Siman 290

We say in Menachot (Menachot 32a): A Sefer Torah that has worn out, or tefillin that have worn out – one may not make mezuzot from them. This is because one does not lower from a more stringent sanctity to a lighter sanctity, and a mezuzah – its sanctity is lighter even than tefillin, because in tefillin there are four parshiot and in a mezuzah two (Rashi). And one should not say: behold, even without this it is impossible, for in the Torah the two parshiot are distant from one another, and if you make a mezuzah from them, one must necessarily sew them? And we have already written in siman 288 that with two skins – it is pasul, even when one sews them. For it can be said: that it could be in such a case where parshat Shema is at the end of the column, and he writes "Ve-haya im shamoa" on the margin beneath it (Tosafot ibid.). And from tefillin – this refers to the shel yad, which are written on one skin. And even though in a mezuzah "Ve-haya im shamoa" is beneath "Shema," and in tefillin they are side by side, yet it has already been explained there that in two columns it is kosher.

And for this reason, one may not write a mezuzah even on the margins of a sefer Torah, because one may not lower from a more stringent sanctity to a lighter sanctity. For the margins of the sefer Torah possess sanctity like the sefer Torah itself. And even if the sefer Torah wore out and is no longer fit, nevertheless it is forbidden. And one of the commentators on the Shulchan Aruch in Orach Chaim siman 154 (Taz, end of subsection 7) says that in his opinion, this rule that one may not lower—this is specifically when it is still fit for the more stringent sanctity. But when it is not fit—one may lower it, for it is better that there be a lighter sanctity than that it be nullified from its sanctity entirely, see there. For behold, a sefer Torah that wore out is no longer fit for a sefer Torah, and despite all this, it is forbidden to make a mezuzah from it. (See there that he raised this difficulty against the Taz. And there is one who wished to distinguish between the sanctity itself and the accessories, see there. But from where do we have the authority to say so? And the proof that he brought from the wraps of a sefer Torah that they make for a met mitzvah—it is a bewildering thing, for behold, this is its burial.)

Several great authorities agreed that it is not only a valid sefer Torah that has worn out from which one may not make a mezuzah, but the same law applies to a sefer Torah in which missing or extra letters were found; for even though it is forbidden to read from it, it nevertheless remains in its sanctity. Similarly, a parchment sheet upon which one began to write a sefer Torah has become sanctified with the sanctity of a sefer Torah, and it is forbidden to lower it from its sanctity (Eliyah Rabbah, and Noda BiYehudah Tinyana, and Teshuvot Chatam Sofer). And even though the Rambam wrote in the tenth chapter that a disqualified sefer Torah possesses no sanctity other than the sanctity of Chumashim—this refers to the matter of reading from it, but not to lowering it from its sanctity.

And know that that which we wrote, that one may also not make a mezuzah from the margins of a sefer Torah, so wrote the Rambam at the beginning of the fifth chapter. And so wrote the Tur and Shulchan Aruch. And it is to be wondered, for in Shabbat (ibid. 116a) we say that the sanctity of the margins exists only when the sefer Torah is complete, and by virtue of the writing—the margins are sanctified. But when the sefer Torah has worn out—the sanctity of the margins is nullified. And one cannot say that there it is merely a rejection, for behold the Rambam in the laws of the Fathers of Impurity chapter nine ruled accordingly, that the margins of a sefer Torah impart impurity to the hands while it is still attached to the sefer Torah, and not afterward, see there. And there is one who says that only regarding saving from a fire did they say so (Noda BiYehudah Tinyana siman 173). But it is not so, as is proven from the words of the Rambam that we brought. And so wrote the Rashba there in his novellae, that with the nullification of the writing—the sanctity is nullified from the margins. Therefore, it appears in my humble opinion that also here, what our teachers wrote that one may not write a mezuzah on the margins of a sefer Torah—it does not refer back to a sefer Torah that has worn out, as it seemingly implies from the flow of their words, and as I wrote in section 2. Rather, it is a matter unto itself, and refers to a complete sefer Torah. And in practice, one must deliberate on this.

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote: But it is permitted to repair the Sefer Torah itself with its margins, if it is impossible to repair it in another manner, and it would have required genizah regardless. But if it is possible to repair it in another manner, even if the Sefer Torah is of gevil and he wishes to adhere parchment to it – he should not cut the margins to repair it, for it is not forbidden to repair it from the outside with parchment even though the Sefer Torah is of gevil. Thus far his words. And this law is from the responsa of Maharam Padua (siman 84). And it is explained there that he does not consider it a descent in status when they repair the Sefer Torah itself with the margin, meaning to place patches upon it. Rather, his concern was because it is impossible to precisely cut from it exactly what is needed for the patches, and remnants of the margins will remain with nothing on them, and they will require genizah. Therefore, he only permitted it if it is impossible in another manner: for since without this they would hide away the Sefer Torah – it is better to repair it with the margins. And he wrote there, and this is his wording: However, if it were possible to cut only according to the need of the patch, it would seem to be permitted. For it is an ascent, initially being a margin, and afterwards being part of the body of the scroll etc. Thus far his words. But the Rivash (siman 32) did not write based on the reason of the remnants, but rather that this itself is a descent in status, and this is his wording: You asked if it is permitted to take from the margins of a Sefer Torah that was torn and to adhere them, or if it is a descent in status? It appears certainly that it is forbidden, for even to write a mezuzah upon it is forbidden, as we do not lower in status etc. and all the more so to adhere the tear, which serves only as a mere act of adhesion and from behind the scroll. Thus far his words. Yet it is possible to say that his intention was to adhere the tear of the Sefer Torah, but it would not be a patch to write upon. And a patch is superior, because one writes upon it. According to this, one may say that they do not disagree with one another, and we can rule like Maharam Padua. (See Darkhei Moshe who understood that they disagree, but it is not definitive. Examine carefully and you will find it easy.) And it is a simple matter that it is forbidden to take a margin from this Sefer Torah and repair another Sefer Torah (Chatam Sofer). And it appears in my humble opinion that this applies only to a kosher Sefer Torah, or one that is capable of being repaired. But a disqualified Sefer Torah, which can no longer be repaired and requires genizah – it is permitted to cut the margins and prepare from them patches for another Sefer Torah, for it is simple that there is no descent in status in this, as this is better than genizah. And according to the opinion of Maharam Padua, it is an ascent. And even according to the opinion of the Rivash, one may say so as I have written, that they do not disagree with one another. And specifically regarding one that requires genizah – one should permit it simply in such a case.