Siman 278

It is stated in the Yerushalmi Megillah (Chapter One, Halacha 9): Their sewing is a halacha given to Moses at Sinai etc. It is a halacha given to Moses at Sinai that they should write on skins etc. and sew with gidin. And when he sews—he must sew like this stitch. Thus far his words. The commentators were hard-pressed in its interpretation, see there. And it seems to me that this is its interpretation: So that you should not say that it is true that one must sew the sheets to one another, but nevertheless there can be a small gap between one sheet and another. It comes to teach us that one must sew like this stitch, as when one sews a garment—they are literally fastened to one another. And according to this, I say that when there are times that the stitches have weakened, and there is a small space between sheet and sheet—this is a hindrance until he fastens the sheets to one another. And I have seen this matter with my own eyes. Therefore, one must be careful in this (so it seems in my humble opinion), and to stick the sheets to one another with glue is invalid.

The gidin must specifically be from a pure animal, for only the skin of a pure animal was permitted for the work of Heaven (Shabbat 28b). And that which is said there regarding tefillin: "and to sew them with their gidin" — applies to a sefer Torah as well. And so it is necessitated by the sugya there. (For if not so, let it establish this teaching of Rav Yosef regarding a sefer Torah, see there. Examine it and you will find it simple.) And so it is explicitly at the beginning of Masechet Soferim, and this is its wording: And it is a halacha given to Moses at Sinai that we write upon the skins of a pure animal etc. and sew them with their gidin. See there. And this is the wording of the Rambam in the ninth chapter, law 13: And when one sews the sheets — one sews them only with gidin of a pure animal or beast, and even from their nevelot and terefot, in the same manner that one sews the tefillin. And this matter is a halacha given to Moses at Sinai. Thus far his words. (And that which he wrote "in the same manner etc. the tefillin" — is because in Shabbat they said this regarding tefillin. Examine it and you will find it simple.)

Our sages, of blessed memory, said in Gittin (Gittin 60a): A Sefer Torah that is missing even a single yeriyah—one does not read from it. And the Rosh explained that this refers to the sewing, meaning: if even one yeriyah is not sewn to the Sefer Torah, one does not read from it. For it is impossible that it is missing entirely, because if so, even a single letter as well, for a Sefer Torah that is missing a single letter is pasul. Rather, it refers to the sewing (the Gra, subsection 4). And based on this, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 4: If one yeriyah is not sewn with it, even if it is placed with it, one does not read from it. Thus far his words.

And there is one who raised a difficulty against our teacher, the Beit Yosef: How could he state the matters without qualification? For behold, many disagree with the Rosh, as the Tosafot in Megillah (Megillah 9a) wrote indeed that in the case of a deficiency of even an entire verse—one may read from it. And only in the case of a deficiency of a yeriah does one not read from it, see there. And the Ramban distinguishes between a deficiency in the middle, where even one letter is an impediment, and at the end, where only the deficiency of a yeriah is an impediment (Ran, second chapter of Megillah, in his name). And the Ran explains that certainly the mitzvah of writing a sefer Torah is not fulfilled even when one letter is missing, but in public one may read from it even with many deficiencies, until a complete yeriah is missing (ibid.). And the Rashba and the Ritva in their novellae to Gittin there answered in other ways, see there. However, in any event, all these authorities do not hold like the Rosh, so how could he state without qualification like a single opinion (Yad Shaul)? And in my humble opinion, it appears that the law is with our teacher, the Beit Yosef, and certainly all these authorities do not argue on the essence of the law. And logic dictates this, for since the sewing is an impediment as I have written, if so, what difference is it to me if they are not sewn at all to one another, or if one yeriah is not sewn? Ultimately, this yeriah has no connection to the sefer Torah, as is understood. And these, our teachers, who wrote other answers, did so not because they do not hold of this law, but because the language "that it was missing one yeriah" did not imply to them that it refers to its sewing. For if so, it should have said "a sefer Torah where one yeriah was not sewn—is invalid." Rather, it is certainly a different matter. But they also hold that there is no difference between a yeriah that was not written at all, and one that was written but not joined by sewing to the sefer Torah. And such is the primary law.

