Popular posts from this blog
Klaff Tanning question:
By
Rabbi Eli Gutnick
-
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.
Rabbi Reuvain Mendlowitz clarifies his position on Ksav Chabad (and my final thoughts)
By
Rabbi Eli Gutnick
-
Last week I posted some thoughts in response to a public lecture given by Rabbi Reuvain Mendlowitz regarding Ksav Chabad (the Alter Rebbe's ksav). I felt he did not represent the issue fairly, and since I had received questions about it from a number of people I felt it made sense to write a general response. After I posted my response on this forum, Rabbi Mendlowitz reached out to me by email and we ended up having a respectful and productive email exchange regarding the relevant issues surrounding Ksav Chabad. His position is a lot clearer to me now, and I think he also took certain things on board that I clarified with him. The purpose of the Stam Forum (at least back in it's heyday before all the whats app groups took over) was to connect sofrim from around the world, to promote achdus and build bridges, as well as to offer support and advice. In that spirit, I felt I should write a follow up post, to clarify some of the issues and misconception...

Seems poshut to me that this is pasul and can't be fixed. If someone made a ches like that, we would be machshir.
ReplyDeleteExcept that it's not 2 zayinim, it's a zayin and a Chet. It's no longer a case of two letters making a new kosher letter, it's two letters making what looks like two chetim fused together.
ReplyDeleteAnd the line connecting them is very thin, even if its dark. It looks thinner than even the tagim. I don't think its obvious.
I remember R Shtern in yalkut has ofer I think has a paragraph about this exact case but I can't remember what he said. I'm also not home to check...
Ari please check and post where I can find it . A rov here was machshir it. What is rem moshes opinion?
Deleteproblem !! It is not so easy to be meikel !!!
DeleteSince the pic. is not 100% clear, (if the dark line is less obvious then the dyo of the letters, there is place to be meikel, since the letters themself are barur, and the negiya is clearly external).
I will look up Rav Shtern quoted by Ari.
Rav Shtern writes there exactly as I wrote - if the negiya is clearly not part of the letters, then one should do a shaylas chacham.
DeleteSo you have to decide if there is a chashash of a ches made out of the zayin and right part of ches - then it is pasul, if not consult with a rabbi [showing him the parsha itself].
I can not answer since the pic. is not clear enough to me (although it looks here - as the negiya is an additional kav, and not part of a ches).
סימן ה׳ אות ח׳ בילקה״ס:
ReplyDeleteנתחברה זיי״ן מתיבת ״בחוזק יד״ להחי״ת ע״י תגין, ועי״ז יש כאן ג׳ זייני״ן מחוברים או וי״ו וב׳ זייני״ן, אין להתיר להפריד הנגיעה. אולם, אם הנגיעה של הזיי״ן להחי״ת הוא שונה מאשר חיבור ב׳ זייני״ן דחי״ת, וניכר היטב שזה אות זי״ן שנגע בחי״ת, יש לעשות ש״ח.
Thanks
DeleteI think this case is even easier than what R Shtern describes because here the negia is not through tagim (ie it's even thinner) and looks completely different than the chatoteret.
ReplyDeleteI may have to show this one to one of the big guns. Its very sentimental parshiyos
ReplyDelete