Dear Readers and Members, The forum has been down for over 6 months because the domain name (www.stamforum.com) lapsed and it is no longer available to re purchase. Although this forum is now defunct (it has morphed into several whatsapp groups), I have had many requests to put it back online because it contains so much information (over 1,800 posts and thousands of comments in the discussions, on a wide range of topics related to STa"M). I have therefore put the forum back online at blogger, so the address is www.stamforum.blogspot.com. The forum lasted for a decade...not a bad effort! It was pretty popular back in the days before whatsapp and managed to receive over a million hits in it's short life. It was one of the only organised forums in the STa"M world and definitely the largest in it's heyday. I would like to thank all those who cobtributed over the years, particularly the early members who helped build it up. Thanking you all, Eli
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei would like to comment on tyour earlier post
ReplyDelete"In regard to the question in the last post - can it be that a ois that is kosher for sfardim be pasul for ashkenazim (or opposite).
The Shaarei Tshuva OC36 quotes Sfardi Poskim that csav ashkenaz is pasul for sfardim, since there are shinuyim between the csavim. He (the ST, I didn’t look up the seforim he quotes) doesn’t mention what/which shinuyim are m'akev, that are pasul for Bnei Sfarad."
Rabbi Greenfeld from Vaad Mishmeres STa"M told me that the tshuvos maharam ben chaviv miksav yad quoted by the shaarei tshuva was already printed as sefer KOL GADOL.HERE IS THE LINK
http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1256&st=&pgnum=114
WOW- IT SHEDS LIGHT ON THE WHOLE SUGYA
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletethanks
ReplyDeleteI looked it up - the maharam there: the gimel ashkenazi looks like a nun sfaradi. which therefore is pasul for sfaradi. Somewhat an opposite case of what i'm talking about, but proves that shinuyim between the csavim that are posel may occur. If so there is no machalokes between the maharam and NB.
yasher koiach
but he doesnt picturize or explain there, why the ashkenaz gimel looks like a nun - maybe, since in BY the regel should resemble a nun, although there was a pgima between - hard to accept.
ReplyDeleteI do recall somebody that explained in the BY יהיה ירך משוך עב אליה - אל הגוף meaning that it was mamash touching the guf, like the first pictures on the post,
obviously today we would pasel that as a nun, maybe thats what maharam saw?