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).
I received this question via email. I am not really a klaf expert, I was wondering if anyone could answer this question: Dear Rabbi Gutnick, I am writing to you because a good friend of mine has put the idea into my head that the klaf in my tefillin were not really tanned and therefore are not kosher. He referred me to Megilla 19a re diftera. From the research that I have done so far, it seems that the klaf that is used today is tanned only with a lime wash. On all of the tanning websites I’ve seen so far, they say that the lime doesn’t accomplish tanning but only the removal of the hair and some other pre-tanning effects. Would you be able to explain to me or refer me to a website that explains how the tanning process that is used today takes the hide out of the category of diftera? Thank you very much.
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?
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