הלכות תפילין ומזוזה וספר תורה פרק ב

Laws of Tefillin, Mezuzah and Sefer Torah, Chapter 2

Introduction – Merit of the Shiur

Speaker 1: Dear Jews, today we are learning Laws of Sefer Torah, Tefillin and Mezuzah, or Tefillin, Mezuzah and Sefer Torah, Chapter 2. And today's shiur has been dedicated by Rabbi R' Yoel Wertzberger, and he very much hopes that other Jews will help him and donate for the shiur. One can send through the link, or send, simply give 500 dollars in my pocket, I'll send it where it needs to arrive.

And through this merit there will be such a great merit as one who gives food. We learned this last night, that just as one may not go three days without water, one cannot go three days without Torah. Therefore, just as it is a great merit to give food to Jews for the elevation of the soul of R' Yeshaya ben R' Moshe, one can also seize the opportunity to give for the elevation of the soul of R' Yeshaya ben R' Moshe to learn for Jews.

Speaker 2: Well, you can say it differently. When we... but say it.

Speaker 1: Instead of making a will that they should give food on my grave, I say, during my lifetime, they should learn with me, during my lifetime, they should learn with me. That means, when I make a will, I write that they should learn with me.

Speaker 2: True. And if someone said that in practice, as the days say, "for satiation and not for hunger," "for Torah and not for..."

Speaker 1: No, the truth is that we have a whole pleasure when we learn with people. It's also bein adam l'chaveiro. It's not only bein adam l'Makom to learn, it's not only for the Almighty to learn. One learns for oneself, one learns for the friends, for the maggidei shiur. It's also this pleasure of a Jew, no?

Speaker 2: Yes, to share our chiddushim, our thoughts, our topics, our disputes.

Halacha 1 – Shel Rosh and Shel Yad: How One Inserts the Parshiyot

Speaker 1: Says the holy Rambam, we are holding here in the middle of Laws of STaM, and this chapter is about tefillin.

As we said in the previous chapter, it was in a general manner, laws of parchment, gvil, the manner of how one should write. Actually we learned laws of everything, Sefer Torah, tefillin, mezuzah, certain parts, but in a general manner. Laws of writing STaM. The letters, the writing. The letters, the writing of all Sifrei Torah.

And here it will state more specifically laws that are relevant regarding tefillin.

This is the Rambam, so. There is a distinction, shel rosh has one way and shel yad another way. That is, shel rosh, one wraps in it four parshiyot.

The Rambam already said earlier that the four parshiyot are "Kadesh," "V'haya ki yevi'acha," "Shema," and "V'haya im shamo'a."

Speaker 2: Yes, you already said it?

Speaker 1: Yes, yes. The after fine.

He writes the four parshiyot on four pieces of parchment, on four different pieces of parchment, and rolls each one separately, each one is rolled together, instead of folding like folding one rolls it together, and places them in four compartments that are connected in one place. One places the four separate parshiyot which this is, and one places in each compartment of the shel rosh, he tells us a secret which he will later elaborate more on, that the shel rosh has four small compartments, and in each of the four compartments which later becomes a bit more glued together, one places a parchment. What is important is that it is four compartments but from one place, not four separate compartments.

Three Possibilities – But Only One Correct for Each

In other words, there can be three different ways to do it, it can be everything from one compartment, that's what one does with the shel yad, it can be four separate compartments, that one doesn't do in any of them, but what does one do? One places it in four compartments that are in one place. Later he will tell us more how one does this.

The compartment of the yad, one writes four parshiyot on four pages on one parchment, one takes one parchment and writes each one on one compartment like this, on one column, yes. He means to say that one doesn't write on one long scroll lengthwise one after the other, but one writes it like... four pages means like what we call columns, it's one after the other, yes.

And afterwards, and one rolls it like a Sefer Torah from its end to its beginning, one rolls it from its end to its beginning, so that the beginning of the four parshiyot should be exposed. Later he won't say which side one writes it.

Golel vs. Folding – Practical Reasoning

Speaker 2: Ah, very good. Here by the shel rosh it said like a Sefer Torah, perhaps this is because it's not so long, there's nothing... here it's already a bit, one can already turn. Start the third, that one gives it such a small turn. Here one actually turns, it's already a few layers. But at least the shel rosh is from its end to its beginning one also turns, we're talking about one parsha, perhaps there's almost nothing to turn. So the main point is that one shouldn't just place it, here one has simply easier to fold together. The main point is that one shouldn't just place it, but one should make a manner of rolled together.

Speaker 1: And places them in a compartment, go on.

Speaker 2: No, it's interesting, I say when documents that one folds together, can easily come out at the crease. But when it's rolled, okay. When it's rolled, it can also from age it can become...

Speaker 1: One folds it, you mean one folds it, not one rolls it.

Speaker 2: Yes, I'm saying, the Torah wants to maintain the honor of the Sefer Torah.

I was at the government office where one must submit documents for building, the Department of Buildings, one must submit various types of plans, and many of them are huge papers, and they have such laws, there's a whole set of laws how it must be folded. Aha, the whole one showed me that one has huge papers, it's rolled eight ways, and this and that is comfortable. Exactly as the Rambam would have needed to explain this, because they want to maintain that it's a great thing, an important thing, a part of this is how one holds it, how one makes it.

Discussion: Why Does Shel Rosh Have Four Compartments and Shel Yad One?

Speaker 1: And one must be careful with the parshiyot. Yes, the shel yad one places everything in one compartment. Why? It doesn't go up like the shel yad. Yes, the source for this is in the braita in the Gemara. If someone can tell me the secret, what is the explanation? What actually, why? A simple explanation, I'm interested to know what is the secret of this. Do you understand my question? What something?

Speaker 2: Yes. One learned like an amulet, it should remind of the things that are written in it.

Speaker 1: Okay, but what something here one places four, here one places in one? Do you understand? Torah-wise I can tell you, but to understand I don't understand. Torah-wise I can also say.

The head must be able to make separate boxes, a person must be able to hold head on separate boxes. And the shel yad?

Speaker 2: The heart must be one.

Speaker 1: There, okay, it's the explanation.

Halacha Regarding Petuchot and Setumot in Tefillin

Speaker 1: Okay, says the Rambam further. This is an important thing, says the Rambam, and one must be careful with the parshiyot. But wait, here he's still talking about how one places them in the compartments actually. But how does one write it, how must one write it? There are parshiyot that are setumot, and there are those that are petuchot. There are those where from one parsha to the next there is a longer break, and there are those where there is no break.

Petucha and setuma means literally that it ends on the same line or on a separate line. There is, we will later see regarding Sefer Torah, there is a dispute among Rishonim how one actually makes the petucha and setuma. There are those who say that one leaves a whole empty line, we conduct for example a petucha is simply that one leaves the whole line empty. And setuma is simply that one makes a space, but one begins the next on the same line, because that is setum, yes? The line is closed.

The only place where one begins completely on a new column is a new chumash, not on a new column. When a new parsha also, no?

Speaker 2: No. The only place where one begins a new column is at the beginning of the Sefer Torah. A new chumash is not, you have four lines between the chumashim and the Sefer Torah, but it's not necessarily a new column. There are places where one begins specifically on a new column, there are simanim, yes, later you'll start saying, BYH ShM"V, whatever. But, not BYH ShM"V, what is it called? I forgot.

Speaker 1: But that's a Sefer Torah.

Speaker 2: In any case, petuchot and setumot is, I want to show you something interesting.

Question: What Is Relevant About Petucha/Setuma by Tefillin?

Petucha and setuma is a law in the break between parshiyot. Here you have four parshiyot, the break between the parshiyot should need to be correct.

Says the Rambam, "and the first three parshiyot," yes? "and the first three parshiyot," revelation is, he doesn't say in which order, but apparently Shema, V'haya im shamo'a, Kadesh, and later V'haya ki yevi'acha.

Speaker 1: No, no, no, according to the order that stands in the Torah. Right?

Speaker 2: Um, says the Rambam that all petuchot, all petuchot, apparently this is V'haya ki yevi'acha, Shema, V'haya im shamo'a, according to the order that stands in the Torah, yes. So the first three are petuchot, and later it stands in Va'etchanan, right? The parsha of V'haya ki yevi'acha and V'haya im shamo'a is setuma.

I don't understand something, because I ask a basic question, perhaps someone can answer me this. Setuma and petucha, what is the definition? V'haya im shamo'a, afterwards stands nothing already.

Speaker 1: No, petucha and setuma is a law in the beginning of the parsha, not in the end of the parsha. The connection is reversed, the connection is on the first. What does it mean that it's petucha?

Speaker 2: I don't understand the idea. As if the whole thing here is that a petucha and setuma is simply that the Torah has here a break, one must make the break correctly. But tefillin is not a Torah, it's only a piece from the Torah. What is relevant petucha and setuma on it? I don't understand clearly the whole point.

I don't understand clearly the whole thing. He brings that by tefillin, one sees it stands in the halacha, that if one makes it petucha, one should make it not as it stands in the Torah, one a parchment, because it's anyway not only one, it's two. So you say, the parsha petucha is actually apparently a law between two parshiyot. The connection of the two parshiyot is a greater connection, a smaller one, whatever the meaning of parsha petucha and setuma. One has anyway already placed in one set, one has anyway simply placed the parshiyot. What comes in to do with petuchot from the Sefer Torah? It's very wondrous to me, no? I don't know the answer. He... he... not any... not clear.

Speaker 1: Further, okay, until here still not... um, change, it's still not relevant at all. Technically how it's relevant. The second is relevant. The first?

Speaker 2: Ah, no, it can be a petucha means one begins at the beginning of a line. There is a part. Because the parsha petucha means one begins at the beginning of a line. And... setuma one would have begun in the middle of a line.

Speaker 1: Why should a sofer begin in the middle of a line? A new form, what is now emerging?

Speaker 2: Perhaps on a deed, on this at the end. And if he does so, it's not proper. So not nice. The whole idea is that they are nice. Petucha setuma is not being nice. Petucha setuma is like a part of how the Sefer Torah works. Of how the Sefer Torah looks. It means how the parsha should be. Yes.

Halacha Regarding Malei and Chaser in Tefillin

Speaker 1: Says the Rambam further, the matter of malei and chaser. Um. Now one has learned the carefulness. Of what I call the carefulness. It's like most of the laws is careful. Need to be careful. Need to be careful. Knows. Right. So another thing that must be careful is. Yes. One must be careful in the parshiyot. So one must be malei and chaser. It touches there are letters where there is an extra letter. It touches it's full. Or where for example what will stand boker, it stands b'kr, there are those where it stands b'kr, and one must oneself understand that the b' is a cholam. It's a definition.

And one must be careful with malei and chaser, or so, yes. The four parshiyot as the parshiyot are in a checked Sefer Torah. The four which he will enumerate soon, as it is in the... arba'tan means the four parshiyot. That all four parshiyot should be exactly, they should match as there is malei and chaser in those parshiyot. As in a good Sefer Torah. As it stands in a Sefer Torah that one writes well. It comes out that one shouldn't... yes.

Law of Correction — Malei Instead of Chaser vs. Chaser Instead of Malei

If he mistakenly made instead of chaser he made malei, it is invalid until he erases the extra. He added an extra vav or an extra yud, he should erase it.

If it is the opposite, it is invalid and has no remedy. Why? Because we learned in the previous chapter that one cannot insert a letter. One can insert a letter, one thing one can, one can make it hanging between the lines as we learned, but by tefillin one cannot, because we learned that tefillin must be written k'sidran.

According to what there is a question what k'sidran means, the Rav understands that it means that it must be written as the order of this, therefore he cannot go back. Or, according to how R' Yechiel Meir learns and others, that k'sidran simply means that it must be written nicely, and tefillin one doesn't make such corrections for small things, it must be written nicely, more than a Torah. It's not a great loss, be strict.

The Rambam's Detail of Malei and Chaser in All Four Parshiyot

Says the Rambam, therefore, since it is so important to be careful with malei and chaser precisely, says the Rambam, I will now enumerate for you what you must keep in mind. Every chaser and malei, which words from the parshiyot of tefillin are relevant to be either or, and therefore I will tell you which it should be. So, we will give a search on the whole thing, because I cannot have been.

First Parsha — Kadesh Li

In the first parsha, Kadesh li, the Rambam enumerates all words that are malei or chaser. He will say for example:

- "b'chor" malei

- "zachar" malei

- "v'chazak" chaser

- "vayotzi'einu" malei

- "vayaharog" chaser

- "b'chor" malei

- "mib'chor" chaser

- "v'ad b'chor" malei

- "zevach" chaser

- "b'chol b'chor" malei

- "l'ot" malei

Note on "Yadecha" — The Hei as a Kamatz

This is a type of malei, it's more than malei. One doesn't simply write it like that. But he says an interesting thing, that the hei of yadecha is like a normal thing, because how does one write the word me'orah? I know what... with a hei at the end. What is the hei? Me'orah. There is no such word me'orah. Meheira? Me'oreinu Elokeinu. Okay, meheira. And how does one write meheira? M-H-R or M-H-R-H?

He asks, how does one write? He says so, the hei that stands at the end of many words, or an alef or a hei, one doesn't say, it doesn't do anything, it's actually only a kamatz. So yadecha, there is no reason why it shouldn't be able to stand so, because the hei is simply a kamatz. He says that Kol Bo wants that even so one should write yadecha without it, but it's not different, it's not really the hei truly.

Second Parsha — V'haya Ki Yevi'acha

"V'totafot" the second, the last one:

- "v'natna" malei, two yuds

- "b'chozek" chaser

- "vayotzi'einu" malei

Third Parsha — Shema

Third parsha, Shema:

- "me'odecha" chaser

- "ul'vincha" malei

- "uv'veitecha" doesn't have the second yud

Me'odecha chaser fits very well, even the little money that you have.

- "uv'kumecha" malei

- "l'ot" malei

- "yadecha" missing the second yud, means yadecha, right? It stands yadecha without the second yud

- "v'totafot" chaser, two vavs

- "eineichem" malei

- "mezuzot" chaser vav rishona

- "bateichem" without yud shniya

- "bish'arecha" malei

Fourth Parsha — V'haya Im Shamo'a

"V'haya im shamo'a" fourth parsha:

- "V'haya im shamo'a" is chaser, yes, the vav doesn't appear by shamo'a

- "Mitzvosai" is chaser, there's one vav. That means, we say the vav, right? But the vav isn't the cholam, the vav is a vav that we say as a consonant, so therefore the cholam is missing

- "Yoreh" is malei

- "Umalkosh" is malei

- "V'siroshecha" is chaser vav, yes, there's a yud but it doesn't say "v'siroshecha"

- "V'asafta" is malei

- "Yevulah" is malei

- "Hatovah" is chaser

- "Nosein" — "hatovah asher Hashem nosein lach" is chaser

- "Osam" is chaser

- "L'os" is malei

- "L'totafos" is chaser the second vav, yes, there are two totafos, once it appears with a vav, later the second vav is missing. But the first vav also doesn't appear in the previous one, the first "ul'totafos"

- "Ul'totafos eineichem" is malei

- "Atem" or "osam"? What does it say here? "Osam" chaser

- "Bateichem" without the second vav

- "Uvkumchem" is malei

- "Mezuzos" chaser the second vav, "mezuzos" malei

- "Bateichem" without the second yud

- "Bish'arecha" is malei

- "L'ma'an yirbu y'meichem" chaser vav

"Anan Lo Beki'in B'chaseirus V'yeseiros" — Gemara Kiddushin vs. The Rambam's Ruling

So, we don't know, if someone knows the secret of why there are certain verses in the Torah that have a yud, that have a chaser, that have a malei, I don't know the secret at all.

And the Gemara is very interesting, because in the Gemara it says in Kiddushin, you see that "anan lo beki'in b'chaseirus v'yeseiros." We don't truly know which verses in the Torah weren't important traditions, so says the Talmud Bavli.

