akev beis entering a vav
In order to correctly ask a tinok, the body of the beis left of the vav should be covered.
In order to correctly ask a tinok, the body of the beis left of the vav should be covered.
How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
In order to correctly ask a tinok, the body of the beis left of the vav should be covered.
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 ...
Rav friedlander told me not to be choshesh an eikev of a beis going into the challal of a vov, reish or daled...
ReplyDeleteyes one should not to be choshesh a shailas tinok on an eikev entering the challal if the rosh of the vav is the shiur of an ov kulmas
Deletehere however the issue is not even the eikev of the beis.
the issue is with the vav itself. the rosh is more than an ov kulmus putting it into a reish/vav shailas tinkok, l'aniyas da'ati
I have examples that R' Shammai said were kosher (although he has mentioned that in some cases it would be a shailos tinnok.) I will post soon. I will bli neder bring this and post the teshuva.
ReplyDeleteThe Vav is not wide enough to be a shailas tinok. trin the eken down a bit and round the top right of the Vav.
ReplyDeleteIm not with my sefarim atm but from memory, mishnat hasofer says along the lines of what R Fridlender told R Eli. I think The reason the akev of the bet doesn't pasel the vav bediavad is because the tzura of the bet is complete before the akev enters the vav - hence it was never a hey. Whereas with the rosh of a lamed entering a vav/dalet/reish its different because first it would be a kosher hey (then even possibly a kuf) and then it's made into a lamed which is chak tochot al yedei Ketiva.
ReplyDeleteIn this case it shouldn't make a difference if the rosh of the vav is shiur mlo kulmus or not (obviously putting the aside the issue of the vav turning into a reish...)
Correct?
Hi Ari,
DeleteYes this is the opinion of Keset Hasofer as you wrote.
But other argue, that there is no difference between a lamed entering a reish, or an ekev of the beis.
Just felt it needs clarity.
Deleteobviously the rosh of the lamed is only comparable to the ekev of the beis when part of the lamed is outside the riesh or daled,
because its written from the left and started outside the letter...
so ive been told by Rav Vosner here in Monsey