- This topic has 91 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
youdontsay,
Obviously I agree nothing would beat derech emunah, but have you read the intro to daas notah. The whole point of the work was to clarify all the misquotes of Reb Chaim, and his son went to his father many times to clarify his position. I think it would be the one sefer that is pretty reliable of all the books quoting Reb Chaim. But maybe I’m just being Naive.anonymous: Iv’e gone through the relevant parts in Daas Noteh and have NOT seen the Mahril addressed at all. Kindly share with us where it is mentioned.
As to the rest of your remarks, they are again quite ridiculous, you seem to have a problem with conflating issues. What relevance does the correct shiur or talking during davening have to do with techelis? You don’t attack the ARGUER only the ARGUMENT. WHO says something has no bearing as to the WHAT that is said. If you have nothing what to answer to an argument attacking the messenger of the argument doesn’t destroy the reasoning.
But for the fun of it: I actually go with a size 24, I fully agree that talking during davening is a terrible thing and B”H I don’t do it. As to the zman of krias shma, the Shulchan Aruch Harav disagrees with you.
And the best for the last, about nipitz leshma. For anybody that is an Ashkenazi and follows the Rema, המנהג להקל בניפוץ, (O”C 11) . I therefore do not have the audacity to say that for us nipitz is nothing more than a chumra.
Youdontsay, of course I know the difference between the two seforim. And of course Derech Emunah is a completely different caliber if a sefer. However, I am not aware of anywhere in Derech Emunah where techeiles is discussed.
My point was that although there are many seforim printed with teshuvas from Reb Chaim, I understand that not all of them are very reliable. I have at least 20 of them in my collection, and many can nit be relied on.
Daas Noteh however is a much more reliable sefer. Especially because Reb Chaim gave him access to his personal notes of hanhagos of the Chazon Ish, and spent a lot of time with his son who authored the sefer explaining to him a great detail many of his opinions.
When Daas Noteh brings kisvei yad and teshuvas from Reb Chaim, it is very reliable. On this issue, it seems like he was trying to get Reb Chaim to agree that at least there is nothing wrong with wearing techeiles just in case, but Reb Chaim strongly opposed.
The commentator here FakeMaven is bordering on kefira. To say that if any Rishon holds there is no techeiles nowadays should “wrap it up”, is heresy. We don’t talk about Rishonim in that tone. And the agenda of such a writer is obviously not coming from Yiras Shomayim. And the way he talks about the majority of Gedolim who are on the opposing side is extremely disrespectful.
Some of the comments posted here are real kefira and should be deleted from any frum forum.
daass torah: The Rambam does not say that nignaz means until Moshiach comes, rather he merely says ‘we don’t have techelis’. My point is that there is no Rishon which says that the chilozon cannot be found, whereas the Maharil CLEARLY says that it CAN in fact be found.
[The other thing that you wrote שויא וכו’ I’m not sure what you mean].anonymous OY VEY .your comment attacking fake maven is a botched up job .You said “FakeMaven is bordering on kefira. To say that if any Rishon holds there is no techeiles nowadays should “wrap it up”, is heresy”.But the funny part is fake maven WAS QUOTING the commentator DAAS torah who said” There are those who argue, but any one rishon that says nignaz is a halacha shoiuldnt wrap up the whole mitzva, becouse there is a broader world out there.” To that fake maven replied ” Please name me one Rishon that clearly says nignaz means literally.” in other words he was arguing.. SO it seems you where nebach choshed biksherim .!!! Now as the tzaddik you clearly claim to be who knows everyone’s level of yiras shamayim should you not apologize and as the gemara says chosed bkesheirim tzarich levarcho??
