Greetings. I have been arguing with someone about the differences in the times for shabbos between Zman Rabbenu Tam and the Zman Hageonim. The dispute focuses on the reality of day and night per the discussion in the gemara, but practically speaking there seems to be a serious conceptual problem.
People have a custom to follow Rabbenu Tam on Motsei Shabbos, and the geonim on Friday night. EVEN if one claims that it is permitted and praiseworthy to be machmir because of the issurim involved, this doesn't make sense because each shita is valid on its own merits as to what constitutes day and what constitutes night, including the laws of melachas.
So when one follows the geonim on Friday one acknowledges their perspective of what constitutes day and night, but this is valid SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, not just shabbos. And if one follows Rabbenu Tam on Motzei Shabbos one is following their understanding of what constitutes day and night SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. So how can one differentiate between Friday night and Motsei Shabbos?
If one establishes a sevara for differentiating between two different views of what constitutes day and night for Friday and Shabbos times, then one can establish a sevara for differentiating the other way: accepting shabbos later and ending shabbos earlier EVEN if this is being LENIENT for convenience's sake.
One can consider being machmir praiseworthy even within this conceptual framework and maykel NOT praiseworthy, but nonetheless it is a sevara for following two different concepts of day and night! This should be perfectly acceptable regardless.
In another matter, Sephardim and Chassidim have a custom of wearing Rashi and Rabbenu Tam tefillin, both of which (in addition to several others) are perfectly legitimate. Yet, nowhere do we find that a person MUST or OUGHT to follow two different shitas in order to fulfill a mitzvah. This is unheard of as far as I know.
Either one is 100% valid, and despite the claim that one doesn't make a bracha on Rabbenu Tam tefillin, the fact is there is nothing wrong with doing so. Thus, really one can wear either one and fulfill the mitzvah perfectly. But to then claim one "must" wear BOTH to fulfill the mitzvah, REGARDLESS of who recommends it (Arizal, Baal Shem Tov, etc.) cannot be obligatory. The fact is that this is an anomaly in halacha that has no force of obligation for compliance with the mitzvah.
I'll be interested in your thoughts on these two issues. Don't worry, I have many more! :-) ;-)
David Goldman
Shalom David,
I like your insights and way of thinking. I want to offer two points regarding both topics, the Zemanim and the Tefilin.
Although you are correct when we look at it logically, but there is place in the realm of Halachah to try to be "Yotzei" all of the Shitos. There is a humble stance we can take when we take a step back and say, it is true that we might need to decide ("Pasken") in an argument which is way over our heads, such as an argument of Rabeinu Tam with the Ge'onim (!) or an argument between Rashi and Rabeinu Tam (!), and that is why we have a Mesores of Psak -- Rambam, Shulchan Aruch, etc. But after this being said, if one practices both Shitos it does not have to mean he holds or knows what is the right Shitah. On the contrary, he knowingly is showing his respect to these giants who for us are like shining lights, and he is saying that although I can practice like the Ge'onim on both ends, I still honor the opinion of Rabeinu Tam, and even though I don't have to, I still want to give this opinion the benefit of the doubt, because perhaps Rabeinu Tam is right on both ends, but I won't lose anything if I am Machmir. In short, a Chumra does not have to imply a decision.
Another point I would like to bring up is discussed more regarding the Tefilin. It is well known that the Vilna Ga'on said that if you want to Machmir for all of the Shitos of the Reshonim regarding Tefilin, you might need to prepare over 60 pairs of Tefilin. This reflects your opinion in your question. But there is a very deep Sugya which is hinted to in the Gemara in Gitin 7b, the Sugya of "Eilu v'Eilu Divrei Elokim Chayim. Many times, different opinions in a Halachic question, or actually in any question, are not binary options. A learner or a Posek has a few arguments in front of him, and he needs to weigh each argument and make a decision. The decision might be a binary one, but the arguments are far from "black and white." We see that in the Machlokes in the Gemara, one said Tamei, the other said Tahor, and Hash-m said both are "Divrei Elokim Chayim." So, sometimes from a higher perspective, the common denominator can unite two different or even opposite opinions, because the opposition is not really in the argument, but more in the need to decide. The argument between Rashi and Rabeinu Tam regarding what order to put the Parshiyos in the Tefilin has two or more perspectives. We need to decide what a Jew should do every morning, but that does not turn the two close opinions, with fine distinctions, to be any further from each other than they really are, even though once one opinions becomes the Halachah in practice (in the Olam ha'Ma'aseh), a Chasid and a Litvak might fight about it vehemently. These kinds of harsh and sharp arguments, trying to take ownership of the truth while hiding behind excessive honor to this or another rabbi, are not the shining side of intelligence or wisdom, and for sure not of the beautiful Torah. In theory, you might have to put on Rashi's Tefilin, but you still can fulfill Rabeinu Tam's nuance in the way he sees the Mitzvah, because both opinions are different perspectives of the same idea.
This is the way I learned from my Rebbi (Rav Moshe Shapira zt"l). There is a place in the hall of truth, that two opposite opinions reflect two perspectives of the same higher idea.
I hope this helps a bit, and I'm looking forward to hearing your other thoughts.
Aharon Steiner
Thank you for your reply. I will need to reread it again. However, it seems to me on a purely practical basis of how halacha is carried out, anyone could fulfill the mitzvah of tefillin with any one of the 60(!) shitas, and at least make a bracha on RT tefillin, or alternate.
But there is no practical basis for the kabbalistic/chassidic assertion that fulfillment of the mitzvah requires both pairs, even if it isn't an explicit halachic psak. There are many additional aspects of tefillin that I have thought about that I feel are never adequately resolved.
