English translation — עקב ה

A.

Together with the command regarding mezuzah

(In our parshah¹)

"And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates,"

the Torah states

(immediately afterward²)

also the <b>reward</b> of the commandment: "In order that your days and the days of your children be multiplied, etc."; and as it is brought as a <b>ruling</b> in Shulchan Aruch³

: "Whoever is careful with it, his days and the days of his children will be lengthened, etc."⁴.

In this matter of making known the reward, the commandment of mezuzah is similar to certain other commandments for which the Torah explicitly makes known their reward

(such as honoring father and mother⁵,

and the like⁶)

; however, we find in the commandment of mezuzah an additional aspect that is not found by other commandments:

Chazal&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;

say - and the Tur&lt;sup&gt;3&lt;/sup&gt;

brings

it down - that through that which one fixes a mezuzah on the entrance of the house,

the Most High guards the house

("A king of flesh and blood is inside and his servants guard him from outside, but you sleep on your beds and the Holy One, blessed be He, guards you from outside"&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;)

What this protection,

which is performed through the mitzvah of mezuzah,

is not a matter of <b>reward</b> of the mitzvah,

but this is

(as the Ba”Ch⁹

explains)

a “benefit and profit <b>from the body</b> of the mitzvah itself ..

<b>in addition</b> to the reward etc.”

And with this the Ba”Ch explains that which the Tur writes that the protection through the mezuzah is “greater than this” – “greater” than the reward “in order that your days be multiplied etc.”¹⁰

– because this is a benefit “from the body of the mitzvah itself.”

Even more: the matter of protection is not a side “benefit and profit” of the mitzvah of mezuzah,

but this is an essential aspect in the mitzvah of mezuzah,

and in the language of the Tosafos¹¹

: “<b>for protection it is made</b>”*¹¹.

B.

From the aspect of the advantage in the commandment of mezuzah — that the body of the commandment is a protection — there is a distinction between the manner of fulfillment of the commandment of mezuzah and the manner of fulfillment of other commandments:

In general — by explicitly bringing the <b>reward</b> of the commandments,

the Torah is not merely to tell about it,

but — literally¹²

of Scripture — to strengthen¹³

through this and to spur the fulfillment of the commandments.

Our Sages, of blessed memory,¹⁴

say indeed: „<b>Always</b> let a person engage in Torah and commandments even if not for their own sake etc.’”,

and the Rambam brings it down as law in Hilchos Teshuvah¹⁵,

and explains that thus <b>must</b> be the order of study: „The young etc. <b>do not</b> teach them <b>except</b> etc. and in order to receive reward until their knowledge increases and they become wise with extra wisdom they reveal¹⁶

to them

This secret¹⁷

Little by little and they accustom them to this matter

(for its own sake)

“gently etc.”; and how he also elaborates on this in his commentary on the Mishnah*¹⁷,

where he says,

that those who have not yet “attained the truth until they are like Abraham our father, peace be upon him” - “<b>they urge them </b>to this <b>and strengthen their intention</b>” to perform commandments for the sake of their reward.

But on the other hand it is understood,

that when one fulfills a commandment only for its reward,

then there is lacking in the perfection of the fulfillment of the commandment,

because this is “not for its own sake”; moreover: even when he does a commandment in order to fulfill “the commandment of his Creator”¹⁸,

but he intends thereby “also for his own benefit”¹⁸

- he gives charity “so that his son should live or that he should be a son of the World to Come”*¹⁸,

that although he is

(“in this matter”¹⁹)

a “perfectly righteous person” - it is still not the perfect manner of fulfillment of the commandment²⁰.

But not so regarding the protection of the mezuzah,

it can be said that since this is

(not as &lt;b&gt;reward&lt;/b&gt; for the commandment,

but)

a result

(and a part)

of the commandment itself,

this is not a deficiency in the completeness of the fulfillment when this is done for the sake of protection,

for this is indeed among the matters of the commandment; moreover,

as above from Tosafos,

this is the purpose of the commandment — "&lt;b&gt;it is made for guarding&lt;/b&gt;".

Furthermore: one of the reasons&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;

that one must fix the mezuzah "within the handbreadth adjacent to the public domain" is "so that it should protect him",

i.

e.

that the fact that the mezuzah is a protection is not only that one can have it in &lt;b&gt;thought&lt;/b&gt; at the time of fixing the mezuzah,

but this determines the manner of fulfillment of the commandment,

and this comes &lt;b&gt;in actual deed&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;22&lt;/sup&gt;

- as the Tur&lt;sup&gt;23&lt;/sup&gt;

brings it down there in the continuation of his words.

