Bava Metzia 102A

בגובתא דקניא.

to insert a mezuza inside a hollow reed and then affix the whole arrangement to the doorpost.

תנו רבנן: המשכיר בית לחבירו ⁠– על השוכר לעשות לו מזוזה, וכשהוא יוצא ⁠– לא יטלנה בידו ויצא. ומנכרי, נוטלה בידו ויוצא. ומעשה באחד שנטלה בידו ויצא, וקבר אשתו ושני בניו.

A baraita states: If one rents out a house to another, the responsibility to prepare a mezuza for it and affix it is upon the renter. And when he leaves, he may not take it in his hand and leave with it; rather, he must leave it there. But if he rented a house from a non-Jew, he may take it in his hand and leave with it. And there was an incident in which a renter took his mezuza in his hand and left with it, and as a punishment he eventually buried his wife and two sons.

מעשה לסתור?! אמר רב ששת: ארישא.

The Talmud asks: Was the incident cited to contradict the ruling immediately preceding it, which permits one to take the mezuza? Rav Sheshet said: The incident relates to the first clause.

הזבל של בעל הבית, ואין לשוכר אלא היוצא מן התנור ומן הכירים בלבד. במאי עסקינן? אילימא בחצר דאגיר[א] ליה לשוכר ותורי דשוכר ⁠– אמאי של בעל הבית? אלא בחצר דלא אגירא לשוכר ותורי דמשכיר, פשיטא!

§ The Mishnah teaches: The manure found in the courtyard of a rented house, is the property of the landlord, and the renter has rights only to the ashes that come out of the oven and the stove, which can also be used as a fertilizer. The Talmud asks: With what are we dealing? If we say that the Mishnah is referring to a courtyard that is rented out to the renter, or where the manure was produced by the oxen of the renter, then why should it be the property of the landlord? It is clearly the property of the renter. Rather, the Mishnah must be referring to a courtyard that is not rented out to the renter, and the manure was produced by the oxen of the landlord. The Talmud asks: But if so, the ruling is obvious and need not have been taught.