It could be that the Talmud Bavli didn't know the tradition, but we do know, because we have a tradition not from the Talmud Bavli, but from the chachmei Teverya (sages of Tiberias), which the Rambam brings in Hilchos Sefer Torah, the Ben Asher who wrote down everything, there are traditions on everything how it appears malei and chaser. And we know that many times in the Gemara verses are brought differently, because in Bavel there wasn't such a good tradition of what one writes in the Sefer Torah.

Dispute Among Poskim — Whether Malei/Chaser Invalidates

So it could be, it's very interesting, because the poskim all accept as much as it says in the Gemara that we are not expert in chaseirus and yeseiros, it means us too. But not necessarily, it could be that we have a tradition that the Talmud Bavli didn't have, because we have from Eretz Yisrael the tradition from...

Is one obligated? Or is the Talmud Bavli obligated as a custom? It's not a custom, it's a question of how it appears in the Sefer Torah, how did Moshe Rabbeinu write it, or from when it was. It's a tradition.

But... but... what you're saying, that we say we don't know, the Talmud Bavli didn't know, that's true. But we do know, you see that the Rambam does rule, he doesn't say it's invalid.

There were poskim who argued that we don't know anyway. So okay, we follow the custom, we do what it says, but you can't say it's invalid when there's an extra yud, because you don't truly know that a yud needs to come there.

You see that the Rambam, from whom he copied his rules, he held that we know precisely where there's a yud, and therefore it's invalid. He says yes, malei and chaser invalidates.

And for the entire Sefer Torah he doesn't bring where there's every yud and every vav, but presumably he relied on the chumashim that he held were precise.

Why By Tefillin and Not By Sefer Torah?

In the Torah there were greater scribes who wrote, and this is easier to write. Or also, if this is easier, it's not so long, he can't write, he can't write, it's for him forever. I don't know why.

Anyway, that's the law, and it's discussed that we don't know.

What Is the Meaning of Malei and Chaser?

Another thing, what is actually the explanation? I also wanted to simply translate it, so people should know. What is the simple translation of malei and chaser? What is the secret of this?

Why do certain words have a chaser? Nobody knows, I don't know, maybe you know, I don't know.

Drashos From Malei and Chaser

Speaker 2: That everything is a drasha on something.

Speaker 1: Yes, ah, there's once a year a drasha like this, usually. Malei or chaser. "Vayikra" malei, the extra yud can be learned out.

No, no, no, listen well, the drashos almost always go the opposite way. The drashos almost always go "matzos" is "matzos", in other words, so malei and chaser, I don't remember that there's the other way, that one needs an extra vav there.

Yes, "yadcha" "yadecha". Yes, but almost always, the drasha works, I'll tell you why.

Malei and Chaser as a Sort of Vowel System

The explanation is like this: In the Torah there are no vowel points, in the Torah there are only letters. And when there are no vowel points it means one can't know how to read. If it says mem tzaddik tav, you could truly read "matzahs", you could truly read "matzos". And if it appears with a vav, you could truly read "matzovos" or "matzos", because you have everything in the chaser of the second vav. I exchanged one mistake with another mistake. It's not a mistake. It can still be the mistake, "matzovos" or "matzos".

Yes, yes, so if one wants to write, I certainly believe it was helped this way, many times with the malei you bring the point to the highest level. No, so if you truly want people to know, you need to be careful every time it says "matzovos" to write two vavs.

So for example, so let's understand. So in the Torah there are usually no vowel points at all, and you don't know how to read. So now, how does one know? If there's a malei, then one can know presumably for sure how to read, because many times malei is "matzovos" is with two vavs, "ta'alas ta'alas ta'alas", singular and plural, many things malei says.

So malei and chaser is basically like a sort of vowel point, a bit of a vowel point. People think it's an extra yud. It's not an extra yud, the yud is basically a chirik, or a cholam, or a melupam, it's one of the vowel points.

Why Sometimes Malei and Sometimes Chaser?

Now, if so, why sometimes yes and sometimes not? There's no clear explanation for this. Presumably the explanation should have been that in a place where there was a doubt how it should be, where a mistake could be made, the Torah writes malei, and a place where not, the Torah writes chaser.

Speaker 2: The Rambam brings the things as they're important.

Speaker 1: No, the Rambam brings what appears in the Torah, the Rambam doesn't bring... I'm only telling you about the Torah itself, I'm bringing you the explanation. I'm telling you the explanation in the Torah itself. Why actually are there places where it appears...

Yes, the halacha is that it invalidates, but the reason why it invalidates is because one must be with the... one can't deviate from what the tradition is. But I'm telling you a simple reason, why actually the translation of all these malei and chaser?

Proof From Divrei HaYamim — Malei D'malei in Later Books

What one does see is an interesting thing, whoever learns Tanach sees that in the later books of Tanach, like Divrei HaYamim, almost everything appears malei, or even malei d'malei. That means, in Divrei HaYamim for example the word "David" appears. Everyone knows David is written with dalet vav dalet. No, in Divrei HaYamim it appears with a vav and a yud. Only in Divrei HaYamim. In Divrei HaYamim it always says "David" with a yud. Always. In the entire Torah, that is in Sefer Melachim, Sefer Shmuel, it says "David" always dalet vav dalet. Everyone knows that it doesn't say "Dovid" there, it says "David". But in Divrei HaYamim, which is a later book, they already conducted themselves to write more spelled out clearly, that there's a yud so one should know to read "Dovid".

