Question: The "retired" tefillin batim (in which the parshiyot go) I keep in a closet fell to the floor on Shabbat, inside a flimsy plastic bag. I intuited that it was better to pick them up than to leave them in disgrace on the floor. Was that correct?



Answer: There are ample sources on the premise that certain Rabbinic violations of Shabbat are waived to protect holy articles, including tefillin. The mishna (Eruvin 95a) says that one who finds tefillin in an unprotected place may wear them in order to enable him to bring them to a secure area without carrying. The gemara (ibid. 97a) says that if it is not feasible to wear (all of) them, he may carry them in intervals of less than four amot. The gemara and poskim take for granted that muktzeh does not preclude such actions.

Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions (515)

Rabbi Daniel Mann

add_alert

513 - Listening to the Megilla with Limited Concentration

514 - Batim of Tefillin on the Floor on Shabbat

515 - Raffle on Shabbat

Load More

Tosafot, in explaining the gemara that one may send tefillin to his friend on Yom Tov (Beitza 15a), says it is not muktzeh because it is not prohibited to wear tefillin on Shabbat and Yom Tov, just that it is not a requirement. The Rama (Orach Chayim 308:4), basing himself on the Terumat Hadeshen (I:70), gives tefillin the same rules as a kli shemelachto l’heter (a standard permissible object), i.e., it is not muktzeh. However, the Taz (308:3) and the Magen Avraham (308:11) treat tefillin like a kli shemelachto l’issur (a utensil whose main uses are for forbidden actions) because we rule (Shulchan Aruch, OC 31:1) that it is forbidden to don tefillin on Shabbat. The Mishna Berura (308:24) says that one can rely on the Rama only under extenuating circumstances. Indeed, Halichot Shlomo (Tefilla 4:32) views tefillin that fell to the floor, even if they are in their bag, as such an extenuating circumstance and allows picking them and up putting them in the first possible place.

However, these sources are insufficient to have permitted you to pick up the batim because you asked about empty batim, not tefillin. It is true that they were once part of tefillin¸ but when something breaks off from a kli, it becomes muktzeh (Shulchan Aruch, OC 308:6). Even if the batim are not broken but can be used again in the future for tefillin, they are not considered a kli now since their return to tefillin requires an expert (see Chayei Adam 73:13) and also it is forbidden to do so on Shabbat.

Therefore, we must return to the idea that saving tefillin from disgrace allows violating certain Rabbinic prohibitions. It is difficult to suffice with the aforementioned mishna, as commentators understand that there is concern there for great disgrace (see Rashi, Eiruvin 75a; Dirshu 301:109). Maybe, then, here it is sufficient to cover up the tefillin (see Shulchan Aruch, OC 301:42). However, we do find leniency regarding holy things that are on the floor. The contemporary sefer Shalmei Yehuda (1:4) cites Rav Elyashiv and Rav Binyamin Zilber as allowing one to pick off the floor even non-useful scraps of paper with Torah writings on them, which are muktzeh, to save them from disgrace. Batim that were already used for tefillin have the kedusha at least of tashmishei kedusha, as they housed the sacred tefillin scrolls, and they require geniza (Ginzei Hakodesh 6:6). (The bayit of the tefillin shel rosh is even more sacred due to the letters shin on their sides.) Therefore, if it is permitted to pick up the geniza-destined piece of paper when it is muktzeh, it should likewise be permitted and proper to lift up the batim. This is not a trivial conclusion. One could distinguish between the paper that is directly on the floor and the batim that are in the bag. Additionally, some Acharonim forbid (see Orchot Chaim 19:(56)) picking up sacred muktzeh articles without special grounds for obviating the problem of muktzeh.

When considering everything, though, we agree with your intuition to pick them up. In this case, one who wants to be stringent on muktzeh is being lenient on disgracing something with sanctity. We will not suggest complicated means of being machmir for both with creativity because, generally, this is not something that the poskim prescribe in such cases.