Our sages, of blessed memory, said in Megillah (Megillah 19a) that one does not sew the sheets from their beginning to their end, so that it does not tear when this one pulls here and that one pulls there. Rather, one should leave a small amount at its beginning without sewing, and a small amount at its end. And it appears to me that, in any event, the sewing must begin from the place of the writing. And all this is for the mitzvah and is not a requirement, for if one sewed it from its beginning to its end – it is kosher. And there is no fixed number for the stitches. And the sewing must be from the outside and not from the inside, for this is not a beauty for a sefer Torah. And this is also included in what they said in the Yerushalmi, that one should sew like this stitch, for such is the way of the sewers to sew from the outside (the Gra, subsection 1). And it appears that even if one sewed from the inside – it is not a requirement bediavad, and it is permitted to read from it. However, one must remove these stitches and sew from the outside. And regarding the manner of sewing, it appears that it is better to place the edge of one sheet upon the second, for in this manner the sewing is better, and as I wrote in siman 273, section 1, see there.

There is one who is uncertain if it is permitted to sew with the sinews of the gid hanasheh (Beit Yosef). In my opinion, it is no worse than nevelot and terefot, since it is from a permitted species—"in your mouth." And if it is because the gid hanasheh never has a state of permission, behold, all sinews do not impart flavor and are not fit for eating, and we only require that they be from a permitted species "in your mouth." And thin intestines are valid like complete sinews. There is one who disagrees on this (Noda BiYehudah, Second Edition, Orach Chaim, siman 2), but it is not compelling. They are no worse than "talidors" mentioned in Orach Chaim at the end of siman 32 (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 32). The one who disagrees also disagrees on this, but it is not clear. Certainly, ox sinews are better than all types of sinews, but according to the law, it is impossible to disqualify any types of sewing made from the skin of a pure animal. And that which they said: "and they are sewn with their sinews"—this is the common way of the matter, and it is not meant strictly. Also, regarding the sinews of a pure bird, it is impossible to disqualify them, for we only require a matter that is permitted "in your mouth," except that they are not good for sewing. And in Orach Chaim there, more of this will be explained with the help of Heaven.

One shall place two rollers in a sefer Torah, one at its beginning and one at its end. One shall leave a margin at its beginning and at its end, wrap them around the rollers, and sew them with gidim. There shall remain between the roller and the leaf two finger-breadths, as I wrote in siman 273. In a case of pressing need when it is impossible to sew them with gidim, if it was sewn with silk around the rollers—one may read from it, for regarding this the halacha that one specifically requires gidim was not stated. Nevertheless, one should not attach it with glue around the roller, because the glue dries and loosens from the rollers. Also, when one obtains gidim—one shall remove the silk and sew with gidim. However, regarding the sheets, if one sewed them with silk—it is pasul. And know that regarding the rollers, even if they are not attached at all to the sheets but are merely wrapped upon them—one also reads from it, and there is no need to take out another. But without rollers at all, one does not read from it if there is another sefer Torah. However, when there is no other sefer Torah—one does not cancel the reading, but rather reads, and afterwards they repair it when they obtain rollers (Dagul Mervavah and Birkei Yosef). And the Rambam in the tenth chapter did not count the absence of rollers among the disqualifications.

