Tefillin after early Maariv

If one Davened Maariv early may he still put on Tefillin?[1]

One who forgot and did not put on Tefillin throughout the day and only remembered after Davening an early daytime Maariv [i.e. past Plag Hamincha but before night], it is disputed as to whether he is still allowed to put on Tefillin prior to night.[2] Practically, one is to suspect for the stringent opinion [and put on Tefillin after Maariv, prior to night].[3] [However one is to do so without reciting a blessing.[4] Likewise, one must avoid entering into such a situation, and is to always put on Tefillin before Davening Maariv early.[5]]

The community Davened Maariv but he did not:[6] In the event that the community already Davened Maariv but he has not yet done so, then he may still put on Tefillin prior to nighttime [i.e sunset, even with a blessing[7]].[8]

 

Summary:

If one Davened Maariv early he is nevertheless to put on Tefillin after Maariv [without reciting a blessing]. If however one did not yet Daven Maariv, one is to wear Tefillin with a blessing even if the congregation already Davened Maariv, so long as it is prior to sunset.

 

If one Davened Maariv early on Erev Shabbos may he still put on his Tefillin?

See Halacha ???

 

________________________________________________________________________________

[1] Admur 30/5 as explained in Tehila Ledavid 30/3 in his final ruling; Elya Raba 30/5; P”M 30 A”A 7; Makor Chaim 30; M”B 30/17; Kaf Hachaim 30/18; Os Chaim Veshalom 30/4 based on Taz 600/2 [questions Taz as for why the Taz ibid does not bring this down here]; Beir Moshe 1/15-6; Piskeiy Teshuvos 30/3

Other explanations of Admur: See Tehila Ledavid ibid for an alternative explanation and understanding of Admur, according to which one may never wear Tefillin after Maariv, even if he has not yet Daavened and only the congregation has Davened.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one may not wear Tefillin after Davening Maariv. [Michaber 30/5; implication of M”A 30/7; All Poskim in 1st opinion in next footnote] See Michaber Y.D. 262/7 regarding Mila and Taz 600/2 regarding Shofar; Poskim in Piskeiy Teshuvos 30/3

[2] The dispute: There is an opinion who rules that one may not put on Tefillin after Davening Maariv, even though it is still day. [Mahariy in Terumos Hadeshen 2/121; first opinion in Admur ibid; Opinion in Michaber 30/5; first opinion in Rama Y.D. 196/1; see also Admur 18/8 regarding Tzitzis; 108/13 regarding Tashlumin for Mincha; 188/17 regarding Yaaleh Veyavo] The reason for this is because he has already considered this time as night (and as the time of sleeping, in which one says Kerias Shema and Shemoneh Esrei of Maariv). Now, if he were to go back and put on Tefillin he is reconsidering the time as day. This ends up being two leninecies that contradict each other. [Admur ibid; Taz 30/7] However there is an opinion that argues on this. [Second opinion in Admur ibid as explained in Tehila Ledavid 30/3 in his final conclusion that the second opinion and final ruling of Admur here follows the 2nd opinion in Rama Y.D. 196/1, as explained in Shach 196/4, that the second opinion of Rama [of which the Tehila Ledavid concludes is the 2nd opinion of Admur here] rules one may do a Hefsek even after one’s personal Maariv.] Admur concludes that it is proper to suspect for the latter opinion.

Background-What does the last opinion of Admur hold-Alternative explanations of dispute in Admur: Admur ibid brings the second opinion after writing the allowance to wear Tefillin after Maariv of the congregation. It is unclear if this opinion is arguing leniently on the entire law, and is saying that one may always put on Tefillin even after his personal Maariv [as rules Shach 196/4 that even if a woman Davened Maariv she may do Hefsek Taharah], or if it is arguing stringently against the last statement and prohibiting wearing Tefillin even after Maariv of the congregation [as rules Rama in Yoreh Deah 196/1 regarding Hefsek Tahrah that there are opinions who prohibit it to be done even after Maariv of the congregation and so rules Rama initially although Bedieved or times of need says may be lenient].

Which approach makes more sense in Admur: It makes more logic to understand that Admur’s second opinion here is like the first approach and is more lenient and is saying that one may always put on Tefillin even after his personal Maariv [as rules Shach ibid regaridng Hefsek], as accordingly when Admur says to suspect for this opinion it is because one is being stringent to fulfill the Biblcial Mitzvah of Tefillin. [Vetzaruch Iyun on Lashon of Tov Lachush, as if it is a Deoraysa should not one be obligated to put it on?] However according to the second approach which understands Admur’s second opinion here as being stringent [as rules Rama ibid] then it makes no sense for Admur to conclude “to suspect for the second opinion” as by doing so we are being stringent in a Rabbinical dispute [of whether one may wear Tefillin after Maariv] and consequently we are being lenient in a Mitzvah Deoraysa of putting on Tefillin. [Perhaps however it means that initially one is to not rely on placing it on after Maariv of community, or that one should not wear it a second time after they Davened Maariv.] Practically, the Tehilah Ledavid concludes like the former approach!

[3] Admur ibid as explained in Tehila Ledavid 30/3; second opinion in Rama Y.D. 196/1, as explained in Shach 196/4

Background and other explanations of Admur: Understanding the meaning of Admur’s conclusion to suspect for the second opinion depends on which explanation one accepts in the intent of Admur in his second opinion, as explained in the previous footnote. The Tehila Ledavid ibid offers both explanations and in accordance to the latter explanation, according to Admur’s final ruling to suspect for the latter opinion, one is to never wear Tefillin after Maariv, even if he has not yet Davened and only the congregation has Davened. However according to the former explanation, one is to be stringent to wear Tefillin even after his personal Maariv. Practically, the Tehilah Ledavid concludes like the former approach!

[4] M”B 30/17; Tehila Ledavid ibid in name of Elya Raba

The reason: To suspect for the opinion that rules one may no longer put on Tefillin.

[5] As if he Davens Maariv first he enters himself into a dispute.

[6] Admur ibid as explained in Tehila Ledavid 30/3 to be his final ruling; M”A 30/7; Elya Raba 30/; Makor Chaim 30; M”B 30/17

Background and other explanations of Admur: Admur ibid brings a dissenting opinion after writing the above allowance. It is unclear if this opinion is arguing leniently on the entire law, and is saying that one may always put on Tefillin even after his personal Maariv, or if it is arguing stringently and prhibiting wearing Tefillin even after Maariv of the congregation. Admur concludes that it is proper to suspect for the latter opinion. The Tehila Ledavid ibid offers both explanations and in accordance to the latter explanation, according to Admur’s final ruling to suspect for the latter opinion, one is to never wear Tefillin after Maariv, even if he has not yet Davened and only the congregation has Davened. However according to the former explanation, no one argues on this law that one may wear Tefillin after Maariv of the congregation.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one may not wear Tefillin after the Maariv of the congregation. [ Rama in Yoreh Deah 196/1 regarding Hefsek Tahrah that there are opinions who prohibit it to be done even after Maariv of the congregation and so rules Rama initially although Bedieved or times of need says may be lenient]

[7] Elya Raba ibid; Tehila Ledavid ibid; M”B ibid

[8] The reason: It is irrelevent that the congregation has already Davened Maariv, as he himself is not performing two leninecies that contradict each other. [Admur ibid]

Was this article helpful?

Related Articles

Leave A Comment?

/* "); /* ]]> */