3.

Seemingly one can ask: the Tur himself concludes there

(after bringing down the above-mentioned law)

: "But in any case, the intention of the one who fulfills it should be only to fulfill the commandment of the Creator, blessed be He, who commanded us regarding it" — that one should <b>not</b> intend that the mezuzah is for protection?

But — the Tur does not say this in the language of <b>prohibition,</b>

also it is not plausible,

that the Tur comes here to say that one should not think at all during the fulfillment of the commandment of mezuzah that this is a protection — because,

as above,

especially since the manner of its fulfillment is specifically through an <b>action</b> that shows that its subject is protection,

then certainly it is that one may think such a <b>thought</b>;

But with this he only denies that at the fulfillment of the mitzvah of mezuzah there need not be the intention that one does it for the sake of the benefit

The protection that one has from the mitzvah,

Because he would have fulfilled it with the same desire and adornment if there were no matter of protection at all,

But it must be "to fulfill the commandment of the Creator, blessed be He"; however on the other hand one may at the time of the act have in mind,

That the mitzvah consists in this,

That the Almighty commanded a Jew to make a protection on his house -

And even then,

when one does the mitzvah <b>only </b>for the sake of the benefit of protection,

it is the fulfillment of the mitzvah

(but what then -)

not for its own sake,

which also then

(in their state in intellect and wisdom etc.)

is as above

(in the language of the Rambam)

: „<b>We urge </b>them about this and strengthen their intention”.

Seemingly one can ask on this: the Rambam²⁴

rules

(and the Tur²⁵

brings it down)

: „These who write inside the names of the angels ..

behold they are among those who have no portion in the World to Come, for these fools, not enough for them that they nullified the mitzvah, but they made a great mitzvah etc. as if it is an amulet for their own benefit etc.” -

4.

D.

E.

That that which the mezuzah is considered as an "amulet of benefit itself"

(for the sake of protection)

is it not only a matter of not for its own sake,

but also a "foolishness",

and even more - "it is generally those who have no portion in the World to Come"²⁶?

(it is invalid),

does not apply in our case,

because the invalidity is

(not because

That which "they made a great mitzvah etc. as if it is an amulet etc.",

but)

because they added

("names of angels etc.")

in the &lt;b&gt;inside &lt;/b&gt;of the mezuzah - and the Rambam rules in the previous law: "If he added on the inside even one letter, behold it is invalid"&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;

And that which the Rambam continues "that they made a great mitzvah etc." is

(not a reason but)

an addition on "they nullified the mitzvah",

and an explanation and giving of reason on "behold it is included in those who have no etc."].

E.

But in truth, one cannot learn from the halacha of the Rambam,

that the prohibition consists only in that he had an intention not for its own sake

(to use the mezuzah as a protection for "their own benefit")

- because in addition to this,

that it is difficult to say that because of this he should be called a "fool" - since it is made for protection

(as above)

- and especially until that "he is among those who have no portion in the World to Come" - at the time of the explicit ruling in the Rambam&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;

that "the healthy person who recited verses etc. &lt;b&gt;in order that it protect &lt;/b&gt;etc. is permitted",

D.

E.

One may use words of Torah as a protection and one does not say that through this he makes of the Torah an "amulet for their own benefit" etc.;

But the Rambam himself explains it with that which he adds

(after the

words "as if it is an amulet for their own benefit")

: "as it arose in their foolish mind that this is a thing that benefits &lt;b&gt;in the vanities of &lt;/b&gt;the world":

That which they write into the mezuzah "names of angels etc."

(although the mezuzah itself is a protection),

is a proof that by them the mezuzah is entirely not a matter of mitzvah

(- because what place does it have to add in the

(mitzvah&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;

and)

protection of the Holy One, blessed be He?),

but an "&lt;b&gt;amulet for their own benefit&lt;/b&gt;",

that this is because of &lt;b&gt;his &lt;/b&gt;benefits,

which are "&lt;b&gt;vanities of &lt;/b&gt;the world";

And therefore it is foolishness,

because a mezuzah is a protection only because this is a &lt;b&gt;mitzvah&lt;/b&gt; and &lt;b&gt;it&lt;/b&gt; does the protection,

at the time that they

(by adding to the mezuzah)

fool themselves and think,

that the protection is not from the &lt;b&gt;mitzvah,&lt;/b&gt;

but from an "amulet of self-benefit",

which for this reason is correct by them that it is a "thing that benefits &lt;b&gt;in the vanities of&lt;/b&gt; the world"; and therefore "they have no portion in the World to Come",

in the manner as we find it in the law&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

that those who "make the words of Torah &lt;b&gt;healing of the body&lt;/b&gt;" are they "among the deniers of the Torah",

because Torah is only "healing of souls"&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;.

