How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
Popular posts from this blog
Not a "khaf"
This gave me a "Safrut smile"... OK, I realise that this is not Ktav STaM, however it is interesting what happens when graphic/font Hebrew becomes too stylised. Case-in-point, a colleague and I were visiting the mayor's office in the Gaza Belt region of Shaar HaNegev (adjoining Sderot). He is new to reading Hebrew and pronounced the welcome sign as " brooning " or " broobing " (instead of the intended " brookhim ". I replied that he was more correct than the graphic designer, as the letter meant to be a " khaf " was closer to a halakhic "Nun" or "Bet", and had this been Ktav STaM, the letter would likely be considered pasul as a "Khaf".
shin in "Alter Rebbe" script
Both the Shulchan Aruch Harav and the Mishnah Brurah use similar terminology when describing the importance of the shin being "pointy" on the bottom and all three branches of the letter shin meeting at a point or "chad" at the bottom of the letter. There is a strong foundation in Halacha for this and for the bottom of the shin to be flat like a moshav (base) is considered questionable (Pri Megadim) and definitely not Kosher Lechatchillah. It is worse if the moshav is very wide, but it is still questionable if it is lechatchillah if there is a thick noticeable base rather than a chad. Even for Sephardim, who lechatchillah make an angular base, it is still important that the base is indeed on a (significant) angle. If the base is flat, even if all three branches of the shin come out of the base connected , as in the top picture, it is problematic. It is worse in the bottom picture below where the right head/ branch comes out of the right part of the base and the m
I do not know if that tzemach tzedek is relied on by itself without a tziruf. it is a very big chiddush. some say it is a printing error.
ReplyDeletein this case i would ask rabbi zirkind or rabbi clapman since i am not sure of rabbi zirkind's view on this tzemach tzedek. Furthermore since it is rabbi clapmans parshiyos, it would make the most sense that he should be consulted
If you showed me this letter alone, I wouldn't be able to tell what it is.
ReplyDeleteI think it is pasul and cannot be fixed. It has no tzuras ois at all.
ReplyDeleteI second it. Unfortunately, it has no ROSH at all.
Deleteim aware that some hold its a printing error but if you learn the whole tshuvah and the sevoros that he brings down its hard to say its all a printing error, either way i understand its a big kulah.
ReplyDeletei asked a tinok to tell me the letters in the word and he read vov hei hei, he skipped it, so i figured i would ask him other letters then come back to it. I asked him to read other letters of words with yuds in them, then i returned to this word, when he saw it he said this is a ball then he proceeded to look for a yud and he found one he told me this is a yud and thats a small little ball so i guess its pasul.
to confirm I'd ask a shailas chacham but I'd agree it is pasul.
ReplyDelete