ה' from אלה
I once discussed this with Rav Freidlander who said its kedai to fix, so I do. Other poskim like Rav Stern don't worry too much about this issue.
I noticed R' Moshe Weiner is exceptionally machmir when bringing down this case in his sefer. In a picture not dissimilar to the one above, he seems to say it is a major problem.
I was wondering how other members of this forum deal with this commonissue...
יריעות שלמה חלק ג עמוד צד הערה 15
ReplyDeleteelaborates a bit on this topic, and brings from more פוסקים.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteyes, this שבט הלוי is brought in יריעות שלמה.
Deletehowever:
1. the דעת קדושים and so the שבט הלוי are discussing NOTHING similar to the above picture.
דעת קדושים is talking about something more similar to a כ that is broken at the bottom right side. which likely בדיעבד can be כשר as a ה.
but the מקדש מעט questions that ruling.
2. שבט הלוי is also in a very extreme case, that the ה almost has the shape of a ב! and therefore he apparently dose NOT approve it.
he only excepts the דעת קדושים and the צ"ע of the מקדש מעט as a חומרא to prohibit eresing such a ה of a שם. since it's still well recognized that it's a ה.
but לפועל he was מתיר to be קודר that שם!!
can't understand why the ה of אלה is at all Halachaclly problematic.
Delete"can't understand why the ה of אלה is at all Halachaclly problematic."
To explain:
מעיקר הדין the above ה' is kosher. I think thats pretty unanimous (except for Rabbi Moshe Weiner on page 110 of his sefer he shows a picture the same as above and says it's possul in his opinion. He says the left regel must strictly be a נקודה and not a מושב. He brings down the gemara in shabbos , that a wide left regel of ches is possul and so too a hay, and also the gemoro in menochos that a hay must be domeh to an achsadra and open wide on the bottom.)
However putting that aside, there are two concepts which are being blurred here. One is a shinuy tzura ( change of shape) and one is lechatchillah lekesivah).
According to virtually all poskim I have discussed this with, it would pitentially only be a shinoy tzurah in the case of when the left regel comes VERY close to right regel. This is not our case above.
HOWEVER, in the above picture the left regel is not written in a lechatchillah manner, lechatchillah it must be nekudah and not a moshav, i.e. an upsidedown yud, not an upside down reish.
In the same way that many deviations of correct shape render the letter not lechatchillah l'eksivah (a similar example would be if he made the left head of an ayin or shin wide like a reish ie a gug and not a "rosh" - which is supposed to be only as wide as a yud) so too here, it is not lechatchillah leksiva.
This is why many say it should be fixed. And to fix by scratching would not be a concern of chok tochus because to them, meikkur hadin, it is kosher.
I hope I have explained this in a satisfactory manner.
thank you for "putting that aside" and trying to explain it.
ReplyDeletehowever
inside the ה i only see something that is definitely כשר - if turned over - as a יו"ד. and NOT as a ר.
if you would to fit a ר in there, it will be touching the גג and the right foot!
(not sure what's your definition of a נקודה vs. מושב.
did you see יריעות שלמה on that "thought"?
dose a נו"ן in our script have מושב? is that the size of a ר, or closer to the size of a יו"ד?)
on a side note, in regards how it should perhaps be "לכתחילה לכתיבה" see מנחת סולת on the אלפא ביתא, page רכ footnote 93.
I don't think you understood. I am talking only about the width of the bottom of the left regel. It should be a kulmus wide, like the width of a yud, not 2 kulmusim wide like it is now. That is not lechatchillah leksivah.
DeleteThe analogy to an upside down reish was just to demonstrate that if it was a regular yud (right way up) it would not be classified as a rosh but rather as a gug, like a small reish would have. (Obviously the "regel" of the reish is not long enough to be kosher, but that part is not relevant).
The point is it is not the correct tzura and this is why many poskim instruct to fix.
Correct, and i still don't understand how you get to that conclusion.
Deletethe size of the left foot looks less then 2 עובי קולמוס. and besides for that, every י, especially if it's even slightly wider then a קולמוס, can be a גג for a small ד or ר.
But what I don't understand even more is this new "lechatchillah leksivah criticism tool"
which taking this root, the וא"ו of the ל is also more then עובי קולמוס, and can be used as a גג for a small ר...
the left of ע is also not exactly a וא"ו...
and so we can go on and on scrutinizing each letter...
