A place for English speaking sofrim (scribes), magihim (examiners), rabbis and vendors of Stam (Torah, Tefillin and Mezuzah scrolls) from around the world to communicate, share ideas, ask questions and offer support and advice.
Very nice - thanks for posting. I have seen this in Sifrey I have checked too. In fact there are several interesting 'layouts' around the 'ervat' section, 'arur' section and other places that are no longer in the standard tikkun which I think is a bit of a shame. Though of course it does often involve stretching letters a fair amount which whilst fine is often frowned upon (e.g. Rambam who wasn't happy with vavey ha-amudim sifrey when they first came along because sofrim often stretched letters to much to accommodate it).
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?
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 ...
Very nice - thanks for posting. I have seen this in Sifrey I have checked too. In fact there are several interesting 'layouts' around the 'ervat' section, 'arur' section and other places that are no longer in the standard tikkun which I think is a bit of a shame. Though of course it does often involve stretching letters a fair amount which whilst fine is often frowned upon (e.g. Rambam who wasn't happy with vavey ha-amudim sifrey when they first came along because sofrim often stretched letters to much to accommodate it).
ReplyDeleteI have a hard enough time not repeating those words too many times during leining as it is. To use amazon parlance, novelty value -- would not read.
ReplyDelete