*As an Amazon Associate I earn from  qualifying purchases.
- Must one own the Tefillin to fulfill the Mitzvah?[1]
The Tefillin that one wears is not required to belong specifically to him. A person can fulfill the Mitzvah of Tefillin through wearing borrowed Tefillin of his friend.
Stolen Tefillin:[2] Furthermore, Biblically, one fulfills his obligation of Tefillin even if he wears stolen Tefillin, and even if the owner has yet to give up hope on retrieving it.[3] However, the Sages invalidated stolen Tefillin so long as they are in the possession of the robber, even if the owners have already given up hope in retrieving them.[4] Such Tefillin are an abomination before G-d and do not contain a command at all.
Reciting a blessing over Tefillin that one does not own?[5] It is permitted to say a blessing over borrowed Tefillin.[6] However, one may not say a blessing on stolen Tefillin.[7]
Buying one’s own pair of Tefillin:[8] Despite the above, one is obligated to try to purchase his own pair of Tefillin and is not to rely on borrowing from others.[9] If he can afford it, he is to purchase Mehadrin Tefillin [as explained in B].[10] However, if one cannot afford to buy Tefillin he is not required to beg on doors for charity in order so he can purchase it, and may rely on borrowing from others.[11]Â
Â
|  Q&A What is one to do if he switched Tefillin with another person?[12] One may use the Tefillin as if it were his until he is able to switch it back with the person who took his Tefillin.[13] Upon being asked to switch back the Tefillin one must do so. May one purchase Tefillin on credit, such as using a credit card; check, IOU document or a promissory note? Yes. Being that Tefillin are not required to be owned by the wearer [unlike Daled Minim and Tzitzis], therefore according to all opinions, all accepted forms of credit payments are valid. If one refuses to pay:[14] If one purchased Tefillin on credit and refuses to pay the seller upon request of payment, then it is possible the Tefillin are considered stolen, and are hence invalid.  If one missed a payment deadline for his Tefillin, may he still wear them?[15] If one who purchased Tefillin on credit missed a payment deadline to the seller, then it is possible the Tefillin are considered stolen, and are hence invalid.   |
[1] Admur 25:35; 38:11
[2] Admur ibid; Olas Tamid 25:21
[3] The reason: As the Tefillin do not have to belong to the person in order for him to fulfill his obligation. [Admur ibid; Levush 25:12; Olas Tamid ibid]
[4] Admur ibid; M”A 25:26
The reason: As this is a Mitzvah that comes as a result of sin. [Admur ibid; M”A ibid]
[5] Admur 25:35; Michaber 25:12; Orchos Chaim in name of Ittur; Ketzos Hashulchan 8:19
[6] The reason: As [there is no need to own the Tefillin that one is wearing and one hence] one fulfills his obligation even with the Tefillin of his head, as stated above. [Admur ibid] As Tefillin is an obligation of the body and it is not necessary for it to belong to him. [Admur 14:12]
[7] Admur ibid; Michaber 25:12
The reason: As stolen Tefillin are an abomination before G-d and do not contain a command at all. On this type of blessing the verse states “Ubotzeia Beirach, Naeitz Hashem” [Admur ibid; M”A 25:26]
[8] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 25:5
[9] Bach, brought in M”B 25:2 that one who relies on borrowing from others his punishment is great
[10] See Michaber 656:1 that one must add up until 1/3 of the price for a Hiddur Mitzvah; See M”B 656:4; Biur Halacha 656:1
[11] M”B 25:2; See Biur Halacha 656:1 “Afilu” that from the letter of the law he is obligated just like Ner Chanukah; Ashel Avraham Butchach in Nefesh Chayah 25;
[12] Birchas Habayis 37:10; See Kesef Kedoshim 126
[13] The reason: Although we rule that when one switched an article with another it is forbidden to use it due to stealing [Admur Gzeila Ugineiva 30; Michaber C.M.136:2] nevertheless by a Tallis since we assume each person does not mind if the other uses his Tallis until they switch it back, as even in a case that the Talleisim were not switched one may use his friends Tallis without permission under this basis, and thus certainly in this case it is permitted. [ibid]
[14] See M”B 11:27 that if the seller is “Ayel Venafik Azuzei” then it is stolen; Choshen Mishpat 190:10-16; Aruch Hashulchan 11:22; Piskeiy Teshuvos 11:18
[15] See M”B ibid; See Miasef Lekol Hamachanos 25:121 regarding a case that one is unable to pay the seller because the seller is no longer found.