but besides that explain why it’s a problem to say that when there is a machlokes rishonim one rishon is often not enough for the poskim to decide the halacha .Thanx to this coffe room I just discovered a new machlokes happoskim between almost all possum includind rav elyashiv and Rav “Dayeinu” (see his comment above) shlit”a
R Dayeinu holds (above): “It’s very well known Rav Elyashiv spent his time on Shas and Poskim and was generally not the kind of posek who researched the technical aspects the Shailos — that is something Poskim the like Rav Belsky do. Instead, Rav Elyashiv’s approach was to respond precisely to the question how it was asked. …IMHO this is a very, very technical shaila, and people should be relying on the likes of Rav Belsky”
On the other hand almost all poskim inclu r elyashiv seem to disagree…anonymous:
This is my point, “of course Derech Emunah is a completely different caliber of a sefer.” The issue of techeiles is not to be taken lightly, and I don’t think that a sefer that is not muga by the person himself should be inveighed against an issue such as this one. There is a lot more to be said regarding these sefarim (I have them all), but I don’t want to get into it.The minute you resort to hurling the kefira argument against someone you lost the battle. I looked at FakeMaven’s posts, and I think your arguments demonstrate that you miss the point, particularly regarding the Maharil (this is a solid argument). I simply don’t understand the Daas Noteh regarding nignaz (The Medrash is referring to Tannaim – Rav Yose – while the Gemara is referring to Amoraim, and we know that even the Geonim had techeiles, hence the time span is much greater, therefore, I don’t understand what is stated in Daas Noteh).
I don’t want to spend much time on this issue, but I will say this. 1) Much of what the rabbanim, argue is not about the murex, but the cuttelfish. 2) The claim that the Gedolim do not agree that the murex is techeiles is besides the point. This issue requires an immense amount of time to research, which they sorely lack. However, the new crop of younger Gedolim have made the time, and plenty of them believe that the murex is the real deal. Its only a matter of time.
anonymous: “The commentator here FakeMaven is bordering on kefira. To say that if any Rishon holds there is no techeiles nowadays should “wrap it up”, is heresy. We don’t talk about Rishonim in that tone.”
Please explain to me how is it disrespectful to say that a Rishon is so holy that no Achron can argue on it? I was under the impression that those that belittle the Rishonim and say that they are nothing special are the ones being disrespectful, not someone who places the Rishonim above and beyond anybody in our generation.
And the agenda of such a writer is obviously not coming from Yiras Shomayim.
Completely irrelevant. An argument is independent of its originator. If you have something of substance to say in regards to the points made up until now, say it. Bashing people is not productive to anything.And the way he talks about the majority of Gedolim who are on the opposing side is extremely disrespectful.
Please quote the relevant places where I may of inadvertently been disrespectful of any Gadol. I am unaware of where I went wrong and would like to learn from my mistakes.FakeMaven: Daas Noteh addresses the MaHaril on page 140, 141. The questioner quotes it, and Reb Chaim answers in his short written style.He is not ignoring it.
You say “And the best for the last, about nipitz leshma. For anybody that is an Ashkenazi and follows the Rema, המנהג להקל בניפוץ, (O”C 11) . I therefore do not have the audacity to say that for us nipitz is nothing more than a chumra.” BUT YOU LEAVE OUT THE MISHNA BERURA who quotes the Pri Migadim b’shem Maharal that one should be machmir l’chatchila.
As for Krias Shema, nice quote from the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, but the M.B. is not machria and is not willing to be meikel like the Shulchan Aruch Harav, and it is a safek d’oraissah.
And what you write “It’s very well known Rav Elyashiv spent his time on Shas and Poskim and was generally not the kind of posek who researched the technical aspects the Shailos — that is something Poskim the like Rav Belsky do. Instead, Rav Elyashiv’s approach was to respond precisely to the question how it was asked”
AFAR L”PUMAY!! That is right out kefirah and disrespect for a Gadol Hador. It is in total violation of our Mesorah and Trust in our Gedolim and Poskim. Reb Elyashiv understood the Murex, the MaHaril, and all relevant Rishonim and facts much better than you or any other blogger. To write him off like that is grounds for some serious stuff. As the Rambam writes: אע”פ שהמבזה את החכמים אין לו חלק לעוה”ב אם באו עדים שבזהו אפילו בדברים חייב נידוי ומנדין אותו בית דין ברבים וקונסין אותו ליטרא זהב בכ”מ ונותנין אותה לחכם והמבזה את החכם בדברים אפילו לאחר מיתה מנדין אותו בית דין
Edited (again…)
Anonymous please stop putting words into peoples mouth ,fake maven never said “It’s very well known Rav Elyashiv spent his time on Shas and Poskim” that was user dayanu. since you hold its a terrible thing to say you were nebach choshid bkisheirim again. You are clearly so agitated that you are forgetting who is who. So calm down and relaaaaxx
YOUDONTSAY: “This issue requires an immense amount of time to research, which they sorely lack. However, the new crop of younger Gedolim have made the time, and plenty of them believe that the murex is the real deal. Its only a matter of time.”
