Menachos 35
Summary
- Today's *daf* is Menachot 35, beginning six lines from the bottom of Menachot 34b at *Tanu Rabbanan*, and it is learned as a *zechus refuah sheleimah* for חוה מרים בת מלכא פרידא, שלמה בן חיה לאה, and אידל נחמה בת בת שבע, and *le’iluy nishmas* זליג אברהם בן נחום, טובה רבקה אסתר בת ישראל יהושע, and רייזל בת משה. The *Gemara* in *Perek HaKometz Rabbah* presents core *halachos* of *tefillin*, starting with the exact order of the four *parshiyos* in the *tefillin shel rosh* and the major dispute between Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam about how to read the *beraisa*. It continues with rulings that switching the *parshiyos* can invalidate *tefillin*, enumerates multiple features as *halacha leMoshe miSinai*, and details laws of straps, squareness, structural integrity of the compartments, repairing torn straps, minimum strap length, and customary ways of letting the straps hang.
- The text states that *tefillin* contain four *parshiyos* because the *mitzvah* of *tefillin* appears four times in the *Torah*, and each full *parsha* where it appears is inserted into the *tefillin*. The four *parshiyos* are קדש לי כל בכור and והיה כי יביאך at the end of *Parshas Bo*, and the two *Krias Shema* sections, שמע and והיה אם שמוע. The focus is the *tefillin shel rosh* and the exact *seder* of how these four *parshiyos* are placed.
- The *Gemara* brings a *beraisa*: קדש לי והיה כי יביאך מימין and שמע והיה אם שמוע משמאל, and another *beraisa* that appears to say the opposite. Abaye resolves the contradiction by distinguishing between מימינו של קורא and מימינו של מניח, explaining that right and left depend on whether the orientation is from the viewer/reader’s perspective or from the wearer’s perspective. The *beraisa* concludes והקורא קורא כסדרן, meaning that from the *korei* perspective the reading order emerges as *kesidran*.
- Rashi interprets the *beraisa* so that from the *korei* looking right-to-left the order is קדש לי, והיה כי יביאך, שמע, והיה אם שמוע, which matches the chronological order these *parshiyos* appear in the *Torah*. Rashi reads קדש לי והיה כי יביאך מימין as placing קדש לי on the far right and והיה כי יביאך immediately to its left, and reads שמע והיה אם שמוע משמאל as placing שמע to the right of והיה אם שמוע within the left side, yielding the full right-to-left sequence קדש לי, והיה כי יביאך, שמע, והיה אם שמוע. Rabbeinu Tam argues that if this were the meaning, the *beraisa* could simply list all four in order, and he therefore reads שמע והיה אם שמוע משמאל to mean שמע is on the far left with והיה אם שמוע to its right, producing the sequence קדש לי, והיה כי יביאך, והיה אם שמוע, שמע and creating the principle of הוויות באמצע. The text identifies these as רש״י תפילין and רבנו תם תפילין and notes that Rabbeinu Tam must address how והקורא קורא כסדרן works on his reading, with reference to *Tosafos* and an opinion that earlier manuscripts may not have included those words.
- Rav Chananel says in the name of Rav that החליף פרשיותיה פסולה. Abaye limits this, saying the invalidation applies only when one switches an inner *parsha* with an outer *parsha* (גבייתא לברייתא וברייתא לגבייתא), but switching two inners or two outers (גבייתא לגבייתא וברייתא לברייתא) is not a problem. Rava challenges Abaye and argues that any deviation is פסולות because writing/placing them שלא כסדרן invalidates them, and he concludes that the *pesul* applies broadly and not only to inner-versus-outer switches. The text emphasizes that this raises the stakes of the Rashi–Rabbeinu Tam dispute because it becomes an *ikuv* question of validity rather than a *hiddur*.
- Rav Chananel says in the name of Rav that תיתורא דתפילין הלכה למשה מסיני, identifying the base/platform beneath the *bayis* as a required tradition. Abaye says מעברתא דתפילין הלכה למשה מסיני, defining the area through which the straps pass and where the knot sits as part of the tradition. Abaye also says שי״ן של תפילין הלכה למשה מסיני. Abaye requires that the חריץ reach all the way to the מקום התפר, while Rav Dimi of Nehardea says that as long as the division is recognizable (מינכר), it need not reach the stitching.
- Abaye rules that the קלפא דתפילין needs to be checked before writing due to concern for a hidden flaw that could create a hole in a letter, and the writing must be כתיבה תמה. Rav Dimi of Nehardea disagrees and says a separate check is unnecessary because the קולמוס will reveal any hole during writing. The text frames the dispute as whether an advance inspection is required when the writing process itself will expose the problem.
- Rav Yitzchak states רצועות שחורות הלכה למשה מסיני. A *beraisa* is raised that says *tefillin* straps must be made from the same species (במינן) and may be green, black, or white, but should not be red due to מפני גנאי ודבר אחר; Rashi explains *genai* as looking like bleeding wounds and *davar acher* as suspicion of being *meshamesh nidah* while wearing them. The *beraisa* reports stories about a תלמיד of רבי עקיבא tying with תכלת and הורקנוס son of רבי אליעזר בן הורקנוס tying with ארגמן, and it answers that the sages did not protest because they did not see. The *Gemara* resolves the color contradiction with כאן מבפנים כאן מבחוץ, requiring black on the outside while allowing other colors on the inside, and it explains the red concern even for the inside because straps sometimes flip (זמנין דמהפכן ליה) and become visible.
