hei - left foot problem

By -
This was posted on my hebrew stam-blog, and I thought it quite interesting.
The foot of the left hays' are extended way under the line - does this make them into a type of kuf?
I think that since a tinok will not think of them as a kuf because the thickness and form of the yud, they are still kosher and should be fixed by lengthening the right foot a bit.
If the left foot would not be an [ashkenazic] opposite yud (but a sefardic type of foot, that is a simple line) it would be pasul, since it would be a kuf.

Comments

  1. Aaron ShaffierJuly 20, 2012 at 8:18 AM

    It seems from the picture that the actual problem is that the right leg is short not that the left one is long. If this is the case, why should it be any different than the halacha regarding if the right leg was damaged. In such a case, if more than half remains it is kosher. I would think this would be the same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. moshe weinerJuly 20, 2012 at 10:00 AM

    Indeed you are correct - this sofer did 2 things wrong.
    a) the left foot descends to much, b) the right foot is to short.
    There is a whole issue in the acharonim does this left foot descending under the short/damaged/broken right foot make a problem of the hai being a kuf.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownJuly 21, 2012 at 2:38 PM

    The left foot is supposed to be on the left side, not spanning 90% of the entire base. It is supposed to be no different than a ches except that the left leg isn't connected. Lchatchila one needs to chop off the right half of the left leg.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousJuly 21, 2012 at 4:10 PM

    I agree with R Aaron. The issue is with the regel y'min. Still it appears that ikar tzurah is present and adding some dyo to lengthen the regel y'min while carefully reducing the size of the regel smol would help.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ink, Kosher vs. non-Kosher

By -
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?
Read more

Question to Yosef Chaim B

By -
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 ...
Read more