Menachot 39

דלמא דאיקטר

The Gemara rejects this proof: Perhaps the sons of Rabbi Ḥiyya were referring to a case where one tied knots between the sets of windings even though there is no obligation to do so.

ואמר רבה שמע מינה קשר עליון דאורייתא דאי סלקא דעתך דרבנן מאי איצטריך למישרי סדין בציצית פשיטא התוכף תכיפה אחת אינו חיבור אלא שמע מינה דאורייתא

And Rabba says: Learn from it that the uppermost knot in the ritual fringes is required by Torah law. As, if it enters your mind to say that it is by rabbinic law, whereas by Torah law it is sufficient to merely insert the strings into the hole without tying any knots, for what reason was it necessary for the Torah to permit placing wool ritual fringes on a linen cloak? It is obvious that it is permitted, since if one attaches a swatch of wool and a swatch of linen with a single connection, it is not considered a connection with regard to the prohibition against wearing a garment that includes both wool and linen. Rather, learn from it that the uppermost knot is required by Torah law.

אמר רבה בר רב אדא אמר רב אדא אמר רב אם נפסק החוט מעיקרו פסולה יתיב רב נחמן וקא אמר להא שמעתא איתיביה רבא לרב נחמן במה דברים אמורים בתחילתו אבל סופו שיריו וגרדומיו כל שהוא

§ Rabba bar Rav Adda says that Rav Adda says that Rav says: If a string was severed at its base, i.e., where it is connected to the garment, the ritual fringes are unfit. Rav Naḥman sat in the study hall and stated this halakha. Rava raised an objection to Rav Naḥman from a baraita: In what case is this statement said, i.e., that there is a minimum length required for the strings? That is only when the strings are initially affixed to the garment. But in the end, i.e., after the strings are affixed in an acceptable manner, its remainder and its severed strings are fit at any length.

מאי שיריו ומאי גרדומיו מאי לאו שיריו דאיפסיק מינייהו ואישתייר מינייהו גרדומיו דאיגרדום איגרדומי

The Gemara clarifies: What is its remainder and what are its severed strings? What, is it not that when the baraita mentions its remainder it is referring to a case where parts of the strings were severed and parts of them remain, and when the baraita mentions its severed strings it is referring to a case where the strings were completely severed, and nevertheless the strings are fit for the mitzva?

לא חדא קתני שיורי גרדומיו כל שהוא ולימא גרדומיו שיריו למה לי הא קא משמע לן דבעינן שיורא לגרדומיו כדי לענבן

The Gemara responds to Rava’s objection: No, the tanna of the baraita is teaching one halakha, and the baraita should be understood as follows: The remainder of its severed strings are fit at any length. The Gemara asks: If so, let the baraita simply say: Its severed strings are fit at any length; why do I need the mention of its remainder? This teaches us that we require a remainder of its severed strings long enough to wrap them around the other strings and tie them in a slipknot.

יתיב רבה וקאמר משמיה דרב חוט של כרך עולה מן המנין אמר ליה רב יוסף שמואל אמרה ולא רב איתמר נמי אמר רבה בר בר חנה סח לי רבי יאשיה דמן אושא חוט של כרך עולה לה מן המנין

§ Rabba sat in the study hall and said in the name of Rav: The string used for winding around the other strings is counted in the quota of ritual fringes, i.e., it is one of the eight strings on each corner, and there is no need to have an additional string for winding. Rav Yosef said to Rabba: Shmuel said it, and not Rav. This was also stated by another amora: Rabba bar bar Ḥana says: Rabbi Yoshiya of Usha told me that the string used for winding around the other strings is counted in the quota of ritual fringes.

