Commentary for Sanhedrin 96:3

ת"ש כיס שעשאו להניח בו תפילין אסור להניח בו מעות הניח בו תפילין יניח בו מעות אימא עשאו והניח בו תפילין אסור להניח בו מעות כדרב חסדא

— There is here a dispute among Tannaim for it has been taught: If one overlaidthem [the <i>Tefillin</i>] with gold or covered them with the hide of an uncleanbeast, they are unfit.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Shab. 108a on the verse in Ex. XIII, 9, That the law of the Eternal may be in thy mouth, — they (the Tefillin) should be made out of objects permissible for food. ');">⁹</span> If with thehide of a clean beast, they are permissible, even though it was not dressedfor the purpose. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: Even if covered with the hideof a clean beast, they are unfit, unless it was not specially dressed forthe purpose.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Men. 42b. Git. 45b. thus, the first Tanna considers designation as immaterial, whereas R. Simeon B. Gamaliel holds it to be a material act. Hence Raba agrees with the first Tanna; Abaye is with R. Simeon b. Gamaliel. ');">¹⁰</span>

Explore commentary for Sanhedrin 96:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.