The Bracha on the Tallis
[1] (Halacha 1099)
In the previous halachos we saw that the poskim wrote that when a person removes his tefillin and goes to the restroom1, when he returns and puts them on again he must make the bracha once again.
Question: What is the law regarding the bracha on the tallis in a case where one removed the tallis and went to the restroom, and then wraps himself in it once again — must he make a bracha?
Answer: The Agur wrote2 in Hilchos Tzitzis, siman 34: 'The Mahari Molin was asked regarding one who leaves the beis knesses and removes his tallis and then puts it on again, whether he must make a bracha. He answered that the Maharam required him to make the bracha again, and the Maharach disagreed where a tallis katan, which is called arba kanfos, remained on him, or when he returns, he should not make the bracha again'3.
And in Halacha number 1097 we saw that the Tur4 was in doubt about this and inclined to say that one need not make a bracha, and that the Beis Yosef disagreed with him and wrote: 'It appears obvious that even if he intends to put it on immediately, he must make a bracha.' On the other hand, the Darchei Moshe agreed with the words of the Tur: '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.'
As halacha, the Mechaber wrote5: 'If he took off his tallis, even if he intended to wrap himself in it again immediately, he must make a bracha when he wraps himself in it again.'
And the Rema wrote in his gloss: 'And some say that one does not make a bracha if he intended to wrap himself in it again, and some say only when a tallis katan remained on him, and this is the custom.'
And the Radbaz6 wrote regarding one who takes off his tallis or his tefillin with the intention of putting them on immediately: 'The matter depends on a diversion of attention. If he diverted his attention, even if they are on his head he must make a bracha, and if he did not divert his attention from them, even if he took them off while his mind is on them, he need not make the bracha again .. Nevertheless, if he took off the tefillin or the tallis in order to relieve himself, there is no greater interruption than this; even though his mind was on them, he must make a bracha.'
> Thus we have seen that according to the Mechaber one must make the bracha again each time he wraps himself again; according to the Radbaz, only if he went to the restroom; and the Rema cited that some say one need not make the bracha again.
The Acharonim discussed how to understand the words of the Rema where he wrote "and this is the custom" — whether his intent is that one does not make a bracha only in a situation where the tallis katan remained on him, or whether it refers to the beginning of his words7, for as we saw8, regarding tefillin he wrote9: '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'.
Indeed, we saw in the previous halacha that in practice the poskim ruled regarding tefillin in accordance with the words of the Rema in the Darchei Moshe cited above, that entering a permanent restroom is an interruption, but not regarding the tallis, as the Pri Megadim wrote10: 'See the Taz. 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'11.
And so wrote the Mishnah Berurah12: 'And this is not comparable to what the poskim agreed in siman 25 [se'if 12, and see there in the Mishnah Berurah], that if he took off his tefillin with the intention of entering the restroom it constitutes an interruption, for there it is different: since the restroom is forbidden with tefillin, it is a complete interruption, which is not so with a tallis, which by strict law is not forbidden but it is merely not proper to do so; therefore it is not an interruption.'
Regarding the view of the Mechaber, we saw above that he wrote that one must make the bracha again; however, the Shulchan Gavoah wrote13: 'I wonder at our master, how he ruled without qualification like the Shibbolei HaLeket and abandoned the principle that in a case of doubt regarding brochos we are lenient, especially since the custom of the world is not to make a bracha'.
And the Ben Ish Chai14 wrote: 'If he took off the tallis gadol in order to enter the restroom or for some other matter, with the intention of putting it on again immediately, he need not make a bracha on it a second time. And even though Maran z"l holds that one makes a bracha, we hold that in a case of doubt regarding brochos we are lenient, even against the view of Maran z"l'.
> Thus, one who takes off his tallis to enter the restroom, according to the view of the Mechaber, should make the bracha again15, but according to the view of the Rema — and so too did many Sephardic poskim rule in practice16 — he does not make the bracha again, [and even those who ruled regarding tefillin that one must make the bracha again nevertheless held regarding the tallis that he does not make a bracha].
Notes:
1 See the previous halacha for the details of this ↩
2 Hilchos Tzitzis, siman 34 ↩
3 In this halacha we are not discussing the words of the Agur themselves (which were cited only as the source for the words of the Rema below), nor the bracha after removing the tallis in cases where one did not intend to put it on again, or in a case where he removed it without specific intent; rather, the subject is when he removed the tallis in order to go to the restroom and wraps himself in it again afterwards ↩
4 Orach Chaim, siman 8 ↩
5 Orach Chaim, siman 8, se'if 14 ↩
6 Volume 6, siman 2317 ↩
7 See the Magen Avraham there, se'if katan 19. See also the Taz, se'if katan 13. And see the words of the Alter Rebbe in se'if 20, and what he changed regarding this in the Siddur ↩
8 There, in Halacha 1097 ↩
9 Orach Chaim, siman 25, se'if 12 ↩
10 Siman 25, Mishbetzos Zahav, se'if katan 11 ↩
11 See also the wording of the Alter Rebbe (siman 21, se'if 3): 'It is permitted to enter the restroom wearing a garment with tzitzis, because this is not such a disgrace to the mitzvah. When does this apply? To a garment made for wearing that is not designated for praying in, but with our mitzvah talleisim, which are designated only for praying in, it is not proper to enter the restroom wearing them' ↩
12 Siman 8, se'if katan 37 ↩
13 Siman 8, se'if katan 21 ↩
14 Year One, Parshas Bereishis, se'if 10 ↩
15 It should be noted that even regarding the view of the Mechaber, the Magen Avraham wrote (siman 8, se'if katan 16): 'And this is not comparable to what is written in se'if 14, for there he did not have in mind at the time of the bracha that he would take it off and put it on again, but here he did have this in mind [unlike the Ateres Zekeinim]'. Accordingly, it may be said (see Halacha Berurah, volume 1, Otzros Yosef, siman 28, page 113) that even according to the view of the Mechaber, when a person knows in his mind at the time of the bracha that he will need to go to the restroom, he need not make a bracha when he wraps himself afterwards ↩
16 See the Kaf HaChaim, siman 8, os 52. And this is discussed at length in Halacha Berurah there ↩
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