1. As you write, the Hava Amina is that the Beraisa -- which maintains that a 5-cornered Beged must have Tzitzis -- holds that "Yeser k'Man d'Leisa Dami." That is, if a Beged possesses more than 4 corners, the extra corners are considered as if they do not exist. Therefore, a Beged which physically possesses 5 corners is considered Halachically as possessing 4, so one puts Tzitzis only on 4 corners, not on the 5th.

2. The Maskanah is "Yeser k'Man d'Isa Dami" -- if a Beged possesses 5 physical corners, then it also possesses 5 Halachic corners. If so, it should be totally exempt from Tzitzis, since the verse (Devarim 22:12) tells us to put strings on the 4 corners of our garments, not on a Beged which has 5 corners. However, the reason such a Beged does need Tzitzis is, as you write, because of the Ribuy of "Asher Techaseh Bah." However, there is another reason why one cannot put 5 sets of strings on a 5-cornered Beged. This is because the verse (Devarim 4:2) warns us not to add on to the Mitzvos. Rashi there writes that an example of this is putting 5 sets of strings on a Beged.

Therefore, according to the Maskanah as well, one only puts on 4 sets. In summary, both in the Hava Amina and in the Maskanah one puts 4 sets of strings on the 5-cornered Beged, according to the Beraisa that a 5-cornered Beged must have Tzitzis. However, the difference between the Hava Amina and the Maskanah concerns the reason for this Din. According to the Hava Amina, a 5-cornered Beged only has 4 Halachic corners, so one only puts on 4 sets of strings. According to the Maskanah, it has 5 Halachic corners, but if one would put on 5 sets of strings this would transgress "Bal Tosif" (see Mishnah Berurah OC 10:4).

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

1. A central source here is Rashi to Devarim 4:2, as you write, Daniel. Rashi writes that an example of Bal Tosif is 5 Tzitzis. The Magen Avraham (Orach Chayim 10:2) understands that Rashi is also referring to putting 5 sets of strings on a Beged with 5 corners. The Mishnah Berurah (10:4) rules like the Magen Avraham.

2. I also thought that Rashi might be speaking about putting 5 Tzitzis in a 4-cornered Beged as you wrote, Daniel. However, I cannot prove this. I would be very interested to see the discussion on Rashi to Devarim 4:2 that you mention. I would suggest, though, that until we find any good proof to the contrary, we should stick with the Magen Avraham and Mishnah Berurah, who say that putting 5 sets of strings in a 5-cornered Beged does constitute Bal Tosif according to Rashi. There is still a lot more to write on this Sugya but I will close here for the moment. Thanks again for the very interesting discussion.

Dovid Bloom

I found that there is support for the opinion of the Magen Avraham from the words of the Ra'avyah, a major Rishon, although I think the source is not well-known at all.

It is printed in Kovetz Shitos Kamai (I found it in a search in Otzros ha'Torah, and it is also on HebrewBooks), a collection of Rishonim published by Rav Shalom Yungerman zt'l of Zichron Yakov, on Maseches Rosh Hashanah, Daf 33b (page 631 of the Sefer), DH Gam, in the name of the Teshuvos Ra'avyah #171.

1. The Ra'avyah explains the Gemara in Menachos 40b (which we will be learning soon in Dafyomi, bs'd). There, Rav Zeira states, "Hitlis l'Mutleis Kesherah" -- "if one put Tzitzis on a garment which already has Tzitzis, this is valid." Rashi explains that one decided to put 4 new strings on a Beged which already had 4 strings. This is Kosher once one removes the original 4 strings.

2. The Ra'avyah has a different way of learning this Gemara. He writes that Rav Zeira is referring to a garment with 5 corners. It had 4 sets of Tzitzis and one then put on a 5th set on the 5th corner. This is Kosher once one removes one of the first 4 sets. However, the Gemara on 40b cites Rava immediately after Rav Zeira. Rava says that while the Talis is Kosher after one removed the 5th string, nevertheless one transgressed Bal Tosif when he put on the 5th string.

3. So the opinion of the Ra'avyah is that if one puts on 5 sets of strings on a Talis with 5 corners, this constitutes Bal Tosif. We now have an explicit Rishon on the side of the Magen Avraham and Mishnah Berurah.

