Chullin 136

Sugya Map: The Singularity of "Your"

• Issue: Do singular pronominal suffixes (beitekha, deganekha) exclude joint ownership (partnerships) from mitzvot?
• Nafka Mina: Whether a partnership of Jews (or Jew-Gentile) constitutes a "legal person" obligated in mitzvot.
• Primary Sources: Deuteronomy 12:17, Numbers 18:28, Chullin 136a.

Text Snapshot

The Gemara oscillates between treating singular pronouns as exclusionary and functional. Regarding the mezuza, the text notes: "The term beitekha (your house) is similar to bi’atkha (your entry), indicating one places the mezuza the way one enters" Chullin 136a. The dikduk shifts the focus from the owner to the act.

Readings

• Ritva (Chullin 136a): Explains that mezuza is chovat hadar (an obligation of the resident). Unlike tithes, where ownership is the trigger, mezuza is fixed to the act of living; hence, even a partnership with a gentile cannot exempt the Jewish resident from the obligation of shmira.
• Tosafot (Chullin 136a): Raises a sharp kushya: If we use "your" to exclude partnerships elsewhere (e.g., tithes), why not for mezuza? The lack of exclusion here forces a distinction between "obligation of the object" (tithes) and "obligation of the resident" (mezuza).

Friction

• Kushya: If the Torah uses singular pronouns to exclude partnerships (e.g., for teruma or firstborn), why is the partnership exemption not applied universally?
• Terutz: The Gemara establishes that where the Torah provides a plural pronoun (e.g., ma’asroteikhem), the singular serves a specific functional exclusion (e.g., excluding gentile-owned land). The "partnership" status is not an inherent loophole; it is a category defined by the specific mitzvah's dependency on individual vs. collective possession.

Intertext

The interplay between individual ownership and communal obligation mirrors the tension in Leviticus 23:14, where the omer harvest is restricted until the Omer is brought. Just as the Omer sanctifies the collective harvest, the plural pronouns in our sugya calibrate when the mitzvah extends beyond the individual.

Psak/Practice

The meta-heuristic here is chovat hadar vs. chovat mamon. For obligations tied to the person (like mezuza or tzitzit), the "partnership" status is largely irrelevant; the obligation follows the user. For obligations tied to the product (like teruma or first fruits), the singular pronoun functions as a boundary marker for legal standing.

Takeaway

The Torah’s grammar is not a static exclusion of the "other," but a dynamic pointer: when a mitzvah is an obligation of the resident, "your" house is simply where you happen to be; when it is of the harvest, "your" grain defines the boundaries of your liability.