Chacham Ovadia Yosef vs the Ohr L’Tzion

 Rabbi Shay Tahan

 

Last week, we explored the broad differences between Chacham Ovadia Yosef and the Ben Ish Chai. This week, we would like to take a step further and reflect on another important contrast—this time between Chacham Ovadia and his longtime study partner (chevruta), Harav Ben Tzion Aba Shaul, who shared his wisdom in his sefer Ohr L’Tzion.

The differences between each posek highlight distinct approaches in deciding halacha and observing mitzvot. As we explained last week, one of the central contrasts between Chacham Ovadia Yosef and the Ben Ish Chai lay in their approach to Kabbalah versus pshat. The Ben Ish Chai leaned heavily toward Kabbalah, which is evident throughout his rulings, while Chacham Ovadia adhered strictly to the rulings of the Shulchan Aruch, drawing primarily from pshat based on the Gemara and Rishonim. In contrast, Harav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul represented a different approach—while he also valued Kabbalah, he sought a balance between Kabbalah and pshat, often striving to integrate both perspectives into halachic rulings, as we’ll demonstrate with a few examples.

Similarly with pshat, although he would primarily follow the Shulchan Aruch, he would also take into consideration other poskim when possible.

 

In the context of halachic interpretation, pshat represents the straightforward, literal understanding of Torah texts, focusing on the plain meaning as derived from the Talmud, Rishonim, and early halachic authorities. It emphasizes clarity, practicality, and a rational approach to Jewish law. In contrast, Kabbalah offers a mystical, esoteric dimension, often interpreting mitzvot and halachot based on spiritual symbolism, divine attributes, and hidden layers of meaning beyond the surface. While pshat seeks to establish practical halacha based on accessible reasoning, Kabbalah delves into deeper metaphysical concepts that are less immediately apparent in the text itself.

 

What is the basis for these two contrasting approaches to psak halacha? The difference lies in how one interprets the rulings of the Shulchan Aruch. According to Chacham Ovadia, the Sephardic world accepted the Shulchan Aruch as the final and absolute authority, requiring no consideration of differing opinions; therefore, the rulings of the Shulchan Aruch are followed without deviation. In contrast, Rav Ben Tzion held that Sephardim regard the Shulchan Aruch as representing the majority opinion, which means that minority opinions still retain some value. Thus, if a particular case provides sufficient reason to lean toward a dissenting view, it is possible to follow an opinion other than that of the Shulchan Aruch.

For the same reason, if we can act in a way that satisfies both opinions, we should do so according to his view.

 

Here’s an example related to the halacha of how to wear a tallit for the morning tefillah. There is a dispute among the Rishonim about whether, after reciting the blessing on the tallit, one should cover their face with it, similar to how Ishmaelites cover with their keffiyeh, or if one should cover their body as we traditionally do during prayer. The Arizal, a central authority in Kabbalah, instructed to cover only the head after the blessing and throw both ends to the left side, lowering the tallit to cover the body only afterward. The Ben Ish Chai taught to follow the Arizal’s instructions exactly, advising against modifying the practice to cover the body immediately after the blessing. However, Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul took a different approach: he instructed to cover both the head and body at first, then lift the tallit to cover only the head, throwing both sides to the left, and finally lowering it to cover the body. He reasoned that this method satisfies both approaches. This contrast illustrates the Ben Ish Chai’s strict adherence to kabbalistic instructions versus Rav Ben Tzion’s approach in Ohr LeTzion, which aims to fulfill both perspectives when possible.

 

 

Last week we mentioned the differing views regarding the intent when wearing Rabbeinu Tam tefillin. Chacham Ovadia followed the approach of the Shulchan Aruch, advising that one who wears both Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam tefillin should make a condition to fulfill the mitzvah only on whichever set is correct. The Ben Ish Chai, however, adhered to the teaching of the Arizal, who received from Eliyahu Hanavi that both sets of tefillin are equally valid, so they can be worn together without such a conditional intention. The condition one states, according to the Shulchan Aruch, which Chacham Ovadia ruled in favor of, involves wearing both Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam tefillin while expressing the intent to fulfill the mitzvah with whichever is the true tefillin, regarding the other as regular boxes and straps. However, the Ben Ish Chai argued that no condition is necessary since the Arizal stated that both are true and correct. Chacham Ben Tzion Abba Shaul's approach, on the other hand, accommodates Kabbalah, affirming that both sets are valid. He suggests that one should say: if the truth aligns with Kabbalah, then I am fulfilling the mitzvah with both; but if the truth aligns with pshat, then I intend to fulfill my obligation with whichever one is the true tefillin, regarding the other as regular boxes and straps.

 

Another interesting example is the way to wrap the tefillin shel yad. The Ben Ish Chai explains that according to some mekubalim, after reciting the blessing on the tefillin shel yad, one should tighten the straps and then wrap them around the batim and the yud. Chacham Ovadia disagreed with this approach, noting that since it’s not the opinion of the pshat, one need not be concerned with it. He suggested that after tightening, one should stretch the straps directly to the arm without wrapping around the bayit.

Ohr LeTzion took a more balanced approach, once again demonstrating how to integrate multiple opinions respectfully, advising that ideally, if not too difficult, one should follow the practice of wrapping like the mekubalim. However, if one finds it challenging, it is sufficient just to have the intent, as there are other mekubalim who do not see this wrapping as a strict requirement.