Earliest source for kesidran in tefillin and mezuzos?
Does anyone know the earliest source(s) for the law of kesidran in tefillin and mezuzos?
How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
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 ...
The Rosh in hilchos tefilin quotes Mechilta parshas bo [tanaic source].
ReplyDeleteThank you. Is it clear that the Mechilta is referring not just to the physical placement of the letters, words and the parshiot relative to eachother, but especially to the point in time the letters, words and parshiot were written relative to eachother?
Deleteits not so clear from the mechilta, that is why tosfos argues. see the 2nd bi'ur halacha to siman 32
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThanks. Was the Rosh the first to explain the mechilta this way- i.e. the letters, words and parshiot must be written in the temporal sequence that they appear in the Torah?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNo this law is quoted earlier than the Rosh, in Rambam. But the Rambam didn't mention any source.
DeleteTrue the Mechilta is not clear, if speaking about seder of the parshiyos in the batim of rosh [or on the klaf in yad] or the seder of the writing.
The Mechilta doesn't regard mezuza, only tefilin.
The Rambam writes that the law c'sidran applies to mezuza as well. Rishonim [see Cesef Mishna H. Stam ch 1) quote Yerushalmy Megila as source of Rambam.
DeleteThanks. I looked in Rambam hilchos sta"m and I couldn't find where he mentions kesidran as we understand it today. Where do you see it? I only found that he says that the 2 mezuzah parshiot must be in the correct order on the klaf.
Deleteהל' תפלין פרק א הלכה טז: אבל במזוזה ותפלין אין תולין בהן אפילו אות אחת
ReplyDeleteכסף משנה שם: בירושלמי פ"ק דמגילה והטעם משום דהוי שלא כסדרן, ואמרינן במכילתא כו'.
Thanks. I didn't catch that. I was only looking for the word "seder/sidur". This teaches that "kesidran" in writing applies within a word or parshah. Where do we learn that it also applies between one parshah and another? - I.e. Shema must be written before Vehaya im shamoa?
DeleteSee Cesef Mishna ibid that doesn't differentiate, between words or parshiyot.
ReplyDeleteThe simple neaning of the Michilta refers to the 4 parshiyos, while the Yerushalmi mentioned specifies letters or words.
Thanks again. The first clear expression of "kesidran" as also applying to the timing of when each parshah was written relative to another parshah - does this first appear in the Rosh or in the Cesef Mishnah?
ReplyDeleteThe Kesef Mishnah tends to interpret the Rambam in light of other Rishonim. In fact, it is not at all clear that the Rambam himself holds that "kesidran" applies to the sequence of writing each letter. See חדושי מרן רי"ז הלוי. Rav Kapach (in his commentary to Mishneh Torah) agrees with Kesef Mishneh, but (לענ"ד and not that he needs my haskama) the Brisker Rav's analysis is convincing.
ReplyDeleteThanks. In Rambam hilchos stam 1:16 it says for tefillin and mezuzot if one letter was forgotten then one can't go back and write it but must be gonez it. If there was a tikun then why must he be gonez?
ReplyDeleteWhich parts of the Kesef Mishneh does Rav Kapach agree with?
What does the Brisker Rav conclude?
Yankev,
ReplyDeleteAfter rereading the Rambam hilchos stam, especially the halacha I cited before (1:16), I agree with you now that it is not at all clear that the Rambam holds of this at all. 1:16 is speaking about "hanging" the letters and not about erasing and correcting. Thanks.
I'm beginning to suspect that there is no clear source older than the Rosh for sh'lo kesidran exactly as we hold today that every letter must be written in sequence, not just within a parshah but also between parshiot.
ReplyDeleteSee also Chazon Ish (OH 5)
Delete