Sofrus alert
- Get link
- Other Apps
By
Moshe Zeev
-
- Get link
- Other Apps
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
Rabbi Clapman makes some excellent points. Yasherkoach for posting this
ReplyDelete(I agree with points 1,2,4 and 5 wholeheartedly.
Re point number 3, the vast majority of contemporary poskim allow the use of a rapidograph for minor touch ups
Re point number 6, I totally agree it is a conflict of interest but in some cases a "necessary evil" particularly in cities where there are limited options for reliable buying of replacement parts and it is not practical to wait for an order to arrive from abroad)
Agree with eli.
ReplyDeleteWe have a report card that states the quality of every mezuza checked.
By the way there are 2 kosher ink for rapidographs with hechsher available.
Dio lane teach with approval from vaad mishmeres Stam and regulations ink with hechsher from rabbi my gross.
I would add if one wants to question the integrity of the magiah (which is fine), one should ask to see their teudah ksav kabalah (Ordination certificate).
ReplyDeleteIt is also important to ascertain that the teudah is not just for writing (which does not require as much halachik knowledge) but also for Hagah (checking). That the person is ordained to be a magiah.
A few comments iy'h:
ReplyDelete1. The Sofer can answer that, either him or someone working for/with him. As long as the client is told.
2. Like in number 1, as long as the client knows, I don't see any absolute necessity that the work should only be done by the owner/Sofer himself. Just like the Safrus companies proceed usually.
3. Unnecessary, even a metal quill is clearly allowed (Keses Hasofer). So if the writing can be done with metal, a fortiori just repairs. I agree with previous comments.
4. Yes.
5. I do give Checking Report myself, but it would be difficult to start writing the mekoros for every negiah and hefsek. So he probably means for major problem.
6. Like said earlier, it's better than the Sofer himself sells the Mezuzoth to clients instead of them buying in Judaica store unchecked items. Also if the client suspects the sofer of fraud, why would he go to him in the first place?
In my honest opinion, i do find this sort of advertising confusing the client with far fetched hypothetical issues that aren't real or necessary. It's very simple things that will confuse people in a desperate attempt to attract client/parnassa in a forced way, using people's naïveté and credulity. Looks agressive and desperate, trying to point at 'possible' problems at others.
My own view would be not to point at other's imaginary (or even true sometimes) issues, but rather expose the advantages and superiority of my work (as in the Rebbe Rashab's story with his brother.
Wishing good luck iy'h