stamforum

stamforum
פורום בינלאומי לנושא סת"ם

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Yud - proper division, between rosh and regel

The first 2 pictures are a very fine csav - one can see clearly in each, the different parts of the yud. 1) kotz RT, 2) guf-body of the yud, 3) the regel-foot.
1.  In והיו the guf of the yud is one circular slant into its regel, there doesn't seem to be any break in the letter - still it is clear to the vision the different parts of the yud, each one is very distinct.
2.  In ידך the guf curves till a point on right [A] equal to the finish of kotz RT on the left, then the regel protrudes on a further slant inward [B]. Please notice this point, it will help in the continuation - we might imagine that the begining of the regel is starting descending from the guf finishing at A as a triangle, but in truth the regel is the extra piece B turning back inward.
  Try to imagine this yud finishing at A [without B], it would have a strong kotz pointing downward to resemble the regel - but would it be the regel? No! It would be the guf only, in a perfect one-piece moonshape.

The additional pictures from here on, are all from very cheap csavim, I will not relate to any problems in them - only to the specific issue at hand: Yud - proper division, between rosh and regel.

3.  In this picture the yud of hashem is messed up (the yud of elokeinu is also in a very bad shape) - look carefuly, the body piece is somewhat a triangle, from it extends a tiny regel keeping it kosher, the kotzim top & RT are added as a straight line - try to visualize the yud without that line how it would look!
   The word אנכי - the yud is worse, from the bottom (the tip of its regel) all-the-way up is actualy 1 piece only - a triangle, the additional kotz on its face causes an illusion as if there is a division between the guf and the regel, but in truth there isn't. Still since to the regular vision it looks like a yud, I am willing to fix it, but would be very afraid to say its kosher as it is right now.

4.  This yud has a division of guf and regel, but the porportions are totaly distorted. Again forget the kotz on its face that causes much illusion, the guf is on a slant, till the regel descends straight down. The upper part - the guf is much less in hight than the regel, aprox. 1/3. Because of the slant and the kotz, an illusion appears causing one to see the rosh more-or-less equal to the regel.
This yud is very problamatic [in truth it is a tiny vav], but may be fixed by adding ink to the bottom of the rosh, filling in between the kotz RT and the regel on the right, or even widening the rosh downwards more [if needed], and afterwards adding a new kotz RT.

5.  This yud is kosher, although the regel fills in more than half of the bottom of the rosh, still the rosh is distinct to itself. But if the regel would be just a bit more wide, or on a tiny slant towards left, it would swallow the rosh (the rosh would become batel).
6.  This yud is exactly like the yud of hashem in picture 3, the guf comes down on a sharp slant, the final change in slant which allows the regel to be independant, saves the yud.
7.  This yud is pasul (although may be fixed) no doubt!
It is basicaly only 2 pieces, the thick kotz on the left, and the regel on the right - the body is swallowed up in-between!
8.  The yud of hashem is close somewhat to pic. 7, but look carefuly you see in the middle has a guf - its kosher.
  The yud of היום seems to my observation like pic. 7.
  The yud of בביתך is kosher, the kotz is thin allowing a recognition of its guf - in difference to היום that the thick kotz swallows up the recognition of the guf.




9.  The yud of hashem (1st line) need further inspection, it is on the boundary.
     The yud ונתתי (second line) is pasul - enlarge to see accuratly.
     The yudim on third line are kosher - although quite ugly.
     The yud of יפתה (begining 5th line) is pasul - as pic. 7.  The yudim of  אלהים אחרים need further inspection.



 10.   The second yud of כימי is exactly like pic. 5.
         The yud of השמים is kosher, there is a definit break between rosh and the regel..


14 comments:

  1. all pictures can be enlarged by clicking on them

    ReplyDelete
  2. question on tikunim to
    3- the yud of anochi, would it be better to add dio to the inside challal and remake a kotz of RT or add dio to the top left side of the letter widening its rosh?
    7- Same question, how would you fix it, if adding to the top it would lift the height of the letter a little too high or add in between the challal slowly while adding a little to the regel? It is hard to ascertain the proper positioning the letter needs to be from that picture.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Isn't there a distinction between a) a yud whose guf slants up from bottom left to top right and b) a yud composed only of kotz RT and regel with no guf?

