Kosher b'dieved as is? If not, fixable?
I would greatly appreciate if sources can be indicated. Thank you.
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
יש מנהג לפסול נו"ן שראשה הפוכה משום שנדמית לצד"י. המקור חי' רמב"ן שבת קג "שלא יעשה צדי"ן נוני"ן" עיין שם
ReplyDeleteIf the rosh was completely on the right side it would be pasul. You can see the mekoros in kesiva tama. However, in this case the head goes slightly over the left side so it;s not so clear cut hence a shailos chacham is called for.
ReplyDeleteThe klal in this case is how it appears at a quick/ general glance. If it looks like the gug protrudes or may protrude a little on the left side, you can fix it. If it looks like it's only protruding on the right, (and appears to be a complete nun hafucha) it's possul. (even if by blowing it up or looking through a loupe you can dedect a small blita.
ReplyDeleteThe above guidelines are brought down in Rav Stern's excellent sefer, mishas hasofer. I don't have it handy but look at the pictures in the back for this case and you'll find it there.
Because it's blown up in the pic, it's hard to judge based on his guidelines.
If you showed a Rov, you'd probably want to show the real thing and not a pic.
BTW, once you fix it, the two left tagin need to be separated down to the gug
ReplyDelete@ R' Moshe: Thank you. I saw you wrote that in your Sefer... In your opinion, does that still apply in this case in which the Gag does indeed cross over the neck, albeit only a bit?
ReplyDelete@ R' Yerachmiel: Thank you.
@ R' Eli: Thank you. My understanding of the R' Shterns words is that even when the Gag is ENTIRELY to the right with nothing to the left at all, still, at times it does not "jump out at you" that the Gag is entirely reversed (that can have to do with how wide the Gag is, angles, etc.). In such a case, he holds that its a Shaalas Chacham. He explains his rational: the shoel in the Shu"t Beis Shlomo (Y"D Siman 161) was a Torah scholar in his own right. He was of the opinion that a Nu"n with a reversed head is indeed fixable. The Beis Shlomo disagreed with the Shoel since "it is obviously apparent (eineinu ro'os) that it is not the shape of a Nu"n". From here R' Shtern extracts that if it is not immediately apparent then there may still be room to be meikil. He also invokes the ambivalence of Mikdash Me'at on the matter. Mikdash Me'at on Os Nu"n is machmir. In Y"D, Siman 274 Se'if 17, however, he is not as confident.
In any event, this "lee-way" of R' Shtern seems to be applicable even in a case in which there is not crossing over of the Gag at all.
In the case at hand, it would seem even more kal - as the Gag crosses over.
That's right. I have seen cases where NOTHING sticks over to the left but due to the angle etc, it looks, at a general glance, like it's good.
DeleteAnd vice versa.
I would say though that it's important to take this shaylo to a real rov mumcha in stam as you need a very experienced eye to "chap" this
Indeed, I showed the original to R' Avrohom Tzvi Wozner and he gave me the go ahead to fix it.
ReplyDelete