The V-Kom Mizrahi edition of Bekiim BaHalacha is dedicated by his sons for success and good health, wishing for success in all their endeavors. This edition, the fifth, is in memory of Dania Cohen, may his soul rest in peace. We find ourselves on day 81 of our study, nearing the completion of this volume. In about 20 days, we will transition to the new volume, which is already printed and looks beautiful, featuring a blue background. This upcoming volume will cover the laws of ritual hand-washing and the blessing over bread, which are practical and applicable in our daily lives. Today, however, we will delve into some more theoretical aspects as we conclude our discussion on the laws of tefillin.
Let us consider an interesting case concerning a sofer, a scribe who wrote tefillin. Initially, he was observant, but at some point, he deviated from the proper path. Imagine a before-and-after scenario: in the first image, he is wearing a black hat and has a beard, and in the next, he is dressed as a jockey at a racetrack. This individual underwent a complete transformation, a 180-degree turn from his previous life. A person once remarked to me, "Rabbi, you'd be proud of me; I made a 360." However, a 360-degree turn brings you back to the same spot! What we desire is a 180-degree turn, a genuine change in direction.
The question arises: can we rely on the tefillin he wrote while he was still on the right path? Some might argue that since he was observant at that time, we can trust his work. Others may take a more stringent approach, suggesting that one must consider when he began to stray. After all, one does not simply abandon the proper path overnight; there is often a gradual decline. If we could pinpoint the moment of his turning point, we might conclude that any tefillin written after that moment would be problematic.
In such cases, the halacha advises consulting a local rabbi for guidance. Consider a scenario where a sofer is proven to have sold tefillin that were missing parashiyot, and this is confirmed by a Beit Din, a rabbinical court. In such a case, any tefillin he wrote after being caught would be deemed pasul, invalid. However, any tefillin written before that incident could still be relied upon based on the principle of chazakah, which indicates that his prior status was acceptable.
It's worth noting that some soferim become overwhelmed with work; their success can lead to shortcuts in their writing. They may rush through their work, seeking leniencies, and ultimately compromise the quality of their tefillin. There is a notable story about a sofer whose penmanship was exceptional, and he was widely used by religious communities. However, as his popularity grew, he began to struggle with his handwriting due to the volume of work. Eventually, he resorted to using a tracing method, producing what appeared to be beautiful tefillin but lacked authenticity.
Upon investigation, it was found that his hands had begun to shake, and when asked to write a few pesukim on a klaf, he was unable to produce anything legible. This revelation led to a crisis, as many tefillin and Sifrei Torah that he had written were now considered pasul. The challenge then became determining when his handwriting deteriorated and whether any of his earlier work could still be trusted.
In the event that a sofer is later found to have been pasul prior to the testimony against him, any tefillin written during that time would also be deemed pasul. We believe in the concept of teshuvah, repentance, and a ba’al teshuvah who has genuinely accepted the Torah and yirat shamayim can serve as a sofer without concern.
Interestingly, the halacha states that a mamzer cannot write a Sefer Torah. This is a significant ruling, as a mamzer may be a learned individual and deeply religious, yet his status disqualifies him from writing a Torah scroll. The reasoning behind this ruling, as noted by the Mordechai in Masechet Sofrim, is that a mamzer cannot fulfill the requirement of writing the verse "Lo yavo mamzer bekhal Hashem" with the proper kavanah, intention, due to his disqualified status.
However, the Rema clarifies that while a mamzer cannot write a Sefer Torah, he is permitted to write tefillin, parashiyot, or mezuzot since these do not contain that specific verse. Some might wonder why a mamzer could not write the entire Sefer Torah and simply omit that verse. The Siftei Kohen challenges the Mordechai's rationale, suggesting that a mamzer should be able to write other parts of the Torah without issue.
Ultimately, the Siftei Kohen concludes that a mamzer is not qualified to write a Sefer Torah because he cannot serve as an agent for the community, as indicated by the prohibition against a mamzer entering the congregation. This principle parallels the disqualification of women and children from writing a Sefer Torah, as they are exempt from many mitzvot.
There has been debate among the acharonim regarding whether a mamzer can write tefillin parchments. The She’erit Keneset HaGedolah, Eliyah Rabbah, and Nehar Shalom hold that he cannot, while the Pri Megadim offers a different perspective. This leads to the practical necessity of verifying the pedigree of a sofer before commissioning him to write tefillin. It is essential to ascertain whether he is a mamzer, as this would affect the kashrut of the tefillin.
When it comes to a ger, or convert, it is established that he is kosher for writing tefillin. The question arises regarding a convert who reverts to his original religion out of fear of persecution. Such a person is still considered a kosher Jew, as the fear of execution does not invalidate his status. However, some poskim argue that a convert is disqualified if he ceases to wear tefillin, even if he continues to observe other mitzvot.
The Magen Avraham and the Vilna Gaon concur with the stringent view, emphasizing the importance of wearing tefillin as a sign of observance. The halacha states that a tefillin written by an apikores, an atheist or agnostic, should be burned. The rationale is that since the apikores does not believe in the sanctity of God's name, the letters he writes hold no intrinsic holiness.
When an apikores writes a Sefer Torah, it is no different from a secular book, and thus, such a scroll should be treated with the same disregard. The Rambam also supports this view, indicating that a Jewish apikores who writes a Sefer Torah should have it burned, as he does not infuse it with the necessary kedushah. The halacha further states that tefillin written by an apikores should either be burned or placed in genizah, as there is a possibility that he might have written in the correct intention.
Ultimately, the consensus among the halachic authorities is that while tefillin and Sifrei Torah written by an apikores are invalid, the appropriate course of action is to either burn or bury them in a respectful manner, ensuring that they are not treated as sacred texts. This highlights the importance of intention in the writing of sacred texts and the profound implications of the scribe's beliefs on the validity of their work.