And know that I have seen among the great later authorities who wrote that even when the sheets are sewn with silk, one may read from it (Nekudot HaKesef and Dagul MeRevavah). They based themselves on the words of the author of the Terumat HaDeshen (siman 51). And I cry out in great wonder! How is it possible to say such a thing, when this is a halacha given to Moses at Sinai? And also the Rambam counted it in the tenth chapter (Rambam Laws of Tefillin, Mezuzah, and Sefer Torah 10) among the invalidations, see there. And from the Terumat HaDeshen there is proof to the contrary, and this is his wording there: A sefer torah whose sheets are sewn with silk etc. it appears that it is obvious that it is not kosher, and so wrote the Rambam. And in the Sefer HaTerumah etc. however I saw etc. sewn with silk and they read from them. And perhaps it was due to a case of great need, where there was no one there who knew how to repair the gidin etc. and in a similar vein etc. in the name of the Geonim that a sefer torah whose parchments were not processed lishmah etc. that even though we hold that it is invalid, nevertheless they may read because of "it is a time to act for Hashem, they have made void Your Torah etc." Thus far his words. Behold, he wrote explicitly that it is invalid. Rather, he came to justify those who read because of "it is a time to act," and he compared it to processing "lishmah" where the Geonim said it is invalid, yet nevertheless they read from them because of "it is a time to act." And it has already been explained in siman 271 that we do not rely on the Geonim in this, see there. And here too it is so. But Heaven forbid to say that the Terumat HaDeshen validated sewing with silk. And so we hold, and even if there is no other sefer torah—Heaven forbid to read from it unless the majority of the sheet is with gidin and a minority of it is with silk, for then it is possible to permit in a case of great need because the majority is sufficient, as will be explained with the help of Heaven. But if there is even only one sheet that is sewn entirely with silk—it is completely invalid.

And this invalidation is explicit in the Gemara Megillah (Megillah 19a): The Megillah is called a "book" and is called a "letter." It is called a "book," for if one sewed it with linen threads—it is invalid. And it is called a "letter," for if one placed three threads of sinew in it—it is valid, provided they are tripled. See there. Behold, they said explicitly that if one sewed it with linen threads—it is invalid. That is to say: that without sinews—it is invalid. And know that it appears to me from this Gemara that although there is no measure for the stitches as to how many stitches one should make in a sheet, as I wrote in section 5, nevertheless with fewer than four stitches—it is invalid, for regarding the Megillah they said that because it is called a "letter"—it is valid with three. If so, you automatically learn from this that if it were not called a "letter"—it would be invalid with three. And automatically, a Sefer Torah requires no fewer than four. And regarding four, we have no proof that it is insufficient; however, four stitches are an absolute requirement. And also on the condition that from the first stitch to the second be like a quarter of a column, and similarly from the second to the third, and from the third to the fourth. And we learned this from the three stitches of the Megillah, which our sages, of blessed memory, required to be tripled according to the explanation of Rashi, see there. If so, here too regarding the four stitches of a Sefer Torah—they must be quadrupled. However, ab initio one certainly needs many stitches. (And according to the Rambam that for a Megillah one needs nine stitches—necessarily for a Sefer Torah one needs ten.)

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 3 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 278:3): If the majority of the stitching between one sheet and another was torn, but they are still connected by five or six lasting stitches—it is kosher. Thus far his words. From this wording, it is implied that the majority of the length of the sheet was torn, and only a minority remains, and there are five or six stitches in that minority. And so it is in the source of the law in the Terumat HaDeshen (siman 50). And that which requires five or six—it is not exact. For the main point is that there must be a lasting connection, and with two or three it is understood that it will not last, and it will all tear. And it is possible that even with four it is sufficient (see Nekudat HaKesef). But there are those who disagree, and they hold that we require the majority of the length of the sheet to be stitched. And if the majority was torn—it is like the whole was torn (Taz subsection 2, and so wrote the Be'er Heitev). And there is no definitive ruling in this law, and there are arguments for this side and for that side. And in practice, one should certainly be stringent. Nevertheless, it seems to my humble opinion that if it was found on Shabbat at the time of the Torah reading that the majority was torn, and the minority stands firmly—it is not only if there is no other sefer Torah, but even if there is another sefer Torah—one should not disgrace it. And we can rely on our teacher, the Beit Yosef, and on the Terumat HaDeshen, and on the Shach in Nekudat HaKesef, and read from it. And immediately after Shabbat they should repair it.

