<html>
<body>
Much has been written about this issue since SAR announced that it would
allow two girls to put on Tefillen during davening at this school.
It was reported that their mothers have this practice .<br><br>
From
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/meld3ob" eudora="autourl">
http://tinyurl.com/meld3ob<br><br>
</a><font size=3>In Parshat Tetzaveh, we read about the <i>bigdei
kehunah</i> (the priestly garments). When describing the <i>kohen
gadol</i>’s <i>mitznefet</i> (turban), the Torah states: <br><br>
</font>
<dl>
<dd>“You shall place the mitznefet</i> upon his head.” (Shmot 29:6)
<br><br>
</dl>The Gemara (BT Arachin 3b) cites this pasuk</i> when discussing the
laws of tefillin</i>. Specifically, the Gemara wonders if the kohen
gadol</i> is exempt from the mitzvah</i> of tefillin shel rosh</i>,
because the mitznefet</i> gets in the way. Since the tzitz</i> (forehead
plate) is placed in front of the mitznefet</i>, there is, presumably, no
room for the tefillin</i>. However, the Gemara finally rejects this
possibility and states: <br><br>
<dl>
<dd>“His hair appeared between the tzitz</i> and the mitznefet</i>, which
is where he would place the tefillin</i>.” <br><br>
</dl>In other words, there was, in fact, room on his head between the
tzitz </i>and the mitznefet</i>, and that spot was where the kohen
gadol</i> put his tefillin shel rosh</i>. <br><br>
The Rosh (Hilchot Tefillin 18) derives from this sugyah</i> that there
must not be a chatzitzah</i> (a partition or separation) between one’s
head and one’s tefillin shel rosh</i>. After all, if there was no problem
of chatzitzah</i>, the kohen gadol</i> could have simply placed his
tefillin</i> on top of the mitznefet</i>, and the Gemara’s question would
have been a moot point. <br><br>
Yet, the Rashba (282) disagrees and insists that tefillin</i> may be
placed on top of a hat. In his opinion, there is generally no issue of
chatzitzah</i> with respect to the tefillin shel rosh</i>. However, the
kohen gadol</i> had a specific problem: namely, a dvar mitzvah</i> (an
object used as a mitzvah</i>) was the cause of the chatzitzah</i>.
<br><br>
The Halachah follows the Rosh. Therefore, one must ensure that nothing
comes between one’s tefillin</i> and one’s head. <br><br>
The Machatzit HaShekel raises an intriguing related question. Does a
person’s own hair constitute a chatzitzah</i>? On one hand, hair is part
of one’s own body and thus clearly not a chatzitzah</i>. However, on the
other hand, perhaps there are some specific cases where hair does serve
as a chatzitzah</i>. <br><br>
The Machatzit HaShekel is stringent in this regard. According to him,
tefillin</i> may not be placed atop the long hair in the front of one’s
head (i.e. the forelock or blorit</i>, as it is called in Hebrew). In
other words, he holds that the forelock is a chatzitzah</i>. <br><br>
The Aruch HaShulchan distinguishes between the hair that normally grows
on one’s head and the forelock, which includes hair brushed or pulled to
the front of the head from elsewhere on one’s head. In any event, he
concurs with the Machatzit HaShekel that tefillin shel rosh</i> may not
be placed on the forelock. <br><br>
In contrast, Rav Ovadiah Yosef is more lenient due to a s’feik
s’feika</i> (a “double doubt”): First of all, there is a safeik</i>
(doubt) whether the Halachah follows the Rosh or the Rashba. In other
words, does the issue of chatzitzah</i> apply to tefillin</i>? And even
if we say that chatzitzah</i> does apply, we are still left with a second
safeik</i>: Can hair be considered to be a chatzitzah</i>? <br><br>
However, practically speaking, due to ideological reasons, Rav Ovadiah
recommends that men avoid growing their hair long. <br>
<hr>
Women often have longer hair than men. Does this mean that women do
not "fulfill" the mitzvah of wearing Tefillen if their
hair is long? I do not know how long the hair of these two
girls is, but is it not possible that the entire business is a
tempest in a tea cup, since if their hair is long, they are not
wearing their Tefillen properly.<br><br>
Furthermore, how can a married woman who is supposed to cover her
hair properly wear Tefillen in public. Wouldn't the sheitel
constitute a Chatzitzah? Wouldn't a hat also? And
if the mothers of these girls are putting on Tefillen in private with
their hair uncovered, then why are these girls asking to be allowed
to put on Tefillen in public. Putting Tefillen on in private as
their mothers may be doing should be good enough.<br><br>
If the mothers of these girls do not cover their hair in public,
then to me this says something about their commitment to halacha.
Why put on Tefillen which women are not required to do and yet not cover
one's hair which a married woman is required to do? <br><br>
YL</body>
<br>
</html>