Simanim 8:1 - 8:13 The Wearing of Tzitzit
Mishna Berura
Yeshivat Har Etzion
SHIUR
#5:Siman 8:1 - 8:13
Pages
25 - 30
by
Rav Yosef Zvi Rimon
Siman 8: The Wearing of Tzitzit
*********************************
Donning the
tallit (se'if 2):
The Torah
commands,
"Make for
yourself fringes on the four corners of your garment with which you COVER
yourself." (Devarim 22:12)
According to the Ge'onim, the tallit must cover the head as well. This is based on the gemara (Mo'ed Katan
24a): "All robing that is not done the way the Ishmaelites do it is not
considered robing." The Ba'al
Ha-ittur, however, maintains that one need only wear his tallit the way that
people in general wear their garments, and since this can be either with or
without a head covering, it is sufficient simply to cover the body with the
tallit. The gemara's statement in
its simple understanding, he points out, refers to the robing of a
mourner.
How does the Shulchan Arukh rule (se'if 2)? The M.B.? (Yechaveh Da'at, vol. V, siman 1, rules
like the M.B., because his opinion reflects popular practice.) What style of wearing the tallit is
invalid according to all opinions?
Donning the
tallit katan (se'if 3):
"And it is good
to rest it upon the head…" (S.A. se'if 3).
The Ashkenazic custom is rather to don the tallit katan simply, without
wrapping it around the head. The
Arukh Ha-shulchan (8:9) explains that since Ashkenazim bless "al mitzvat
tzitzit" on the tallit katan, instead of "le-hit'atef be-tzitzit," they are
lenient and do not require wrapping it around the head even while making the
berakha.
Separating the
strings of the tzitzit (se'if 7):
The source of
this law is found in Menachot 42a:
"Said Abbaye,
'And one must separate it like the locks of the Gentile.'"
Two reasons can be offered for this. The Ba'al Ha-ittur (brought in the Beit
Yosef and in the Magen Avraham 8:10) relates this law to tekhelet. Since the tekhelet-colored string had to
be separate from the white ones, we still do it nowadays as a reminder. The Gra (8:9), on the other hand, notes
that Rashi, in our source in Menachot, requires all the strings, including the
white ones, to be separated.
Therefore, he concludes, this is a law with intrinsic independent
importance and is unrelated to tekhelet.
What if one is in a hurry and does not have the time to separate the
strings - should he still recite the berakha? The answer depends, of course, on which
side one takes in the above-mentioned dispute. See the Bi'ur Halakha s.v. Tzarikh in
which he remains in doubt regarding this question. In practice, one can be lenient, since
(a) the Arukh Ha-shulchan (8:13) interpreted the gemara as referring only to the
making of the tzitzit, not to the wearing, and (b) the Chazon Ish (OC 3:9) ruled
leniently. (It should be noted,
however, that a knot renders it invalid according to all
opinions.)
Checking the
strings of the tzitzit (se'if 9):
Both Rishonim and Acharonim were puzzled by this requirement. Don't tzitzit, once they are checked
once, have a chazaka (established status) of being kosher until they are shown
to be defective?
The Rosh (Hilkhot Tzitzit; Responsa 2:9), based upon this reasoning,
asserts that indeed there is no need to check them. Most poskim, however, disagree, as does
the Shulchan Arukh. The Acharonim
debate the reason for this:
1) The Magen
Avraham I (8:11): One can rely upon a chazaka only when it is impossible to
check the facts in a case. When
possible, one must check.
2) The Magen
Avraham II: The chazaka of tzitzit in particular is not a reliable one because
the strings can break at any time.
3) The Taz
(8:8): Because of the severity of a berakha taken in vain, we are extra strict
about checking tzitzit.
The practical differences which arise from these approaches
include:
a) If one wears
more than one pair of tzitzit, must he check them all? (According to (3) it is enough to check
just one)
b) If one is in
a rush, can he skip the checking?
(According to (1) he can be lenient in such a case)
The M.B. rules stringently in case (a),
and leniently in case (b).
Kavana in the
berakha (se'if 8):
There is a certain fundamental level of kavana which is required for
every berakha; that is, the intention to fulfill the mitzva commanded us by
God. Beyond this, there are three
mitzvot which ideally require an additional degree. See M.B. 8:19.
