11 Aug Mezuzah or Shul

The Torah in Devarim 13:17 tells us that in the event there is a whole city that serves avoda zora, all its belongings will be gathered in the middle of the city and get totally burned. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 71a tells us that Reb Eliezer says that if a city that served avoda zora has even just one house with a mezuzah in it, the city will be saved. This will not render the city an Ir Hanidachas. The reason for this is that even though there is a mitzvah to burn everything in a city that served avoda zora, they are not allowed to burn a mezuzah. The meforshim ask why don’t we say that a city that has a Shul would also be exempt from becoming an Ir Hanidachas?

There are a number of tirutzim to explain this. The first tirutz is based on the Shailos Utshuvos Tzemach Tzedek 20 based on the Ran in Megilah 8 in the pages of the Rif that says that the kedusha of a Bais Haknesses is only MiDeRabbonon. Therefore, if there is a Bais Haknesses in an Ir Hanidachas, it would get destroyed. The Maharsham Vol 6:9 argues with this tirutz and says that despite the fact that kedushas Beis Haknesses is only MiDeRabbonon, nevertheless the issur of destroying a Bais Haknesses would be Min HaTorah and therefore this tirutz would not satisfy our question.

The second tirutz is based on the Shailos Utshuvos Amudei Aish 18:2 that says that the mezuzah is in a different category since regarding a mezuzah one would transgress many lavin since each time Hashem’s name is mentioned and is burned it would render a different lav. We therefore don’t use the common rule of aseh docheh lo saseh since it would be too many lavin and thereby it saves the whole city. Regarding the destruction of a Bais Haknesses where there is only one lav, we do say that aseh docheh lo saseh. The third tirutz is also mentioned in Shailos U’teshuvos Amudei Aish 18:2 where we pasken that if one knocks down a Shul not b’derech hashchasa, then he would not be transgressing a lav. Therefore, in the case of Ir Hanidachas, where there is a constructive way of destroying of a Bais Haknesses, then one would not have a problem and the whole city can be destroyed including the Bais Haknesses. However, regarding destroying a mezuzah one would be transgressing countless times even if one destroys it in a constructive way. The mezuzah can thereby save the whole Ir Hanidachas.

There are two more tirutzim to the above question. The fourth one is that since we see in Megillah 26a that if the seven officers of a Shul decide to sell the Shul it would be permitted even if the Shul will lose its kedusha. We pasken that way in Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 153:9 that a Shul may be sold even if the next owner will make it into a bar, so long as the seven officers of the Shul agree to sell it. We see that the kedusha of a Shul does not last forever, whereas a mezuzah will always be kadosh. The fifth tirutz based on Megillah 26b is similar in that one may not destroy a Shul until another one is built, but once the second Shul is built, the first one may be destroyed as we see in Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 152. In the case of an Ir Hanidachas, all Bais Din needs to do is build another replacement Shul in another town and then the Shul in the city that served avoda zora may be destroyed. A mezuzah may never be destroyed so it saves the whole entire Ir Hanidachas!

We see from here how great is the mitzvah of mezuzah. May we be zocheh to be mekayim this special mitzvah in Eretz Yisroel bekarov.