negiya
How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
Popular posts from this blog
The forum is back online...for reference and research purposes.
Dear Readers and Members, The forum has been down for over 6 months because the domain name (www.stamforum.com) lapsed and it is no longer available to re purchase. Although this forum is now defunct (it has morphed into several whatsapp groups), I have had many requests to put it back online because it contains so much information (over 1,800 posts and thousands of comments in the discussions, on a wide range of topics related to STa"M). I have therefore put the forum back online at blogger, so the address is www.stamforum.blogspot.com. The forum lasted for a decade...not a bad effort! It was pretty popular back in the days before whatsapp and managed to receive over a million hits in it's short life. It was one of the only organised forums in the STa"M world and definitely the largest in it's heyday. I would like to thank all those who cobtributed over the years, particularly the early members who helped build it up. Thanking you all, Eli
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?
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