Custom of Rishonim and Today — Malei D'malei

The same thing in the Rishonim for example, us today, also today when one writes in lashon hakodesh, it's better to write almost always malei, because otherwise when someone writes without vowel points it's very hard to know how to read. So usually one conducts oneself to write malei, or even... in the Rishonim there was from the customs to add even malei d'malei. That means, I don't remember, inserted an alef in certain places, or a hei, simply so one could know how to read.

Summary — Why Is Malei and Chaser Its Own Halacha?

Okay, anyway, the halacha is however that one must write as it appears in the Torah. Up to here are the laws, the laws of malei and chaser.

I just want to explain, why is this an extra halacha? It means that one must write what appears. Because malei and chaser isn't really the word. The word is the same when it's malei and chaser. But one must be careful that it should be written as one is precise.

All the majority of drashos that you...

Speaker 1: Malei, that means, I don't remember, inserted an alef in certain places, or a hei, simply so one could know how to read. Okay, anyway, the halacha is however that one must write as it appears in the Torah. Up to here are the laws of malei and chaser.

Question: Why Is This an Extra Halacha?

Speaker 2: One can see me about something we'll be. Ah, I just want to elaborate. Why is this an extra halacha? That means, certainly one must write what appears.

Speaker 1: Because malei and chaser isn't really the word. The word is the same when it's malei and chaser, but one must be careful that it should be written as one is precise. All the majority of drashos are about this, because one must be careful, because there mistakes can be made. We're not talking about people who can miss an entire word, and we're not going to miss half a word either. But what one can miss, people can normally miss.

Better Answer: Malei and Chaser Is Another Law

One can say so, but one can say better than that. One can say that malei and chaser is another law. There is a law, certainly the words that appear must appear, that's certainly not a question that it must appear. But there's another law that malei and chaser, like vowel points, isn't the same level of halacha. And I say for this one must be careful. That's what one must be careful about, that if a tav is missing from "totafos" it's not valid, because it's half a word. I understand. But I'm not saying because it's part of the word, but because it's another thing, that malei and chaser also has a tradition how one writes which is malei and which, like the parshiyos, like the tagin that we're going to discuss. It's not truly different from that.

Connection to "Yesh Eim LaMikra" and "Yesh Eim LaMasores"

In the Gemara many times one sees drashos, but usually the drashos are actually about this because one can read another way. One can say "ushmarten es hamatzos", because a vav appears, but so one can read "ushmarten es hamatzovos". And the Gemara many times, this is the topic of "yesh eim lamikra" and "yesh eim lamasores", that there's a way of drasha that says that if it appears in one way, one can expound it actually both ways. And although the tradition is to read differently, one can expound even as it appears differently from the tradition, and the like.

---

Halacha Regarding Tagin

Okay, now we're going to talk about another thing called tagin. What is this? Says the Rema, "And one must crown with the tagin of the letters". A tag means a crown. "Hamishta'meish b'taga chalaf", it says in Avos. The crowns of the letters.

What Does a Tag Mean?

Speaker 2: What does it mean? A crown of the letters means that one makes a bit of graphics, one makes the letter a bit nicer.

Speaker 1: But more in detail, says the Rema, what are the tagin of the letters? That a letter that has a tag, one makes a zayin standing upright on every letter? That has a tag goes up on the zayin, and one makes a zayin that has a tag on every letter? Or one makes a zayin standing upright on the letter that has a tag?

Speaker 2: No, tagin of letters, what does tagin of letters mean? That a letter that we say has a tag means it has a zayin standing upright. Besides having a tag, it also has a zayin standing upright.

Speaker 1: No, not besides, that's the meaning of the tag.

Speaker 2: No, the tag means that the last letter of the word is... like he said yesterday the abbreviation sha'atnez getz.

Speaker 1: No, no, no, no, no. Tagin of letters means... what he means is, that there are certain letters that need to have a zayin standing upright on every letter.

Speaker 2: Exactly. One places such a small zayin.

Speaker 1: No, that's not what he says. The Rambam doesn't say. A tag isn't a crown. Like in the Torah one writes... That means, what he says is, that when one writes in the mezuzah one must write with the same tagin as one writes in the Sefer Torah.

The Rambam's Approach: A Tag Is a Zayin

So the Rambam says that tagin is an extra zayin like higher on the letter. Others learn that tag means that one should pay attention to the beauty of the letter. Like we learned earlier the matter in the previous chapter, a kesav of yud means that the yud should have sharp edges, like that. So we said, but Rabbeinu Tam said there also that he means there's something a bit that sticks out somewhere. Not a tag, like a... others translate, and we agree with the language, like lazayir means...

Speaker 2: Ah, but the Rambam says to write and make for it a zayin. Tzarich lazayir, such language.

Speaker 1: The Rambam, the Rambam calls a tag, no question, the Rambam calls a tag basically what we call tagin, which is a bit of a zayin. It's a zayin that we call, we also say tagin. It's a zayin means actually, there's the line itself on top, and there's something a bit, something a piece. Not a crown. We make three tagin. We have three, that's already made well, we make three such zayins. But a zayin, exactly, a zayin means one.

Speaker 2: No, but he says the word tag means a crown, so...

Speaker 1: Yes, very good. Such a bit... no, soon you'll see, there are letters where one places three tagin. The Rambam will call it so. But a tag means a zayin, such a bit of a point that one places on the letter. Since one must be careful about this, about this says the Rambam...

Speaker 2: Yes, true. The third thing is...

