The International STa"M Forum

I know we have been through this before but I would like rav weiners opinion on these yudin. please click on pic to enlarge, its not clear here. I'm talking about the words ki, bonai, vayehi, vehoya and mibeis

The yud in yisroel is the yud in question. As it is, this image is substantially larger than real life. If you stand back about a meter from your screen it will be similar to what it would be like looking closely in real size. As it is- in real life, it looks like a yud with a small blita on the regel which would probably best be fixed by adding ink to the right side of the rosh with a rapeatograph. I would not even classify it as a shaalos tinuk. Sure, if you blow it up several thousand percent and rotate it, and isolate it / crop it, and show it to a child on its own, you will confuse him good and proper. But as Reb Moshe says, I don't think  you are obligated to do that.

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?

I permitted to fix this nifsak in tefilin.

What is the law in regard to the heads of zayin or nun that are extended? [The pictures are edited, and may be exagerated in order to emphasis the problem] MS (ois nun) writes: one should be careful not to extend the head of the nun, because it resembles a beis. It seems he is saying so, even if the moshav is short, still an extended head resembles partialy a beis. This follows what the MB 36:3 writes that there are opinions that changing a letter so part of it resembles a different letter is pasul, but the MB there concludes this isn't pasul. So we may understand here the same, that lachatchila this should not be done, bdieved it is not pasul. The Mikdash M'at (nun:5, in name of Da'as Kedoshim) questions maybe an extended head and short moshav is pasul, because it looks like an upside down nun. (this reason is questionable, why can't a tinok be asked?) And indeed in Shavet Halevi vol 5:6 writes that if the head is 3k wide it is pasul, either because of

One of the challenges I have as a vendor of Sta"m is when people come to me saying they want to buy a product that is "Top Quality". I am always very careful to say it as it is, and before any sale I always make sure people understand what they are getting, even if it is not warranted. For example even if I am selling something from one of my better sofrim (but not the absolute best) , I will say " even though it is mehudar and you are getting a good price, it still isn't top quality". I feel the need to emphasize this primarily because I know that there is a good probability that within a few years another sofer/magiha will be looking at the product, and judging it, and if I somehow gave the impression that it is better than it is, it would end up reflecting badly on me. And I know plenty of sochrim who have received bad reputations for "overselling". The problem is what happens when someone comes along and says he wants "the best" or

What is the law in regard to this tes? Is this a moshav, or that a tes doesn't need a moshav? Or is it pasul? This question relates to other letters that have a moshav; lamed, kuf, mem psucha, samech. Another problem is in regard to shin, the shin has a moshav that is sharp not wide (as written in BY), what about a shin [like this] that has 3 lines connected to the bottom point but there seems to be no moshav? In many Sfardi scripts it is common to see samechs, that are triangle at their bottom [sharper than the picture given] the lamed and kuf are without a moshav. But maybe for ashkenazic script this isn't accepted? [the second picture is a mixup of different csavim, but at least shows a sfardi kuf - without a moshav] The Mishnat Sofrim [see Biur Hallacha in each of the letters] lamed, kuf clearly holds that they must have a moshav, if not are pasul. The Mikdash M'at on lamed agrees to the MS that a lamed lacking a moshav is pasul (it seems that he d

A good  Erev Shabbos to one and all. It has been nearly 2 months since the launch of this forum. The idea behind this forum was simply to provide support for sofrim and magihim, such as myself, particularly in more remote places outside of Eretz Yisroel. Just this week alone three new sofrim became members, and I received emails from a number of others looking to join (hopefully I will have time after Shabbos to add their profiles). We have received as many as 300 hits per day and I can see a lot more than the registered members who are visiting this site reguarly. I did not anticipate the success of this site, nor was I expecting it to grow this quickly. Clearly, there is a need for this site and I guess it is somewhat overdue. I think it would make sense for this forum to be run a little more professionally. I do not have the time or the expertise to do so myself, so I am looking for a professional who can assist in building this site. It would involve obtaing a domain name (

I added this picture the word "beisecha" the yud looks to me like a mini lamed. R' Moshe do you agree on this? The Mikdash maat sif katan 11 seems to say that it is fixable by adding dio on the top? Can someone explain me the mikdash maat? This is a sefardi yud with a big tag on top of it (seems disconnected a little) I believe is still kosher. this is ksav chabad where the tag is a little thicker than should be, interestingly I have learned that the top tag should be just over a kolmus ( just bigger than the regel) The next picture the tag is even taller (like that of the sefardi, besides for the positioning) however thinner. although I believe both are still passable since the tzura is still on them. What do you say?

In the first picture the Yud is it kosher? The second picture the א and the ו from the word "laois". Does the aleph have a kosher foot? The vuv is it still moil tinok or too long? The Nun of Anochi is the head technically fixable? Here the Nun of the word Vinasati looks like a proper chuf with tagim on top of it. What do you say?

This first bet could be related to Mikdash Meat's doubt " Ee (=if) tinok moil"; is it kosher? Vav and zain are quite close one to the other; are they still kosher?