- A teaching states that תפילין מרובעות is *halacha leMoshe miSinai*. Rav Pappa explains that “square” includes בתפרן ובאלכסונן, requiring squareness even at the stitching so the shape is not distorted, and requiring the correct diagonal-to-side proportion of a true square. The *Gemara* cites a *beraisa* that העושה תפילין עגולה is סכנה and אין בה מצווה, and Rav Pappa says this may refer specifically to a nut-like shape (כי אמגוזא) with a pointy bottom that causes physical danger rather than proving the full precision demands of the square requirement.
- Rav Huna rules that as long as the פני טבלא, the visible outer leather, remains intact, the *tefillin* are *kosher* even if internal partitions have issues. Rav Chisda says that if two internal walls are torn the *tefillin* are *kosher*, but if three are torn they are *pasul*. Rava qualifies that two torn walls are only acceptable when they are not opposite each other (זה שלא כנגד זה), while tears directly opposite each other (זה כנגד זה) invalidate, and even then only for new *tefillin* (חדתא) but not for old ones (עתיקתא). Rav Yosef defines *old* versus *new* by how the leather behaves when pulled and whether it returns to its original form, and he gives an alternate test based on tugging strength and tear risk.
- A story describes Abaye’s strap snapping while he sits before Rav Yosef, and Abaye asks if he may retie it. Rav Yosef derives from וקשרתם that there must be קשירה תמה and rules that a torn strap may not be retied. Rav Acha the son of Rav Yosef asks Rav Ashi whether sewing it and hiding the seam on the inside would help, and Rav Ashi responds פוק חזי מאי עמא דבר, implying the practice is not accepted. Rashi presents uncertainty about the underlying reason, suggesting either that an extra knot is not יפה and undermines *noy* and *zeh Keili ve’anveihu*, or that קשירה תמה means a single complete connection rather than patched segments.
- Rav Pappa says גירדומי רצועות כשרות, but the *Gemara* rejects this with ולא מילתא היא based on בני רבי חייא who validate גירדומי תכלת and גירדומי אזוב and the distinction that those are תשמישי מצוה while *tefillin* are תשמישי קדושה. The *Gemara* infers from the very concept of *girdumin* that straps have a required minimum measurement (שיעורא). It then asks the size of the *shiur* and cites Rami bar Chama in the name of Reish Lakish: עד אצבע צרדה, with Rav Kahana demonstrating a *kefuf* measure and Rav Ashi demonstrating a *pashut* measure, yielding two interpretations of the finger-span reference.
- The *Gemara* records that Rava would place the hanging straps behind him. Rav Acha bar Yaakov would braid them. Mar brei d’Ravna would do what “we do,” leaving them hanging in front.
- The text quotes the Shulchan Aruch in Orach Chaim siman 34 stating that the prevailing practice follows Rashi and the Rambam for the order, and it states that a ירא שמים should be יוצא both views by making two pairs and wearing both with intent that the pair that is correct *aliba dehilchasa* fulfills the obligation and the other is merely straps. The Shulchan Aruch says there is room on the head and arm to wear both, offers an alternative of wearing sequentially on one *berachah* if one cannot place both properly, and brings an opinion to wear Rashi during *tefillah* and Rabbeinu Tam after *tefillah* without a *berachah* while reciting *Shema* and והיה אם שמוע. The question from the *Noda BiYehudah* (Orach Chaim Tinyana siman 4) asks why this Rabbeinu Tam view uniquely receives such deference when many other Rabbeinu Tam positions are not followed, and it notes an additional Rashi–Rabbeinu Tam dispute about whether the *parshiyos* are standing or lying where the Shulchan Aruch does not require accommodating Rabbeinu Tam. The *Noda BiYehudah* answers briefly that the Rabbeinu Tam position here is supported by major Geonim and others, and because the opposing side in this dispute is exceptionally weighty, it warrants being stringent to account for it, unlike a view “שוחה שאין לו מסייע משאר הגאונים.”
- The text states that the dispute is also framed as Rambam versus Raavad, with the Rambam in Hilchos Tefillin 3:5 detailing an arrangement aligned with Rashi and the Raavad objecting at length and advocating a form of הוויות באמצע, though with a different orientation than Rabbeinu Tam. It cites a long responsum in Shu”t Yabia Omer (Chelek 1, Orach Chaim siman 33) that lists many Rishonim and Geonim on each side, presenting the controversy as broadly divided among leading authorities. It cites a *Mechilta* at the end of Parshas Bo listing קדש לי, והיה כי יביאך, שמע, והיה אם שמוע and stating כותבן כסדרן and ואם לא כותבן כסדרן הרי אלו יגנזו, which Tosafos notes sounds like Rashi’s order. It reports the Chida in Shem HaGedolim (מערכת ספרים, ערך ירושלמי, מערכת י' סימן ס״ה) describing an earlier tradition of a “Yerushalmi on Kodashim,” used by the Raavad together with a תיקוני זוהר to support הוויות באמצע. It quotes Shu”t Min HaShamayim where the author asks in a dream for the correct order, receives the answer אלו ואלו דברי אלקים חיים, and is told that הקדוש ברוך הוא says הויות באמצע while כל פמליא של מעלה says הויות כסדרן, concluding with the statement that this gives special stature to the controversy.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions