The Bracha on Tefillin
[1] (Halacha 1097)
Question: A person who removed his tefillin in order to go to the restroom — when he puts them on again, must he make the bracha again?
Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Sukkah1 says: 'It was taught: Tefillin — whenever one puts them on, he makes a bracha on them; these are the words of Rebbi. And the Chachamim say: he makes the bracha only in the morning. It was stated: Abaye said, the halacha follows Rebbi; and Rava said, the halacha follows the Rabbanan. Rav Mari, son of the daughter of Shmuel, said: I saw that Rava did not act in accordance with his own teaching; rather, he would rise early and enter the restroom, come out and wash his hands, put on tefillin and make the bracha. And when he needed to go another time, he would enter the restroom, come out and wash his hands, put on tefillin and make the bracha'.
And the Rambam wrote2: 'Tefillin — whenever one puts them on, he makes a bracha on them, and even if he takes them off and puts them on several times a day'.
The Tur in Hilchos Tzitzis3 wrote: 'If he took off his tallis and did not intend to put it on immediately, when he puts it on again he must make a bracha. But if he intended to put it on immediately, for example he took it off in order to enter the restroom, in this case I am in doubt whether he must make a bracha, for there are arguments in both directions. For one could say: since we derive the whole Torah from tefillin, and with tefillin, whenever he touches them he makes a bracha — meaning, if they moved from their place and he touches them to return them to their place — then all the more so here he should make a bracha. However, one could say that there it is different, for they moved from their place and he did not know that they were not in their place; but if he moved them from their place with the intention of returning them immediately, there too he would not need to make a bracha, and to this my view inclines'.
And the Beis Yosef wrote: 'I do not know what occurred to him to be in doubt about this, for it is explicitly stated in Perek Lulav VaAravah that Rava would rise early and enter the restroom, come out and wash his hands, put on tefillin and make the bracha, and when he needed to go another time, he would enter the restroom, come out and wash his hands, put on tefillin and make the bracha. And it is certainly implied that he would wear tefillin all day, and when he removed them in order to enter the restroom, he certainly intended to put them on again immediately when he came out, and even so he would make the bracha; and the same applies to tzitzis.'
However, the Rema in the Darchei Moshe4 resolved the words of the Tur: 'And I say that the case under discussion is not comparable to the proof, for there, regarding tefillin, he was required to remove them, since it is forbidden to enter the restroom with them, and the matter does not depend on his intention; therefore he must make the bracha again, for this is an interruption. But when he removes the tefillin in a situation where he was not required to remove them, and he intends to put them on immediately, he need not make the bracha again. And the same applies to tzitzis: even though he removes them because he wishes to enter the restroom, since he is not required to remove them, it is not considered an interruption, and he need not make the bracha again, in accordance with the view of the Tur. And this distinction that I wrote is explicit in the Gemara (Brochos), Perek Mi SheMeiso, regarding whether one who interrupted his tefillah must return to the beginning; see there, daf 23 (amud 1).'
And so wrote the Divrei Chamudos5: 'And not where he interrupted between them by relieving himself, like that case of Rava, for there it is different: since at the time of the interruption he is not fit for tefillin, it is a complete interruption and requires another bracha, like the interruption of the night, where even according to the Chachamim he makes the bracha in the morning at least. But one who removes them in order to put them back for some other reason, and does not interrupt between the removal and the return in a manner that he is not fit for tefillin, it is not an interruption — not with actual removal, and all the more so with merely slipping off in order to put them back. And there is support for this distinction from that which is in Perek Mi SheMeiso, siman 23, regarding whether he paused long enough to complete all of it.'
As halacha6, the Mechaber wrote7: 'If he puts on tefillin several times a day, he must make a bracha on them each time. If they slipped from their place and he touches them to return them to their place, he must make a bracha. If he moved them from their place with the intention of returning them immediately, he must make a bracha'.
And the Rema wrote in his gloss: 'And some say not to make a bracha, and this is the custom, and it was already explained above in siman 8, se'if 14.'
And the Taz wrote8: 'If he moved them from their place, etc.' Above in siman 8, se'if 14, these matters were clarified, and that we should rule like the first "some say" that the Rema cites there. Accordingly, regarding tefillin one should rule that if he removed them in order to enter the restroom he must make the bracha again, but without entering the restroom he need not make a bracha9'.
And the Magen Avraham10 wrote: 'And some say not to make a bracha. But if he removes them to enter the restroom he must make a bracha according to all opinions, for he is not permitted to go into the restroom with them, and so it was set aside, as written at the beginning of siman 65 (so it is implied in the Gemara, daf 40b, Bach, daf 38). And likewise if he did not intend to put them back immediately he must make a bracha, as written at the end of siman 639. And it is possible to say that when the restroom is not far away, unlike their restrooms which were in the field, he need not make a bracha; and if so, there is no distinction between the restroom and another place, and therefore the Rema wrote without qualification here'.
And it is implied that in the conclusion of his words the Magen Avraham inclines to the view that the bracha depends on the (time and) distance of going out to the restroom11. Accordingly, it emerges that the Taz and the Magen Avraham disagree12 regarding one who removes his tefillin in order to go to a restroom close by, whether he makes a bracha when he puts them on again.
> Thus we have seen the three reasons and opinions as to when one must make the bracha again: a) every new putting on of tefillin (Mechaber). b) only if he was in a place where it is not fitting to wear tefillin (Taz). c) if the restroom is far away (Magen Avraham). And in the next halacha we will see the words of the Alter Rebbe and other poskim, and the differences between the types of restrooms today.
--------------
Notes:
1 46a ↩
2 Hilchos Tefillin, chapter 4, halacha 7 ↩
3 Orach Chaim, siman 8 ↩
4 There, os 6; see also the Bach, and the Taz, Orach Chaim, siman 8, se'if katan 12 ↩
5 Halachos Ketanos, Hilchos Tefillin, siman 14 ↩
6 Due to the length of the discussion regarding the tallis, below it will be presented only in relation to tefillin. And there is yet more to come on this at another time ↩
7 Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 25, se'if 12 ↩
8 There, se'if katan 11 ↩
9 And the Pri Megadim wrote in the Mishbetzos Zahav: 'And in siman 8, os 12, [it is explained] that with a restroom, where it is impossible to enter with tefillin, it is an interruption, and even though in siman 21, os 3, [he wrote] that with a tallis gadol it is not 'proper' [to enter] the restroom, nevertheless this is not by strict law, and therefore with tzitzis it is not an interruption. And the Magen Avraham, os 22, [wrote] that with our restrooms, which are not far away, one should not make a bracha, and this is the custom' ↩
10 There, se'if katan 22 ↩
11 And see Ohr HaHalacha (Davidovitch), Chiddushim, os 17, who explained the words of the Magen Avraham at length ↩
12 And the Pri Megadim wrote in the Eishel Avraham: 'See the Magen Avraham, that with a restroom that is not far away one does not make a bracha, and this is the custom, unlike what the Taz wrote to make a bracha; see there.' And see also the Pri Megadim, Mishbetzos Zahav, cited in note 9 ↩
[2] (Halacha 1098)
In the previous halacha we saw the three opinions as to when one must make the bracha again when he removed his tefillin to go to the restroom: the Mechaber wrote that one makes the bracha on every new putting on of tefillin; the Taz wrote, only if he was in a place where it is not fitting to wear tefillin; and the Magen Avraham wrote, if the restroom is far away.
Question: How was the halacha ruled, and what is the practice in fact1?
A. Regarding those who follow the rulings of Maran the Mechaber, the opinions are divided:
1) The Kaf HaChaim wrote2: '.. for the Acharonim rejected the proof of Maran z"l, see there .. And even though we rely on the rulings of Maran, and his view z"l is to make the bracha, we have already written above in siman 18, os 7, and in several places, that in a case of doubt regarding brochos we are lenient, even against Maran and even against the majority, see there .. And know that in this there is no distinction between moving them from their place with the intention of returning them to their place and taking off his tefillin with the intention of putting them on again immediately; in all these cases he does not make the bracha again, as explained in the words of the poskim cited above. But if he took them off in order to enter the restroom, the poskim cited above wrote that he must make the bracha again .. However, the Magen Avraham, se'if katan 22, set out to distinguish that if the restroom is not far away, unlike their restrooms which were in the field, he need not make a bracha, see there. And the Pri Megadim wrote in the Eishel Avraham, os 22, and in the Mishbetzos Zahav, os 11, that the custom is not to make a bracha if the restroom is not far away, unlike the Taz, see there. And even though the Rav, the Chayei Adam, klal 13, os 6, and the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, siman 10, os 15, wrote that even in such a case one should make a bracha, we have already said that in a case of doubt regarding brochos we are lenient even against the majority, and this suffices for the understanding .. And so ruled the Ben Ish Chai3, that one should not make the bracha because of the principle that in a case of doubt regarding brochos we are lenient. Rather, he should make the bracha without Hashem's name and kingship, and think of Hashem's name and kingship in his mind'.
2) However, there are those who wrote that although the practice is not entirely in accordance with the words of the Mechaber, it is also not in accordance with the words of the Magen Avraham, as written in the Yabia Omer4: 'And in any event, since in any case the view of Maran the Shulchan Aruch is that even if he took off his tallis with the intention of putting it on again immediately he must make a bracha — granted that we are stringent l'chatchila to take into account the words of those who disagree .. And what the Pri Megadim wrote, that the custom follows the Magen Avraham, is puzzling, for on the contrary, the custom is not in accordance with the Magen Avraham; and also the Magen Avraham did not write this as a clear matter but only as a possibility, and one should not abandon the plain view of all the poskim because of the doubt of the Magen Avraham. See there .. And accordingly, what the Ben Ish Chai wrote, to take into account the words of the Magen Avraham because in a case of doubt regarding brochos we are lenient, and the Kaf HaChaim followed after him .. their words are not compelling, especially since in all this the view of Maran is that one must make a bracha, and together with the words of the Acharonim there is a double doubt (sfek sfeika) requiring one to make the bracha. And this is the primary view'.
B. Also for those who follow the rulings of the Rema [since in his gloss on the Shulchan Aruch the Rema did not distinguish as he did in the Darchei Moshe], the poskim are divided in practice. Some wrote that the practice is in accordance with the words of the Magen Avraham, as the Pri Megadim wrote5: 'See the Magen Avraham, that with a restroom that is not far away one does not make a bracha, and this is the custom, unlike what the Taz wrote to make a bracha; see there.'
Likewise we find others who testified that this is the custom, as the holy Rebbe of Munkatch wrote in Os Chaim V'Shalom6: '.. Such proofs are not sufficient to change from the custom of the world, who have practiced in accordance with the Magen Avraham, that even when one goes to the restroom one does not make the bracha again. And behold, the Pri Megadim wrote that the custom follows the Magen Avraham, and I saw in the sefer Toras Chaim (by the Dayan of Pest) that he wondered at the Pri Megadim on this, for the custom is not in accordance with the Magen Avraham in this; and I wonder at his wonderment, for in truth the custom is in accordance with the Magen Avraham, that even when going to the restroom in the middle of the tefillah one does not make the bracha on the tefillin again, except for some few select individuals) — but the custom of the world is in accordance with the Magen Avraham, as mentioned.'
C. On the other hand, many poskim ruled in practice in accordance with the words of the Taz7, as the Mishnah Berurah wrote8: 'If he took them off to enter the restroom, even if he intended to put them on immediately, he must make a bracha according to all opinions, for he is not permitted to go into the restroom with them, and so it was set aside, as written in siman 65. And the Chayei Adam wrote that the same applies when he takes them off because he needs to pass wind: since it is forbidden to pass wind while wearing them, he must make the bracha again.'
