<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=windows-1255 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.7600.16588"></HEAD>
<BODY style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
id=MailContainerBody leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>RZS wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> At the time the<BR>Torah was written, perhaps "yishgalenah" was still
thought of as clean,<BR>but at some later stage it became dirty so the sofrim
instituted a<BR>kri that was even more indirect and thus cleaner.<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>RAH wrote:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Where does Rambam say this? I wonder how he gets around Megillah
25b,<BR>where it is explicitly stated that "qri" renders objectionable terms
in<BR>"ktiv" acceptable for reading in public.<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>CM notes:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>I think some of the posts here are mixing two different
concepts and treating them as one. To my understanding (I have no specific
cite) Kri and Ksiv are halacha leMoshe miSinai (at least in Chumash if not in
Nach). Whereas the subject matter in Megilla 25b, (Mishna and gemara) refer not
to Kri and Ksiv, but to Kriah and Targum, not the same as Kri and Ksiv and
likely of Chazal's origination based on the meaning at the time as others
have noted.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>Kol tuv</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri>Chaim Manaster</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>