Bo: Filling your Phylacteries
One of the first commandments that the Jews received is the mitzvah of wearing phylacteries, which is a sort of ritual garment meant to symbolize and commemorate the Jews’ miraculous exodus from Egypt. Although those phylacteries are commonly known in Hebrew as tefillin, the word tefillin actually never appears in the Bible. Instead, the Biblical Hebrew word for tefillin is totafot, which appears three times in the Bible (Ex. 13:16, Deut. 6:8, 11:18) — all in reference to the phylacteries placed on one’s head. But the Biblical Hebrew totafot is actually rendered by Targum Onkelos and Targum pseudo-Jonathan as tefillin. This essay explores the underlying etymological bases of the words tefillin and totafot, while attempting to tease out a way of understanding how those two synonyms do not quite connote the exact same thing.
Let’s start with the word totafot. Even though (as mentioned above) some Targumim equate the word totafot with tefillin, there is another tradition among early translations of the Bible: Targum Neofiti and Peshitta render the word totafot into a Aramaic/Syriac equivalent of the Hebrew word zikaron (“remembrance”), which implies that they understood the core meaning of totafot to be related to the concept of “remembering” (an approach echoed by Ibn Ezra to Ex. 13:16). With this approach, it is unclear exactly what the etymological root of the word totafot might be, or even from what language it comes.
The Tosafists (Tosafot to Menachot 34b), on the other hand, look to Rabbinic Hebrew to find cognates of totafot and hone in on its exact meaning. In doing so, they offer two ways of understanding the primary meaning of the word: Firstly, they propose that totafot refers to a “head-ornament” or “frontlet” that covers the forehead. Indeed, the Mishnah (Shabbat 6:1) uses the word totefet in reference to an article of jewelry worn by women (see Shabbat 57b), and Targum (to II Sam. 1:10, see also to Ezek. 24:17) uses the Aramaicized totafta in reference to a “bracelet.” This approach is also adopted by Ibn Janach (Sefer HaShorashim), Radak (Sefer HaShorashim), Rashbam (to Ex. 13:9) and possibly the Zohar (Bo 43a). Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi Mecklenburg (1785–1865) expands on this idea to explain that totafot as an ornament refers to the phylacteries as a Jew’s way of announcing to the world that he is proud to be in the service of Hashem. This also explains why the Talmud (Megillah 16b) sees the word yakar (Est. 8:16), "honorable/precious" as a reference to phylacteries. In presenting this understanding, Ibn Janach and Radak trace the word totafot to the triliteral root TET-TET-PEH (which only occurs in the Bible in the word totafot).
Alternatively, the Tosafists relate the word totafot to the act of “gazing/seeing,” as the head phylacteries are placed on the head near the eyes, as though they were also part of one’s “eyes” that look outward. This explanation — which is also adopted by Chizkuni and Rabbi Yosef Bechor Shor (to Ex. 3:16) — alludes to a specific aspect of phylacteries in that they are highly-visible religious artifacts that all can see. To that effect, the Torah promises that “the nations of the world will see what the name of Hashem is called upon you, and they will fear from you” (Deut. 28:10), which the Talmud (Brachot 6a) explains as a reference to the gentiles “seeing” the Jews wearing phylacteries. In light of this, it makes sense that very word for phylacteries in the Bible might be related to “seeing.”
Menachem Ibn Saruk (920–970) in Machberet Menachem (also cited by Rashi to Ex. 3:16) traces the word totafot to the biliteral root TET-PEH. He lists four different categorizes of words as deriving from this two-letter root: "children" (taf), "dripping" (notef/tipah), “adornments and niceties” (netifot), and "speech/preach" (matif). In doing so, Ibn Saruk explicitly classifies the word totafot as derived from the last of these meanings (“speech”), but he does not offer any further justification for that assertion.
Another approach connects totafot to the “dripping” meaning of (NUN-)TET-PEH. Rabbi Yissocher Ber Eilenberg (1550–1623) in Tzeidah La’Darech (to Exodus 13:16) quotes in the name of his teacher Rabbi Mordechai Yaffe (1530–1612) that phylacteries represent the trickle-down effect of Hashem’s manner of sustaining the world. The black leather box worn on the head represents Hashem’s dominion that rises above all of existence, while the leather straps that descend from the box symbolize His influence, which reaches down to the inner core of the world (represented by the wearer’s torso).
A third approach found in the work Daat Mikra (to Ex. 13:16) explains that totafot refer to “jewelry” worn on the head that would typically "hang down" (as though dripping), thus connecting totafot to the Biblical word netifot (Isa. 3:19).
