1

I presume that there a distinction in the way that different Chirik's are pronounced if they are blended syllables ("Chaser") or not ("Malei"). If so...

How should the word Tzitzis ציצת be pronounced? If the word is צִיצִת, wouldn't the second chirik be pronounced as a shorter sound, as in the word "מִנְחָה" ? The word is always spelled צִיצִת throughout Tanach and not צִיצִית . (Although this former spelling would contradict Chazal's comment of the gematria of 600.)

I've heard from this site here: KOL HAMIKRA that both Chiriks are "Malei" and should be pronounced as a long Chirik sound.

Improve this question
2
  • 1
    Why do you assume anything such? Your assumptions may be crucial in answering your question...
    – Kazi bácsi
    Commented Jul 28, 2019 at 18:52
  • 2
    It's a long chirik. The main clue is the trope/taam position. Chirik with taam is almost always long. Short chirik can sometimes take metheg (as a secondary stress), but if the taam is on chirik, then it's long. The spelling doesn't have any significance grammatically. For example, the chirik in the name דוד is also long, but the word almost never appears malei in Tanakh.
    – pandichef
    Commented Sep 6, 2019 at 5:18

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
-2

I think this should answer the question. The word should be spelled malei on both Tzaddi letters. The commentary Minchas Shai on Bamidbar 15:38 states:

ציצת. כתוב בהעתק הללי כל ג' כתב כן ע"כ. וכך הם בספרים מדוייקים ובמסורת גם הרמ"ה ז"ל כתב ציצת ג' ובענין חסרים יו"ד בתראה ומלאי' יו"ד קדמאה אך במדרש רבה פרשת קרח ציצית בגמטריא ת"ר וח' גרורין וה' קשורין הרי תרי"ג פי' גרורין חוטין הנגררין. וכן הביאו רש"י ז"ל כאן. וכן פי' בברייתא פרק התכלת גם בעל הטורים כתב על מספר זה כמה גמטריאות. והרמב"ן ז"ל יטען על רש"י ז"ל וכתב לא הבינותי זה שציצת בתורה חסר יו"ד ואין מנינה אלא חמש מאות ותשעים והרב המזרחי השיב שאינה טענה שהמדרש הוא אליבא דמ"ד יש אם למקרא ע"כ. עוד כתב בטור אורח חיים סימן כ"ד אף על פי שהוא כתוב חסר יו"ד מפרש בתנחומא ג' פעמים כתוב ציצת בפ' ציצית וחד מינייהו לציצת שדי למ"ד לכולהו. והיא משלמת המנין עכ"ל. וכ"כ בסמ"ג עשין כ"ו ופסיקתא דר' טוביהו ובס' הזוהר בפ' פינחס דף רכ"ז ברעיא מהימנא ציצית בתרין יודי"ן ואי חסר יו"ד הא חירק באתרה ועיין עוד בספר גור אריה:

The writing ציצת with first yud malei and second chasar is found 3 times in the paragraph of tzitzis in the known verified sifrei Torah and in the mesorah, Rabbi Moshe haDarshan (as quoted by Rabbeinu Gershom).

Midrash Bamidbar Rabba 18:21 ציצית has gematria 600, with 8 strings and 5 knots gives 613. So says Rashi on Bamidbar 15:39, Ba'al haTurim brought several gematrias. Ramban, when questioning Rashi, stateed that he does not understand why the word ציצת has a missing yud, which gives gematria 590, rather than 600. Rav Mizrachi answered that it was not a problem because the midrash followed the opinion that the accepted masoretic reading has authority (and can be used to derive halakhos). Tur O"Ch 24 says, even though it is written hasar, Midrash Tachuma notes that out of 3 times it is written ציצת, in one case it is written לציצת, which adds the value of missing 30. I.e. ציצת, ציצת, לציצת have gematria 590+590+30+590 = 600+600+600, which completes the count. Such is also consideration of other midrashim, sifrei kabbala, and the commentary Gur Aryeh.

Summary of the comment: the writing in the Torah is authoritative as chasar. The Oral tradition implies reading as if the writing is not chasar, but malei.

Improve this answer
1
  • 2
    Please remember the site is geared towards English readers. Would be great if you could translate the critical parts of the answer. Having the source is wonderful though but not alone.
    – mbloch
    Commented Jul 29, 2019 at 5:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .