some shailos
samech above?
samech above (both)
How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
Popular posts from this blog
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
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".
samechs kosher.
ReplyDeleteno problem with the caf, I doubt any tinok would read it a zadi.
In terms of sources I think it's Mishnat HaSofer who says if the moshav of a samech is noticeably narrower than the gag, even if it has squared corners (which btw would have to be angles greater than 90 deg anyway) it's kosher...
ReplyDeleteBut Rav Moshe, re the kaf yud - don't we measured spaces compared with the rest of the ktav? Accordingly this Sofer wrote the other spaces between letters much larger and I would think that in reality (not in a blown up photo) the yud kaf would be mamash lo nikar lehedya, in which case would be noteh lipsul if not sheilat tinok? Meaning - if I received that case where it was supposed to be a tzadi I don't think I'd pasel a tikun straight away? Unless your intention is that since its a kaf, the left rosh makes it less likely to be read as a tzadi than if it were say a nun peshuta and that's why you're machshir?
since its a kaf, the left rosh makes it less likely to be read as a tzadi than if it were a nun peshuta, and that's why it is kosher.
DeleteIndeed if this would be a nun pshuta instead - it would be a big shayla.
It is interesting to note that the SAMEKH has a prickle on the bottom left. This is also the case with many of the old extreme cursive Sephardic Scripts. I have seen a manuscript in R. Yehuda HaLevy's cursive hand dating around 1140 in which this prickle is quite pronounced. This is likewise the case with Rashi's script. Has any one in this forum studied some of these older forms of Hebrew writing and how this & other similar cursive writing features have crept into our block lettering?
ReplyDelete