I would like to hear suggestions how to correct this double hayom
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".
the best I can suggest is erase the second hayom and stretch the mem stumah from the first hayom a little on the gug on the left side as well as to thicken the left side as well so that the gug is in proportion. Then add to the back of the gug of the hay as well as add to the regel so it is in proportion. In doing so you should ensure that the gap is 100%less than nine yudin. Assuming the thickening of the mem and hay is done proplerly, this should be the case.
ReplyDeleteThen, as an extra precaution, make holes in the gap.
The result, assuming you do the mem and hay correctly, will ensure the parshiyos are kosher, although with the gap, even with holes, It wont be geder mehudar.
You could erase the יום of the first היום and the ה of the second one and then stretch the gag of the first ה.
ReplyDelete? But how would the stretched hay be kosher? what would you do about the nekudah (left regel)? (If it was a daled I would understand the merit to such an argument)
DeleteSince there aren't many options we could be maikel b'shaas hadchak (keses 9-7)
Deleteyou mean do ponim chadashos with the left regel / nekudah? (ie keep adding ink and scratching as you extend the gug - it would be a delicate process).
DeleteIMHO I think that's more problematic than leaving a gap under 9 yudin. Ponim chadashos is lo kesidran according to the minority of opinions.
Typo - Ponim chadashos is possul according to the MAJORITY of opinions
DeleteI am not saying that he should move the regel b/c as you say that would be ponim chadoshos. What I am saying is to leave the regel and be moshech the gag, although the regel has to be under the end of the gag but b'shaas hadchak its kosher if a tinok reads it as a hey
ReplyDeleteI agree with Eli as this is the only correct tikkun. Whether a shiur parsha R"T with holes is lechatchila should be clarified with a posek of STAM.
ReplyDelete