Your thoughts?
How about the Bais of Uleovdo?
Popular posts from this blog
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?
Question to Yosef Chaim B
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 ...
לי נראה שהנקודה התחתונה הפכה לגולם ופסולה
ReplyDeleteI would consider this a case of "נגע רגל האל"ף בגג האל"ף".
ReplyDeleteA fundamental problem is showing us the enlarged , zoomed in version.
ReplyDeleteplease submit an "actual size" .
Remember R Shlomo Mualem agreed to optic magnification only to be like "chadei Ha Ain" and my mesora is to use magnification to be "machshir" not the opposite.
Please see the discussion on this matter.
Deletehttp://www.stamforum.com/2013/04/rav-friedlander-on-paskening-from.html
While I can't speak for others, my purpose for posting is for discussion and education. There are few among our membership who are poskim and even less who can judge from enlarged images as per Rav Friedlander's comments. With regards to this shaila, you can save it as an image then view it in a smaller size but even then the image lacks the sharpness of the actual ksav.
The mesora I have with regards to magnification is we may use it to confirm, to be machshir or to pasel, what we are confident we see with the naked eye/corrective lenses. If with magnification we see the opposite of what we are confident we see without it, whether lekula or lechumra, then magnification isn't taken into account.
I don't understand why this isn't a clear case of the regel touching the guf, and would require a bitul tzurah (barring the potential issue of there not even being a "regel" anymore)...Can anyone explain the shailah?
ReplyDelete