The Rabbi of my shul said that it is not considered a proper "lekicha" if one has a ring on their finger while taking the 4 minim. This is especially relevant to women who have jewelry (and men who have wedding rings).

  • 1
    Why do you need all the fingers to be holding the Lulav? So what if it's a Chatzitzah for that finger?
    – Double AA
    Oct 8, 2017 at 15:37
  • If this is the psak of your Rav, why don’t you just ask your Rav for his source?
    – DonielF
    Oct 8, 2017 at 16:55

1 Answer 1


The basis for the rabbi's statement is a gemara (Suk. 37a) where it is evident that a barrier between the lulav and one's hand does not render the taking of the lulav "lekichah tama" (לקיחה תמה). Following this, the Bet Yosef (OC 651, end) cites an opinion that men should remove tefilin from their arms and women should remove rings when taking the lulav as these would constitute a chatzizah. However, Rema (OC 651:7) states that this is not halachically required and is only a chumrah.

  • 1
    It is interesting to note that Ashkenazim, who put tefillin on Chol hamoed, remove it before Hallel in contrast with Rosh chodesh. Might this be the real reason for this custom? Oct 8, 2017 at 20:44
  • 1
    @Kazibácsi Interesting theory but fairly certain that's not the reason. I think it simply originates from the Taz (OC 31:2 end); the Hallel and Torah portion are themselves results of the day's uniqueness (it being a holiday, a symbol of covenant; אות) negating the "אות" of the tefilin; Rose Chodesh the tefilin aren't nec. because of the unique Kedusha recital (״כתר״).
    – Oliver
    Oct 9, 2017 at 0:58
  • @oliver I find Kazi's theory more compelling than the Taz's
    – Double AA
    Oct 9, 2017 at 1:13
  • 1
    @DoubleAA That's fine, but before coming to a conclusion I'd suggest researching the general subject of donning tefillin on CH (the arguments and the practices) and then reflecting on whether or not the rabbi's of old were at all concerned with Kazibácsi's proposal. Particularly, see R. Azariah of Fano (Resp. §108). The end of that resp. is what's quoted by Magen Avraham (OC 25:31) about the chazan leaving them on until after Hallel.
    – Oliver
    Oct 9, 2017 at 2:00

You must log in to answer this question.

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