Menachot 35a (לה.) — the Talmud in English

Abaye said: We said only

that when he switched the sections, the tefillin are invalid!

But

this is so only when he switched the

inner

section, placed in the innermost compartment,

with the outer section,

the section placed in one of the two outer compartments. For example, he placed the section “And it shall be when He brings you” [which must be placed in the innermost compartment] in the outer compartment, where the section “Sanctify” must be placed. Or he switched the section

outer

and placed it in the place of the

inner,

for example, he placed the section “Sanctify” in an inner compartment, in place of the section “And it shall be when He brings you.”

But

if he switched

one inner section with another inner section,

switching the order of the two inner sections and placing the section “Hear” in place of the section “And it shall be when He brings you,” or he switched

one outer section with another outer section

and placed the section “And it shall be if you surely heed” in place of the section “And it shall be when He brings you,”

it is of no concern

to us that this change was made, and the tefillin remain valid.

Rava said to him

to Abaye:

What is different

about switching

an inner section with an outer section

and likewise switching

an outer section with an inner section, which is not

sufficient to validate them,

since this

outer section

needs to see air

—that is, it must be in the outer compartment adjacent to the air, unlike the inner compartment, which is farther from the air—

does not see

the air, and likewise

this

inner section,

which does not need to see air, does see

the air when it is placed in the outer compartment? If so, even when he changes and switches the place of one

outer section with another outer section,

or changes the place of one

inner section with another inner section,

different

also

it should be invalid, because

this

section

that needs to see the air on the right sees

the air on the left,

and the section that needs to see the air

on the left sees the air on the right?!

Rather,

Rava concludes:

It makes no difference

whether he switched an outer section with an inner one, or switched one inner section with another inner section, or one outer section with another outer section: they are invalid!

And Rav Ḥananel said that Rav said: The titura ,

that is, the lower surface of the compartments

of the tefillin,

which closes the openings of the compartments and is made from the leather of the compartment [one of the walls of the compartment is elongated and folds over to serve as a closing surface beneath the other walls]

is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai!

It must be made in this manner.

Abaye said: The ma’avarta of tefillin ,

which is the projecting strip of leather of the tefillin, where the elongated leather of the compartment folds over to become the lower surface, and in which an opening is made for the tefillin strap to pass through [it is called ma’avarta because the tefillin strap passes through it]

is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai!

It must be made in this manner.

And Abaye said: The shin of tefillin

made by the folds in the leather of the two outer compartments of the head tefilla

is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai!

It must be made in this manner.

And the groove must extend

between one compartment and another in the head tefilla until

the place of the seam

of the titura to the compartment, that is, to the bottom of the compartment!

Rav Dimi of Nehardea

said: It is not necessary for the groove to extend all the way down. Rather,

once

the groove is

discernible

a little higher up,

it is not necessary!

And Abaye said: This parchment

the parchment

of tefillin must be examined

to determine whether it is fit for writing,

lest it contain a defect

such as a perforation, in which case the writing will no longer be ketiva tama, beautiful and complete, since ink cannot be written where there is a perforation.

And we require complete writing

in the sections of the tefillin,

but there is none!

Rav Dimi of Nehardea said:

It is not necessary to examine the parchment, because

the quill examines it:

if the letter appears complete and no hole is visible in it, it is valid, and we need not be concerned about a hole in the parchment.

Rabbi Yitzḥak said:

The straps of the tefillin must be

black, a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai!

The Gemara raises an objection: The compartments of

the tefillin

may be tied only with their own kind,

that is, with leather straps ,

whether

those leather straps were

green, whether

they were

black, or whether they were white,

but red straps

must not be made,

for two reasons:

The first reason is

because of disgrace:

perhaps onlookers will say that the person suffers from an itchy skin condition, and that the tefillin straps were dyed red by the blood from his wounds; this is disgraceful.

And the second is because of

another matter:

people might say that he had intercourse with his wife while she was a menstruant, and that the straps were colored by menstrual blood.

And the beraita continues:

Rabbi Yehuda said: An incident occurred involving a student of Rabbi Akiva who tied his tefillin with strips

of wool

dyed tekhelet, and he did not say

Rabbi Akiva

anything to him!

Rabbi Yehuda proved from this: Is it

possible

that

that righteous man,

Rabbi Akiva,

saw his student

putting on tefillin שלא כהלכה

and did not rebuke him?

Rather, it is evident from here that woolen strips are valid for tying the tefillin, and leather straps are not specifically required.

The Sages said to him

to Rabbi Yehuda:

Yes,

it is possible that Rabbi Akiva did not rebuke him, but there is no proof, because Rabbi Akiva

did not see him

tying his tefillin with strips dyed tekhelet.

And if

he had

seen him, he would not have allowed him

to do so.

