two shailos
- Get link
- Other Apps
By
Eli Gutnick
-
.jpg)
.jpg)
- Get link
- Other Apps
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".
Hei- shorten regel (is this too long to be lechatchila after tikkun?)
ReplyDeleteReish- if we measure the regel based on the general ksav then it looks to be a kemaleh Yud (probably not long enough according to the MB).
According MB if a tinok recognizes the letter you may fix the length of the regel.
ReplyDeleteR' Moshe, Which shaila do you refer to?
ReplyDeletethe reish
DeleteThe psak I have is that it depends on the length of the regel. If it's a kemaleh os ketana it is kosher (not like the Yad Efraim and Kol Sofrim who require a tinok) and if not it is pasul. (Of course there's the machlokes what a KOK is - a kulmus or kulmus and a mashehu.
ReplyDeleteI haven't carefully measured but in this case it is likely a KOK (not likely according to the MB hence might be pasul according to him) based on the general ksav. Perhaps, since the KOK is based on the general ksav, there'd be basis according to those not choshesh for the YE in this case to ask a tinok?
The MB [32:40] is meikal that although there isn't a mlo ois ketana and the letter is passul, since the tinok recognizes the letter, it can be fixed in tefilin shlo ksidran.
ReplyDeleteI understand that this kula of the MB is correct according to his shita, not only in regard of the left regel of the hay, but in regard to the right regel as well.
I'm not aware of anyone understanding the MB that this applies applies to the right regel If so, a maleh os ketana is required and is otherwise pasul and irreparable. In this case, while I didn't measure, if measured according to the standard kulmus, it appears to be pasul and irreparable according to the MB, who requires a kulmus plus. However, others who only require a kulmus it appears to be kosher.
DeleteDo you have a mekor to apply this to the yerech? What about Menachos 29a?
ReplyDeleteSee Kesiva Tama and Yeriot Shlomo who are mechalek between the nekuda of the Hei and the yerech of the Hei (Reish, Dalet..)
yes, the later acharonim are mechalek, but I think that we should be more lenient (than their opinion). It will be a length for me to explain my position, and I am planning on doing so in my hebrew blog (in english it will consume to much ...)
ReplyDeleteBut in any way you hold in that regard, when we combine this svara, to those that say that MLOK is measured by standard width of the csav, and not by this reish which it's gag is an exception. It is pashut that you can fix the reish.
Kindly e-mail me a copy or a link at sofer@stam.net. In the meantime I hope to discuss it with Rav Friedlander.
ReplyDeleteNote that the 2 sources I quoted are present day poskim. Typically the Kesiva Tama quotes both tzadim but in this case he doesn't provide any mekoros to be mechalek. Are you aware of any Shutim or Poskei zmaneinu that are mechalek?
http://hebrewstam.blogspot.co.il/2014/05/blog-post_28.html
ReplyDelete