1)WRITING VERSES OR HASH-M'S NAME NOT IN A SEFER [Kisvei ha'Kodesh: writing Pesukim]
1.61b (Beraisa): If Hash-m's name was written on the handle of a Kli or the leg of a bed, one cuts off and buries the part containing His name.
2.115b (Beraisa): [Written] Berachos and Kemi'im, even though they have letters [of Hash-m's name] and verses from many Parshiyos, may not be saved from a fire. One must let them burn;
3.This is why Chachamim said that one who writes Berachos is like one who burns Torah.
4.Erchin 6a (Beraisa): If a Nochri donated a beam for a Beis ha'Keneses with Hash-m's name on it, for Yisraelim to use it, we cut off the place of His name, and bury it. The beam may be used, for a name not in its place is not Kadosh. We learn from the above Beraisa (61b).
5.Gitin 60a (Rabah): One may not write a Megilah (partial Chumash) to teach a child.
6.Question (Mishnah): She (Munvaz' mother) made a gold tablet on which Parashas Sotah was written.
7.Answer: The tablet was written b'Seirugin (this will be explained).
1.Rambam (Hilchos Sefer Torah 7:14): One may not write a Megilah to teach a child. If a Megilah has three words in every line it is permitted.
i.Beis Yosef (YD 283 DH v'Chasav ha'Rambam): The Gemara answered that Parashah Sotah was written on the tablet b'Seirugin. The Rambam (in a Teshuvah) explains that there are three words on a line, and the words on each line are far from those on the next line. If one must write a verse he should write at most three words. If he needs the entire verse he should write Simanim in place of the words, or write just one or two letters of each word, or write b'Seirugin.
2.Rambam (Hilchos Yesodei ha'Torah 6:2): One who erases a Kodesh name of Hash-m is lashed mid'Oraisa. It says about idolatry "v'Ibadtem Es Shemam... Lo Sa'asun Ken la'Shem."
3.Rambam (6): If Hash-m's name was written on a Kli, he cuts off the place of the name and buries it. Even if Hash-m's name was engraved on a metal or glass Kli, and he melted the Kli, he is lashed. Rather, he cuts off the place and buries it.
4.Rosh (Teshuvah 3:15): One may not say 'Shalom' in a bathhouse (Shabbos 10a), but no one forbids erasing it. People write it in letters, and it is thrown out.
i.Tosfos (Sotah 10a DH Ela): One may not erase 'Shalom'. Maseches Sofrim (4:1) lists names that one may not erase. It omitted Shalom.
1.Shulchan Aruch (YD 276:13): If Hash-m's name was written on any Keli, we cut off the name and bury it.
2.Rema: L'Chatchilah one may not write Hash-m's name not in a Sefer, lest it come to disgrace. Therefore, we do not write it in letters. Some are careful even not to finish the word Shalom.
i.Shach (16): Most people are not careful about Shalom. The Rosh permits.
ii.Nekudas ha'Kesef: However, Tosfos forbids. Some say that this is only to explain the question in Sotah. I say that he truly forbids. Other Poskim do not forbid. In practice, this requires investigation.
iii.Pischei Teshuvah (28): The Radvaz (Chadashos 202) says to be careful about a greeting with Shalom, for he gives Shalom from Ba'al ha'Shalom (Hash-m). When it means 'peace', it has no Kedushah.
iv.Sha'arei Teshuvah (OC 1:3): People used to make illustrated parchments in the shape of a Menorah to put in Sidurim. They wrote on them "Shivisi Hash-m l'Negdi Tamid" with Hash-m's name spelled out, to instill fear in people not to talk during the Tefilah. The Tevu'os Shor fiercely opposed this. It is hard to guard them, and they fall on the floor. They made a Yom Tov when they abolished writing Hash-m's name in documents (Rosh Hashanah 18b)! One may fix a big Menorah [with the verse] in front of the Amud or under a glass cover. Those in Sidurim fall, and the name gets erased.
v.Chavos Ya'ir (16): A Chacham permitted to stamp Hash-m's four-letter name with a signet ring, for this is not writing. It is improper to write Hash-m's name without need, lest it come to disgrace, and if one did, it must be buried, but it is not an actual Isur to write it. One who stamps Hash-m's name transgresses Lifnei Iver if the recipient will throw away the paper. Also, sometimes it does not come out so clear the first time, and he stamps again over Hash-m's name, and transgresses Lo Sa'asun Ken. Even if a Nochri made the stamp without intent for Kedushas ha'Shem, it is Kodesh by itself.
vi.Chazon Ish (Yadayim 8:18): We learn from handles of Kelim that one may not erase Hash-m's name, even if it was written without intent for Kedushah.
vii.She'alas Ya'avetz (2:140): Someone inherited a ring with Hash-m's name on it. The Rosh permits writing Hash-m's name where it will not come to disgrace. Chavos Ya'ir (57) said that even if elsewhere, writing is like Dibur, like the Avudraham, who obligates Birkas ha'Torah before writing Divrei Torah, [here it is permitted]. I prove that it is not like Dibur, from Megilah 18b. If one wrote a Megilah on Purim, he fulfilled Kri'as ha'Megilah only if he said every verse. This supports YD 221:10, based on Teshuvas ha'Ge'onim (ha'Rachavi 179), that if David swore not to speak with Ploni, he may write to him. I say that even the stringent opinion that permits writing only on the table is a mere decree and stringency. (Be'er ha'Golah (221:45) brings an opinion that infers from one text of the Rambam (Hilchos Nedarim 6:18) that he may not send writing to Ploni. Rather, David writes on a table, and Ploni comes and reads it.)
