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.
While there is a yerech, albeit thick and ugly, does the blob of ink make it a shinui tzura? If the oketz was a normal length I'd be less inclined to pasel but as is it only makes the tzura look worse.
A fundamental problem is showing us the enlarged , zoomed in version. please 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. http://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?
I recently tried this kosher ink for my rapidograph and I am extremely pleased with it. It does not clog the nib like other kosher rapidograph inks, and it's very dark and strong. It's at least as good as the Rotring commercial grade rapidograph inks (of course these can only be used with batch numbers that have been lab tested and approved kosher), and in addition you do not need to add a drop of regular Sta"m ink (as per the instruction of the Shevet Halevi, which is messy and time consuming). I was wondering if anyone else had an opinion or comments with regards to their experience with this ink...
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?
In today’s day and age, virtually every kosher product available to the consumer comes with a hechsher. By hechsher, I mean an official and recognised rabbinical body or agency that certifies the kashrus of a product, be it a food item or a religious article. Hechsherim play a vital role in providing consumer confidence, and something branded by a reputable kashrus agency will be considered more legitimate than a similar product that does not. The agency has rigid policies and protocols in place to ensure correct standards are met, and they are independent of the manufacturer so that there is no conflict of interest. As we have discussed on this forum previously, there is a distinct lack of official hechsherim on Sta”m products - Tefillin, Mezuzos and Sifrei Torah. Even the Vaad Mishmeres Sta”m, the oldest and most well- known rabbinic agency in the Sta”m world does not certify products. They test and ordain sofrim and magihim (examiners), offer a computer checking service (sp...
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