4

Would usage of Zephaniah 3:8 solely as a pangram – it being the only option with both finals and cantillation – constitute shemos, and therefore require genizah?

לָכֵ֤ן חַכּוּ־לִי֙ נְאֻם־יְהוָ֔ה לְי֖וֹם קוּמִ֣י לְעַ֑ד כִּ֣י מִשְׁפָּטִי֩ לֶֽאֱסֹ֨ף גּוֹיִ֜ם לְקָבְצִ֣י מַמְלָכ֗וֹת לִשְׁפֹּ֨ךְ עֲלֵיהֶ֤ם זַעְמִי֙ כֹּ֚ל חֲר֣וֹן אַפִּ֔י כִּ֚י בְּאֵ֣שׁ קִנְאָתִ֔י תֵּֽאָכֵ֖ל כָּל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃‏

Double AA
  • 98,894
  • 6
  • 250
  • 713
Adám
  • 6,801
  • 21
  • 54
  • 5
    Wouldn't the presence of God's name make it literally Shemos regardless of what you want to use it for? – Isaac Moses Aug 27 '14 at 17:46
  • @IsaacMoses No. We burn a Torah written by a Mumar, for instance. http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/33584/sort-of-writing-the-name-of-god#comment85590_33584 and http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/44200/759 are further indicators to that effect. – Double AA Aug 27 '14 at 17:53
  • @IsaacMoses See here that if the intention is not God's name – even though it is the same four letters in that specific order – it does not constitute a Shem. Maybe here too, since the intention is only to display the letter-forms, and the specific order of letters is incidental, it wouldn't either. – Adám Aug 27 '14 at 17:55
  • 2
    @NBZ If the "specific order of letters is incidental," then it could have simply been written in alphabetical order. The point of using a verse as a pangram is that the letters written in this order do in fact have meaning. – Fred Dec 20 '15 at 19:27
  • @Fred Typographers generally use real text because the "look" of a font is not so apparent when the letters are just in alphabetical order. – Adám Dec 21 '15 at 02:07
  • http://clagnut.com/blog/2380/ list of pangrams – Double AA Jan 03 '21 at 22:43
  • 2
    It's a pangram even without the name of g.d – kouty Jan 03 '21 at 23:18

1 Answers1

0

Adam, many poskim (Rav Eliyashiv zt"l included) were machmir that if even an extract of a complete phrase, as long as it makes sense, is used, then that would indeed require geniza, even if the intention is for a 'chol' (non-sacred) use. That includes divrei Chazal too, not just Tanach. The specific example addressed to Rav Eliyashiv zt"l was regarding people who make stickers using משנכנס אדר מרבין בשימחה.

Shady Chareidi
  • 49
  • 4
  • 1
    firstly welcome to Mi Yodeya!! Could I trouble you to provide the source please for where Rav Elyashiv says this – Dov Jan 03 '21 at 23:28
  • Can you further justify that most poskim agreed that משנכנס אדר stickers actually require geniza? I'm rather skeptical of that – Double AA Jan 03 '21 at 23:57
  • I didn't say most, just many. And again, I believe that they regard this level of care as a chumrah. But here is the source I had in mind... It's the article in the top-right section of the first page. It quotes the original mekoros itself. http://www.torahtavlin.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/14-Bo.pdf – Shady Chareidi Jan 04 '21 at 15:47
  • I don't think such stickers are chol. After all, they are quoting a halacha, and urging people to follow it. For it to be a purpose of chol, the use would be לשון צחות, which is taking something out of its context and using it as an expression. As always CYLOR. Btw, according to many Rabbanim pretty much all Orthodox Jewish publications would require Genizah. So ask your Rav. (Mine is machmir). – N.T. May 30 '22 at 01:05