1. I would like to suggest an answer to the question that Rav Moshe Sternbuch asks on the Radzhiner Rebbe in Teshuvos v'Hanhagos 1:26, DH vC'K. Rav Moshe writes that the Radzhiner Rebbe asked why the Ge'onim of Yisrael did not want to use a string with the Techeles dye in order to be Machmir just in case it is the true Techeles, and cover oneself from any doubt. Rav Moshe answers that the Ge'onim were concerned about Bal Tosif. If one believes that one is fulfilling the Mitzvah of Techeles but in reality one is not (because this might not be the real Techeles), then one effectively is adding a new Mitzvah of Techeles, which in reality is not a Mitzvah.

I suggest that the Radzhiner Rebbe's proposal was based on the Ritva in Sukah 31b. The Ritva writes that whatever one does because of a Takanah of Chazal is not included in Bal Tosif. Therefore, if one adds extra blasts of the Shofar on Rosh Hashanah because Chazal have a doubt concerning the correct Teki'os, there is no problem of Bal Tosif. Similarly, the Radzhiner Rebbe wanted the Gedolei ha'Dor to say that everyone should wear what he believed to be Techeles. Then, even if in reality it transpired that it is not the Techeles, one still did not transgress Bal Tosif because one only wore the Techeles because that is what the Poskim told him to do in order to be Yotzei the Safek.

2. Here is a way of reconciling the Ritva in Sukah 31b with the Gemara in Zevachim 81a, both of which you cited, Daniel, with the implication that the Gemara poses a Kashya on the Ritva.

a. I found what Rav Elchanan Wasserman Hy'd writes in Kovetz Shi'urim 2:33:1. He cites Rav Chaim Brisker zt'l, who explains the opinion of Rebbi Yehoshua in the Mishnah in Zevachim 80a and Gemara there, 81a. Rebbi Yehoshua maintains that if the blood of a Korban which requires 1 sprinkling becomes mixed with the blood of a Korban which requires 4 sprinklings, one may perform only 1 sprinkling, because if one performs 4, this consitutes Bal Tosif. One sees that Rebbi Yehoshua learns that one transgresses Bal Tosif even if he does not intend to add to the Mitzvah but merely intends to cover the doubt that it might need 4 sprinklings.

2. Rav Elchanan writes in the name of Rav Chaim that it is possible to say that Rebbi Yehoshua said the above ruling only according to the opinion (Rosh Hashanah 28b) that Mitzvos do not require Kavanah. However, according to the opinion that Mitzvos require Kavanah to be Yotzei, it also follows that one transgresses an Aveirah only if he intended to do the act. This idea perhaps also applies to Kodashim, in which case one transgresses the prohibition of Bal Tosif by sprinkling the blood too many times only if he intended to transgress this prohibition, but not if he merely did so because of a Safek.

3. Now let us turn to the Ritva in Sukah 31b. The Ritva writes that whenever one does something merely to save himself from a doubt, and with no intention of adding on to the Mitzvah, this does not constitute Bal Tosif. This idea of the Ritva seems to be directly contradicted by Rebbi Yehoshua's ruling which prohibits 4 sprinklings even though they are done only out of doubt.

However, now with the Yesod of Rav Chaim we may answer the riddle. Rebbi Yehoshua only said this according to the opinion that Mitzvos Ein Tzerichos Kavanah, but since we rule that Mitzvos require Kavanah to be Yotzei, it follows that one may do 4 sprinklings because of a Safek. When the Ritva wrote that one may add on to the Mitzvah if he is doing it only to save himself from a doubt, this follows the Halachah that Mitzvos Tzerichos Kavanah, and it does not follow the Gemara in Zevachim 81a which is following the opinion that Mitzvos do not require Kavanah.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

I wonder how Rav Chaim Brisker fits in with the Rabeinu Bachya that you cited, Daniel.

I am referring to Rav Chaim Brisker in Stensil on Shas, in the Kodashim section, #275, page 234. He cites the opinion in Menachos 99a that Shlomo Hamelech made 10 tables, but the showbread was only arranged on one of the tables. Rav Chaim writes that even though it was all given in writing to make more than one table, and presumably they were all identical to Moshe's table, nevertheless there was only one table for Lechem Hapanim. This is because when the Chumash tells us that Hashem said "And they shall make me a Mikdash" this only included one table.

So according to Rav Chaim there were 10 tables, but the other 9 were tables without the Mitzvah of putting bread on.

Yasher Koach

Dovid Bloom