The Specific Letters With Tagin in Tefillin

Speaker 1: And the Rambam will write which letters one must have such a tag, which letters are crowned in the parshiyos of tefillin.

First Parsha (Kadesh)

The first parsha of tefillin has only one such letter, and that's the closed mem that appears there "miyamim yamimah", and on the mem there isn't one zayin, but one must be careful about the zayin, and what are the zayins there, what is the law of zayins on the letter, it has three zayins. Three tagin, or three zayins, yes.

Second Parsha (V'haya Ki Yevi'acha)

Like in tefillin there are letters. The second parsha, yes, has five letters, and all of the five are heis, and all the heis must have four zayins.

Speaker 2: Which heis?

Speaker 1: After "v'haya ki yevi'acha", yes, "v'nasna", "v'nasna lach", the hei of "v'nasna". Yes, "v'haya the hei of v'nasna", yes, "v'haya ki yevi'acha". And the first and last hei of "hiksha", yes, "vayaksheh Hashem es leiv Pharaoh", "vayaksheh Pharaoh es libo", yes, "ki hiksha". And the hei of "vayaharog", "vayaharog Hashem kol bechor b'Mitzrayim". And the hei of "yadcha". All these heis have four zayins each. Okay? Yes.

Third Parsha (Shema)

The third parsha has five such. Further, the third parsha is... umm... yes, he doesn't have a picture here of the zayins? He doesn't make any zayins in his picture? Very funny. Well, what should be actually? He doesn't know it. He knows it yes? By the... okay, I'll explain to you later what he... look at the hei. The tav has a few... has a few zayins. He knows it yes. Yes, yes, that's how it goes in kesav Teiman. He knows the zayins, the lines above the letters, well. It's very simple. On every letter that the Rambam counts out, he has the exact number of lines. We also make it, I think, I remember, in the tefillin.

Speaker 2: He makes such a line from below upward.

Speaker 1: Yes.

Speaker 2: Right?

Speaker 1: Yes.

Speaker 2: Are there some that have only one zayin?

Speaker 1: Let's see. Let's see, the Rambam will say. By them it doesn't look like anything.

Speaker 2: Everywhere there are three.

Speaker 1: Not everywhere there are three. Here there are four.

In the third parsha, meaning the parsha of Shema, there are five letters that have a zayin. The kuf of "ukshartam" has three zayins, the kuf of "ukshartam" has three, the tet tet of "l'totafos" - each one has four. Ah, each one of the three has four zayins. That's in the third parsha.

Fourth Parsha (V'haya Im Shamo'a)

Tefillin Crowns and Checking Requirements

And in the fourth parsha there are five letters. The peh of "ve'asafta" has three zayin crowns, the tav of "ve'asafta" has one zayin, the two tets of "letotafot" also each have four zayins, just as we had in the previous parsha.

Speaker 2: The totafot makes sense, because the totafot is the essence of tefillin, one must emphasize it.

Speaker 1: In total it comes out that in tefillin there are sixteen letters.

The Law If One Did Not Make the Crowns

Ah, this is what the Rambam says, "And if he did not make the crowns, or added, or subtracted - he has not invalidated them, they are kosher."

Speaker 2: It is presumably a secret of the weapons of Israel, that Jews should have weapons, weapons. Exalted and uplifted.

The Topic of Crowns Is Not So Clear

Speaker 1: Now, the important thing is that the topic of crowns is not so clear at all. First of all, we have a custom to make them in the entire Torah. In the Gemara there is some language that sha'atnez gatz has two things, sha'atnez gatz and bedek chai. Bedek chai we make one line, and sha'atnez gatz we make three, by each one in the entire Torah. And the Rambam doesn't look like he brought this halacha. He didn't learn that one must learn later in Sefer Torah what he says, the Rambam understood that the sha'atnez gatz is specifically for tefillin, and showed it to him, I don't know clearly. Also in the responsa he says he very much fights for the position, but... However, the Rambam did understand that there is something extra, it's not specifically in certain letters of certain parshiyot that crowns come, this is like a tradition, it's not every time where the letter is. It's a tradition that these letters come with crowns, but he also said that it's not me'akev (indispensable), it's not clear why the secret of the crowns is at all, why is there? It was in others, we'll see soon after Sefer Torah, other things, they used to do it differently. It's an interesting thing that he does.

The Secret of Crowns

Speaker 2: What did he say? He says that it's a sign that here there is some secret, here there is some deeper meaning.

Speaker 1: Yes, I bring from a sefer that it's like a reference marker that here a Jew must look deeply.

Speaker 2: By the corners, what are you saying?

Speaker 1: Inside secret, that on the corners of the letters one must expound a derasha. That this is the meaning of Rabbi Akiva who expounded on the crowns of letters.

Others, it says that Rabbi Akiva goes and expounds on the crowns. Crowns are the tag. What does this mean, how does one expound on the tag? It's not simple that the derasha is why you say the opposite.

Speaker 2: Yes, but they always meant that the simple meaning is why is there a tag, the answer is that you see that... You're saying that the tag is simply a hint that here one must expound. It's a little star like "here requires investigation," "appears incorrect," no, like the little stars that one makes in a book.

Speaker 1: Yes, but there a unique individual must come and say, some unique individual should reveal the secrets of the Torah. What do the two kufs mean? What do the kufs want from us?

Part of it I understand, for example the totafot I understand for example, because it makes sense that the totafot is tefillin, one must give it emphasis. Not so hard to understand.