יתיב רבא וקא אמר משמיה דשמואל תכלת שכרך רובה כשרה אמר ליה רב יוסף רב אמרה ולא שמואל איתמר נמי אמר רב הונא בר יהודה אמר רב ששת אמר רב ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב תכלת שכרך רובה כשרה

Rava sat in the study hall and said in the name of Shmuel: If one wound the majority of the white and the sky-blue strings instead of leaving the larger portion of the strings hanging loose beyond the windings, the ritual fringes are nevertheless fit. Rav Yosef said to Rava: Rav said it, and not Shmuel. The Gemara supports Rav Yosef’s version from that which was also stated: Rav Huna bar Yehuda says that Rav Sheshet says that Rav Yirmeya bar Abba says that Rav says: If one wound the majority of the white and the sky-blue strings, the ritual fringes are nevertheless fit.

רב חייא בריה דרב נתן מתני הכי אמר רב הונא אמר רב ששת אמר רב ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב תכלת שכרך רובה כשרה ואפילו לא כרך בה אלא חוליא אחת כשרה ונויי תכלת שליש גדיל ושני שלישי ענף

Rav Ḥiyya, son of Rav Natan, teaches this discussion like this: Rav Huna says that Rav Sheshet says that Rav Yirmeya bar Abba says that Rav says: If one wound the majority of the white and the sky-blue strings, the ritual fringes are nevertheless fit. And even if he wound only one set of windings, the ritual fringes are fit. But the finest way to affix the white and sky-blue strings is to ensure that one-third of the length of the strings is windings and two-thirds are loose hanging strings.

וכמה שיעור חוליא תניא רבי אומר כדי שיכרוך וישנה וישלש תאנא הפוחת לא יפחות משבע והמוסיף לא יוסיף על שלש עשרה

The Gemara asks: And what is the measure of a set of windings? It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is such that one winds once and winds a second and third time, i.e., each set must contain at least three windings. It was taught: One who minimizes the sets of windings may not have fewer than seven sets, and one who adds to this number of sets may not have more than thirteen sets of windings.

הפוחת לא יפחות משבע כנגד שבעה רקיעים והמוסיף לא יוסיף על שלש עשרה כנגד שבעה רקיעין וששה אוירין שביניהם

The Gemara provides explanations for these guidelines: One who minimizes the sets of windings may not wind fewer than seven sets, corresponding to the seven firmaments. And one who adds to this number of sets may not wind more than thirteen sets of windings, corresponding to the seven firmaments and the six air spaces between them.

תנא כשהוא מתחיל מתחיל בלבן הכנף מין כנף וכשהוא מסיים מסיים בלבן מעלין בקודש ולא מורידין

It was taught: When one begins to form the windings, he begins winding with a white string. This is because the verse indicates that one first inserts “the fringe of the corner” (Numbers 15:38), i.e., the white strings, which are of the same type as the corner of the garment. And when he concludes the windings, he concludes with a white string, in accordance with the principle: One elevates to a higher level in matters of sanctity and does not downgrade.

רב ורבה בר בר חנה הוו יתבי הוה קא חליף ואזיל ההוא גברא דמיכסי גלימא דכולה תכלתא ורמי ליה תכלתא

§ The Gemara relates: Rav and Rabba bar bar Ḥana were sitting together. A certain man was passing by wearing a cloak that was made entirely of sky-blue wool, on which he had affixed white and sky-blue strings,

וגדילא מיגדיל אמר רב יאי גלימא ולא יאי תכלתא רבה בר בר חנה אמר יאי גלימא ויאי תכלתא

and the ritual fringes were composed entirely of windings, without any portion of the strings hanging loose. Rav said: The cloak is beautiful, but the white and sky-blue strings are not beautiful. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: The cloak is beautiful, and the white and sky-blue strings are also beautiful.

במאי קא מיפלגי רבה בר בר חנה סבר כתיב גדיל וכתיב פתיל או גדיל או פתיל

The Gemara asks: With regard to what principle do they disagree? The Gemara answers: Rabba bar bar Ḥana holds that since it is written in one verse: “You shall prepare yourself twisted cords” (Deuteronomy 22:12), and in another it is written: “And they shall put on the fringe of the corner a sky-blue thread” (Numbers 15:38), it teaches that the ritual fringes may be composed entirely of either twisted cords, i.e., the windings, or loose threads or strings.

ורב סבר לעולם פתיל בעינן וההיא גדילים למניינא הוא דאתא גדיל שנים גדילים ארבעה עשה גדיל ופותליהו מתוכו

And Rav holds that actually, we also require loose strings in addition to the windings, and when that term “twisted cords” appears in the verse, it comes for the purpose of teaching the number of strings that are required. If the verse would have employed the singular term twisted cord, it would still indicate that two strings are required, as twisted means that two strings are wound around each other. Once the verse uses the plural term “twisted cords,” it thereby indicates that four strings are required. By using the terms “twisted cords” and “thread,” the verses indicates: Form twisted cords with the four strings that one attaches to each corner, and let the strings hang loose from them.

אמר שמואל משמיה דלוי חוטי צמר פוטרין בשל פשתן

§ Shmuel says in the name of Levi: Wool strings exempt a garment made of linen, i.e., one fulfills the mitzva by affixing wool strings to a linen garment.

איבעיא להו של פשתן מהו שיפטרו בשל צמר צמר בשל פשתים הוא דפטר דכיון דתכלת פטרה לבן נמי פטר אבל פשתים בצמר לא

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha with regard to whether strings made of linen exempt a garment made of wool? One can say that it is only wool strings that exempt a garment of linen, as since the sky-blue string, which must be wool, exempts a linen garment, white strings of wool also exempt the garment. But if one affixes linen strings to a wool garment, he does not fulfill his obligation.

או דלמא כיון דכתיב לא תלבש שעטנז צמר ופשתים יחדו גדלים תעשה לך לא שנא צמר בפשתים ולא שנא פשתים בצמר

Or perhaps, since it is written: “You shall not wear diverse kinds, wool and linen together. You shall prepare yourself twisted cords upon the four corners of your covering” (Deuteronomy 22:11–12), which indicates that one may wear wool and linen together in order to fulfill the mitzva of ritual fringes, there is no difference whether one affixes wool strings to a garment of linen, and there is no difference whether one affixes linen strings to a garment of wool.

תא שמע דאמר רחבה אמר רב יהודה חוטי צמר פוטרין בשל פשתן ושל פשתן פוטרין בשל צמר חוטי צמר ופשתים פוטרין בכל מקום ואפילו בשיראין

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma, as Raḥava says that Rav Yehuda says: Wool strings exempt a garment made of linen, strings of linen exempt a garment made of wool, and strings of wool and linen exempt a garment in any case, i.e., all garments, and even garments made from silks [beshira’in].

ופליגא דרב נחמן דאמר רב נחמן השיראין פטורין מן הציצית איתיביה רבא לרב נחמן השיראין והכלך והסריקין כולן חייבין בציצית מדרבנן

The Gemara notes: And this last point disagrees with a ruling of Rav Naḥman, as Rav Naḥman says: Shira’in are entirely exempt from the obligation of ritual fringes. Rava raised an objection to the opinion of Rav Naḥman from the following baraita: Garments made from types of silks known as shira’in, kalakh, and serikin all require ritual fringes. The Gemara answers: The baraita means that there is an obligation by rabbinic law, whereas Rav Naḥman meant they are exempt by Torah law.

אי הכי אימא סיפא וכולן צמר ופשתים פוטרין בהן אי אמרת בשלמא דאורייתא היינו דמישתרו בהו כלאים אלא אי אמרת דרבנן היכי מישתרי בהו כלאים אימא או צמר או פשתים

The Gemara challenges this suggestion: If that is so, then say the latter clause of the baraita: And with regard to all of these garments, strings of wool and linen exempt them. This indicates that one may affix wool sky-blue strings and white linen strings. Granted, if you say that the obligation of ritual fringes for silk garments is by Torah law, that is why diverse kinds are permitted for them. But if you say that the obligation is by rabbinic law, how could diverse kinds be permitted for them? The Gemara answers: Say instead: Either wool or linen strings exempt silk garments, but one may not affix both wool and linen strings to the same silk garment.