Follow your name and DON”T SAY!! You re not allowed to talk about the Gedolim that way. Your comment sounds like it comes from the Open Orthodxy movement.
It’s not a matter of time. B:H we are not all breslovers or BT’s without Mesora, and we will not be putting on techeiles until Moshiach comes, as Reb Chaim instructs us. And neither will our children. They are also coming from a Mesorah. There is a reason why almost no Gedoilim or Rosh HaYeshivos put on techeiles, and neither will their talmidim, who are the future Gedolim, Rabonim, and Rosh Hayeshivos. B”H we live with Mesorah.
Anonymous it’s obvious the reason you are so shrilly arguing over here is because you feel threatened .Because you actually are very worried that it is only a matter of time before more and more people start wearing it. haha
But why should that bother you so much?
Do you have a problem with people following rabbi Belski or yblc rav Karp or other rabbanim?
Who do you think you are ?Anonymous why do so many anti techieles people like yourself ignore so many things which are so much more important to be against .Like not taking during davening first zman krias shema lashon hara etc.Where are your posts on those issues? there are so much more important things to be against than techeiles.
After looking at the earlier posts on this thread I find the wild way anonymous writes to be bizarre. I mean look at this quote “But from the way you write, I assume your talis katon is something like a size 18 which is less than an amah even according to the minimum shiur.” So here we have this big anonymous tzadik just randomly accuseing some random guy he does not even know .And he was wrong because the other person says he actually goes with a size 24 .
I mean wow somebody needs to calm downanonymous: Thanks for your opinion, but as is discernible from all your rants you know nothing about halachah, and mesorah. Furthermore, all your arguments point in one direction, you fail to grasp the difference between chumra and issues of d’Oraysa. Your only argument is, but the Gedolim, but the Gedolim, but the Gedolim. (Oh, and by the way, your citation of where Rav Chaim mentions the Maharil demonstrates exactly as to why these type of seforim should not be relied upon. Your proof is utter inanity.)
The only thing that is afar l’pumay is how you throw around the kefirah and OO label. As I said, you lose every time you resort to such vacuous statements.
Also, for those who are interested you can get techeiles niputz lishma, and they even made a run once of geziza lishma, etc.
But again it is wrong to compare a hiddur that the poskim debate about to a chiyuv de`oraysa that there is a machlokes about.I saw this discussion, and I couldn’t help but comment a few points:
1- Although I have nothing to do with the making of the video, I watched it and I think it was very well donr. It is true that it was indeed made by those in the pro-techeiles camp, and the techeiles people always got the last word, but there was no distortions on the matter. They had big big Rabbanim speaking against it, and they in no way hid the fact that the gedolei harabbonim do not support techeiles. And those making the video are only achrai in what the narrator says, not what the Rabbanim they interviewed say.
2- They also stated bfeirush that the intention of the video is to give knowledge on the subject, like learning halacha and obviously everyone should ask a Rav. They in no way are encouraging people to start wearing techeiles without making a sheilas chacham.
3- A commenter above stated that the claim that there is no harm in wearing techeiles is a proof of the dishonesty of the video since anyone who knows the first thing about techeiles knows that this isn’t true. Let’s get things clear: The baalei Havideo didn’t say that, rather it was said by none other than Rav Shmuel Kaminetsky Shlit”a and Rav Dovid Kohn Shlit”a, although they are clearly against the identificatioin of the Murex as the Chilazon.
Anonymous
You are obviously losing your mind. Not only are you conflating the arguments, (like sizes, not talking in middle davening ect.) You’re mixing up who’s saying what you are trying to write against, (writing against fake maven, for what deyenu wrote). Just take a nice big nap, and maybe you will start making some sense. Stop the ranting if you can’t answer fake maven (he may not be so “fake” after all!).anonymous: And what you write “It’s very well known Rav Elyashiv spent his time on Shas and Poskim and was generally not the kind of posek who researched the….AFAR L”PUMAY!! That is right out kefirah and disrespect for a Gadol Hador….
