Reference for Menachot 67:17

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב לא נצרכא אלא לקוצו של יו"ד והא נמי פשיטא לא נצרכא אלא לאידך דרב יהודה דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב כל אות שאין גויל מוקף לה מארבע רוחותיה פסולה:

It is possible to think that this means that one should write [the portion] upon the stones [of the house], therefore it uses the expression 'writing' here and the expression 'writing' there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the law of a bill of divorce; cf. ibid. XXIV, 1. So Rashi; Tosaf. suggest that the reference is to the scroll used in the case of a woman suspected of adultery, cf. Num. V, 23, or to the Book of the Law written by the king, cf. Deut. XVII, 18.');">¹⁷</span> and as in the latter case it means upon a scroll so here it means upon a scroll. Or perhaps argue this way: it uses the expression 'writing' here and the expression 'writing' there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With reference to the memorial of stones to be set up by the Israelites when they cross the Jordan, and upon which are to be written all the words of the law; cf. ibid. XXVII, 3ff.,');">¹⁸</span> as there it means upon the stones so here it means upon the stones. Let us then see to which [of the two] is this case most similar. We may infer the 'writing' which is intended as a precept for all times from the 'writing' which is also intended as a precept for all times, but we may not infer the 'writing' which is intended as a precept for all times from the 'writing' which is not intended as a precept for all times.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The engraving upon the stones was an ordinance for that time only.');">¹⁹</span> And [it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The mezuzah as well as the bill of divorce and the other cases mentioned above in n. 3.');">²⁰</span> must be written with ink] as it says elsewhere, Then Baruch answered them, He pronounced all these words unto me with his mouth, and I wrote them with ink in the book.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jer. XXXVI, 18.');">²¹</span> R'Aha the son of Raba said to R'Ashi, But the Divine Law says upon the door-posts,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., actually written upon the wood. o,c,fu o, c,fu');">²²</span> and you say we must infer the 'writing' here from the 'writing' there [that it shall be written on a scroll]! [He replied,] The verse says, 'And thou shalt write them', which implies a perfect writing,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Heb. 'and thou shalt write them', is interpreted as though divided into two words: meaning, a perfect writing; and this is the case only when writing is applied with ink upon a scroll, for any writing with ink upon wood or stones would be imperfect and indistinct.');">²³</span> and then [place it] upon the door-posts. But since then it is written, 'And thou shalt write them',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Signifying that the writing must be upon a scroll.');">²⁴</span> wherefore do I need the analogy of the common expressions? - Without the analogy I should have said that one must write it upon a stone<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., one must carve the words upon a stone, which would also be a perfect and distinct writing.');">²⁵</span> and set it up upon the threshold [as the door-post], it therefore teaches us otherwise. OF THE FOUR PORTIONS OF SCRIPTURE IN THE TEFILLIN, THE [ABSENCE OF] ONE INVALIDATES THE OTHERS; INDEED EVEN ONE [IMPERFECT] LETTER CAN INVALIDATE THE WHOLE. Is not this obvious?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra ');">²⁶</span> - Rab Judah answered in the name of Rab, The law had to be taught in respect of the tittle of the letter yod. And is not this, too, obvious? - It was necessary to be taught in respect of the other statement of Rab Judah; for Rab Judah said in the name of Rab, Any letter that is not surrounded on all four sides by a margin of parchment is invalid.

Explore reference for Menachot 67:17. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.