Since B"h we are getting into mezuza laws, I would ask does anybody know about a specific lubavitch custom in regard to the shiur parsha in mezuza. The kuntres acharon of SA Harav [32:12] writes: ובמזוזה אין צריך להיות הריוח רק כשיעור ג' יודין סוף פרשת שמע וכשיעור ג' יודין קודם התחלת פ' והיה אם שמע. It seems there is a printing error and it should be ט' יודין as the minimum shiyur (not ג' יודין ). Meaning that the Alter Rebbe didn’t require a full 3 x Asher in mezuza (as in tefilin). The difference the Alter Rebbe makes between tfilin and mezuza, can easily be explained. This was to my knowledge the custom followed by all lubavich sofrim that I saw or heard – to leave at least 9 yudim [b'revach – well spaced] in the mezuza both before vhaya, and after shma. Lately I heard a suggestion that this isn't a mistake, rather the Alter rebbe did instruct to leave less than a shiyur. I doubt this rumor has any reliable source, (also it doesn’t fit w

B"H 2 questions on fixing a mezuza: I am wondering what is the custom concerning placing a Mezuza on a gate (or door etc..) when it is placed on the outside of the door and not within the Oivei Hapesach (since it is very thin). The Pischei Teshuva in Yoreh Deah 290:10 writes that the bottom of the mezzuza should be alachson pointed towards the door while the outer part should be going pointed away from the door. Is this the accepted practice, I have seen by many that in this case the exact opposite, (i.e. the top is pointed towards the door and the bottom pointing away from the door)? 2) In a bedroom (which has windows) and the only door the heker tzir opens out from the room. Should the mezuza be placed as walking into the room (against the heker tzir) or following the heker tzir (from the inside of the room going out)? Possibly in this case minhag chabad is to follow heker tzir, while others go by the conventional way to enter the room from the outside? If a Rabbi (non Sofer/ M

I recently saw an article where mishmeres stam exposed a sofer who was selling magnificently written ksav velish mezuzos, parshiyos and sifrei torah (see pic). However the sofer was using a dubious technique - he was printing on the klaf with a machine, and then writing over it. While ksav al gabei ksav is common in Sifrei torah, esp. refurbished ones, and presents no Halachic problems, the issue here was that the first ksav underneath was computer generated and printed, not hand written. Rav Elyashiv Sh' and others ruled the sefer should go to genizah. If you look at the second picture, you can see and example of  the way he was caught out. The printed ksav underneath was not always perfectly covered by the new ink. This led to "double edges" and edges that were a different shade and texture, which was a giveaway, particularly when examined closely with a magnifier. I once had a discussion with a prominent rav as to whether you could use a stencil when writing stam.

2 sheilas In the first picture the gimmel of Diganecha problems 1) it is connected high near the rosh? (although in this case may be still kosher) and 2) the two feet are like a bow (although again in this case I think it is kosher), correct? the head of the nun nun is primarily going to the right (with a tad to the left). Since the Tagim are on the right side specifically it makes it look even more like a nun hafucha (which is a chashash pasul?) What do you say?

Im'm throwing a question into the ring: If lechatchillah the ink has to dissolve in water like the opinion of the Rambam, how is it mehudar to write with these "new age" waterproof inks????

Magen Avraham 32:1: צריך לכתוב ד' דאחד כל כך גדולה כמו ד' דלתי"ן קטני' (כתבי האר"י).   The dalet of echad should be large the size of 4 small daletin (in the name of Ari-zal). The MB 32:1 (in name of Pri Megadim): maybe this is not estimated by the script actualy used, rather if it has the size of 4 tiny dalet, it is sufficient. And therefore the custom is to write this dalet only larger than a regular dalet. This means that the custom wasn't to make the large dalet actualy 4 times a dalet in the script, only slightly larger. R. Menahem Dovidovitz shlita holds that the proper writing of this dalet (4 x dalet ktana) is done by doubling the size of the rosh to its height and twice its length, so it is equal in area to 4 regular dalets. My opinion is that this is not the meaning of the MA (Ari). The extending of the gag twice is not considered doubling the dalet, since the dalet once [its gag] becoming thicker must be also extended in order not t

A continuation to a point I mentioned in my last post "shiyur moshav of the lamed" - the basic measure-unit in stam is a yud. But this unit may not be a exact square area – highth=width, since the width of the yud may vary, and will be fairly accepted at 0.7k, when the hight is always 1k – the oivei of the kulmus is the width of the line [gagei ha'oisiyos]. So a shiyur yud may be = 1kHigh/0.7kWide. In Alfa Beisa (p. 200, 205. Quoted in Darke Moshe, and Mishnat Sofrim) that the beis should be 3x3 kulmusim highth=width. This is built according to the measure of a standard yud, which is 1x1 kul. As the MS ois yud writes:  שיעור גופה מלא קולמוס אחד ולא יותר שלא תדמה לרי"ש   The guf of the yud is 1k, no more, so it won't resemble a reish. Obviously, the MS is speaking about the width of the yud, not its hight, because it shouldn't resemble a reish! (not a vav). Accordingly, the regular BY csav today is built on a structure of exact square, the yud 1x1k, th

B"H Sheilas for R" Moshe In the chuf, it has a kav going down from it. I assume it is allowed to erase it since lo nishtanu ikur tzuroso, correct? I have another sheila (not able to take a picture of it, because it does not show well) where a tiny kav is going from one part of the inner half of the tav untill the next part. The ink is extremely faint (done probably by a mistaken swift of a rapidiograph), not so noticeable. I would assume it is allowed to erase but I did not see this is mefurash in sfarim? These are similar vuv's which I showed yesterday although here the roshim are even bigger, (this is from the same sofer, he had a tendency of writting long rashei vuvim) the tinok correctly called this and the following picture by vuv. I am able to rely on it or is this or the next one too similar to a reish?

Sheila of Ches