But when someone affixes a kosher mezuzah and adds nothing to the mezuzah,

rather at the fulfillment of the mitzvah he has the thought that he does it because he wants the &lt;b&gt;protection&lt;/b&gt; from the mitzvah&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;,

it is at most in the category of fulfillment of the mitzvah not for its own sake&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;.

And in particular when he does it not &lt;b&gt;only &lt;/b&gt;as a protection,

but he intends to fulfill a commandment of the Most High,

that He commanded to place a protection upon the entrance of the house — then he fulfills the commandment in its completeness³⁴.

6.

According to what was said above,

that the protection which is effected through mezuzah is not a “reward” or additional “segulah” upon the commandment,

but this is from the essence of the commandment itself — there becomes understood a wondrous thing that one finds in connection to the commandment of mezuzah:

The Mishnah

(in Tractate Keilim&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;)

enumerates several vessels that have a receptacle

(and therefore "these are susceptible to impurity"),

and one of them is: "a staff that has a receptacle for a mezuzah."

Says there the Tosafos Yom Tov: "And it is possible that there were people in the time of the Mishnah who carried a mezuzah with them and considered this a mitzvah and a protection for them";

That from the fact that the reality of "a staff that has etc." is brought down for the sake of protection and it is not nullified&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;,

it implies,

that this conduct has a basis&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;.

And in truth it is implied

(and more so - proven)

from the Yerushalmi,

that the mezuzah itself has in it the segulah of protection,

even when there is <b>not</b> involved the matter of fulfillment of the commandment:

It is told in the Yerushalmi³⁸,

that Rabbeinu HaKadosh sent a mezuzah to Artbon - a non-Jew³⁹

- and told him that he is sending him "a thing that puts you to sleep and it <b>guards you</b>"; i.e.

i.e.

although a non-Jew is not in the category of fulfillment of the <b>commandment</b> of mezuzah⁴⁰,

nevertheless also in this case the matter of "it guards you" which is here in the mezuzah applies.

which is brought in She'iltot*⁴⁰,

that through the fact that Artbon took the mezuzah etc. immediately the protection opened up and "and that demon fled etc."].

And superficially it is a thing that is astonishing: since they were accustomed to put into the "staff" specifically a mezuzah,

is this not a proof that they took this not as a mere portion from the Torah

(which is - in general - protective⁴¹),

but as

(protection of)

a <b>mezuzah</b> - how does the category of protection of a mezuzah apply here?

The law⁴²

is indeed,

that "if he hung it on a staff it is invalid",

and as the Gemara⁴³

further emphasizes: "danger and there is no mitzvah in it",

and according to Rashi's explanation⁴⁴

"danger - from the harmful spirits

that the house is not guarded by it until he fixes it in the form of the doorway according to its halacha.

that "the house of King Monbaz would do so in their inns &lt;b&gt;as a reminder &lt;/b&gt;of the mezuzah",

and as we find regarding several commandments,

that one makes a reminder of a commandment

(when one cannot fulfill it),

like the "arm" that we take on Passover eve as a reminder of the Passover sacrifice&lt;sup&gt;45&lt;/sup&gt;

- we do not find, however, that through a &lt;b&gt;reminder&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;46&lt;/sup&gt;

one should receive the &lt;b&gt;reward &lt;/b&gt;of the commandment etc.; and of course the reason - although this is indeed a "semblance" and "reminder"

(according to Torah)

of the commandment,

the reward is nevertheless connected with the &lt;b&gt;fulfillment &lt;/b&gt;of the commandment].

According to the above it is understood: since the protection that is through the mezuzah is connected with the body of the mezuzah,

consequently it is possible that a kind of this matter of protection exists in the mezuzah itself,

even before one has with it fulfilled the commandment of mezuzah,

since it was written for the sake of mezuzah etc.,

or even as per the local custom.

7.

With this one can also explain a wondrous story,

which the Rebbe, my father-in-law, the Admor, told*⁴⁶

: while he was in imprisonment,

at the first interrogation they asked him whether he knows where he is?

