The International STa"M Forum

היו"ד [השניה ב'עיניך'] עוקץ שמאל כמעט שוה באורך לרגל ימין הקצרה -  נראה לי שזו כשרה כי הרגל ועוקץ קצרים ביותר, ושום תינוק לא יטעה בה לקרותה חי"ת. וראוי לתקן צורתה, ע"י הוספת מעט דיו להאריך מעט את רגל ימין. [אבל  רק מעט,  לא הרבה שלא תהא בעיה של שיעור ו'].

This is not the first time I've encountered this problem in a mezuza. Again, I'll reiterate - it is not easy to distinguish between (1) a yud whose Rosh is slanted and also functions as a "kotz" אליבא דחתם סופר ודעימיה and between (2) and yud that has only a kotz and no Rosh. In this case I believe it's the latter. (Btw we've been here before www.stamforum.com/2014/02/yud.html though I think this case is worse)

Regel and kotz but no Rosh?

״...אבל אם הוא קטן מאוד ונראה כקוץ קטן אין להקל אף בדיעבד, ובתו״מ לא מועיל תיקון...״ (ועיין שבט הלוי ח״ה סי׳ ח ס״ק ד) משנת הסופר סי׳ ה׳ ס״ק פט What does everyone think about this yud?

This is from a shel yad I was checking today. Obviously it's greatly magnified. To me, the yud has no Rosh and is Pasul. If you look carefully (it's clearer in reality), the thick regel at the top connects directly with the tag/kotz. Does anyone disagree?

The yud is to long extended. I would passel it.

Unfortunately the nun and yud are just touching. It's hard to tell from the photo but I don't think that its thin or light enough to be insignificant. Also, especially with a mem that often has a very small connection at the chartom.

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?

There are a couple things with the yud of יפתה that I'm not sure about. 1) it looks like its made of regel and kotz with no Rosh, but not easy to tell 2) the regel is slanted to the right instead of straight down or to the left 3) the regel has a strange shape Are any of these concerns in this case apparent enough to be meakev here?

In the yud of beneichem, the left kotz extends down almost to the length of the right regel. Such a tzurah is oft mentioned as being problematic. However in this case there are two saving graces, 1) the kotz and regel are both very short so it's not really a small ches and 2) the left kotz is indeed a fraction shorter than the right regel. Am I correct to assume its OK to fix in Mezuzah and not a shinuy tzurah? You can click to view it bigger. I wanted to keep the angle of the scan in proportion which is why I did not crop.

This new stuff called "Spray Klaf."  The claim was that it was Mei Klaf in spray form.  I have been using Mei Klaf(usually with an Eida Chareidit Hekhsher) for years.  I have never seen Mei Klaf do this.  The letters litterally are not davuk to the klaf.  I can erase them with a rubber eraser, and break them by running my fingernail over them.  Here is a picture of a Mezzuzah that I wrote with "Spray Klaf" treated Klaf.  The damage done occurred from simply rolling the Mezzuzah.

This to me looks like the yudim brought by R Moshe where the regel attaches directly to the kotz with no rosh in between. Yalkut HaSofer says it can be fixed by adding ink....thoughts? Sorry - the yud in עיניך....

What letter is this? If you say Beis then what does this mean about Mezuzah #1 from this post . What I did here is isolated the yud from that picture and rotated it a bit. What I remember learning is that if a letter looks like any other letter, even rotated, upside down etc it is a shinuy tzurah. It seems pretty clear to me that this letter, when rotated is a beis not a yud. Rav Weiner, in the comments you mentioned that the extra part could be scraped away. I have two questions: 1. Shouldn't you cover the letters around it (since its small size might mislead the tinok) and show it to a tinok? 2. If you are machshir this Yud wouldn't it be better to add ink instead of scraping so at least it's not a safek of Chok Tochos, since Shelo Kesidran is derabanan. Shouldn't we treat this like the case of a square Chaf Sofis which is brought in the teshuvah of the Tzemach Tzedek?

