Parshas Vaeschanan

Mi Casa Es Su Casa

By Rabbi Yochanan Zweig

“And write them on the door posts of your house and upon your gates” (6:9)

Generally, a mitzva is defined by the object used to perform the mitzva, such as shofar, lulav, and tefillin. However, the word “mezuzah” means “door post”; the object itself has no defining name other than the post upon which it is placed. This would be comparable to referring to tefillin as “arm”. What is different about mezuzah?

The Talmud teaches that upon vacating a home, if a person knows that the next tenants will be Jewish, he is responsible to leave a mezuzah hanging on the door. The Talmud relates a story concerning an individual who ignored this responsibility and was punished with the loss of his family.1 What does this transgression which result in such a tragic punishment?

When leaving the land of Moav, Naomi attempts to dissuade her daughter-in-law Ruth from embracing Judaism and accompanying her to Eretz Yisroel. Among the precepts she mentions that Ruth will be required to observe is the mitzva of mezuzah.2 What is the significance of this particular mitzva to a person who is interested in converting?

In the secular world, a person has a right to his privacy, and no authority can dictate to him what to do behind closed doors; man is king of his domain. The manner in which a person makes it be known that his house is under his control is by placing his name on either the door or door post. By placing a mezuzah on his door post, man is affixing Hashem’s name upon his home, thereby submitting to Hashem that He is the authority of this abode. Naomi understands that Ruth, coming from a society which entitles a person to complete control over his actions within his own home, needs to be warned that as a Jew this will not be the case.

Leaving a mezuzah behind when vacating a premises is an affirmation that this is Hashem’s home. A person who removes the mezuzah is denying Hashem’s control over his home. Therefore, the quid pro quo for this is that he loses his own home, i.e. his family.

The mezuzah functions to make a home “Hashem’s home”. Therefore, the object of the mitzva becomes the home, not the name affixed to it. Consequently, the mitzva is defined by the doorpost of the house.

RECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES

“Alas - she sits in solitude!” (Lamentations 1:1)

The Talmud teaches us that the prophet Jeremiah wrote the book of Lamentations.1 The custom since the times of the Talmud is to recite Lamentations on Tisha B’Av night.2 The prophet Jeremiah laments, using the expression “Eicha” - “Alas”. The Midrash sees a parallel between Jeremiah’s use of the word “eicha” and Hashem’s questioning of Adam after he ate from the forbidden fruit with the expression “ayeka” - “Where are you?”3 How does the story of Adam’s sin shed light upon Jeremiah’s lamentation.

After Adam ate from the forbidden fruit, Hashem called out to him, “ayeka” - “Where are you?”. Adam answered “I heard the sound of You in the garden and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid.” Rashi explains that obviously Hashem knew where Adam was, however, He did not want to punish Adam without him understanding why He was doing so. Therefore, Hashem first engaged Adam in dialogue prior to punishing him.4 Why did Hashem introduce the conversation with such an seemingly inane question? If a person were to surprise a thief burglarizing his home, one would expect the homeowner to ask “What are you doing?” or “Why did you do this?” It would be completely inappropriate for him to ask “Where are you?” Similarly, why did Hashem not ask, "What did you do?", rather than ask a question that was obvious to both He and Adam? However, what is more troubling is that Adam did not perceive the question to be inane, for his answer legitimizes the question.

As a precondition to sin, man must block out the reality of standing in Hashem’s presence. His state of mind must be such that he believes that is possible to hide from Hashem. By asking Adam "Where are you" and giving him the opportunity to answer “I was hiding”, Hashem was informing him that a new chasm had opened up between man and his Creator; the bond that existed prior to the sin had been severed. When Adam sinned, he attempted to remove Hashem from his immediate world. As a consequence, Adam could not expect Hashem to relate to him on an intimate level. If man hides from Hashem, Hashem will hide from man. This stunning blow to human existence was summed up in one word - “ayeka”. “Where are you mankind? You have cut yourself off from Me.”

The Midrash is teaching us that by lamenting using the word “eicha”, Jeremiah is expressing his distress over the chasm which exists between Hashem and Bnei Yisroel, reflected by the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash. The word “eicha” is used thirty-six times in the book of Lamentations, corresponding to the thirty-six instances in which the word “kares” - “to be cut off” is used in the Torah.5

The tragedy of the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash is not the terrible punishments which were inflicted upon Bnei Yisroel at that time, rather the loss of our intimate relationship with Hashem. Throughout history, Bnei Yisroel have suffered terrible tragedies which involved even greater loss of life than the events which transpired on the day that the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed. However, it is only on Tisha B’Av when we find that a day of mourning has been ordained, for a state of mourning reflects a loss of relationship, not a punishment. Punishment, although it may be severe, still indicates an ongoing relationship. A parent may discipline and punish his child as part of an ongoing relationship. However, if he is forced to throw the child out of his house, this signifies a termination of the relationship. On Tisha B’Av Hashem was forced to throw His children out of His house. The Talmud teaches us that three times a day Hashem laments “Woe to the father who had to banish his children from his table”6. The consolation we have is the knowledge that this is not an irreparable breach. May we all merit to see the restoration of this intimate relationship and be present for the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash speedily, in our time.