L'Shem Kedushas HaShem / Sefer Torah

A sefer Torah was written by one sofer. At some point one Shem HaShem in the sefer Torah was found to be pasul. Another sofer came along to fix it and said "L'Shem Kedushas HaShem" but *not* "L'Shem Kedushas Sefer Torah". What's the din in that case. As well, what would be the din if it was the same sofer, however years later he came to fix the Shem and did the same thing, said  "L'Shem Kedushas HaShem" but *not* "L'Shem Kedushas Sefer Torah".


  1. Very good question. I should think the second case is not a problem. The first case, assuming his tikkun was one that without would not be kosher I.e. He added ink to broken letters, then its more of a problem. However since he was makdish the shaim obviously he knows he is not writing stama. This may be the heter here, ie he has at least machshava that he is writing leshaim kedushas sefer torah. I think rav shtern discusses this case in his sefer but I do not have it on hand

  2. Rav Shtern indeed writes about these problems {Eli great memory. I looked it up!!}
    Biur Hasofer p. 26 (ד"ה ומספיק) writes that there is no difference between another person or the original sofer - since he finished the sefer he was maisiach daas from the sefer, and requires a new kidush for any later tikun.
    But, the first question is indeed a dificult one. R. Shtern Biur Hasofer p. 146 refers to Shut Maharsham vol.4:111, and R. Shtern concludes וצ"ע.
    This is indeed dificult - the Maharsham there asked about a somewhat similar question - a person in middle of writing tefilin, came to mekadesh a shem in the tefilin, and said "l'shem kedushas hashem u'lshem kedushas mezuza". The acharonim debate if this is a horada in the kedusha or a mistake, and are meikal (since originaly he was mekadesh the tefilin when starting to write them).
    The Maharsham then adds another reason to meikal - that kedushas hashem is greater than any other kedusha and includes in it the lower kedushas (of ST, tefilin, mezuza) so therefore he sees no lacking of this kidush hashem.
    This psak would clearly answer your question.

    The problem is, a: would the Maharsham rely on this svara alone, b: it seems from the Biur hasofer's wording that this svara isn't pashut at all.
    Indeed, I don't understand the Maharshams svara, since the kedushas hashem is a different kedusha than the kedusha of sefer tora or tefilin, how does one [although being greater] include a separate issue.

    I hope the chevra will pick up the issue, because it is a very difficult inyan.
    I am ready, prepared, and happy, for the coming argument - see keset hasofer 2:4, Lishkat hasofer chakiros ch. 1.

    Yehoshua, thanks for your input, and obviously Rabbi Shammai's opinions (after he comes back - bezras hashem).

  3. Eli, Is there anyway you can change the format of the comments - the lines are very crunched. A bit spacing would be appreciated.

  4. Thanks for pointing this out. I looked at the Maharsham inside. At the end when he mentions this idea that the Kedushas HaShem is bigger than anything else then it should work even if one said l'shem mezuzah (seemingly not worse than my case?) he also brings a de'ah that by Tefillin you don't need l'shmo. So with his savara together with that de'ah he wants to be makil. Also this savara is only being said after the whole teshuva with a lot of back and forth if this person saying "l'shem mezuzah" can "change" somehow the kedusha of the Tefillin.

    Tzrich iyun still in our case...It's on my list for when R' Shammai comes back. In the meanwhile I wanted to see if anyone spoke about it...

    I didn't look at the R' Shterns sefer inside yet (I will...) But from reading the teshuva you see that this savarah is difficult to understand. My first thought is like Eli that since the person is writing the Shem for sure he has a machshava that he is doing it in order to be machshir the Sefer Torah.

    1. yes, but the basic hallacha is that a person that didn't verbally say b'perush lshem kedusha, the machashava isn't sufficient unless he made a verbal statement earlier. Which is not in the case of your question.

  5. oops, didn't realize...you're right.

    I heard this Shailo this week from a Talmud Chocham here in Yerushalayim (a dayan, a zakan...) that once had the shailo. He just told me he never found anyone who spoke about it, but I don't know what he paskened (he didn't say and then we got caught up with other shailos...)

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. Rabbi Shterns sefer Mishnas Hasofer is a leading book in stam today, so its cday for you to be accustomed to it.
      but on this point there is nothing to see, he just refers to the maharsham, and adds וצ"ע

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. I got the Sefer a few days ago and has already been such a great resource (I'm learning now Mikdash Ma'at (tzuros haoisios) with my chevrusa so I find myself looking up a lot of things in there as well which helps to better understand the Mikdash Ma'at plus get a clarity on how R' Shtern at least paskens.)

    In Yerushalayim they only sell it at Girsa for 106NIS. I found a talmid of R' Shtern who sits by the Beis Horah every Monday who was able to get it for me for 70NIS. When I went to pick up the sefer he showed me a few shailos that were by R' Shtern this week also so it was worth bus ride and time to go get it :).

  9. I spoke to R' Shammai about the shailo. He told me he is makil and somach on the savara of the Maharsham together with a few other things that he has written down in a teshuva (which I think is still b'csav yad, not in any of the printed volumes of Shevat HaKahasi; but I'll check...)


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Not a "khaf"

shin in "Alter Rebbe" script