Sources and reasoning:
See the Shach (siman 276, se’if katan 16), who writes that although the Rema cites, in the name of some authorities, that one should not write the word shalom, even in a letter, because it may come to be treated disrespectfully, nevertheless, most people have not been careful about this, as the Birkei Yosef writes (Orach Chaim siman 85). This is also the view of the Vilna Gaon in his commentary (ot 29).
However, even according to the Rema’s view, this applies specifically where a Jew wrote it. But where it was written by a non-Jew, a Jewish apostate, or an electrical machine—as is generally the case—there is no cause for concern according to most poskim. For Maran, in the Beit Yosef’s Bedek HaBayit (Yoreh De’ah siman 276), writes that if one wrote the Name of Hashem without intent for holiness, it is not holy, and that the Semak likewise wrote so. See there. Indeed, this may be inferred from the Rambam (Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 6:6), who writes: “Writings written by a scribe may not be burned or destroyed. To what does this apply? To sacred writings written by a Jew with holiness,” etc. Thus, anything not written for the sanctity of Hashem’s Name, even if one intended to write the Name of Hashem, has no sanctity. Consequently, the prohibition of “You shall not do so to Hashem your G-d” does not apply. I also saw that the Hagahot Maimoniyot wrote this (there, ot 1). Accordingly, the Rambam’s statement (Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 6:6), “Likewise, if the Name was written on one’s flesh, he may neither wash nor anoint himself, nor stand in a filthy place. If he has occasion for a mitzvah immersion, he wraps a reed around it and immerses,” applies specifically where he intended to sanctify Hashem’s Name through writing it. I later saw that this is stated explicitly regarding the Rambam’s opinion in Responsa Be’erot HaMayim (Yoreh De’ah siman 13), which supports this reasoning. Otherwise, why would the Rambam write that he receives lashes? At most, it would be like letters appended to the Name, for which one receives rabbinic lashes, as explained by the Rambam in halachah 3. The Shach likewise rules (siman 276, se’if katan 2) that a Name written without holiness may be erased, though he adds that the erasure must be for the purpose of correction. (This will be explained below.) Many other poskim likewise write so; see Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 437, se’if katan 8), Responsa Bnei Yehudah—Ayyash (siman 40), and Responsa Yabia Omer, vol. 4 (Yoreh De’ah siman 21, ot 1). To be sure, some disagree, as cited by Maran HaChida in Birkei Yosef (siman 276, se’if katan 12) in the name of the poskim: whenever one intended to write the Name of Hashem, even if he did not intend to sanctify it through writing, it is forbidden to erase it; and he inclined to their opinion. (Only where one had no intention to write the Name of Hashem is erasure permitted.) Thus, the matter remains subject to dispute. In such a case, one may certainly rely on the fact that this is, in any event, only a stringency.
It occurred to me, however, that even according to the opinions forbidding erasure when one writes one of the sacred Names, this applies specifically when it was written by an observant Jew who merely did not intend to sanctify it. But when it was written by a Jew who publicly desecrates Shabbat, since a Sefer Torah written by him is invalid, it remains invalid even if he intends to sanctify Hashem’s Name. This is stated in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah siman 281, סעיף 3); see also the Mishnah Berurah (Orach Chaim siman 39, se’if katan 6), who writes that the same applies to a Jew who publicly desecrates Shabbat. The same reasoning applies to an electrical machine.
b) Additionally, one may combine here what the Rashbatz writes, cited in Pitchei Teshuvah (siman 276, se’if katan 28), that there is no prohibition of writing—and likewise of erasing—the full word shalom where it was not written at the time of greeting, as stated regarding Boaz: “And he said to the harvesters, ‘Hashem is with you.’” In our case, where it is permanently written, it is considered not to be at the time of greeting, and it is permissible to step on it.
This response was translated automatically from Hebrew and has not yet been reviewed by a person. Therefore, it may contain inaccuracies and should not be considered a definitive reference.
