stamforum

stamforum
פורום בינלאומי לנושא סת"ם

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

hei instead of daled

if someone wrote a hei instead of a daled, can he add ink and round out the top right corner like a reish, then erase the left regel, then add ink and make the reish a daled?

8 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is an interesting shyla, logically since at the time he erased the left foot [did the chakika] it wasn't the kosher letter required [the dalet] and he finished by writing the correct form of dalet it should be kosher.
    But the question bothers and it is uneasy - since this example of erasing a hei to make it into a dalet is written in the poskim and nobody gave this advice, they all write that the right foot must be erased and rewritten [although this is not solid proof, but still bothers]

    Maybe this solution is a type of "csiva b'pisul" since there is no true intention of reforming the dalet into a reish, this fictive addition is not considered.

    Tzarich Iyun !! thanks for the question !!

    ReplyDelete
  3. NOw I found that the mishnas hasofer (siman 8,ois 5,ois katan 15) writes that after you erase the left foot, you can erase the daled to make it reish, and then rewrite the eikev to make it a daled.

    would the same apply if erased the left foot only after it was made a reish?
    would the same apply if instead of erasing the daled to make it a reish , you made it a reish with ksivah?

    ReplyDelete
  4. would the same apply if erased the left foot only after it was made a reish? - yes

    would the same apply if instead of erasing the daled to make it a reish , you made it a reish with ksivah? - that is your original question, and as I wrote in the note maybe thi sis different.

    ReplyDelete
  5. From a conversation I once had with R' Shammai....


    Shailo: A sofer had to write a daled and by mistake wrote a hei. However the gag of the hei was made like a reish and not like a daled. Is it enough to erase the "yud" of the hei and be mosif an eikev onto the reish. Or must the tzurah of the reish also be erased.

    Teshuva: It's not enough to erase the yud and be mosif an eikev this is still considered to be chok tochos. Must be mavatel the entire tzurah of the "hei". L'maseh in some casavim (by the Sephardim) the gag of the hei is written like a reish.
    (Note: I thought in such a case one must erase the entire reish otherwise chock tochos since the reish was part of the hei and is not being made into a daled only by erasing the yud. Even though by itself it's a pasul daled. I pointed to a re'ah that the Mikdash Ma'at brings from the Radak (See Mikdash Ma'at in Letter Hei Ois 20) that when someone writes a Mem-Stumah and gets closed off that the Radak says not enough to erase only the chartom, must erase the entire ois. Even though over there the "chof" it's not a tzuros Mem, still however it's coming through chok tochos. R' Shammai agreed this was a good re'ah and that my psak to erase the entire ois and re-write it (or be m'vatel the tzurah) was the correct psak. One could bring a re'ah that it's enough to be mosif an eikev to the reish from from what the Mikdash Ma'at writes by the Letter Hei in "ois daled" over there. V'Tzrich l'ayin b'zeh...

    Could be when the Mikdash Ma'at brings the Radak and the Chasam Sofer that argues you could bring a re'ah against this psak as well and what I wrote here from R' Shammai. I'd be interested to see what you have to say R' Moshe...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to what Peretz quoted from Mishnas Hasofer, it is pashut that in your shyla he did not have to erase any part of the reish, only add the zavis & akev finishing the letter with csiva of a dalet.

      The Radach is known and he is machmir that in any case of pasul of chok tochos or csiva bpisul the whole letter must be erased and rewritten (this is quoted clearly in Magen Avraham 32:23), but we do not follow this chumra [only the Keset advises lechatchila to follow this opinion].

      Delete
    2. R' Shammai although said this by the case of a daled/hei said by the Mem we're not machmir like you point out l'maseh. So what's the difference. Did you look at the other re'as from Mikdash Ma'at that I pointed out?

      Delete
    3. I don't know of a difference between the shayla of dalet [at hand] and a question in regard to mem. In both we are meikel [opposed to the Radach] that gomro bcsiva is sufficient.

      Delete

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