viii.She'alas Ya'avetz: I saw a Gadol with Kodesh names carved in a gold ring, for a Segulah for Shemirah; they were covered with leather. This is not Hana'ah from Kodesh names, which is forbidden. One may use Divrei Torah to protect, even though one may not heal himself with Divrei Torah or benefit from them. Only sensual benefit is forbidden. On Shavu'os, some feed to a child [first starting to learn] cake with verses and [Kodesh] names written on it. I question this.
ix.Noda bi'Yehudah (2 YD 181): On a cornerstone of an Aron Kodesh was carved "Elokei ha'Tzevakos" for a sign of the year [based on its Gematriya]. This was a disgrace to the letters of Hash-m's name. However, once it was done, we leave it. However, if a Nochri wrote it, it should be buried. Perhaps he intended for idolatry. Here, he wrote it for the sake of Yisrael. Rashi (Gitin 45b DH v'Amrei) says that then it is not for idolatry. Tosfos (45b DH Amru) says that it is a Safek, i.e. when a Nochri wrote with intent to sell to a Yisrael. He intends to keep it if he will not be able to sell it. If he wrote on a Yisrael's property, also Tosfos permits.
3.Shulchan Aruch (283:3): If a Megilah has three words in every line it is permitted.
i.Taz (2): The words on each line are far from those on the previous line, so they are not read together. It is permitted because it does not look like one Megilah.
4.Shulchan Aruch (4): One may not embroider verses on a Talis.
i.Beis Yosef (DH v'Chosav Od Sham): This is because a Talis has no Kedushas ha'Guf (intrinsic Kedushah), so one may enter a bathroom or Mikveh with it, or use it to cover Ervah. One may not write a verse anywhere where it will come to disgrace.
ii.Maharit (2 OC 3, cited in R. Akiva Eiger): Embroidering is not writing! Rashi (Gitin 20a DH Anduchtri) explains that a document of freedom embroidered on a garment is Pasul, for this is not writing, for it is not fixed. In any case, it is proper to be stringent. I do not protest against one with a tradition to be lenient. Perhaps the tradition is based on the Rif [who permits writing a Megilah].
iii.Radvaz (4:45): The Rambam [in a Teshuvah] gave several valid reasons to forbid embroidering verses in gold on a Talis. I learn from him that one may not even write secular matters in Ashuri writing, for the writing itself has great Kedushah. There are great secrets in the forms of the letters. Especially here, if the Talis wears out, he will melt the gold and overtly destroy Hash-m's name. Writing verses of Torah even in other characters is forbidden. It is no less than other Seforim and their explanations. One who overtly destroys them is lashed mid'Rabanan.
iv.Pischei Teshuvah (3): Divrei Yosef (41) says that due to this, R. Shmuel Di Pam wrote a Kinah (lamentation) on his son's monument in Rashi script, but not in Ashuri characters. He did not forbid this to others.
v.Shach (6): Since the mantle for a Sefer Torah has Kedushas ha'Guf, it is the custom to write verses on it. R. Yerucham forbids because one may not write even one verse, but it has become widespread to be lenient.
vi.Panim Me'iros (2:133): If Hash-m's name was carved on cups, Shabbos 61b and YD 276:13 connote that one may not use them. Mateh Yosef (1 OC 4) permitted blessing on a Talis on which Parshas Tzitzis was embroidered. However, there it cannot come to disgrace, for one does not enter a bathroom with a Talis Gadol. In Erchin, Rashi explains that Hash-m's name on a beam requires Genizah (lest there was intent for Kedushah), and then one may use the rest. This implies that before it is cut off, the entire beam is forbidden. Why does the Mechaber discuss Hash-m's name written on a Kli? The Gemara discusses when it is on a handle, or the leg of a bed. These are disgraceful. (Regarding a handle, the name can get erased through usage.) What is the source to require cutting His name off an honorable Kli? It is not Mekadesh the entire Kli! The Isur to use it is only when there is disgrace! I question the Rambam, who forbids using a Kli on which Hash-m's name was written or engraved. Why is it forbidden if it is engraved? The Gemara discussed only a name written on a handle, which is disgraceful, lest it get erased! Perhaps the Rambam discusses only disgraceful Kelim. However, I do not argue with the Tur and Rambam. In any case, the name is not Mekadesh the entire Kli. Therefore, one may wrap gold or silk over Hash-m's name, and use the cup. Covering the name evades disgrace.
vii.Igros Moshe (YD 4:38:4): No verses should not be put on invitations, not even "Kol Sason v'Kol Simchah...", which is from a verse. There is no need to put it on. Some write Kol Sason in one line, and v'Kol Simchah in another line, for two words is not considered writing a verse, for we do not find a verse like this (with only two words on the line). All know that he does not intend to write the verse, rather, for a mere Berachah he cites the verse. It is better not to write it. This is not the place for a Berachah.
viii.Halichos Shlomo (20, footnote 72): If there are verses on an invitation, it should not be thrown out.
Other Halachos relevant to this Daf: