוה אלא שעשו מצוה גדולה שהיא יחוד השם של הקב”ה ואהבתו ועבודתו כאילו הוא קמיע של הניית עצמן כמו שעלה על לבם הסכל שזהו דבר המהנה בהבלי העולם.
… But those who write inside [the mezuzah] the names of angels or holy names or a verse or seals, such people are in the category of those who have no portion in the World to Come. For these idiots, it is not enough for them that they have [through these actions] negated a positive mitzvah [by invalidating the mezuzah], but they have turned an important mitzvah –viz., the unification of God’s name and the love of God and the worship of God – and made it like it were a kemiya, a magical amulet, whose function is to serve their personal needs, as they tend to think in their foolish thoughts that this [mezuzah] is a thing that affords them benefit in meaningless worldly things.Rambam, Laws of Mezuzah 5:4
For more of a background on this, see this post at The Daily Daf, and this article in Tradition: Mezuzah: Protective Amulet or Religious Symbol.
Here is how I would explain it, both tefillin and mezuzah. We are taking the word of Hashem, His law and His instruction, and binding it on our arm. The arm / hand is the means by which we act in this world. And so we are committing ourselves to acting in accordance with Hashem's will. We also bind it on our head-pate, 'between the eyes'. This might be cast as binding our minds, our selves, to Hashem. We give him our obedience.
Then, we also write these words on the doorposts of our house and on our gates. There was, in the ancient world, family law and city law. Certain things were taken care of in the home. And, as I have suggested, the function of ben sorer umoreh was to move extreme punishments from the realm of possibly biased family law into the public sphere, to the gates of the city where the courts met. The perpetual servant is brought to the doorpost, because that is where he is binding himself until Yovel. And when Boaz wanted to arrange for the marriage of Rut, he organized people at the gate of the city.
Thus, writing these words on the doorposts expresses a commitment to follow Hashem's word in the private realm. Writing these words on the doorposts of our gates expresses a commitment to follow Hashem's word in the public sphere.
Of course, that this is the meaning does not eliminate the need for physically doing it. The Karaites don't wear tefillin or put on mezuzah, because they view the metaphorical message as purely metaphorical. They compare it to Mishlei 3:3's instruction to write truth and justice on the tablet of your heart.
But one need not resort to that. Many ritual actions have deep, meaningful imports, whether overt to us or not. Why physically break the eglah arufa's neck? There is action paired with meaning, whatever it may be. We perform physical bris milah, even though in parashat Ekev, we have the pasuk וּמַלְתֶּם, אֵת עָרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם; וְעָרְפְּכֶם--לֹא תַקְשׁוּ, עוֹד. And we would physically pierce the ear of the perpetual servant. So I would regard these commandments to bind here and there, and write here and there.
Related, see how Isis wearing tefillin increases my emunas chachamim. And this other post, in the comment section, where I converse with a Karaite. We have a tradition on Bein Enecha as head-pate which is confirmed by an ANE text, the Chronicles of Baal. This is not something one would expect were the inteny only metaphorical, with no physical tradition of tefillin from rather early on.
The Rashbam is a different story. The Karaites love to cite him in this context, for here is a Rabbinite who says like them! Here is what the Rashbam writes, on Shemot 13:9, where just tefillin is under discussion:
פסוק טI will make the pretty straightforward assumption that by omek peshuto, he means peshat, and not some deeper level. He maintains that le'ot al yadecha means that it should be as a constant remembrance, as if it were written on your hand, in the same manner as {Shir Hashirim 8:6}:
לאות על ידך - לפי עומק פשוטו:
יהיה לך לזכרון תמיד, כאלו כתוב על ידך. כעין, שימני כחותם על לבך.
| ו שִׂימֵנִי כַחוֹתָם עַל-לִבֶּךָ, כַּחוֹתָם עַל-זְרוֹעֶךָ--כִּי-עַזָּה כַמָּוֶת אַהֲבָה, קָשָׁה כִשְׁאוֹל קִנְאָה: רְשָׁפֶיהָ--רִשְׁפֵּי, אֵשׁ שַׁלְהֶבֶתְיָה. | 6 Set me as a seal upon thy heart, as a seal upon thine arm; for love is strong as death, jealousy is cruel as the grave; the flashes thereof are flashes of fire, a very flame of the LORD. |
I don't have to agree with Rashbam's assessment, of course. I could probably point out at least one disagreement I have with his interpretation on every parsha. But I would still point out that Rashbam did put on tefillin every day with a bracha. And further, if you asked him whether this was a mitzvah deoraysa he was fulfilling, he would almost certainly answer you in the affirmative. For many medieval Jewish commentators, peshat does not mean the one true meaning, where everything else is just made up or an error. Rather, the text was written to be understood on multiple levels. The "derash" of the pasuk referring to tefillin was just as intended by its Divine Author, but runs parallel to the peshat level of the text. This gives him the 'excuse' to interpret the text, all over the place, contrary to decided halacha, and yet not be a Karaite.
5 comments:
The fact that halakha requires sirtut for mezuzot and not tefillin would seem to indicate that, at least at some point, the mezuzah was meant to be read on the way in and out of the home.
there is a similar conversation regarding the prohibition with using a razor for shaving the EvenEzra seems to say that the isser is just for mourning as that seems to be the peshat in the passuk , apperently shadal read the pasuk as the EE did and based on that reading used a razor .....
adderabbi:
interesting idea. rav kanievsky would likely require a cover for such a mezuza, though...
josh fan:
right you are. here is that ibn ezra and shadal.
And don't forget MT 6:13 wherein the Rambam goes in with this:
"And it is they (referring to tefillin and mezuzot) who are the angels that save him from sinning, as it states, ‘The angel of the Lord camps around those who fear Him and rescues them.’ Blessed is the Merciful One who has helped us.
Beautiful.
HaSepharadi
Nice article!
I think though that you are creating a dichotomy which doesn't exist at least according to the Rambam.
I don't see any reason to say that the Rambam would deny that the Mezuzah has intrinsic protective properties (that is to say that it is a type of amulet). What he is trying to stress is that we don't affix a Mezuzah because of its protective properties but rather because G-d commanded us to do so.
That is why he mentions an example of someone who writes mystical names of angels inside of the Mezuzah to 'strengthen' its protective properties. He says that one who adds things to the Mezuzah which are not commanded in the Torah, is basically taking G-d's commandment and making it into an amulet.
We could apply this same principle to so many Mitzvahs. Lets take an extreme commandment. The prohibition against theft. It is clear that when one refrains from theft, they make the world a better place and will naturally improve their life in the long run. Yet we have no right to say that that is the ONLY reason that G-d has prohibited theft.Rather we must refrain from stealing because G-d commanded us to. That also means that there will be instances where some action which seems to us like theft may be permitted and something that seems fine to us is prohibited.
In short, we can't possibly fathom the wisdom of G-d which is contained in any of his Mitzvahs. There are some Mitzvahs where we do understand some aspect. When it comes to something like Mezuzah where its affect is spritual or supernatural, there is an added danger of turning it from a Mitzvah into hocus pocus.
Post a Comment