7

Halachically is ש a single letter with two pronunciations or are there 2 different letters in the Hebrew alphabet (shin and cin) which happen to be draw the same in the torah, have the same gematria etc. For example if the wrong letter is used in a legal document would the document validity be in question? Or if a scribe writing a torah intends to write a cin instead of a shin for God's name (sha-kai).

rikitikitembo
  • 14,079
  • 3
  • 22
  • 80
  • I am not sure what halachic ramification there could be. They do have the same gematriya, but gemattriya isnt really halachic. – mevaqesh Aug 10 '15 at 00:53
  • Like @mevaqesh, I don't know what you mean by "halachically". Can you clarify by means of an [edit] to the question, please? – msh210 Aug 10 '15 at 01:04
  • @mevaqesh i have edited the question to cite an example. i'm sure readers can think of others. – rikitikitembo Aug 10 '15 at 01:11
  • I'm not sure about the halacha regarding a sofer's intent on writing a shin instead of sin. However, clearly "Shadai" is a reference to one of G-d's names, whereas "sadai" means "my fields". So, it seems that these are two distinct letters, even if they are written alike and only differ by the dot placement and pronunciation. – DanF Aug 10 '15 at 01:17
  • 1
    @DanF to be accurate (what others call nitpicky) that doesnt prove the existence of halachic letter differentiation. One could have the same issue with, for example, two words with identical spellings, but different vowels. – mevaqesh Aug 10 '15 at 01:22
  • @DanF Furthermore, in the case of the letters, what is lacking is the intent for holiness, not the intent for the correct letters alone. Thus, there is further no proof of the existence of halachic letter differentiation. – mevaqesh Aug 10 '15 at 01:24
  • 1
    "For example if the wrong letter is used in a legal document would the document validity be in question" In general the validity of documents, e.g. an IOU is dependent on a person being able to understand it. Thus, if one substituted a shin for a sin, it would be fine, as long as it is understandable. The exception is gittin; divorce documents which must be written correctly. They are not writtn with nekudot so I am not sure how anyone would know. If they did write in nekudot they might have a problem. But, that wouldnt necessarily be that the wrong letter was used halachicaly, but rather – mevaqesh Aug 10 '15 at 01:29
  • 1
    That a different person has been identified. E.g. calling "shimon" "Simon" this is a different name, because it is a different name, not because the letters have discrete halachic identities (I think that makes sense). – mevaqesh Aug 10 '15 at 01:30
  • There is no difference just pronunciation, when you write anything real, you don't write nekudot, so no difference. – havarka Aug 10 '15 at 03:03
  • Just to give extra credence to @rikitikitembo 's question: In any given word, interchanging beis with veis, or pey with fey, or kaf with chaf etc will never dramatically change the core meaning of the word. But Shin with sin can result in such a categorical change, ex. שׂם (he placed) Vs. שׁם (there). – Shady Chareidi Jan 04 '21 at 16:07
  • @ShadyChareidi רִצְפָה is a floor but רִצְפָּה is a coal. – Double AA Jan 04 '21 at 16:15
  • @DoubleAA Is it the dagesh on the פ that changes the meaning, or the meteg on the ר? – Joel K Jan 04 '21 at 17:41
  • @JoelK Or the shva under the צ? – Double AA Jan 04 '21 at 17:42
  • Shin and sin should be considered (almost) completely separate letters. The letter shin etymologically corresponds to the Arabic س (s) or ث (th). Sin corresponds to ش (sh) in Arabic. The same comparison can be done with other Semitic languages (even Biblical Aramaic, where e.g. Hebrew שׁ = שׁ or ת, and Hebrew שׂ=שׂ). It is certain that in the hypothetical proto-Semitic language, shin and sin were different phonemes completely. – Argon Jan 04 '21 at 23:40
  • @Argon I think this should be posted as an answer. Tho, I expect you'll catch some flack for it. – MichoelR Jan 07 '21 at 03:34

2 Answers2

4

Torah, mezuzot and tefillin, or legal documents are written without nekudot (vowels). This includes the dot of the shin/sin. So there would be no halachic difference, being that there's no difference of the letter.

This is only for writing. When praying, reading the Torah, etc., you'll need to say it correctly.

Edit: I just realised that you wrote 'intends' for the Torah. I never heard of a sofer needing to know how the word is pronounced before writing it. As long as he writes it correctly, and his intention is l'shem mitzvah, I don't see why there should any problem.