1) The obsession with gasos which never existed in history, is rather ironic considering how much attention is given to "mesora" among Jewish communities. After all, if Rashi and Rabbi Akiva could use pshutim then that should be good enough for the rest of us, regardless of "hidurim". My own great-grandfather who lived in Russia before coming to Canada and was very frum, was not like today's frum in many ways. One of them was that his tefillin were pshutim. According to his son, my grandfather, he had been through Shas 4 times, and in Canada saw his children weaken in observance, and their own children even more and worked to stay close to them. I even saw a photo of him with two of his daughters in law arm in arm with him (!). This is just anecdotal but an interesting observation.
2) One of the rishonim discussed karkafta with tefillin and mentioned that wearing tefillin every day was "middos chassidus" since there is no requirement in the Torah or mishna otherwise. Although I am not Chabad in any way I can understand the benefit of a Jew putting on tefillin at least once in his life.
3) Zman Grama has alot of kashes to it. No one could say that today a woman is the same as it was in the past when a woman was like a slave and was subject to someone else. And no one could therefore say that even any woman today could not find 5 minutes once in a while to put them on. Not to mention the areas of "zman grama".
I'll end with that, because I have many many other areas!!
Best,
David G
You are touching upon very interesting points. I recall when I was studying in the Chevron Yeshiva, one of the Roshei Yeshiva was Rav Hillel Zaks zt"l, who was a grandson of the Chafetz Chayim. He once said that even if we would have the Tefilin of his grandfather, he would still prefer to use the ones he had. As you wrote, it is not obligatory to make Tefilin from Gasos skin, but I think it became standard nowadays because it is possible and the Tefilin are of a much higher quality and have much greater endurance. I remember a friend who made a terrible mistake and somehow his Tefilin found their way into his washing machine. When the cycle was finished, the Tefilin were in pretty good condition, and the Parshiyos were still Kosher. (Don't try this at home!)
You are correct about the "Hidurim" fashion. It is true that we live in a generation that some people find a special taste in their Judaism when they add on something unique. I would connect this to the general modern-age run to individualism.
As for what you wrote about "Karkafta d'Lo Manach Tefilin," I agree with you. Sometimes we hear these stories of people who grew up in Communist countries where they had no access to Tefilin and then, at some point, found a pair of Tefilin just before they died. We all feel that this one time has a special meaning.
You might be interested in this article written by Rabbi Dr. Chaym Soloveitchik:
https://traditiononline.org/rupture-and-reconstruction-the-transformation-of-contemporary-orthodoxy/
Here is a response to that article, written by my father z"l.
https://traditiononline.org/the-transformation-of-contemporary-orthodoxy-another-view/
Best regards,
Aharon Steiner
Thank you for your reply. I will try to get to reading those interesting articles even though they are lengthy.
I think you skipped the issue of zman grama ;-)
About karkafta, this has alot of importance because we all know that notwithstanding the statements of AMORAIM, there is no obligation in the Torah or Mishnah to wear tefillin every day at all, which to my mind is rather strange. Although it is possible that the Torah would not oblige a Jew to wear something that required craftsmanship and alot of expertise to know its kosher status. I also know there are many ethics-related attempts to prove the need for frequent wearing of tefillin. However, the bottom line is still the bottom. Even the basic amoraic position is wearing them at least once in a lifetime, which might be an added reason why the Rashbam wanted to offer the pshat spiritual definition of Oys and Totafos.
Then comes of course tzitzis, for which no obligation exists to wear a four cornered garment (which doesn't exist anymore anyway) then there is an obligation exists for fulfilling a mitzvah of shiluach hakan unless the circumstances present themselves.
DG
The Zman Grama topic you raised is a wider question which is not really a topic related to Zman Grama, but more to Judaism in the modern ages. I can give my insight on this topic, but I'm not sure I really have anything to add, because my bottom line will always come from the position that we do not have any power or right to change what Chazal have taught us, even if it might seem that the reasoning is not relevant anymore. After saying that, all I can add is apologetics to Chazal, and I feel that there are many out there who can do so better than I can. I can cite the Semag (Mitzvah 3) who writes how he put in much effort so that Jews should go back to wearing Tefilin every day.
As for your thoughts regarding wearing Tefilin every day, from your question I can tell that I do not have to give you the several references in Chazal regarding how often wearing Tefilin is obligated. Some references show that Tefilin should be on all the time, and others, at least once a day, but there is no clear-cut reference.
I would just add my thought that Judaism, as we know, is not only the written word. Without the Masoret which is passed down, all written words can be explained or misunderstood, as we see time after time that a text can be taken out of context and ideas can be misunderstood when written as texts. This is why Masoret, which in broad, is the way Klal Yisrael accepted and practiced the beliefs and Mitzvos and is what we are left with when it comes to the bottom line. This Masoret, of course, has wide areas of dispute and discussion, especially after the Galus, which -- besides all the physical and mental agonies -- we lost our supreme authority and we became spread all over the world, holding on to our customs as much as we can. The Masoret was held in different ways in different areas of the world, according to the different situations Jews went through in the places they were and are living. For example, the discussion regarding women and Mitzvos which you raised is sharper in more liberal countries while, in others, the discussion around women's role in Judaism is minor.
The fact that in all of Klal Yisrael the practice of wearing Tefilin daily is considered a simple fact means much more to me than any written document. To me, Minhag Yisrael is much more "Jewish" than anything else, especially if it is a custom which is found in all Kehilot with no exceptions.
Kol Tuv,
Aharon Steiner