I've deleted my previous post. I made the mistake of not looking up the footnoted sources.
ReplyDeleteThere are 2 scenarios. There's the Da'as Kedoshim who discusses a Chaf that's split and may look like a Hei/ a Hei in which the left regel is stretched so that it may look like a split Chaf. All agree that this can be/is a shailah/shailas tinok. The Shevet Halevi is discussing such a Hei.
Then we have R' Eli's scenario in which the left regel is as wide as the midway point of the Hei or a bit more but there's no concern of it looking like a split Chaf. Here the Mikdash Me'at ohs Hei:12 has a צ"ע.
The Mishnas Hasofer (Biur Halachah page 50 דקה מלמעלה) brings sources that disagree with the MM and he says a solid svara to question the MM's proof so he holds that it's kosher as is. While Rav Mualem (Yerios Shlomo) also says it's kosher, he told me that the Hei in this scenario is bedieved and should be fixed. Perhaps Rav Stern holds the same.
I can concur that Rav Friedlander held that lechatchila it needs to be fixed.
thank you for looking up the sources,
Deletebut the מקדש מעט and his צ"ע is also in a extreme case. and is NOT at all questioning the Kashrus in "R' Eli's scenario".
The proof of the MM is from the case of a left regel that's in the middle and by the fact that the option to fix by stretching to the left side isn't offered lends him to say that it's because it may be pasul. This is not an extreme scenario.
DeleteIn any case, the poskim don't seem to be choshesh for this and lechatchila some/many? hold it should be fixed as explained.
If your moreh horaah in Stam has paskened that it's lechatchila as is then don't fix it.
מעיקר הדין the above ה' is kosher. I think thats pretty unanimous (except for Rabbi Moshe Weiner on page 110 of his sefer he shows a picture the same as above and says it's possul in his opinion. He says the left regel must strictly be a נקודה and not a מושב. He brings down the gemara in shabbos , that a wide left regel of ches is possul and so too a hay, and also the gemoro in menochos that a hay must be domeh to an achsadra and open wide on the bottom.)
ReplyDeleteSee Yerios Shlomo. He brings Rav Moshe Shaul Klein who says this svara, though I don't know how he actually paskens.
Rav Friedlander concurs that lechatchila is should be fixed. As I wasn't sure as to his exact reasoning, I discussed it with a colleague who was also close to Rav Friedlander and is a moreh horaah. He's not sure if Rav Friedlander was at all choshesh for the MM or more so because it lacks the correct form. He suggests the latter, as Rav Vozner points out from the Gemara חיתי"ן ההי"ן it's clear that the left regel of the Hei is more or less the same as the Hei (like in Vellish) and from the Gemara that says a Hei is the tzura of an achsadra its clear that the left regel takes up a minimal amount of space of the chalal.
Thanks for clarifying. What you are saying is the common psak, at least from what I've always been answered. And as you say, most dont consider it lechatchillah without fixing...
Deleteif i understand correctly, you and rabbi gutnick are trying to bring out 2 points:
Deletethat any ה which
1. either the left רגל is wider than it's height.
2. or that the gap between the two legs, are less then between the left רגל and the גג.
then the ה is NOT lechatchila, (and according to "אותיות הרב" even Posul) and therefore needs to be fixed.
sounds great, possibly based on your (or others) understanding in גמרות מדרשים קבלה הרגשים...
however NO source was yet brought from ANY previous פוסקים.
and therefore i still do not understand why it is at all Halachically problematic.
No, you did not understand correctly. I did give the gedorim 1. And 2. Above and I don't understand how you came to that conclusion. I never mentioned the height of the left regel or the space between tge left regel and the gag.
ReplyDeleteAll is said was if the width of tge left regel was 2 kulmosim and the gap between both roglayim is only a kulmos, this is not how a hay is supposed to be written lechatchillah!
I did not say there are sources that render it problematic me'ikkur hadin.
I did say this:
"In the same way that many deviations of correct shape render the letter not lechatchillah l'eksivah (a similar example would be if he made the left head of an ayin or shin wide like a reish ie a gug and not a "rosh" - which is supposed to be only as wide as a yud) so too here, it is not lechatchillah leksiva.
This is why many poskim say it should be fixed. And to fix by scratching would not be a concern of chok tochus because to them, meikkur hadin, it is kosher.
I hope I have explained this in a satisfactory manner.