In his work Cheshek Shlomo, Rabbi Shlomo Pappenheim (1740–1814) champions the biliteralist approach espoused by Ibn Saruk, and expands on how a single core root can have so many varied tributaries. In the case of TET-PEH, he explains that the core meaning of this root is "that which is secondary/subordinate to a main element." Following that approach, he explains that "children" are secondary to the master and mistress of a household, a "drop" of liquid is a small insignificant droplet that falls from a larger body of liquid, and “speech” refers specifically to prophetic or hortatory speech spoken in a controlled and slow way that resembles the drips of a liquid that is slowly falling. In his work Yeriot Shlomo, Rabbi Pappenheim adds that the word tinuf (“dirtiness”) also derives from this biliteral root (with a middle NUN added), as that which soils an object is secondary to the object itself.
Expanding on these ideas, Rabbi Pappenheim explains that totafot refers to a sort of hat that was fastened on the head with straps. In such headgear, the hat itself is the main frontispice, while the straps that emanate from its sides are merely secondary. He understands that when the Torah says that one’s phylacteries should be as totafot, this means that the head phylacteries should be worn where people would normally wear their totafot, but not that the word totafot actually refers to said phylacteries.
All of these understandings seem to presume that the word totafot is a native Hebrew word that can be traced to other established roots in the Hebrew language. However, the Talmud cites an additional approach to the word totafot which seemingly sees it as a loanword from a foreign language. Rabbi Akiva (Menachot 34b, cited by Rashi to Deut. 6:8) argues that the word totafot itself alludes to the “four” passages that are written on parchment and inserted inside the phylacteries (or, according to Rashi to Ex. 13:16, to the four chambers inside the head phylacteries). This is because Rabbi Akiva explicitly parses the word totafot as a portmanteau comprising of the word tot (“two”) in Coptic and fot (“two”) in Afriki (“Phrygian”), thus showing that he understood totafot to be related to languages other than Hebrew.
In this spirit, others have argued that totafot is actually of Aramaic origin. Rabbeinu Chaim Paltiel (to Ex. 13:16) relates totafot to the Aramaic word t’fei (“more,” “addition”), in allusion to the way that wearing phylacteries contributes to a person being more likely to remember the exodus. In a different way, Rabbi Mecklenburg explains the word totafot as cognates of the Aramaic word for “appeasement” found in Targum (Gen. 34:22, Prov. 1:10).
Another approach sees the word totafot as being of Egyptian origin. Rabbi Avraham Saba (1440–1508) in Tzror HaMor (to Ex. 13:16) connects the word totafot to Egyptian headdresses, and Abarbanel (there) argues that totafot is actually the Egyptian word for “brain.” A similar explanation has more recently been proposed by Professor Hubert Grimme (1864–1942), cited by Professor Jeffrey H. Tigay, who sees totafot as deriving from the Egyptian word ddft, which means “snake,” as a reference to the Uraeus snake that was often worn on the headdress in Ancient Egypt. It has even been suggested that totafot somehow relates to the names of the Egyptian deities Thoth and Ptah, but I have not seen this cited in any serious scholarship on the topic.
We now turn to the more common and familiar word for phylacteries — tefillin. This word appears multiple times in the Mishnah (Brachot 3:1, Shabbat 6:2, 16:1, Eruvin 10:1, Shekalim 3:2, Megillah 1:8, Moed Katan 3:4, Nedarim 2:2, Sanhedrin 11:3, Shavuot 3:8, Yadayim 3:3). Technically-speaking, the word tefillin actually refers to a pair of phylacteries that includes those worn on the head and those worn on the arm. This is why it is in plural form. In the Mishnah, the word for a single phylactery is tefillah (Menachot 4:1, Keilim 16:7, 18:8, Mikvaot 10:2, 10:3-4). A inflection of tefillin also appears in the Mishnah in the second-person possessive form as tefillav, meaning “his tefillin” (Erachin 6:4).
The same passage from the Tosafists cited above that sought to explain the etymology and meaning of totafot also addresses the word tefillin. In that passage, the Tosafists explain that the word tefillin derives from the root PEH-LAMMED-LAMMED (“argumentation,” “proving”), and refers to the phylacteries’ role as a tangible testament to the Jewish People's association with Hashem. Similarly, the Rosh (Hilchot Tefillin §2) and his son the Tur (Orach Chaim §25) explain that tefillin is an expression of plilah ("argument," in Modern Hebrew it refers to "criminality") as it quells any argument as to the specialness of the Jewish People, because it serves as a physical sign of Hashem resting His presence upon the Jews.