For the first time since this topic was started I’m at loss for words. I have never said such things. How can someone who preaches so passionately about being careful with words fling theirs around so easily. How can someone who is trying to come across as protecting the kavod of Gedolim LeSham Shamayim be so flippant and condescending in their words against their brethren? “B”H we are not all Breslovers etc..”. Seriously, are they not Jews? Is lashon harah not an issur when it comes to them?
It would seem that your not interested in having a civil discussion about this important topic. You’d rather make disparaging remarks about Klal Yisroel. Self righteous anger is not a virtue…I don’t see much gain with any correspondence with you since we are obviously here for different reasons. I want to have a discussion with others and hear different opinions so that I can learn new things, whereas you seem to relish in stirring up personal dissent. I’m not looking to argue, I want to discuss, something which you seem incapable of doing civilly.
As an aside. You also seem to be clueless with how one paskens. Although you may personally choose to follow the M”B in all his pesakim, I am not beholden to it. One may choose any one posek and stick with that one for all the hachrais. As has been my practice since I was a bachur I follow the Shulchan Aruch Harav in all cases. For you to make disparaging remarks against those that do not follow the M’B is something that the Chofetz Chaim himself would have definitely not condoned.
[BUT YOU LEAVE OUT THE MISHNA BERURA who quotes the Pri Migadim b’shem Maharal that one should be machmir l’chatchila.
Again I am at loss for words. This is what I wrote:I therefore do not have the audacity to say that for us nipitz is nothing more than a chumra.” In my dictionary machmir l’chatchila is synonymous with chumra.]As for Krias Shema, nice quote from the Shulchan Aruch HaRav, but the M.B. is not machria and is not willing to be meikel like the Shulchan Aruch Harav, and it is a safek d’oraissah.
You should really learn Y’D siman 242 (and the last Shach over there) you will clearly see that this does not constitute a Safek Deoraisa.5- As far as the discussion of Nignaz. I think it is silly to make believe that Reb Chaim never claimed that the chilazon is nignaz etc. and it is only hearsay. I honestly believe that that is what he holds. But like every area of Halacha, not all poskim have to agree to one opinion. Besides Moreinu Harav Chaim, the rest of the poskim who discussed techeiles didn’t raise the issue of nignaz.
Obviously, this doesn’t mean you can’t be somech on Reb Chaim, but again it also means that it is not a black and white case.
In the times of the Radziner Rebbe, The Maharsha”m, Reb Itzele Ponvitzer, Reb Chaim Ozer Grodzintsky and other gedolei hador (including the letter from the Beis Halevi that the Radziner quotes) all held it was possible for techeiles to return, and obviously thought that Nignaz is not a kasha.
The Yeshuas Malko was misquoted as holding that nignaz meanas literally. Fakenews.
He wrote a teshuva explaining that the Radziner’s techeiles is based on assumption and not on rayos, and he writes:
איברא שאם היה נמצא תכלת בבירור והיה ידוע לנו כיצד צובעין, ודאי היה ראוי לאחוז במצווה זו אלא שאין לנו בירור גמור שזה התכלתDoesn’t sound like he understood nignaz to mean that it can’t come back.
A few commenters quoted Rishonim saying Nignaz means you can’t find it. This isn’t true. Not one Rishon discusses if you can find it or not. There is however a rayo from the Ri”f that brings all of hilchos techeiles, that he obviously held that the laws still applied bizman hazeh, even though he doen’t bring the laws of kodshim.
