SHATNEZ BY TZITZIS

It is written [Devarim 22: 11 - 12]: You shall not wear shatnez (wool and linen together). You shall make for yourself tzitzis (twined fringes). The fact that the Torah juxtaposes these two verses, teach us that one can make tzitzis even in a case of shatnez. This indicates that a positive commandment can override a prohibition.

The commentators ask from the Gemora below (4b): The Gemora states: If the Torah would have only written the passuk in Vayikra: and a garment that is a mixture of shatnez shall not come upon you, we would have thought that placing shatnez upon oneself in any manner would be forbidden, and even garment sellers would be prohibited from wearing shatnez (they merely drape themselves with the garments in order to exhibit them without a specific intent for the warmth which these garments offer). This is why the Torah wrote in Devarim: You shall not wear shatnez, teaching us that it is forbidden to wear shatnez only by a wearing that offers physical pleasure (and since a garment seller does not wear the garment for that intent, it will be permitted for him).

Accordingly, what is the proof from the fact that one can wear a garment of tzitzis which contains shatnez that a positive commandment can override a prohibition; perhaps one can don a garment of tzitzis that contains shatnez because the prohibition is only when wearing a garment that provides physical pleasure and his intention is for that purpose? One who is wearing tzitzis should not be regarded as deriving pleasure because of the dictum of “mitzvot lav le’henos nitnu” – mitzvos were not given for the purpose of pleasure.

According to the Ran, this is not a question, for he says that the principle of “mitzvot lav le’henos nitnu” is not applicable when there is a physical pleasure; here, the garment is providing physical warmth and therefore, it should be prohibited if not for the fact that the positive commandment can override the prohibition.

However, the Rashba disagrees and maintains that we don’t consider any benefit that one receives during the fulfillment of a mitzvah; if so, let us say that one is permitted to wear tzitzis containing shatnez because he is not deriving any pleasure?

Reb Shmuel Rozovsky answers: The prohibition of shatnez is merely not to wear a garment containing shatnez; there is a condition that it is only regarded as wearing if he is deriving pleasure.

One who is wearing a garment of tzitzis is wearing the garment and deriving pleasure. While it’s true that the performance of the mitzvah negates the benefit he is receiving, he is still wearing the garment and it should be prohibited, if not for the fact that the positive commandment overrides this prohibition.

Quote "
However, the Rashba disagrees and maintains that we don't consider any benefit that one receives during the fulfillment of a mitzvah; if so, let us say that one is permitted to wear tzitzis containing shatnez because he is not deriving any pleasure?"

I think it's no comparison. Here, technically, the Mitzva is not to wear a four corner garment that has tzitzis on it, rather the Mitzva is if one is wearing a four corner garment he has a Chiyuv to put Tzitis on it. Therefore the Mitzva is not wearing the garment, but putting/ having the Tzitzis on it. This we see that on Shabbos from the Torah, someone can wear a four corner garment without Tzitzis, since the Mitzva is not wearing a four corner garment with Tzitzis, which right now you're not doing, rather if you wear it, you must put on Tzitzis, which the Torah is not Michayiv you on days you cannot put them on.

Another proof is that the Beged is not a Cheftza D'Mitzva and may be thrown in a Ashpa, but not the Tzitzis. So when he's wearing the Beged, that is not the Mitzvah, rather the Tzitzis that's on him, so the wearing of the Beged itself was given for Hanah.

I believe that the Beis HaLevi answers like you. Boruch shekivanta

Quote "we would have thought that placing shatnez upon oneself in any manner would be forbidden, and even garment sellers would be prohibited from wearing shatnez (they merely drape themselves with the garments in order to exhibit them without a specific intent for the warmth which these garments offer). This is why the Torah wrote in Devarim: You shall not wear shatnez, teaching us that it is forbidden to wear shatnez only by a wearing that offers physical pleasure (and since a garment seller does not wear the garment for that intent, it will be permitted for him)."

I also think that there is another difference we can make. The intent of the wearer. The Gemara's whole problem was by people who's intent were not to wear them, just drape them on for show, thus in order that they become automatically being worn and not just showing is by providing warmth

We see this similar concept in Shabbos 29b (among other places) that those who sell clothing can sell by having the clothes on them as long as they don't intend it to protect them from the heat or rain. Tosfos points out that you have other clothing for that so it wouldn't be a Psik Reisha to be protected from the heat and cold.

It would seem, that if your intention is to wear it, then it doesn't have to warm or do anything, as long as it's intended to be worn. This we see from the Halachos of saving clothes from a fire on Shabbos. It doesn't matter how many you have on, though as long as you wear them, they are clothing. The belt too is one of the clothing, and though it doesn't warm you at all, that's why we Paskin you can't go out with two belts for an article, it is definitely an article of clothing and definitely applies Shatnez (besides that this was the Shatnez by the Kohein's Begadim was the Avnet.)