We have several areas to cover in this week's sheet, and it seemed a better idea to group these two mitsvot in order to do so. We have, lef t over from last week, the discussion of why Hashem would divide the mitsvot of tefillin into two. Before answering that question, we should briefly review this weeks mitsvot.

The mitsvah, as Rambam describes it, is to place white strings on the corners of our garments, which Rambam, based on a gemara in Menahot, assumes are meant to look like the hair that grows on our heads (did Rambam assume that men's hair grew long in back?). Wrapped around those white strings, we are obligated to place a tekhelet string, which Rambam, again based on the gemara assumes matches the color of the sky. In the case of tsitsit, in contrast to tefillin, the two parts of the mitsvah are not separated into separate mitsvot; they are, rather, combined into one mitsvah, although neither part prevents the fulfillm ent of the other. That would mean, to translate the halakhic language into our own, that tekhelet is not valuable only for its relationship to the white strings or vice verse. Their being placed on the corner of our garments together enriches the mitsvah, but the fulfillment of the mitsvah is not dependent upon it.

This mitsvah, like tefillin, is one from which women are exempt, although here Rambam does not clearly define the source of that exemption. He simply notes that the issue is discussed in the Talmud in Kiddushin. What is odd about this comment, to me, is that he could as easily have said the same about the mitsvah of tefillin; there, however, Rambam pointed to the verse the Talmud cites as the source of the exemption-- what is different about tsitsit?

One difference might be that the Talmud includes tsitsit among the mitsvot `aseh she-hazman grama, a slippery category for which the gemara offers three possible derivations. Two of those, I would note, depend on a comparison between these mitsvot and tefillin (the archetype of mitsvot aseh she-hazman grama), so that Rambam might easily have noted that similarity here. His vague reference to the gemara suggests that he did not see the source as clearly laid out as I have, and is worth further consideration in another forum. In any event, the reason for women's being exempt is not spelled out by Rambam in Sefer HaMitsvot or in the Mishneh Torah, although the commentators reasonably assume that it is because he has already given the general rule of women's exemption from mitsvot aseh she-hazman grama earlier in the Mishneh Torah.

A less technical explanation of the distinction between the two might have to do with Rambam's confidence that he understood the principle underlying the exemption. While people continue to argue over the reason for women's exemption from time-related commandments (and Rambam does not, as far as I know, offer a reason), the reason for tefillin (its relationship to Torah study and to keriat Shema, as noted last week) seems more clear. If that is true, it means that Rambam saw more reason for women to be obligated in tsitsit than in tefillin.

Pursuing that thread of thought requires reminding ourselves of the Talmud's view of these three mitsvot. According to the gemara in Menahot, anyone armed with tefillin, mezuzah, and tsitsit will not soon sin. That stress on the protective role of these mitsvot leads us to wonder as to how each one protects us from sin. Tefillin, resting on our bodies, would, in that scheme, remind ourselves to focus on God. Indeed, traditionally, the shel yad is seen as reminding us to bind our emotions to God, while the shel rosh (the head-tefillin) is meant to channel our thoughts towards God (hence, perhaps, the stress on focus while the tefillin are on our heads).

Tsitsit, on our clothing, perhaps contributes to our maintaining a focus on God even in our outward activities (clothing, in some sense, is mostly for presenting ourselves to others; the tsitsit are there to remind us that God must figure in that presentation as well). Mezuzah, following that logic, would remind us about God in our homes, our family interactions.

Viewing these mitsvot as protecting us from sin by reminding us of God in several different ways leads us closer to an understanding of the issues we raised above. Rambam might have understood why women are exempt from the mitsvot that impose a rigid discipline upon one's thoughts and emotions. Whatever reason the Torah chose to exempt women from the obligations of Torah study and/or the recitation of Shema (repeat performances of disciplining one's thoughts constantly towards God) can reasonably be seen as applying to tefillin as well.

When it comes to tsitsit, however, the reasoning is less clear. Certainly women can benefit from some kinds of protection, as they are, in fact, obligated in themitsah of mezuzah. What led the Torah to draw the line at elements of one's clothing, but to include them in obligations of their residence? The answer might lie in that category of time-related, but Rambam does not seem so sure, since he did not point to that as the decisive element. For our purposes, we might note that, while tsitsit is clothing rather than person-related, it is still a personal reminder. It may be, then, that the Torah steered clear of such personal obligations upon women, for reasons we have yet to discover.

Our reasoning around this issue, however, has brought us to recognize an important distinction between the two mitsvot of tefillin; one is for the head and one for the heart, for the mind and for the emotions. In some sense, those are simply two parts of a human being. In another sense, they are completely distinct from each other, in how they work and in the purpose they serve for the human being. If so, the Torah might be showing us that the need to guide ourselves towards service of God, and the mechanism for doing so, differs radically in the case of the emotions and the intellect, and these two mitsvot are meant to require us to do both, each in the appropriate manner.

Carrying that logic over to tsitsit in turn indicates that tekhelet and lavan, the white and bluish strings on the tsitsit are working towards the same goal, although each might be sufficient on its own to accomplish the goal. If tekhelet is to remind us of the sky (as the gemara says), and tsitsit remind us of our heads (as Rambam makes clear by citing a verse where Yehezkel refers to being taken by the corners of his head), they both provide visual aids to draw our thoughts towards God. Those visual aids work somewhat differently, but closely enough to be considered the same mitsvah.

All of which leaves us with four mitsvot, two of which are physical appurtenances we don to simply remind us of our obligation to mold our thoughts and emotions to an awareness of God. Another mitsvah, made up of two components, provides visual stimulation towards that goal (we are meant to feel our tefillin, but to see our tsitsit). The last mitsvah, the one in which women are also obligated, mandates that our entering or exiting through doorways also provide the opportunity to think about God. The goal is clear, but the need for so many aids reminds us of how deep a challenge it truly is. Shabbat