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.
The Shulchan Aruch Harav is far more stringent in this case than the Mishnah berurah. Acc to SA"H, If it actually was a reish it would be a shinoy tzurah and fixing would not be permitted, even by adding to the left side of the regel. However I'm not sure , if in this case its an actual reish, but probablyenough of a sofek to render it not mehudar, even after repair.
Since Yosef is a Chabad sofer and by the looks of things this is an Arizal ksav with revochim chabad (and most likely belonging to a Chabad customer) I would say Yosef is correct.
Outside of Chabad, tikkun would make this Ches mehudar. Had it been a proper Reish then tikkun may not do the job to make it even lechatchila but in this case of a "shailos tinok" Reish, the tikkun works. Thank you for your insight on Chabad's stance in this situation. I looked it up in Kesiva Tama and he brings the SA"Has being machmir on a Ches made up of a Reish- Zayin. (The Pri Megadim leans this was as well.) I would agree with you that in this instance, even according to the machmirim, tikkun should make it lechatchila.
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?
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 ...
Make the left side of the regel a little thicker so the rosh will be shorter. It will be mehudar.
ReplyDeleteThe Shulchan Aruch Harav is far more stringent in this case than the Mishnah berurah. Acc to SA"H, If it actually was a reish it would be a shinoy tzurah and fixing would not be permitted, even by adding to the left side of the regel. However I'm not sure , if in this case its an actual reish, but probablyenough of a sofek to render it not mehudar, even after repair.
DeleteSince Yosef is a Chabad sofer and by the looks of things this is an Arizal ksav with revochim chabad (and most likely belonging to a Chabad customer) I would say Yosef is correct.
Outside of Chabad, tikkun would make this Ches mehudar. Had it been a proper Reish then tikkun may not do the job to make it even lechatchila but in this case of a "shailos tinok" Reish, the tikkun works.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your insight on Chabad's stance in this situation. I looked it up in Kesiva Tama and he brings the SA"Has being machmir on a Ches made up of a Reish- Zayin. (The Pri Megadim leans this was as well.) I would agree with you that in this instance, even according to the machmirim, tikkun should make it lechatchila.