Wearing tzitzit
out (se'if 11):
According to the Shulchan Arukh, one should wear the entire tzitzit over
his clothes - both the strings and the garment. See the Rama 13:3. Does he agree?
The M.B. (8:25, based on the Magen Avraham) rules that one must leave out
at least the strings.
The Nimukei Yosef and the Ri ben Maron (brought in the Ba'al Ha-ittur)
locate a biblical source for this ruling:
"Those who
cover their tzitzit underneath their cloaks are not properly fulfilling the
mitzva, as it is written, 'Make for yourselves fringes on the four corners of
your garment,' meaning that the tzitzit should always be ON the
garment."
However, this is the subject of debate; the Ittur himself disagrees with
the Ri ben Maron.
In practice, the following halakhic opinions appear. The M.B. is extremely stringent about
this issue (see 8:26). The Arukh
Ha-shulchan (8:17) believes that the strict letter of the law does not require
it, though he adds, "Why should we be ashamed of God's mitzvot?" In Yechaveh Da'at (vol. II, 1) it is
written that Sepharadim should not wear their tzitzit out lest they appear
boastfully arrogant about their performance of mitzvot; Ashkenazim may do so
without fear. (Both Asei Lekha Rav
and Az Nidberu, vol. III, 3, permit this for Sepharadim as well.) The Tzitz Eliezer (vol.VIII, 3 and vol.
XIII, 5) rules that one who wears his tzitzit inside is not at fault; it is,
however, praiseworthy to leave them out, especially for
Ashkenazim.
There are those who follow the custom of the Shla (the beginning of
Chullin, s.v. U-mei'achar), who wrote, "And because of the mockers, I, too, wear
my tallit katan beneath my clothing; yet I take the two front tzitziot and bring
them out through the hooks of the garment [nowadays, wrapped around the belt],
and I see them constantly."
Wearing more
than one pair of tzitzit (se'if 13):
The obligation of tzitzit falls upon people, not upon inanimate objects
(this will be more fully explained in siman 24). Therefore, one need not put tzitzit on a
four-cornered garment which is not being worn.
What if one wears several garments which are four-cornered - must he put
tzitzit on all of them? The Orchot
Chayim (the Ri Mi-lunel) rules that tzitzit on the outermost piece of clothing
suffices. See S.A. 8:12. How does the Shulchan Arukh
rule?
According to the Mor U-ketzia (OC 10), although we do not rule like the
Orchot Chayim, this opinion can be taken into account under certain
circumstances, when there are other mitigating factors. The Tzitz Eliezer (vol. VI, 1) ruled
that one need not put tzitzit upon a suit jacket which has four corners (nor
need one round one of the corners) even if the slit is more than half the length
of the jacket. Following the Mor
U-ketzia, he includes among his reasons that of the Orchot Chayim - that the
tallit katan is sufficient.
Donning the
tallit katan and then the tallit gadol (se'if 13):
One who puts on his tzitzit with a berakha and immediately puts on his
tallit does not make a second berakha.
What if he waits in between - for example, goes to synagogue - is this
considered a hefsek (break or interruption) that would require another
berakha?
The Shulchan Arukh believes that the very act of walking constitutes a
hefsek. The Acharonim (cited in
M.B. 8:33) maintain, in contrast, that the walking per se is not a hefsek, but
the change in location is. (The
precise definition of "change of location" is a complex one which will be
discussed in the context of hilkhot se'uda in siman 178; as a rule of thumb,
"change of location" or shinu'i makom involves going out from under one roof,
even if one returns to the same room, but not going from room to room under the
same roof.)
According to either of these two opinions, one who leaves his home to go
to synagogue, even if the synagogue is nearby, must make a berakha upon his
tallit. There is a third opinion,
however, held by the Chayei Adam (brought in M.B. 8:34; and in Biur Halakha s.v. Chashiva he
writes that this is also implied by the Taz and the Gra) which states that even
a change of location is not considered a hefsek; therefore a second berakha is
not required unless the synagogue was far from his home, or he became distracted
in between, or the like.
The M.B. apparently does not accept the position of the Shulchan Arukh;
however, he does not tell us which of the other two he believes correct. In practice, what is the preferred
option? See above M.B. 8:24. In any case, one who does not wear a
tallit but has proper tzitzit should make a berakha on
those.
(This
shiur was translated by Pnina Baumgarten.)