Home › Forums › Bais Medrash › Stacking Seforim
- This topic has 37 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 7 months ago by Curiosity.
July 29, 2012 2:54 am at 2:54 am #604318
The order in which we are to put one Sefer on top of another Sefer, is Chumash on top, then Tehilim, and then finally Siddur and other Seforim. Am I missing any in the chronology?
Also, it should be always noted that it is forbidden to use a Sefer as a stand in which to place other things, including other Seforim. This even precludes putting a “higher” Sefer on top of a “lower” Sefer. i.e. It is prohibited to prop up your Chumash on top of your Siddur, in order to have a better view or angle to read your Chumash. And it is prohibited to place your Siddur on top of any other Seforim, in order to have an easier view or be able to read your Siddur better.July 29, 2012 6:11 pm at 6:11 pm #889421
I’ve also heard that, since it’s customary worldwide to stack books in order of size (with largest on bottom), that it’s not considered disrespectful to do it that way; even if the order of content isn’t chronologically correct.July 29, 2012 6:47 pm at 6:47 pm #889422
I don’t believe that is correct.July 29, 2012 6:49 pm at 6:49 pm #889423jbaldy22Member
According to Rav Heinemann and many other rabbonim there is no issue what so ever with stacking seforim in any order see aruch hashulchan YD 283:6July 29, 2012 7:12 pm at 7:12 pm #889424
Englishman, I have it from a very good source. Why don’t you believe it’s correct? The only issue here is disrespecting a sefer by putting a lesser sefer on top of it. Since it’s derech haolam to stack by size it’s not considered disrespectful. The only thing is that it has to be all Torah sforim. You can’t put a John Gresham novel in the stack.July 29, 2012 7:23 pm at 7:23 pm #889425
In Halacha it only talks about Chumash Vs Neviim Vs KesuvimJuly 29, 2012 7:30 pm at 7:30 pm #889426
And the order would be 1) Torah, 2) Neviim, 3) Kesuvim, 4) Other (Seforim).July 29, 2012 9:06 pm at 9:06 pm #889427
No maybe you can put other seforim on top of a Chumash. The halocha may only be regarding Tanach where Chazal were makpid that people should not confuse the kedusha of Torah with Neviim. However with other seforim where such confusion is not possible , maybe there was no takana.
I say this only b’toras efshar – as a possibility.July 29, 2012 9:20 pm at 9:20 pm #889428
With all due respect, that boich svara holds no logic. (That you can put a random non-Tanach Sefer on top of a Chumash.)July 29, 2012 10:45 pm at 10:45 pm #889429working harderMember
@jbaldy22 is correct.
The Halacha of stacking was referring to handwritten sefarim. The halachos do not apply for printed sefarim. In fact hand written notes on Torah would need to be placed on top of the chumash.July 29, 2012 10:47 pm at 10:47 pm #889430
Actually if you read my post I made the logic very clear. It may be incorrect as I myself admitted but it is not illogical and I believe it is a possibly legitimate tzad as to how the halochah should be understood.
Please explain why you think it holds no logic. Or please provide a proof that your way of understanding the halocha is correct and that it is osur to put a gemora on a chumash.
If you are unable to do any of the above then YOU are guilty of the boich svora as you are just going with your feeling and/or with an understanding of the halochah that you have held many years and are unwilling to even question rather than applying logic or bringing a proof.
Unless, (as apparent) you define a boich svora as any svora that you, Englishman, disagree with even without giving it any due logical process.July 29, 2012 11:05 pm at 11:05 pm #889431shlishiMember
Why should there be a difference between handwritten (not a Torah) and printed? Logically there is none. That there is, is a minority opinion. The Halacha remains one mustn’t place a sefer out of order.July 30, 2012 1:05 am at 1:05 am #889432pcozMember
Reb Leib Gurwicz z”l said if you are on seforim tidy-up roster and you’re going round the beis hamedrash collecting seforim to put them away then you do not need to be makpid on the order the seforim are in. Otherwise you would have to be.July 30, 2012 1:31 am at 1:31 am #889433working harderMember
too bad you not a posek shlishi, because the poskim say there is a difference.July 30, 2012 2:15 am at 2:15 am #889434sam4321Participant
Aruch Hashulchan (YD 293:6) equates all printed sefarim in kedusha and in terms of placing one on top of another:
???? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?July 30, 2012 2:28 am at 2:28 am #889435
A Chumash has to go on top. Many Poskim hold that a Gemara has to go on top of Nach, but others disagree. All agree that a Nach with Meforshim goes on top of a Gemara because then it contains Torah Shebiksav as well.