The Maharal of Prague (Be’er HaGolah §4:2) proposes that the core meaning of the PEH-LAMMED-LAMMED root is “intellectuality/thoughtfulness.” It is in this sense that the word tefillah (“prayer”) is a declension of that root, as it denotes a thoughtful plea and appeal to the One Above. Judges are likewise called pelilim (Ex. 21:22) because they use their brains to figure out how to decide the law. In the same sense, he explains that tefillin also relates to “thoughtfulness” because the phylacteries are placed on one’s head and one’s arm adjacent to the heart in order to help focus one’s mind and heart on always remembering Hashem. Comparable explanations are also offered by Rabbi Yaakov Emden (Mor U’Ketziah Orach Chaim §25 and Siddur Yaavetz on the benedictions before laying tefillin) and Rabbi Yisroel Lipshitz (Tiferes Yisroel to Menachot 4:1 Yachin §2).
Rabbi Nosson of Rome (1035-1106) in his famous lexicon of Rabbinic Hebrew known as Sefer HeAruch, lists the word tefillin under the root TAV-PEH-LAMMED. However, Rabbi Eliyahu Bachur (1469–1549) in Sefer Tishbi questions why Sefer HeAruch did not write that the root of tefillin is PEH-LAMMED-LAMMED (like the aforementioned Tosafists did). In explaining Sefer HaAruch’s position, Dr. Alexander Kohut (1842–1894) argues in HeAruch HaShaleim that the root TAV-PEH-LAMMED is actually a permutation of the root TET-PEH-LAMMED (tafel, “secondary/subordinate” element that is attached or otherwise associated with a primary element), and refers to the way that phylacteries are attached or tied to a person’s body.
Rabbi Yosef Teomim-Frankel (1727–1792), author of the Pri Megadim, suggests in one of his epistles that the word tefillin derives from the root TAV-PEH-LAMMED (“unsalted”), just like Sefer HeAruch. He explains that this refers to the fact that because one is commanded to don tefillin every single weekday, wearing tefillin becomes like something routine and bland that has no special taste to it. Yet, he insists that one must still continue to perform this commandment simply because Hashem has decreed so.
Furthermore, Rabbi Yosef Teomim-Frankel suggests connecting the word tefillin to pele/hafla’ah (“wonderment,” “exaggeration,” “separation”), whose root is PEH-LAMMED-(ALEPH). As Rabbi Mecklenburg explains this idea, tefillin refers to the way that the Jewish People consciously “separate” themselves from the ways of evil and from impure thoughts by tying phylacteries upon their person. As Rabbi Mordechai Abadi (1826–1884) explains it, this refers to the way that only the Jewish People “separate” Hashem from everything else and single Him out for praise by declaring His uniqueness, while other nations are not dedicated exponents of that monotheistic creed.
When Judah had given his ptil (usually translated as “wick,” but in this case generally understood as “belt”) to Tamar whom he thought was a prostitute (Gen. 38:18), some commentators explain that this ptil was none other than his tefillin, as the word ptil can be read as an anagram of tefillin (see Paneach Raza and Baal HaTurim there). Rashi (to Gen. 30:8), in fact, connects the word tefillah with the word petil and the root PEH-TAV-LAMMED (“thread/string/cord,” “crooked/twisted,” “wrestle”). Expanding on this idea, Noam Elimelech (to Num. 18:8) echoes the Tosafists in explaining that tefillin represents that which connects the Jewish People to Hashem and vice versa. Indeed, the Talmud (Brachot 6a) relates that just as the Jewish People wear tefillin whose written contents declare the Oneness of Hashem, so does Hashem wear tefillin whose contents declare the uniqueness of the Jewish People.
Interestingly, Professor Moshe Weinfeld (1925–2009) notes that in the Aramaic writings found at Elephantine, the term tefillah is used to describe a silver “amulet,” and in Ugaritic, the word tefili similarly refers to some sort of “ornament” worn on the head/forehead. This would mean that in some ways the etymology of tefillin might actually line up with that of totafot which might also refer to an “ornament.”
Finally, I would like to address an interesting question related to the interplay between the words totafot and tefillin. The rabbis instituted that the benediction recited before putting on phylacteriesshould refer to tefillin (al mitzvat tefillin and l’haniach tefillin, respectively). Why do these blessings use the Rabbinic Hebrew term tefillin instead of the Biblical term totafot? This is especially noteworthy because other blessings usually prefer Biblical terminology to Rabbinic terminology. In addressing this question, two contemporary rabbis — Rabbi Pinchas Avraham Meyers (the Chief Rabbi of the Hague) and Rabbi Moshe Rachamim Shayo — offered the same two answers: Firstly, because the Biblical term totafot only refers to the phylactery of the head, but never to the phylactery of the arm, the rabbis preferred using the term tefillin which is a more inclusive verbiage. Secondly, because the word totafot itself is more likely of foreign origin (per Rabbi Akiva), they preferred using the term tefillin which seems more closely related to Hebrew.