There are some among the great authorities who forbade the sewing of women in a sefer Torah, for since the Torah disqualified their writing—if so, all repairs of a sefer Torah that are indispensable are disqualified in women. And the sewing is indispensable. And a proof for this is from tefillin, as has been explained in Orach Chaim siman 39, that they are disqualified in all the repairs of their making. And here too regarding a sefer Torah (Maharam Lublin in a responsum, siman 8). And in my humble opinion, there is a clear proof to the contrary from the Rambam, for in the first chapter regarding writing, he included sefer Torah, tefillin, and mezuzot, that a woman is disqualified by a scriptural decree. And in the third chapter, halacha 16, he wrote regarding tefillin: One may not make tefillin except for an Israelite, for their making is like their writing because of the shin that they make in the leather. Therefore, if a Cuthean covered them or sewed them—they are disqualified. And the same law applies to anyone disqualified from writing them, that he should not make them. Thus far his words. Behold, he made it dependent on the shin that is in the batim, and were it not for the shin—they would be permitted in their making. And in a sefer Torah where there is no shin—they are permitted in their sewing. And therefore he did not mention this law except regarding tefillin. And such is the opinion of the commentators of the Shulchan Aruch in Orach Chaim there (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 39). (For the Taz, sif katan 2, wrote: because there is in their making a shin etc., and the Magen Avraham, sif katan 6, wrote: but if he scraped etc. it is kosher ex post facto. And the same law applies if he sewed the sefer Torah. Thus far his words. And I do not know what happened to the Pitchei Teshuva in siman 282 in Nachalat Tzevi, who wrote in the name of the Magen Avraham that it is disqualified. And he erred in this.)

And regarding the essence of the matter, I do not understand: for is it so that the Torah disqualified the writing of women only because she is not subject to the commandment of "and you shall bind them"? For behold, regarding mezuzah, which women are obligated in, nevertheless her writing is disqualified. Rather, it is a decree of the verse, and this is what it means: anyone who is not subject to "and you shall bind them" is not subject to "and you shall write them." That is to say: in any writing. But regarding other matters, even though she is not commanded—nevertheless, she is permitted to perform them. For behold, regarding tzitzit she is not obligated, and nevertheless she is permitted to place the tzitzit in the garment, as I wrote in Orach Chaim siman 14. And regarding lulav she is not obligated and is permitted to bind it, as I wrote there in siman 649. Therefore, the Rambam was required to explain the reason for the disqualification of making the batim of tefillin because of the shin, that is to say: that this is also included in the category of writing. But in other matters—it is obvious that she is fit to perform them. And we see the custom of Israel, that the women sew the Sefer Torah and rejoice in the mitzvah. And the custom of Israel is Torah, and there is no basis in the law to prevent them from this. And it is a source of gratification for them, and so is the primary ruling according to my humble opinion. (And it is true that according to our teacher Tam, who disqualifies women from making tzitzit on the grounds that anything for which one is not commanded—they are disqualified from performing them, as the Hagahot Maimoniyot wrote in the first chapter of Tzitzit, see there. And this is the opinion of the "there are those who are stringent" in Orach Chaim siman 14. And see Magen Avraham at the end of siman 649, that our teacher Tam interprets "anyone who is not subject to 'and you shall bind them'"—meaning that she is not subject to this mitzvah. And it is very difficult according to his approach regarding mezuzah, as I have written. But we do not hold according to our teacher Tam. And besides this, behold we have proven in siman 270 that according to the opinion of the Rambam, women are obligated in the writing of a Sefer Torah, see there. Therefore, there is no hesitation regarding our custom that women sew the sheets to one another, and one should not doubt this. Examine it and you will find it simple.)