Scimonster
  • 23,124
  • 4
  • 55
  • 127
user613
  • 2,403
  • 10
  • 18
  • I have seen a legal document (ketuba) where cin and shin are clearly delineated (name of the town, and name of a witness). Also, now that you mentioned it and i'm curious what is the name of the nekuda that is used to differentiate between these two letters? – rikitikitembo Aug 10 '15 at 10:41
  • @rikitikitembo Interesting. Not usually the case, AFAIK. I don't think it has a name, just shin or sin. – user613 Aug 10 '15 at 10:45
  • @rikitikitembo, according to the preface in the Koren Jerusalem Bible, it is merely referred to as a "shin/sin dot" – Noach MiFrankfurt Aug 10 '15 at 11:55
  • As a Ba'al Kri'ah (Torah reader), I am curious if you can further support the claim in the last paragraph. I am not as concerned about pronumciation, per se. But, I think I read that a sofer must be fully aware of each word that he writes, which may imply that he needs to know its meaning. There are cases where a shin vs. sin (or vice versa) changes the word meaning. If, in fact, the sofer must be aware of the exact word he's writing, than he may have the wrong intent. – DanF Aug 10 '15 at 14:17
  • Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 32(30) says that someone who cannot read, may not be a sofer. The nosei keilim say he will easily make mistakes and not realize it. I don't see why that would require the sofer to know much about the meaning, just that he recognizes the word. – MichoelR Jan 04 '21 at 17:15
  • The intention of the sofer is needed for a word (like אלהים) that sometimes refers to a name of God and other times to other entities (judges, foreign gods). Not so relevant to the OP. – Mordechai Jan 04 '21 at 23:42
  • Is ktiva of deaf or mute kosher? – Nissim Nanach Jan 05 '21 at 04:47
-1

I'm skipping the "halachically" part of the question, which others answered well, and just discussing whether they are two letters or one.
Yoma 75b "The word quail is written shlav, with the letter shin, but we read it as slav, with the letter samekh. What does this teach us?..." The gemara treats it as a kri/ksiv, as if the real letter is a shin, except - it is [always] pronounced as a S.
Similarly: Sanhedrin 70a “'And wine that gladdens the heart of man' (Psalms 104:15). The word for gladdens is written yeshamaḥ, meaning that wine makes one crazy, but we read it as yesamaḥ, gladdens the heart, meaning..."
And Sotah 3a: 'Reish Lakish says: A man commits a transgression only if a spirit of folly [shetut] enters him, as it is stated: “If any man’s wife goes aside [tisteh]” (Numbers 5:12). The word tisteh is written with the Hebrew letter shin...'
These examples make it sound like any sin is really a shin, only it is [always for that root] read differently.
Note that these are different from the more common ___ אל תקרי ___ אלא , "Don't read it ___, but as ___", where we are comparing an alternate reading with the standard reading (i.e., vowels).

Note also that for many piyutim that are in alphabetical order, the letter Sin appears in the place for Samech. (I do not think this ever happens in Tanach; see for example Psalm 119.)

MichoelR
  • 3,427
  • 7
  • 25
  • These are aggadic drashos, where we can change שטחו to שחטו, as in Sanhedrin there. So I don't think this is a proof. – Mordechai Jan 04 '21 at 23:38
  • Not proof, no. Interesting indications. – MichoelR Jan 04 '21 at 23:42
  • But Mordechai, aggadic drashos are awesome. I think you get a picture from them of Chazal's take on a topic. – MichoelR Jan 05 '21 at 14:30
  • Aggadic drashos are קדוש ונורא, and חס ושלום for me to say a word against them. I just don't think they are relevant to the question. – Mordechai Jan 06 '21 at 12:53
  • I guess that depends on the question. Asking about halachically being two different letters. I think the right answer was given: What exactly are you asking? Some people talked about what the sofer is thinking, and I think the right answer was given to that as well: It doesn't matter, except for obscure issues of shemos kedoshim. – MichoelR Jan 07 '21 at 02:42
  • So I wanted to talk about the question once the "halachically" is left out: Are they two letters or one? I think these Chazals point to an interesting twist: There's only one letter, but sometimes it is pronounced like a different letter. That isn't an occasional thing; certain shoroshim do that all the time. צריך עיון – MichoelR Jan 07 '21 at 02:43
  • Ah, could be Turk Hill agrees with me: https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/119407/is-brahmoism-avodah-zarah 'Brahmos examine the prevalent notion of "sin".' – MichoelR Jan 07 '21 at 05:21