Englishman: I don’t think it’s so true that you can’t use a lower Sefer as a prop. I believe R’ Matisyahu Salomon has a piece on this in his Matnas Chayim on Moadim, but I don’t remember his sources.
On the ball: I don’t think that’s a S’vara that the Poskim bring down.
Curiosity: That makes sense but I don’t recall seeing any Poskim say it.July 30, 2012 2:39 am at 2:39 am #889436jbaldy22Member
@shlishi to you it is logical that there is no difference? i assume u fast then if u drop a sefer on the floor. look up the mareh mkomos on the issue and you will see that you are not right.July 30, 2012 3:39 am at 3:39 am #889437
Sam2: Please double-check your source about using a Sefer as a prop for another Sefer, and provide the source. I specifically learnt that it is assur.July 30, 2012 9:28 am at 9:28 am #889438chofetzchaimMember
I heard from R’ Nosson Shulman that the Chazzon Ish once told him that a Siddur goes on top of a Chumash.
In terms of propping a sefer on another, I heard that if it is there already it is OK, but you shouldn’t go out of your way to stack them for that purpose.July 30, 2012 9:52 am at 9:52 am #889439g73Member
Englishman – the issue of using a sefer to prop up another sefer is a machlokes Taz (he says it is assur) and Magen Avrohom (see below where he says it is ok):
???”? ??”? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??”? ???? ???? ??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ?? ???? ??”?, ???”? ???? ???? ???? ??”? ?????? ????? ???? ???”? ??’ ??”? ?”?,July 30, 2012 11:36 am at 11:36 am #889440
That’s what I thought. If it’s already there it’s okay.
By the way, the Minhag Ha’olam is clearly like that Aruch Hashulchan, though I still feel very uncomfortable about it. My Ra’aya (which I have been upset about for years) is that all of the printed Siddurim have the morning Leinings in the back. Lich’ora that’s a major problem unless we hold like this AR”H.July 30, 2012 7:23 pm at 7:23 pm #889441
Reb Leib Gurwicz z”l said if you are on seforim tidy-up roster and you’re going round the beis hamedrash collecting seforim to put them away then you do not need to be makpid on the order the seforim are in. Otherwise you would have to be.
And, once again, I’m in the wrong.
There are times I clear the sefarim in the shul I’m in and will stack them in any order for the sake of convenience. However, since I am not on the clean-up roster for this shul (I’m not even a member), I, once again, have failed to uphold the mitzvos, since the exemption only applies for those who are on the clean-up roster.
The WolfJuly 31, 2012 4:59 am at 4:59 am #889442YW Moderator-42Moderator
The Wolf, they let reshoim like you touch the sforim? I hope they dunk them in the mikvah 613 times to purify them your tumah after you touched them.July 31, 2012 9:52 pm at 9:52 pm #889443
I hope they dunk them in the mikvah 613 times to purify them your tumah after you touched them.
To my knowledge, there is nothing that says that a sefer touched by anyone under any circumstances becomes passul for use and required purification in the mikvah or by any other method.
If you have a source to the contrary, please advise.
The WolfJuly 31, 2012 11:32 pm at 11:32 pm #889444
… I think he was joking dude :/August 1, 2012 1:35 am at 1:35 am #889446YW Moderator-42Moderator
You are correct, there is no source. But svara would say that for somebody who has sunk to your level we have to make up these types of chumras.
(And in case you need clarification, yes, I was/am joking)August 1, 2012 1:15 pm at 1:15 pm #889447ItcheSrulikMember
I often use the aruch hashulchan’s heter when using the less holy book (as a tashmish) for the more holy one for example:
I will often put a sefer that is not kisvei kodesh down on top of a stack of papers with pesukim to keep them from blowing away. I also use large secular books to hold yerios open while I write. I still don’t get why some people think this is wrong. If the halacha was to avoid ever putting anything on top of kisvei kodesh, how could we ever cover a sefer torah between aliyos?August 1, 2012 2:48 pm at 2:48 pm #889448SayIDidIt™Participant
Sam2: My Ra’aya (which I have been upset about for years) is that all of the printed Siddurim have the morning Leinings in the back. Lich’ora that’s a major problem unless we hold like this AR”H.