    What I mean is, to my eyes at least, pic 7 and hayom of pic 8 seem to be a slanted guf with no kotz RT instead of being a big kotz RT with no guf.

    I'm basing this on biur hasofer siman 5 ד"ה ראשה כפוף, where he seems to question the validity of a kotz in such a situation, not the existence of a guf.

    R' Moshe, could you please clarify/correct my analysis?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dovid
    In the word אנכי I would add ink inside filling in till the kotz, then add with a rapidograph a new tiny kotz RT.
    In השמים I would add both to the top to round the right top of the guf, and to the bottom a bit building the bottom of the guf, and adding carefully a stroke widening it left outward a bit. All of this should be done with a rapido only. I am not realy adding to the hight of this letter just squaring the top to the right.
    This mezuza is 10 or 12 and the picture is already enlarged, in reality it looks much worse.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ari
    these pictures are enlarged 3 or 4 times their size, so when seeing them in reality - you see 2 chunks, a left piece which is a thick kotz from top down, next to it another piece which is the regel - the coordination in these letters are lacking, losing the form of a yud.
    Even if one visualize this as a guf, he would still have to fix it anyway to add a kotz RT.

    It is important to add a further point not mentioned inside, but I commented somewhere on the forum. When you see a mezuza or parshiyos that are realy a mess, not that one or two cases occured, but the sofer? didnt know or care what he is doing, I question the validity of this piece in general, and letters like these that are very questionable I am not going out of my way to fix or machshir.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ari,
    I fixed the text inside regarding pic. 8.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Please clarify when and why a yud with no guf may be fixed shelo kesidron. also please explain why #4 may be corrected if it is a small vav

    ReplyDelete
  8. The basic permission to fix these types, is because a tinok definitly recognizes them as a yud, [including pic. 4 which is actualy a tiny vav, but the tinok seeing it in porportion to the whole line, and the rosh with kotzim, called it a yud] - so we have 2 shitos:
    1) it is up to a shaylas tinok, 2) it is pasul lacking correct measure - a compromise is to allow it fixed.
    This resembles square caf psuta, or lack of mlo ois ketana in the foot of hai - see MB on 32:15-16.
    I didn't have/find in my collection a yud that was mamash 1 piece, the rosh and regel have totally no distinction at all. That would be pasul, and could not be fixed - lacking the regel yemin as written in poskim.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Isn't there a Tzamach TZEDEK as noted on the side of the A.R.Shulchan Aruch that even a Yud missing a Regel could be fixed?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes, but many believe this to be a printing mistake

    ReplyDelete
  11. Yes, but many believe this to be a printing mistake

    ReplyDelete
  12. Indeed there is a printing mistake!The Siman is 17 and not 18 in the Tzemech Tzeddek.I believe this T .T. can help also to understand why the Yudim without a defined Rosh and an Oketz of R.T. Can be fixed

    ReplyDelete
  13. No, some say this teshuvah of the tzemach tzedek itself which allows to be mesaken a yud without a regel yemini in tefillin and mezuzos is not a genuine teshuvah and was "edited" by the misnagdim to discredit the TT. I'm sure moshe weiner would know more. I don't know many lubavitcher rabbanim that straight-up allow adding the regel yemini of a yud leachar kesivah by tefillin and mezuzos (without at least making a tziruf with another sofek)

    The teshuvah that allows the tikun of sofek kav moshuch is in sif beis (of siman yud zayin), one which is more widely accepted.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It is true, I heard Rabbi Ashkenazi shlita (Kfar Chabad) says not to rely on this tshuva of the ZZ to be matir fixing a yud [lacking a regel], against psak barur in SA Alter Rebbe.
    But I didn't hear that the tshuva itself was forged.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.