Last week I posted some thoughts in response to a public lecture given by Rabbi Reuvain Mendlowitz regarding Ksav Chabad (the Alter Rebbe's ksav). I felt he did not represent the issue fairly, and since I had received questions about it from a number of people I felt it made sense to write a general response. After I posted my response on this forum, Rabbi Mendlowitz reached out to me by email and we ended up having a respectful and productive email exchange regarding the relevant issues surrounding Ksav Chabad. His position is a lot clearer to me now, and I think he also took certain things on board that I clarified with him. The purpose of the Stam Forum (at least back in it's heyday before all the whats app groups took over) was to connect sofrim from around the world, to promote achdus and build bridges, as well as to offer support and advice. In that spirit, I felt I should write a follow up post, to clarify some of the issues and misconception...
bad case
ReplyDeletebepashtus the tefilin are safek psulim.
but are you definite that the cracks where pasul, IE the letters where definitlt broken - maybe the sofer was only strengthening the dyo, but it wasn't mamash pasul??
ReplyDeleteDon't we say that since there is a chazakah that he normally says it so its bechezkas kashrus?
ReplyDeleteYehoshuah can you ask Rav shammai please, I am interested to know his opinion on this.
A few things...
ReplyDeleteIf the sofer had once said in their life or for sure that day that they are writing everything "L'Shem kedushas...." then that could help as a tziruf to be makil. On top of the fact that it's hard to say there was no machshava what so ever b'frat that they were coming to fix the tefilin. If they would remember which oisios they fixed then c'dei to go over them again and say l'shem kedushas tefillin. If missing all these things then he said very hard to be "machshir". I said does that mean "pasul"...However he didn't want to go that far. He said also that in a case where the ikar tzurah of the oisoos was kiyum (most likely the case as we are talking about fixing tefillin) and only a few cracks, hefsekes, etc. then for sure a tzad to be makil like what R' Wosner brings down in a teshuva (see here: http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1418&st=&pgnum=28.) On top of that I noted to R' Shammai when I spoke to him the shitas of the Ramban and "shar poskim" that the Maharsham brings that you don't need kasiva l'shmo by tefillin (See here: http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1528&st=&pgnum=129 -- end of teshuva 111. ) However a big tzrich iyun where this Ramban is, who else says it and if there is a possibility to use it as a tziruf. Im col zeh...It seems like makom to be makil in such a case.
see my post above
Deletehttp://www.stamforum.blogspot.com/2012/01/morning-prayer-kol-ma-sheani-cosev.html
R' Moshe -
DeleteI remember your post about this and I understand you. He says it more as a "back-up". But I realize all of your concerns about this hanhagah would also apply in such a case.
R' Shammai mentioned as well that there were others (big poskim) that gave this eitzah. Tzrich iyun.