B"H
Dear Rabbi Kornfeld
I hope this is not a silly question, (and I don't recall seeing a discussion of this) but why does the Gemara use the example of writing two letters/whole word as Shem and Shimon? Is the point that one has to write a complete word (and the smallest word has two letters) or is it just to write any two letters?
Let's say someone writes shin and mem (final form) - then that is something that has two letters and is a complete word.
But if they wrote shin mem (not final form) then although that is two letters, the intent of the writer cannot be to write a complete word yet otherwise he would have used the mem sofit. Would this then not be an example of devar sh'ein miskaven?
In order to avoid that whole machlokes, why didn't the Gemara use another two letters that form a word and begins a longer word that does not involve a letter that has a regular and final form? Is it to show that the minumum shuir is that any two letters are written even if they do not spell a word? (ie shin - mem - middle form is not really a word, but shin - mem sofit is)
Thank you in advance
Sincerely
David Wiseman
Zaide Reuven's Esrog Farm, LLC.
Your question is not silly at all. It is very valid and important, since it has wide-ranging repercussions.
The main Sugya is actually in Perek ha'Boneh, and begins with the Mishnah on 103a. The Mishnah there actually adds a few more examples, 'No'ach mi'Nachor, Dan mi'Daniel, and Gad mi'Gadiel'. Note that all of these are straightforward two-letter words, and indeed, Rashi there specifically explains that it must constitute a complete word in other contexts.
That answers two of your questions.
Your third question appears in the Gemara there on Amud Beis, which actually uses this Mishnah to prove that if one writes a regular letter instead of a Sofit or vice-versa (even in a Sefer-Torah), the Seifer is Kasher.
(Note: Concerning a Sefer Torah, the Halachah follows the Tanna Kama of that Braisa, who says that such a Sefer Torah would be Pasul).
b'Virchas Kol-Tuv
Eliezer Chrysler