Speaker 2: For such devoted Jews there is...

Speaker 1: No, again, the totafot I already understand, it's one of fifteen I already understand.

The Shulchan Aruch Doesn't Bring This Law

The Shulchan Aruch doesn't bring this law at all, interesting. Okay.

By the law, the Shulchan Aruch has already accepted the sha'atnez gatz.

This is a different law, it's not the same law. And the Rambam says here that one must... the specific letters of the specific parshiyot must make three, four, this is not the same thing. That each line was indeed a completely different law. It's not the same...

Speaker 2: Why don't the poskim argue - the Shulchan Aruch with the Rema? About this the Rosh argues, the Rif, the Tur? Not clear.

Speaker 1: What would you do with Tosafot? The Tosafot? What would you do? That means, everyone has an opinion about all these things. Okay.

Law: Distinction Between Two Laws in Tefillin Shel Rosh

Speaker 1: Interesting. Okay.

This is a different law, this is not the same law. The Rambam says here that one must have the specific letters of the specific parsha, one must make three, four. This is not the same thing that every Shabbat it's optional to make a second. This is a completely different law, this is not the same.

Discussion: Why Does the Shulchan Aruch Rule Like the Rambam?

Speaker 2: Why does the Shulchan Aruch rule like the Rambam? They argue, the Rosh, the Rif, the Tur. Not clear. What does this have to do with Tosafot? You have Tosafot? You have everyone has an opinion about all these things. Okay. I don't know. Let's learn further.

Law: Checking Tefillin — "One Should Only Purchase Tefillin From an Expert"

Speaker 1: Now we're going to learn the interesting thing that sometimes one must check tefillin. Now, the Rambam doesn't explain what checking means. It could be, as Rav Rabinowitz learns, that what checking means is that one has now learned the laws, one has now learned all these things. If someone does these things, then the meaning is that we know that he does... Let's understand, there are things that one cannot check. For example, one thing that we certainly learned is work for its own sake (lishma). That means, it must be lishma, the leather must already be lishma, and the letters, the Names one must write lishma. There are things that one cannot see at all in the writing, but we want to know that the scribe has learned Rambam. And there is a very good way, one looks at all the zayins, one knows that he learned Rambam, he knows these things. The Rambam says that one must check the zayins. It's not invalid, but one must have checked the full and deficient spellings, because the crowns he is not particular about.

So says the Rambam, "One should only purchase tefillin from an expert." That a person should not buy tefillin from someone who is called an expert. Expert means, who is an expert? What does expert mean? That someone is a tefillin scribe, a sofer, how does one know that he is a... he doesn't yet have a chazaka that he is good. There's no chazaka. No, expert means apparently a... not a chazaka. Expert means simply someone who is a sofer, someone who is a tefillin scribe, he is a tefillin maker.

Speaker 2: No, no, not correct. The chazaka means that I buy it from a merchant. The chazaka is that he knows from whom to take and so forth, he then becomes an expert. When I say I mean he becomes an expert? It's the same thing, I say an expert, it's the same thing. You can already assess him as he is a professional, he sells good tefillin, he knows how...

Speaker 1: He sells or he writes?

Speaker 2: It looks like the one who purchases from him. It could be we're talking here about a wholesaler. But it could be that he is a sofer who sold, no difference. It looks like... Let's go into the law and see.

Law: Checking When Buying From a Non-Expert

Speaker 1: If one takes from someone who is not an expert, that means we don't know that he is a good seller, he is not known, where is he indeed an expert? You go to Lakewood and there it says that the tefillin seller, and presumably he is an expert. But if not, one must check it, yes?

So what does one do? So, one who purchases from him, he must check, because it's not so hard to check tefillin. One opens it up, one takes out the parshiyot. But if one purchases from him one hundred pairs, he took from him one hundred pairs of tefillin, yes, one doesn't need to check each one. One doesn't need to check each single piece, because the matter is not that there is some law of checking, rather we need to make sure that the person knows what he's doing. One must establish some sort of chazaka. One takes three pieces, and there's no difference if the three are shel yad or shel rosh. It could be two shel rosh, one shel rosh, or two shel yad and one shel rosh, no difference. And one checks the three randomly, it seems. So if they are found to be kosher, I'll say the words, then we have a chazaka that the person knows how to write parshiyot and it's good. Apparently that he knows from whom he buys, or the person who wrote, and he doesn't know from whom it comes. If he knows from whom it comes, he can ask him. Or the homeowner says that he says, "I wrote it," but you don't know him, and no one has seen that he sits and writes.

Law: Checking When Buying in Bundles

Speaker 1: He says further, "And if he took them in bundles," he took them in packages, then it's not enough that he opens three from all the packages, rather he must open every box or every package, whatever the package is, bundle, each bundle requires checking, all need checking. He must take out from each one two, three. "For the chazaka of the bundles does not rise to the chazaka of the purchasers." We see here that we're talking about a wholesaler, we're talking already a business. When one bag comes, you can think that it comes from the same person, so three testifies for all. But if it comes in different boxes, can't you also say that three makes for all? Because for each box you must be extra concerned that perhaps it was sent from a different merchant that he doesn't know from a different merchant. Original.

Discussion: Question on the Checking — What Does It Help?