Morning Leinings? What about the complete Sefer Tehillim??
SiDi™August 1, 2012 4:17 pm at 4:17 pm #889449
(And in case you need clarification, yes, I was/am joking)
Why would you joke about this?
The WolfAugust 1, 2012 4:56 pm at 4:56 pm #889450
ItcheSrulik, that’s not really a raya. The reason you don’t put stuff on kisvei kodesh is for fear of disrespecting them. We cover a sefer Torah between aliyos for the sake of respecting it.August 1, 2012 7:27 pm at 7:27 pm #889451zahavasdadParticipant
Seriously if you are stacking serforim
And you have a large Gemorah, a Small pocket sized Chmuash and some other medium sized seforim somewhere in the middle
If you dont stack it up Gemorah, Medium sized Seforim (By Size) and then the pocket sized Chumash, ALL the seforim will fall and topple overAugust 2, 2012 4:01 am at 4:01 am #889452
SiDi: That too. The morning Leining is just the one I thought of because the Siddur I used in school as a kid had the Leining in the back (not Tehillim, if I recall correctly).August 2, 2012 4:47 am at 4:47 am #889453
Sam2 – There’s a halacha that something that’s mechubar to itself can’t be used to cover itself. That’s why you can’t place your hand on your own head as a yarmulka, but you can use someone else’s hand. Lechorah a book is considered one unit because it’s mechubar through the binding, and therefore the front pages aren’t considered covering the back pages. Even without this though, what you are saying would mean a book can’t have a cover, title page, copyright/publisher page, blank pages, or introductions in front. No disrespect, but that’s a boich chumra. I’m sure those that argued with the Aruch Hashulchan didn’t tear out title pages from chumashim.August 2, 2012 5:17 am at 5:17 am #889454
Curiosity: Interesting point. If I recall correctly, someone discusses a rolled Tanach and how you sometimes end up with parts of Nach being on top of parts of Chumash. I don’t at all remember what was said though. (A cover would not be a problem as that serves to protect the Sefer. Title pages and introductions etc. would be an interesting issue to deal with. I have to think about this.)August 2, 2012 9:47 am at 9:47 am #889455KozovMember
Its actually said in the name of Gdolim like Reb Shlomo Zalman (Ginzei Hakodesh 3 30, I haven’t seen it) that you shouldn’t put Torah Shebaal Peh on top of a Siddur (different from the Aruch Hashulchan), and its Kdusha is like Neviim and Ksuvim since it has psukim from Tanach in it.
It is like Neviim and Ksuvim because in YD 282:19 (from Megillah 27a), The Rama says the dinim of not putting Neviim and Ksuvim on a Chumash and a Chumash on a Sefer Torah is only with two Krichos, but in the same one Hakol Shari.
So the svoro might be its the same as with tfillos and tanach printed together.
Its not like a “Chumash” even though it has Torah in it because there’s a difference between gilyon and kricha (Rama YD 283:1)
But they don’t need to rely on the Aruch Hashulchan because they are possibly differentiating between printing together and placing one on another. Just like we see by putting a Sefer Torah on Neviim that you can’t but you can write them together.
Who are the Poskim who hold a Gemara goes on top of Nach and what is the svoro? The Ri Migash for one says it can’t and those mentioned before. ??”? ??”? ???? ??’ ??
On the ball,
even from the Aruch Hashulchan the Svoro goes further than the chshash of mixing up the Kdusha, rather, with their actual Kdusha. In fact, the Zohar says “???? ????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??”, not vice versa.
(?’ ??, ?”? ??,?)
the Rama (YD 282,19) says we are not makpid about the placement of ksuvim (divrei kabala,nevuah) on neviim (divrei kodesh, ruach hakodesh), even though they have different kdushos (Ran (Rif Megilla 8,2).August 2, 2012 3:59 pm at 3:59 pm #889456
Kozov: Now I will look. I really don’t remember.August 2, 2012 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm #889457ItcheSrulikMember
Curiosity: Exactly. It’s a matter of respect, not the actual act of putting something on top of the sefer. In my example, it would not be very bakavod for a parsha of tefillin or a megillah to have to go to geniza because it rolled shut and the ksav got ruined.August 3, 2012 4:10 am at 4:10 am #889458
ItcheSr- oops, I misread your comment. My mistake, I thought you were saying something else.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.