And he explained in the Biur Halacha9: 'See in the Mishnah Berurah what I copied, that one who takes them off to enter the restroom must make the bracha again. Even though the Magen Avraham was in doubt regarding our restrooms, which are not far away, the Chayei Adam already wrote that we do not abandon the plain view of all these great ones [the Bach, the Ateres Zekeinim, the Taz and the Eliyah Rabbah] because of the doubt of the Magen Avraham; and also his main reasoning was rejected — see the Chiddushei Rabbi Akiva Eiger and the sefer Artzos HaChaim. And likewise I saw a whole host of further authorities, all in one voice, that in this case one must make the bracha again. Therefore, even though the Pri Megadim and the Derech HaChaim copied the words of the Magen Avraham, one who makes the bracha certainly has not lost, especially since the Gra z"l agrees with the view of the Mechaber that in every case one must make the bracha again.'
The Alter Rebbe10 wrote in accordance with the words of the Rema in the Darchei Moshe and the Taz, that when there was a time when he could not wear them, this is considered an interruption and he must make the bracha, but he changed his wording from theirs, as follows, and these are his words: 'One who took off his tefillin .. if at the time he took off the tefillin he intended to put them on again immediately, and he puts them on again immediately, he need not make the bracha on them again, because they were already covered by the bracha that he made on them when he put them on the first time. When does this apply? When he did not relieve himself between taking off the tefillin and putting them on the second time. But if he relieved himself11 in the meantime, since at that time he could not wear tefillin, it is of no avail at all that he intended to put them on again immediately; therefore he must make the bracha again on the second putting on, as if he had not intended at all at the time of taking them off to put them on again immediately.'
> Thus we have seen in practice that many of the Acharonim ruled in accordance with the words of the Rema and the Taz, that one who comes out of the restroom makes the bracha on the tefillin again [since there was a time when he could not wear tefillin, therefore when he puts them back on he makes the bracha again]. The Alter Rebbe agreed with this principle, but he did not write that one must make the bracha again because of entering the restroom, but rather because he relieved himself; and see the note.
Notes:
1 Many poskim discussed this topic, and due to limited space only the various approaches have been presented here in general terms. And see the sources cited below in the words of the Kaf HaChaim, in Shu"t Yabia Omer, and in Piskei Teshuvos, siman 25, note 186 ↩
2 Orach Chaim, siman 25, se'if katan 78 ↩
3 Year One, Parshas Vayeira, os 13 ↩
4 Shu"t, volume 8, siman 2 ↩
5 Eishel Avraham, siman 25, se'if katan 22 ↩
6 Siman 16 ↩
7 See the sources cited in note 1 ↩
8 There, se'if katan 47 ↩
9 s.v. "And some say not to make a bracha" ↩
10 There, se'ifim 29–30 ↩
11 The poskim cited above wrote that the interruption is the very entry into the restroom, but the Alter Rebbe wrote: 'if he relieved himself in the meantime', and it has been explained (see Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe with the Biurim of Rabbi Alashvili, note 159; and see Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe with Dover Shalom, there, note 97) that he intends to be precise that the very entry into the restroom does not create the interruption, since not every restroom is a place where it is forbidden to wear tefillin, as will be explained below; and therefore only when he relieved himself is it certainly an interruption and he must make the bracha again, and not when he merely urinated. And see siman 43, se'if 1, where he wrote: 'It is forbidden to enter a permanent restroom to urinate with tefillin on one's head or arm, as a decree lest he relieve himself while wearing them; but *in a temporary restroom, that is, a place where people are not accustomed to defecate, it is permitted to urinate while wearing them, and we are not concerned lest he defecate there, even if it is a private place.* And there is one who forbids urinating while wearing tefillin even not in a restroom, as a decree lest he pass wind while wearing them, for such is the way of those who urinate, and tefillin require a clean body; and one should take his words into account'. Accordingly, a place that is not designated for relieving oneself but only for urinating is, by the letter of the law, not a place where it is forbidden to enter with tefillin, and according to this, one who enters there — this is not considered an interruption, and he would not be able to make the bracha again when he comes out and puts them on. [And one should pay attention to this when he removed his tefillin and was only in a room in which urinals are installed: seemingly he cannot make the bracha again when he puts on the tefillin] ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — a daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp group