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
מאיר עיני סופרים סימן י סעיף ח ס"ק א
ReplyDeleteומ"מ לכתחילה צריך לכתוב גם ס"ת כסדרן דס"ת חמור מקדושת תו"מ רק בדיעבד כשר משום דא"כ לא תמצא ס"ת כשירה, בגדי ישע בשם רדב"ז סי' ש"י
וכן שם בדקדוקי סופרים
ומ"מ לכתחילה צריך לכתוב גם ס"ת כסדרן
Is this accepted and lehalacha writing in this fashion is bedieved, or lemaase we are not choshesh for this opinion?
Deletethanks for the mare mokom
by the way your source doesn't seems to differentiate between same or different yerios
DeleteSounds unreasonable to me.
ReplyDeleteI thought the same but the Rabbi in my shul brought this up and I wanted to check the sources
DeleteThere is a Tshuvas HaRitva (I think around siman 100, but might be wrong) who says that "lulei d'mistafina" he would've said that the 4 parshiyos of tfillin, even when written in a Sefer Torah, must be written k'sidran.
DeleteOk but that's no halachically binding, just a random thought... nevertheless thanks for the source.
DeleteMy intention was as a point of interes. None of the sources being discussed here are halachically binding.
DeleteThe Shaila is if somebody wrote a whole sefer kesidran and found one mistake that needed to be corrected.Did he loose the whole lechatchila?
ReplyDeleteThe Keses himself writes it!!! That since holiness is even more than tfillin - it ought be written kesidran.
Deleteלשכת הסופר סימן ט ס"ק א
Deleteעוד כתב שם הרדב"ז . . ולפע"ד תמוה . . אמאי לא נימא דגם ס"ת בעי כסדרן
!קושייתו שם שס"ת יצטרך "כסדרן" מדאורייתא
אבל בסעיף א שם כותב "תפילין ומזוזות צריכין לכתוב אותם כסדרן", ואינו מזכיר ס"ת כלל אפילו בנוגע לכתחילה
בנוגע לפועל פוסק אדה"ז סימן לב סעיף מט
אבל בס"ת יכול למחוק כל השורות העליונות אם אין בהם שום שם משמות שאינן נמחקין
אף שגם אם לא ימחוק כשר עכ"פ בדיעבד
ולתרץ קושיית הקסת ראה אגרות קודש כרך ז עמוד שפה אגרת ב'רמה, ובהמצויין שם
I don't understand this whole discussion. My understanding was that the Radvaz was only theoretical, but no one ever actually held such a shitta l'mayse. Perhaps the strongest raaya is the fact that the only source for the din of k'sidran is the M'chilta at the end of Parshas Bo that specifically is talking about the four parshiyos of tfillin and possibly the Mishna of "ein tolin" and it is m'furash that tliya is kosher is Seifer Torah!
Delete