sofek hey

By -
see prim"gd siman 32 eishel avraham s"k 33
However we might be more lenient since there is no shita that this is a hay lechatchila as in the m'a cse where the rashb"a holds that foot of hay belongs inward

Comments

  1. moshe weinerJuly 30, 2014 at 12:40 AM

    אני מכסה כל מה שחוץ לחלל הכ"ף ושואל תינוק, אם קורא לזה כ"ף - אין בעיה

    ReplyDelete
  2. Beis HastamJuly 30, 2014 at 12:40 PM

    I forgot to mention that the dot in chof peshutah happened after the lamed was written.
    Must I still cover the lamed while asking the shailos tinok?

    ReplyDelete
  3. moshe weinerJuly 30, 2014 at 3:52 PM

    That doesn't make any difference. I am sure that the tinok will read it kosher!

    ReplyDelete
  4. yisroel levinJuly 31, 2014 at 2:22 PM

    שו"ע אדה"ז סי' לב סעי' כ - ...ומכאן אתה למד שא"צ לכסות מלפניו שאר האותיות כמו שנוהגים

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. moshe weinerJuly 31, 2014 at 3:39 PM

      פירוש שא"צ לכסות שאר האותיות, ולחשוש שמא מחמת שיראה אותן יבין מהו האות שבשאלה - כי מיירי בתינוק דלחול"ט. אבל האות עצמה שנשאל צריך להראותה כולה, ולהסיר דבר שעלול לבלבל קריאתו. וכאן גוף הלמ"ד אינו מכלל השאלה, כי השאלה היא רק על הכ"ף, ולכן צריך להסתיר הלמ"ד כדי שלא יפריע לתינוק לראות אם כ"ף זו היא כ"ף או ה"א.

      Delete
  5. yisroel levinAugust 1, 2014 at 11:58 AM

    ?מ"מ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. moshe weinerAugust 2, 2014 at 4:39 PM

      משנה ברורה סי' לב ס"ק קלב
      מקדש מעט סי' לב ס"ק נו

      Delete
    2. moshe weinerAugust 3, 2014 at 1:40 PM

      גם המקדש מעט הוא באותו ענין של המ"ב בנוגע ללמ"ד לחלל כ"ף או דלי"ת
      קל וחומר למקרה שלפנינו שהלמ"ד מבלבל הקורא לענין הנקודה הקטנה שבתוך חללה של כ"ף

      Delete
  6. yisroel levinAugust 3, 2014 at 12:49 PM

    תודה
    המקדש מעט אינו כרגע תח"י
    אבל המשנה ברורה מדבר על למ"ד שנכנס "לתוך חלל" האות
    לא נראה לי שראש הלמ"ד כאן נכנסת לתוך חלל הך', א"כ מנין שצריך להסתירו

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Klaff Tanning question:

By -
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.    
Read more

The forum is back online...for reference and research purposes.

By -
 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
Read more