Shu"A Ha'Rav - hekef gvil toich ha'os

By -
I am wondering what is the opinion on Shu"A Ha'Rav? Does he agree with the Mishna Berurah that the insides of letters (at least 3-walled letters) are exempt from the requirement of hekef gvil (at least after the fact)? Or does he hold that the inside is no different than the outside?

From my learning I have concluded that the inside is no less than the outside.

I'm wondering if anyone understands differently?

Comments

  1. moshe weinerSeptember 18, 2014 at 12:32 AM

    דעתו העיקרית להלכה דאין חילוק כלל בדין מוקף גויל בין בפנים או בחוץ של האות. ורק בסוף סעיף יט מביא דעה אחת דס"ל לחלק דבחוץ צ"ל היקף גויל גם אחר הכתיבה, ולא מבפנים

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Y.Y.September 18, 2014 at 7:22 AM

      This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Y.Y.September 18, 2014 at 7:24 AM

      to be speaking le'achar ha'ksivah...
      furthermore, I infer from the same Kuntreis Acharon that even Rav Chisda still required the potential for the letter to become mukaf gvil, but not the actualization of that.
      Accordingly, Ashiyan spoke lifnei ha'ksivah (as the Keses suggests in Chakira 4 in order to explain the assertion in Yerushalmi that Ashian and "le'maalah passul" of R' Yochanan are the same).
      Accordingly, the pasul of Ashiyan could have meant that it requires actual hekef gvil, not only potential, but that it can certainly be fixed.
      Accordingly, its Muttar to fix all hekef gvil issues always.
      (I am negating the point that Shut Rame makes, as well as Keses, that Rav Chisda requires fixing. It seems we can learn that Rav Chisda only required the potential to fix).

      Delete
  2. moshe weinerSeptember 18, 2014 at 1:16 PM

    מנין לנו שלפי הירושלמי מועיל גרירה לעשותו מוקף גויל, אם האות חסר היקף גויל
    הרי הרשב"א וסייעתו סוברים דבמקרה שנפסל משום שאינו מוקף גויל לא מהני גרירה - שהרי זה חק תוכות

    ReplyDelete
  3. Y.Y.September 18, 2014 at 4:18 PM

    Well, how did the Rashb"a know that? Secondly, the A"R clearly takes the approach of the Rosh, Trumah etc. That hekef gvil is muttar to scrape. Now, its possible tgat their makor for that is the Yerushalmi. I.e. they learned Yerushalmi "pasul lemaalah" to mean passul before tikkun. But tikkun is muttar.
    An advantage of learning this way is that theres no machlokes bavvli and Yerushalmi. Ashyan and R Yochanans "lemaalah passul" is bishaas haksivah and muttar to scrape. Rav chisda, and rav, and lemata kosher are leachar haksivah and dont require scraping. Just that they require potential for scraping. Bavli requires no potential at all.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ink, Kosher vs. non-Kosher

By -
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?
Read more

Question to Yosef Chaim B

By -
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 ...
Read more