The International STa"M Forum

Help shaaloh on a tof. I was writing and this taf got filled in if someone could answer i would really apreciate it.

My opinion: The Tav is pasul. The left foots' blita is more inward as a pei, and to minimal outward. The Nun of nafshechem is also pasul - it looks more a caf than nun.

The tav - I think is pasul, the left foot is not distinguished, it looks like a ches. I personaly think this is not even a case for a shylas tinok [although probably others will go for a shylas tinok]. The yud - the foot [regel yemin] is clearly 3 times longer than the head [rosh], it is a small vav. Why is the oilam machmir when a yud clearly looks like a small ches, lamed, caf, etc. but not so when it appears to be a small vav?

Notice the tavim (ודבר ת at the begining of the picture, לאו ת ) in Dovids post [a problematic lamed, Saturday]. The tavim have a big problem, the left foot seems to be bent [to the left] outward, because of the way the sofer pulls the kulmus - but in truth are almost a stright line down = kav mashuch. Although it is recognizable as a tav (because the way the foot is presented) still it is more a ches than a tav, and a kav mashuch instead of the left foot. The left foot of a tav has to be bent so there is a opposite head of vav/dalet or as a moshav of a nun, but here the foot is lacking this part of the letter. This is a common problem I have noticed in many ksavim (also ashkenazim!). Note also the vav in לאות - the top of the head is thinner than the guf/regel of the vav, but is clearly seen as a head of the vav, because of the opening slanted line that outlines the panim/face of the letter (as I wrote in a comment on the vavim).