And the beraita continues:

An incident occurred involving Hyrcanus, the son of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, who tied his tefillin with strips of purple, and he did not say anything to him

Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus to his son

at all!

Rabbi Yehuda proves from this incident: Is it

possible

that

that righteous man,

Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus,

saw

his

son

putting on tefillin שלא כהלכה

and did not rebuke him?! The Sages said to him:

The Sages

Yes,

it is possible that he did not rebuke him, not because he thought that doing so was proper, but

he did not see him

tying his tefillin with strips of purple,

and if he had seen him, he would not have allowed him

to do so!

And now they challenge Rabbi Yitzḥak, who said that black straps are a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai:

In any event, it is taught

in the beraita that the tefillin straps are valid

whether

they are

green, whether black, or whether white?!

They answer:

It is not difficult!

Here, where the tanna of the beraita validated even straps that were not dyed black, the straps were dyed

on the inside ,

on their inner side, whereas

here,

where Rabbi Yitzḥak invalidated them, the straps were dyed

on the outside,

since on their outward-facing side the straps must specifically be dyed black.

The Gemara challenges this resolution:

If

you established that the beraita refers to straps dyed

on the inside,

why should they not also be dyed red?

What disgrace

is there in a color on the inner side, and what suspicion of

another matter

could there be, when the inner side is not visible? They answer: There is still concern for disgrace and for the other matter, because

sometimes they turn over,

and the red color becomes visible to people.

A tanna

taught: Tefillin must be

square,

that is, the tefillin compartments [see carefully the wording of Rashi and Tosafot!] must be square in their length and width [but not necessarily in their height]

by a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai!

Rav Pappa said:

The squareness of the tefillin must be

in their stitching,

so that when he sews the leather of the titura [which closes the openings of the compartments], he must take care not to pull the stitching thread excessively, so that the leather of the compartment will not contract and the square shape will not be lost.

The squareness must also be

in their diagonal,

that is, the length must equal the width, and they must not have the shape of a rectangle, whose length is greater than its width. [The reference to the “diagonal” means that every given side length has a corresponding fixed diagonal in a square; the diagonal of a square is two-fifths greater than the measure of its side. Therefore, if the diagonal of the compartment measures one and two-fifths times the length of its side, it is square; otherwise it is a rectangle or a rhombus.]

Let us say that this supports him,

Rav Pappa, who requires the place of the seam to be square. For we learned in tractate Megilla:

One who makes his head tefilla

of the head

round,

without a base, so that it is shaped like an egg, is in

danger

if he places it on his head, lest, when he suddenly enters through a doorway without paying attention, he strike his head against the threshold and the round tefilla penetrate his head.

And there is no

fulfillment

of the mitzva

of putting on tefillin through placing the round tefilla, because it is round! This proves Rav Pappa’s view, that the tefillin must be square in the lower surface adjacent to the wearer’s head!

The Gemara rejects this:

Rav Pappa said:

There is no proof from that Mishna, because there it refers to a round tefilla

that is made

like

a nut,

like a nut [Rashi, Megilla 24b], whose base is pointed [and therefore it is dangerous to wear], and one does not fulfill the mitzva of tefillin with it because its pointed base is unfit for placing tefillin. But a tefillin whose bottom is round and does not have a pointed base might have been considered valid for wearing, despite its rounded shape. Rav Pappa teaches that this too is invalid.

Rav Huna said:

With regard to tefillin that have perforations in the leather between the compartments,

as long as the surface of the tablet remains intact 24 .

As long as the outer leather remains whole, they are

valid.

Rav Ḥisda said: If

two walls

are severed,

that is, torn or perforated, of two compartments, the tefillin are still

valid,

but if

three

walls of the compartments are perforated, the tefillin are

invalid.

Rava said: We said only

that perforations and tears in two walls of two compartments do not invalidate the tefillin

when

the perforations were

not opposite one another,

so that one tear is not visible through the other.

But

if they were

opposite one another,

in two adjacent walls, the tefillin are

invalid

even with only two tears!

And Rava added:

And this opposite

one another

that we said renders them invalid

we said only with regard to new ones,

when the leather of the compartments was new, so that the perforations and tears indicate that the leather itself is defective.

But

if the two adjacent tears occurred

in old ones,

in old leather,

it is of no concern

to invalidate them, because the leather itself is not deemed defective; rather, the tears occurred because of its age. 27 .

Abaye said to Rav Yosef:

how

is it identified as

hide

that is new, and how is it identified as

hide

that is old?

He said to him:

Rav Yosef:

Whenever it is stretched on a peg,

when one grasps the hide and stretches it,

and then it contracts,

and when he relaxes his hold on it and leaves it, it contracts again as it had been before, this is hide

that is old,

which, even when it expands, contracts again.

But the other,

which does not expand and then contract again, is hide

that is new!