הכי נמי מסתברא דקתני סיפא הן במינן פוטרין שלא במינן אין פוטרין אי אמרת בשלמא דרבנן היינו דמיפטרו במינן אלא אי אמרת דאורייתא צמר ופשתים הוא דפטר

The Gemara comments: So too, it is reasonable to assume that this is the correct interpretation of the baraita, as the baraita teaches in the latter clause: Strings made from these silk fabrics exempt a garment of their type but do not exempt a garment that is not of their type. Granted, if you say that the obligation to attach ritual fringes to these garments is by rabbinic law, that is why they are exempted if one affixes strings of their type. But if you say that the obligation is by Torah law, then it should be only wool or linen that exempt these garments.

אי משום הא לא איריא כדרבא דרבא רמי כתיב הכנף מין כנף וכתיב צמר ופשתים

The Gemara rejects this: If it is due to that reason, there is no conclusive argument, because one can maintain that other fabrics also fulfill the obligation of ritual fringes by Torah law, in accordance with the opinion of Rava. As Rava raises a contradiction: It is written in one verse: “And they shall put on the fringe of the corner a sky-blue thread” (Numbers 15:38). The term “the corner” indicates that the fringe must be from the same type of fabric as the corner. And yet it is written: “Wool and linen” (Deuteronomy 22:11), immediately before the verse states: “You shall prepare yourself twisted cords upon the four corners of your covering” (Deuteronomy 22:12), indicating that ritual fringes must be from either wool or linen.

הא כיצד צמר ופשתים פוטרין בין במינן בין שלא במינן שאר מינין במינן פוטרין שלא במינן אין פוטרין

How so? Strings made of wool or linen exempt any garment, whether the garment is made of their type of fabric, or whether it is not of their type of fabric. Strings made of all other types of fabric exempt garments made of their type of fabric, e.g., silk strings exempt a silk garment, but they do not exempt a garment made from a fabric that is not their type, i.e., a garment made from a different fabric.

ורב נחמן כדתנא דבי רבי ישמעאל

The Gemara notes: And Rav Naḥman, who holds that silk garments do not require ritual fringes by Torah law, holds in accordance with the ruling stated by a tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael.

דתנא דבי רבי ישמעאל הואיל ונאמרו בגדים בתורה סתם ופרט לך הכתוב באחד מהן צמר ופשתים אף כל צמר ופשתים

As a tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: Since the word garments is usually stated in the Torah without specification as to the material from which the garments are made, and the verse specified in one of its references to garments that it is referring to garments made from wool or linen, as it states: “And the garment in which there will be the mark of leprosy, whether it be a woolen garment or a linen garment” (Leviticus 13:47), it may be derived that so too, all garments mentioned in the Torah are those made from wool or linen. Other fabrics are not classified as garments by Torah law. Consequently, when the Torah requires strings on the corners of garments (see Numbers 15:38), it is referring specifically to garments made of wool or linen.

אמר אביי והאי תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל מפקא מאידך תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל דתנא דבי רבי ישמעאל בגד אין לי אלא בגד צמר מנין לרבות צמר גמלים וצמר ארנבים ונוצה של עזים והכלך והסריקין והשיראין מנין תלמוד לומר או בגד

Abaye said: This statement by a tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael diverges from another statement by a tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael, who holds that all fabrics are considered garments. As a tanna of the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: From the fact that the verse states: “A woolen garment” (Leviticus 13:47), I have derived only that a garment of wool can become ritually impure. From where is it derived that garments made of camels’ hair, rabbits’ wool, goats’ hair, or the types of silk kalakh, serikin, and shirayin, are also included in this halakha? The same verse states: “Or a linen garment.” The word “or” serves as an amplification to include all types of fabric.