Pri Megadim's Ksav al gabei Ksav
1. Is this the case that the Pri Megadim is referring to?
2. Do we pasken like this Pri Megadim?
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 ...
1. Is this the case that the Pri Megadim is referring to?
ReplyDeleteNO, there is no other dyo under the letters.
So it's 100% kasher??
DeleteNot that this is a proof, but in the פאר הלכה (i.e. Picture משנה ברורה) it definitely portrayed the פרי מגדים as referring to a case where there was no actual ink left and just an impression, as in this case.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete100% kosher
DeleteI'm curious about your lamedim. Is there a particular reason why the regel resembles more ktav vellish being a slanted regel instead of a horizontal moshav and why the right kotz is on the right side of the Rosh instead of next to the left one?
ReplyDeleteCurious combination: Arizal Shin, Tzadi, Ayin, even Tes (unusual), yet Bais Yosef first-yud-of Tzadi...
ReplyDeleteI have seen and heard about tzadis written like that in ktav ari zal before - I believe there is a valid Shita though I don't recall any sources at the moment.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the tet, from memory I think R Chaim Vital is the source for making the tet like a normal b"y rosh, I don't remember the source for making it a Rosh of a vav.
But in some places this ktav looks like it is meant to be beis Yosef. look at the lower regel of the alephs - no akev of a dalet and the left rosh in several ayins...
The Ksav is meant to be Beis Yosef. The Dikdukdim are according to ספר תמונת האותיות by R' Mordechai Hes and ספר פתשגן הכתב by R' Mordechai Slushtz.
ReplyDeleteCorrect. The Shaatnez Getz letters do not come out mamash from the side as in Arizal, but slightly indented, see תמונת האותיות and פתשגן הכתבas R' Yankev pointed out. The kotz coming out of the bottom is just to ensure that there is a noticeably sharp point at the bottom left to be choshesh for the shittos that that is the pshat in the tagei shaatnez getz. As for the lameds, the pashtus in the Alpha Beisa when in says that the zanav of the lamed in כפוף לפניה היטב is not that it have a flat moshav but that it curve inward significantly and is not mamash a khof, but resembles a khof al pi sod, again see the above-mentioned sewforim. This is almost certainly the way that the Vilna Gaon understood it as he compares the zanav to the right head of a tes.
DeleteAlso, the following was written to me by Rav Greenfield shlit"a when I posed the shayla to him:
ReplyDeleteבס"ד
לענ"ד אין זה רושם של כתיבה, אלא הוא רושם של מחיקה
ועכ"פ לא חמור משאלת "געפלאסין" שמכשיר הנוב"י אם האות ניכרת מתוך הגעפלאסין
והאבנ"ז שמחמיר להצריך הבחנת תינוק, במקרה זה ברור שהתינוק לא יתבלבל מן הרושם של האות המחוקה.
ואם מע"כ חושש להחמיר, אזי יעשה הבחנת תינוק ויסתלק מן הספק המדומה
בכבוד רב ובברכת "כתיבה" וגמר חתימה טובה
דוד לייב גרינפעלד
What are you basing your understanding of the Alpha Beita on?
ReplyDeleteThe Beis Yosef brought by Mishnat Sofrim also has that lashon and he clearly explains that the moshav should indeed be pulled flat like a kaf - the only dispute is whether only to pull it all the way to the end of the gag (Radbaz, Torat Chaim) or only a little (Kehilat Yaakov). Indeed the Mishnat Sofrim brings that Kehilat Yaakov heard this shita in the name of the GRA himself and that this is how we are noheg today in ktav beis yosef.
I also think that it makes more sense that this is the GRA's opinion because the right rosh of the tet has to have kefifut harosh and is pulled around like a kaf just that is it round and not flat, but it isn't a straight diagonal like your lamedim.
Are there any acharonim that bring down to write a beis yosef lamed like you have understood?
My second question was about putting the right tag of the lamed on the right side and not on the left side next to the left tag. Is there a source for this? (admittedly, my teacher told me once in the name of R Menachem Davidovitch that this would also be considered mehudar but I don't think he gave a source or a reason) But I wouldv'e thought a lack in hiddur since the beis yosef and MB write for the rosh lamed to be a vav and specifically round at the top right.
First off, when reading the Alpha Beisa it is very important to differentiate between the practical writing of the letter, which he describes in the first Alpha Beisa, and the r'mazim behind them, which he elaborates on further in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.
DeleteAs far as my understanding of the Alpha Beisa, please see the sources that I references earlier. The ספר תמונת האותיות in particular received glowing endorsements from גדולי הפוסקים, including R' Elyashiv zt"l, ויבלח"ט R' Shternbuch, R' Nissim Karelitz, etc., who say to write al pi that sefer l'chatchila. Truth be told, much of what he writes to do l'mayse in the sefer conforms more to "R' Nesanel Beis Yosef," but I have seen copies of his personal parshiyos and they did not. (Agav, the sefer that was put out as a responsse to that one was proven to be שקר וכזב ממש! The author of תמונת האותיות put out another sefer to rebut the lies of that sefer and received special haskamos from R' Shternbuch & R' Nissim Karelitz shlit"a stating that nothing in his opponents sefer was to be trusted as he took quotes out of context, doctored sources, and was מגלה פנים בתורה שלא כהלכה in an attempt to "prove" his case.)
As far as the straightness of the zanav, this mezuza was written a couple of months ago and I have since begun to make the zanav more rounded on the bottom, but not at all flat.
As far as the tag, if you look in most of the old ksavim from Europe the tag was at the corner of the head mamash. Once again, being makpid on rounding the corner so that it looks mamash like a vov is mainly a product of taking the r'mazim of the Alpha Beisa overly (לפע"ד)literally. A similar (but much more problematic) style has developed (very recently and seems to have begun with R' Nesanel zt"l) is making the regel of the kuf a nun pshuta mamash. The Alpha Beisa says that it is "like" a nun pshuta and it's head is עב ומתמעט. Nowhere does he say to make it a nun pshuta mamash! This gets into shaylos of מקצת האות דומה לחברתה, which is a חשש פסול. In the ספר תמונת האותיות he says that he was advised by the גדולי הפוסקים that although it is problematic, it is very difficult to completely uproot this practice and they therefore recommend a compromise of sorts, עיי"ש. As I'm sure you're aware, the minhag by many sofrim before very recently was to make a ball on top, which also was m'ramez to a nun pshuta, but not to make a nun pshuta mamash.
I could go on and on, but I think I've ranted enough.
More important than my ranting though is that I hope no one takes anything I'm saying personally and while I'm sure many of you disagree, may we do so with mentshlichkeit and all be zocheh to a גמר חתימה טובה!!!
Thanks for the lengthly discusion in regard to the moshav of lamed, it is very interesting and needs more עיון היטב.
DeleteBut in regard to Rabbi Hes' shita in the kuf:
"A similar (but much more problematic) style has developed (very recently and seems to have begun with R' Nesanel zt"l) is making the regel of the kuf a nun pshuta mamash. The Alpha Beisa says that it is "like" a nun pshuta and it's head is עב ומתמעט. Nowhere does he say to make it a nun pshuta mamash! This gets into shaylos of מקצת האות דומה לחברתה, which is a חשש פסול."
This rosh [of the regel of the kuf] is mentioned also in Mikdash Me'at.
I personaly dont think there is any chashash of מקצת האות דומה לחברתה in this case.
בברכת כתיבה טובה וכשרה לכל השנה כולה, וגמר חתימה טובה בגשמיות ורוחניות לכל חברי הפורום