For a full list of mareh mekomos on the issue see the article on the techeiles.org site from Reb Yisrael Barkin <<http://bit.ly/UA2er2>>
Following Gedolei Yisroel, Mesorah, etc did not stop when the shulchan orech was codified. Following poskim and Gedolei Yisroel is a core Torah principle. It is core Halacha. Our primary mesorah did not change from human to printed sefarim. The printed sefarim are used by the poskim as sources for them to understand the Torah along with what they know from their Rebbeim and the enormous time they spend learning Torah. Therefore simplistic Torah from fakemaven are meaningless to those who follow the Torah, which is defined by the understanding of poskim and Gedolei Yisroel in each generation. Therefore most of do NOT wear techeilis, since the vast majority of poskim do not. It’s that simple. Unless you consider Fakemaven a posek but I did not see him posting credentials and do not know anyone that follows his non-psak. Klal Yisroel is smarter then these shenanigans and the more rabble rousers argue why we should wear techeilis, the more we are convinced that the arguments are not based on yiras shomayim and should be ignored. So keep digging your own hole…
I have no strong opinion on the techeles issue at all, but what I find fascinating here is that the pro side is talking like they were raised locked in a basement and only shown the pro-techeles shittas so that it’s absolutely shocking when people assert that rov poskim are opposed.
Also, a video of Reb Chaim saying “if you had the real techeles you should wear it” as proof? Come on… That’s beyond a loaded question. That’s like asking “if you knew for a fact that this batch of chalav stam milk were actually pig’s blood died white, could you drink it?” And then using the psak as a proof against all chalav stam.
chacham
“As far as the discussion of Nignaz. I think it is silly to make believe that Reb Chaim never claimed that the chilazon is nignaz etc. and it is only hearsay. I honestly believe that that is what he holds. But like every area of Halacha, not all poskim have to agree to one opinion”Thank you so much for saying that. Last year there was a similar discussion (last link in my previous comment) at the end of which I became disheartened, as it became clear that many in the pro-techeiles camp where not driven ” I want to have a discussion with others and hear different opinions ” nor to be mevakesh the emes.
so thank you for the breath of fresh air.Fake maven
I don’t want to revisit our whole discussion.
I do hope you can explain why resort to blatantly silly arguments. R’ Chaim doesn’t hold its real, nu nu there are machlokisim in klal yisroel. why does it bother yo uso much that this is yet another machlokes, that you are forced to say such blatantly foolish things? Why not say simply. “I don’t know why R’ chaim (and r’ Elyashiv ybbcl”c) ddiont hold of it, you’d have to ask them” ?Bshtei_Einayim:
Neville ChaimBerlin: Also, a video of Reb Chaim saying “if you had the real techeles you should wear it” as proof? Come on…
I think you missed my point with that. All I stated was that if R’ Chaim really learns (only) nignaz kepshuto, then it is impossible for ANYONE to be able to find it since Chazal definitely knew what they are talking about. Yet R’ Chaim did not tell the questioner that he must be mistaken as it was nignaz kepshuto. Doesn’t that sound like R’ Chaim understands that nignaz CAN be learn’t both ways?As to your first comment, I beg to disagree, Iv’e spent over a year on this topic and have gone through virtually every pamphlet, as well as listened to numerous shiurim from both sides.
Bshtei_Einayim: The poskim themselves disagree with you!
The halacha is that a safek which is negeah to a deoraisa (even if the machlokos is IF it is a deorasa, see Rema C”M 25:2) the halacha does NOT follow the majority rather even a yachid over the rabim, (Shach at the end of Y’D 242). [Furthemore see שבילי דוד (Y”D 242 SK 4 that even against the Gadol Hador we can say this klal, since it is not a רבו המובהק).
Techeiles is safek deoraisa, as the klal of אין תכלת מעכב את הלב is only said if techeles is not known, however if we have the techeilis then it is מעכב. Now since there are Gedolim on both sides, even if the majority disagree that this is the correct techelis, the halacha follows the minority since this is a question of a דאורייתא. [since all agree that תכלת is a דאורייתא and is מעכב if we have it, The question is: is it the correct one).Thus, according to כללי הפסק we are mechuyav to put on תכלת. [Now, of course if you have a Rav whom you always follow then that is what you should do (see Chazon Ish (Y’D 150:1). My point is that for many who do not have one particular Rav, they should be מחויב to put on the techelis.]
Bshtei_Einayim: Our primary mesorah did not change from human to printed sefarim….
