questions on tzuras ois
Can we machshir the hai of shem without a shailas tinok, or must ask a tinok first, since it resembles a ches?
How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
Popular posts from this blog
Ink, Kosher vs. non-Kosher
We all know that there is no ancient source that requires ink to be מן המותר בפיך . Possibly, as said here before, because in the olden days ink was always מן המותר בפיך and the question was never raised. It was probably self-evident. Nowadays, no decent Rav will approve an ink which is not מן המותר בפיך . Who was the first one to raise this question? Was it raised because of animal ingredients or because of non-kosher wine?
Question to Yosef Chaim B
Thank you for commenting on my ink article. In your comment you stated: "Many poskim disagree... Many rishonim have clearly stated the use of our ingredients." Would you please be kind enough to teach us (so I can include it in the article) which Poskim and what exactly and where did they say that the עפצים וקנקנתום type of ink is preferable over good quality דיו עשן that does not fail? We are not interested in biased פילפולים , or in those who said that דיו עשן is not being used because it fails easily or because it was not known how to make good quality דיו עשן. Nor are we interested in those who said to use עפצים וקנקנתום וגומא ואין לשנות when they discussed specifically the עפצים וקנקנתום type of ink. We are interested to find out where and who (if any) said explicitly, based on sources, that the עפצים וקנקנתום type of ink is preferable over good quality דיו עשן , even when there is דיו עשן of good quality that does not fail. There are well known Poski
He says the Tav is a shailos tinnuk. One because it almost looks like a gimmel and 2 because there needs to be a "space" under the gag. He drew me 2 pictures one where the 2 legs of the Tav come to a point in the middle of the gag and look like an upside down "V" the other where the gag was written normally then a regel coming down and then another regel going out from that corner on an angle. He said he doesn't think this picture fits that problem so much. L'maseh a tinnuk should be asked.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the Hei he said one can see cleary that the regel is not touching and looks like a hei. He said he wouldn't require a Shailos tinnuk, kosher as it is.
Yehoshua thanks,
ReplyDeleteI think that after the tinok read the tav correctly, one is obligated to scrape out and hollow the challal of the tav.
In regard to the hai I think a shaylas tinok is required, it does resemble a ches.
ReplyDeleteIn other letters/situations a slight break like that is permitted to be fixed. example: the regel of dalet disconnected abit from gag as long as a tinok will recognize it is permitted to fix shlo csidran in tefilin.
So for a ches of rashi this might be a (permitted to fix) ches?!
R' Moshe -
ReplyDeleteI agree with you in regards to the Tav.
In terms of the Hei...I hear what you're saying. Even though I do disagree with R' Shammai at times here in this shailo (b'clal in this inyun) I go with whatever he says. I spoke to him in the past about fixing such a ches. He said it's a shailos tinnuk because of the other way that maybe it looks like a hei!
He didn't mention this but perhaps something would be different here because we are dealing with a Shem?
Just to mention this now...I asked in the past about the chalel of a Mem stumah the following is what he said (more or less his response translated into English -- not word for word.)
"B'dieved even a very small chalal should be ok. It really would depend though, as long as there is still tzuros haois. A very small dot as the chalal however wouldn't be kosher."
Yehoshua I didn't understand: "I spoke to him .. about fixing such a ches. He said it's a shailos tinnuk because of the other way that maybe it looks like a hei!"
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly what I'm saying: since this is a problematic tzura for ches, it is equaly problematic for the hei! Just as the ches separated slightly may be a hei, a hei separated slightly may be a ches. We are at the grey area in between hai and ches that should be defined by a tinok.
You're right...hmmm..
ReplyDeleteWhat is the "essence" of the tzurah of the hei. More domeh to a ches that is seperated or a daled with a yud.
Could be also he holds the shailo really starts only when it's mamash close and not niker l'hedia that it's not connected.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the ה, see the mikdash maat sif katan 16 where when there is a hefsek of cichut hasarah (here it looks a little more than that)to the gag, it is kosher and the wording is "... shmistama tinok yakir..."
ReplyDeleteImplying that it is not necessary to ask a tinok in this case when it is assumed he will answer correctly.
Dovid, please read the mikdash me'at once again - maybe you might see my point there?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell it seemed to me that the regel is separated enough not to mix it up with a ches,(at least from a large screen,) maybe in person especially from an amah away it is not the case.
ReplyDeleteMy point was that it is not the most severe closeness to the gag since it seems more than a chut hasarah separation, but again the big screen can throw off the true metzios.