     Here are examples of Zadi Pshuta I have scanned of Reb Reuven Sofer. 1. In the word (ארץ הכנעני) one can clearly see that R"R writes the right yud first , as a straight yud [as in csav beis yosef] except it doesn’t have a regel. Only, after writing the Nun pshuta he connects the yud to the nun, with a line (which doesn’t look exactly a regel for the yud of Ari-zal) and the connection is a bit inward – not from edge of oketz of the yud, so both yudim are somewhat visible. 2. The upper right kotz of the yud is added after the initial writing of the yud, just as the kotz that connects the yud to the guf of the nun is added later. Sometimes we can see that he pulls the kotz all the way down the right side of the yud (see חמץ), so there will definitly be a kotz on both top and bottom of the yud. Now, this yud has 4 kotzim at its 4 edges, an exception to all his yudim wherever that have only three kotzim. I found a source to this unique feature of this yud in Zo...

Here are examples of another common problem in yudim, found in cheap mzuzos and parshiyos, but it may occur in expensive ones by mistake. The yudim don’t have a clear division between their guf (the rosh) and the regel, actualy turning them into a yud that doesn’t have a regel, which is pasul. In extreme situations where there is definitly no diference between the rosh and regel, it is pasul and impossible to fix because shlo c'sidran , in situations where we can see some slight diference one should ask a rav if it can be fixed. This may occur also in good mezuzos/tefilin – an example Look carefuly at this yud, it is one piece only, plus a kotz rabenu tam, there isn't a distinction between the rosh and regel.

The Gmara Shabos 103 teaches: U'chsavtom [csiva tama] sh'lo yaase … vavin yudin yudin vavin, zayinin nunin nunin zayinin … [rashi: nunin - nun pshuta] According to the argument developed/explained above, what is the meaning of these details "sh'lo yaase vavin yudin .. zayinin nunin"? According to the SA's shita explained, it is simple – in each pair one letter is short and the other longer, if the longer one was short it is pasul, and so the opposite. If the vav was short resembling a yud it is pasul, if the nun pshuta was short resembling a zayin it is pasul, if it is only a bit short and we have a doubt it’s a shaylas tinok. This is simple in the wording of the mechaber Shulchan Aruch 32:16. (and also should be the simple conclusion of BY ch.36 and all the acharonim that record his alpha beta-tzuras haosiyos , as Shulhan Aruch Harav and Mishnat Sofrim, in the letters mentioned) But Rema changes the explanation of SA 32:16, in adding הפשוטות כגון וי...

Shulchan Aruch 32:15: If the left foot of the hai is perforated, even if לא נשאר ממנו אלא כלשהו it is kosher according to Rosh. Rema remarks: but the other poskim require כמלא אות קטנה (a full complete small letter), and Rema concludes that the halacha follows the latter opinion. [note the MB 32:40 remark: this is not a chumra but the hard-line halacha, וצריך להזהיר מאד הסופרים שנכשלין בזה ]. One might think that SA and Rosh hold that כלשהו means any tiny dot visible to eye, is sufficient for this hai to be kosher. This is obviously a mistake, the common sense [and R. Vozner paskens so, Sheivet Halevi vol. 2, Yore Dea Siman 140) that the כלשהו mentioned is a size worthy to be considered the inner foot of a hai, not any tiny dot. This interpretation is very important, we use it l'halacha l'mayse when a tiny drop of ink falls into a Dalet or Reish – although we (ashkenazim) follow the Rema's psak given above [machmir in regard to mloi ois ktana], but to be maikel ag...

This is a very low quality Mezuzah, (I have to check several similar to these) if you see the י of והיה it looks almost like the letter J on an angle. It does not have a Rosh and instead a hook for a body. I assume it is shinui Tzura, I would appreciate your opinion on this.

The yudim in the first mezuza have a regel that is very long [see also the word בניכם] – much longer than the width of the head of the yud. This causes a big shayla! Are these yudim kosher or maybe they are classified as vavim?! And fixing them in tefilin or mezuza is pasul since it is Sh'lo C'sidran. It is obvious in the poskim that the defining point that divides yud from vav is shailas tinok, if so does this automaticaly accept any yud at any length because in regard to the general csav the yud is shorter than other letters, or maybe there is a shiur for the yud that it may not pass, as the [opposite] minimum shiur that the vav can not be shorter. In the second mezuza the yudim are worse, not only the regel is longer than the width of their head – the regel descends straight down, without a curve inward at all. To my opinion these yudim are pasul, they are [more a] vav than a yud!!! Although these yudim are shorter than the general csav, the porportion between the yuds' ...