Speaker 1: So here is an interesting thing, but here we see however... Let's just clearly ask a question. Because the thing that the Rambam says is not clear. And afterwards it strengthens that the person knows what he's doing, I ask you the question, they learned earlier that there are laws that one cannot check at all. There are certain laws of the Names that one cannot check. And they learned that for example in the Rambam he said earlier that not everyone knows that one writes all the Names not lishma that it invalidates the entire thing. And they learned explicitly in previous chapters, but why does it help me that I check? Perhaps that person doesn't know the law of writing the Names with sanctity? And therefore it doesn't help that I checked. Or you can say if there's a law of in order, you can further say perhaps it wasn't written in order, and he doesn't know about it the person? What does it help that he wrote the parsha well, perhaps he wrote it in the wrong order?

Answer: The Checking Is a Chazaka on the Person

Speaker 2: Until he goes over how does it help to there one thought about helped so whoever is a chazaka of kosher, is that a Jew sells it. But it doesn't yet say, chazaka of a Torah scholar. It could be that it's a practical chazaka, that the person who knows indeed about deficient and full spellings it's simple that he's not an ignoramus, it shows that he is one who knows how to write scrolls, he is one who had a teacher, it means, one cannot do it alone, one who knows in order means that he's not just a boy who started playing by himself, he had a teacher, he is in the industry, he is free that he is in the industry. Because this is a good question.

Speaker 1: But what about that which directs that that is presumably sometimes there was an incident and in the past for a minute.

Speaker 2: But you are correct, apparently it's more such a chazaka, that if you know that that one writes well, then one assumes that you know the rest of the things. A thief not everything can one always check. But what is pious like side is a whole good thing, because it's not just a form of Israel. It's something that one must remember, something a Rambam already points to something.

Discussion: Why Three?

Speaker 1: Okay, the taking three, reminds one, that one advises so many times in the laws of tithes. I know that the Rambam says so in other places, but how one takes sometimes, one has a bunch of a certain vegetable, how does one know that it is established with tithes, one checks three, and it testifies for the others. But this is that three is a chazaka, three years is a chazaka, or three times doing something, but this is three pieces from... One sees that the word is that he sees that he knows... One sees such similarity to the genre of three on such a law... I mean that the... People do so, today!

Speaker 2: I check on three is simply that... knows that it's not random! One could be just that time he wrote well, that the three are good, simply he knows that he does it deliberately, it's intentional, if it's intentional, then already good. One knows that...

Law: Tefillin Don't Need Checking After Time

Speaker 1: Now we're going to learn another type of checking. Now the first checking that we learned is regarding the initial checking to know that that person is an expert. Now we're going to learn another type of checking, if one needs some type of checking to check if it has become invalid or such a thing, and the answer is that one doesn't need to, yes? They, what doesn't come right, understand that it's not the same type of checking. The Rambam simply places it one next to the other, because both have the word checking, but they are not the same - once tefillin has become kosher, one has no obligation whatsoever. You might think that there is also a checking of maintenance, who says that it remained kosher? You don't need to think so, one doesn't need to check it anymore, even after many years. Why is this the law? Which I should say that as long as the boxes are intact, and as long as the tefillin are whole, and the parshiyot lie inside preserved, a Rambam is short, "and one need not be concerned that perhaps a letter was erased from within it and is not recognizable, and one need not be concerned that perhaps a change occurred inside the closed box." So the word is that the box, the box of the tefillin, that protects it, and therefore one has no fear that it is erased.

Story: Hillel the Elder's Tefillin

Speaker 1: Oh, an amazing story he brings in. He brings in a story about Hillel the Elder. Hillel the Elder was a... he descended from the Rabbinic family, and he was a great lineage from whom began until Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and he was a grandson of King David. Obviously the inherited objects went there very high. This is the grandfather, and he is a double grandson of the rabbi rabbi rabbi... Hillel the Elder says, Hillel the Elder says "These are from my mother's father." The tefillin that I wear are from my grandfather, my mother's father. That means, very old tefillin, and it was pure, one didn't need to open it.

Discussion: The Proof From Hillel the Elder

Speaker 2: Right, I knew that it has questions. There was someone who said, one opinion said that one must indeed check every twelve months the tefillin. The Rebbe said that one doesn't need to. And Hillel the Elder he said, "These are from my mother's father," one sees that what? That in his times one didn't check it. One left it in the box.

Speaker 1: But it's very interesting, because the Rebbe has a custom not to bring almost any names. One must make a list of the exceptions when he brings with a name. Very strange. He should have written, well, a sage, a Rishon, behold. It's an interesting thing, just he mentions, he brings a story, what comes in here?

Speaker 2: Well, obviously, father and foundation of Torah, father and mother, one has here some matter that is not simple.

Speaker 1: Ah, very good, already the further ones come to the simple answers. Hillel the Elder said "These are from my mother's father," understand? Very good.

Summary: The Exterior Protects the Interior

Speaker 1: But one also sees an awesome thing, that when the exterior is completely good and it is closed, one can trust. This is what Hillel the Elder taught us, ha? Hillel the Elder said that one doesn't need to check. Okay, until here is Chapter 2.

Discussion: Practical Checking Today

Speaker 2: A person who goes to check the tefillin, he simply throws money into the world. It's a shame. But one must indeed check something, that one turns around scribes with the checkers preachers, one must see it. They check the tefillin? Not the inside, the outside.

Speaker 1: They check? I mean, they travel around with their own confession, they found here an invalidation, there an invalidation, here it fell out.

Speaker 2: I was now with the law, the law says that one must check it. And I know who else must check it, and I know who else must which. I wanted to see if someone says the simple meaning from this Hillel the Elder.