To this he answered: "Certainly I know

I,

that I find myself in such a place,

which is exempt from a mezuzah,

there are places which are exempt from a mezuzah,

like a stable of horses⁴⁷

and a bathroom.”

And superficially it is not understood: why did the Rebbe, my father-in-law, choose a <b>negative</b> matter — that this is a place which is <b>exempt</b> from a mezuzah?

Superficially it would have been more appropriate to answer with a positive matter,

that he finds himself in a place where

(also)

there is Divine Providence⁴⁸

— and especially since he <b>emphasizes</b> this, recounting the details of the imprisonment before the hearing and afterwards — that it is “the whole earth is full of His glory” and the like?

And especially that the Rebbe, my father-in-law, wanted to show

(as he related several times⁴⁹)

that he conducts himself with firmness and does not reckon with them at all,

until they are "as if they are not and as nothing and naught actually"*⁴⁹

- would it not then be fitting to say specifically the aforementioned matters?

But the matter in this - it can be said: The Rebbe, my father-in-law, also there,

in the prison,

wanted to have the protection of the mezuzah; since it was not possible to fulfill the commandment in its simple sense,

he therefore did what he could to make a "remembrance" of the matter of the mezuzah,

and moreover - to speak about the teachings of the mezuzah

(through which a semblance of the protection of the mezuzah is drawn down).

And therefore he said and

clarified⁵⁰

was this halachah,

that the place where he was located is exempt from mezuzah,

which thereby opened the connection to the matter of the mezuzah in a twofold manner:

(a)

Through the study of the laws of mezuzah there is the ruling of Chazal "Whoever engages in the Torah of etc. is as if he offered etc."⁵¹

- as if he is then fulfilling the commandment of mezuzah;

(b)

Through that which he clarified the halachah that <b>the house </b>

(he is <b>in the category of </b>"And you shall write them on the doorposts of <b>your house</b>"⁵²

-but in this case)

is exempt from mezuzah - it effected a connection

(not only with "the <b>Torah of</b>" mezuzah,

but also)

with the <b>commandment of </b>mezuzah - a negative connection: <b>the </b>house is exempt from mezuzah⁵³.

— In a slightly different style:

The <b>connection</b> of a house to a mezuzah can be in two ways: a)

A house that is obligated in mezuzah,

the connection is in a <b>positive</b> manner — by fixing the mezuzah at the entrance of the house.

b)

A house that is exempt from mezuzah — the connection is in a negative manner: one fulfills the command of the Torah and is <b>not</b> fixing a mezuzah there —

And it can be said that this was the reason of the Rebbe, my father-in-law,

that he chose to say that he is in a <b>house</b> that is exempt <b>from mezuzah,</b>

because this continued a matter of protection from mezuzah.

8.

From all this is understood the greatness of the merit that exists in the effort in "Operation Mezuzah" and especially in these times:

Jews are indeed as one sheep among seventy wolves,

whose help is the "Shepherd who saves and guards it, etc."

; and especially after the recent events,

in which one saw <b>tangibly</b> that it was lacking in the homes <b>of the sufferers,</b>

the fulfillment of the commandment of mezuzah,

that the Name,

written in a manner that one should see it when the mezuzah is already rolled together is <b>Shin-Dalet-Yud</b> acronym for "Guardian of the doors of Israel"

- is the Name

(and its guarding)

was not with them -

must be the effort <b>the greatest</b> that <b>every</b> Jewish home should have a mezuzah on <b>all doors</b> obligated in mezuzah and it

Should be affixed according to halachah;

And the effort must be both among men,

and among women who are obligated in mezuzah just like men⁵⁷,

and especially as the Gemara⁵⁸

explains: "Men need life, women do not need life"⁵⁹

lies upon her a special duty to safeguard the matters of the house - consequently also the guarding of the house through "mezuzot of <b>your house</b> etc."]

And through this there is a protection upon the house and upon everything that is found in the house,

and moreover

(as it is stated in the Zohar⁶⁰)

: the protection is in a manner of "Hashem will guard your going out and your coming in from now and forever" - even when going out of the house,

And since all of Israel are guarantors one for another⁶¹,

and all Jews are a "single structure"⁶²,

it is understood,

that through the addition of the fulfillment of the commandment of mezuzah of <b>every single</b> room obligated in mezuzah - there is added also in the protection of the entire structure,

of all of Israel,

of <b>every</b> Jew,

men, women, and children,

in every place that he is,

And in the language of the verse: Hashem will guard your going out and your coming in from now and forever.

12 Tammuz 5734)