It would seem that you never looked into the opinion of the printed seforim themselves, see שו”ת מהרשד”ם C”M 1, Radvaz 6:2147.ubiquitin: R’ Chaim doesn’t hold its real, nu nu…
Can you please quoate where I said R’ Chaim believes that it is the techelis? All I’ve said is that I do not know what R’ Chaim holds with this issue, and that I have not seen him refute the Maharil at all. Thus I believe the Daas Noteh to be an extreme oversimplification of his opinion. NOWHERE to the best of my knowledge does R’ Chaim give the sefer Daas Noteh a ‘stamp of approval’.Over and out. I have no further comments but stand by my points that we follow our poskim, most of whom do NOT wear techeilis. Any arguments that we should each go our own way and decide on our own to establish a lost mesorah without guidance from most poskim does not make any sense to me. It seems that the overly vocal pro techeilis people on this thread seem to feel that this defines their yiddishkeit. It’s okay for them to wear techeilis but I am astounded on how they are jumping on anyone that disagrees with their minority unproven opinion that is not followed by most poskim. I am done, I usually try not to come back and reiterate my opinions more then once but in this case I made an exception. Over and out… Good Luck to all…
FakeMaven: There’s no doubt that you’ve done research on this topic, but what you seem to be doing here is focusing on one aspect of the theoretical component of the discussion in order to completely ignore the l’maaseh. The reality, which is not in your favor, is that almost all relevant poskim do not wear the techeles.
You can use lomdus points to make almost anything sound good, in theory. But, it doesn’t change the reality and it isn’t going to change what people do.
We aren’t denying that you’ve done your research. We’re just denying that you’ve done more research than all the gedolei yisroel combined as you seem to think.
NO major American Kashrus organization follows Rav Elyashiv’s psak regarding worms in the fish, mainly because they contend that the metziyus was not presented to Rav Elyashiv properly.
Techeiles requires far more detailed technical knowledge than the question of anisakis in fish.
When taking about “most poskim”, it’s important to the refer to most poskim who went through the Sugya.
Bshtei_Einayim: So I guess you agree that the מהרשד”ם Radvaz and more disagree with you, and that you misspoke. Furthermore, as is well known the Posek Hador of the previous generationm the Mahrsham wore the Rezhiner Rebbes techeiles, and so did many other such as Reb Itzele Ponvitzer. It seems that when it came to a דאורייתא they were חייש (as I have previously written). I don’t put my self over these Gedolim and I too would like to be חייש for a דאורייתא.
The underlying thread of all these ‘Mesorah’ arguments seem to stem from a lack of understanding of כללי הפסק. It is quite telling that although I have given ample sources to where I got my opinions from about how we go about an halachic inquiry, your only comeback has been with ‘Mesorah Mesorah Mesorah’, without ANY source for your opinion!
Neville ChaimBerlin: what you seem to be doing here is focusing on one aspect of the theoretical component of the discussion in order to completely ignore the l’maaseh. The reality, which is not in your favor, is that almost all relevant poskim do not wear the techeles.
True, and my whole point is that that aspect is comepletely irrelevant. There are some Gedolim that do/did wear it, and according to כללי הפסק, we should be following them.You can use lomdus points to make almost anything sound good, in theory.
Which is exactly why I don’t use lomdos rather HALACHA. Lomdos doesn’t get you far, but halacha must be followed. All the sources Iv’e brought are from the Poskim straight and simple, and does not constitute lomdus.Bshtei_Einayim: I guess we can take it that you agree that the מהרשד”ם and the Radvaz disagree with you, and that you misspoke. Furthemore it is a well known fact that the Posek Hador of the generation of the Rezhiner Rebbe,, the Mahsham did wear techeilis (according to some versions every day), and so did many other Gedolei Hador such as R’ Itzekel Ponivizer. It seems that when it comes to a דאורייתא these Torah luminaries deemed it necessary to be חייש. I personally do not think myself better than them that I too shouldn’t be חייש.
Moreover, I find it very telling that although I have given you ample sources in explanation of how I reach my conclusions, you have given us none. You say ‘Mesorah mesorah mesorah’, yet from where did you receive such a מהלך? The aforementioned Poskim do not agree with you, yet you have no source for your opinions? And why should I or anybody else listen to your opinion of כללי הפסק when you give no source for it?
There was an article in Hamodia on Sukkos about this topic, although the writer is clearly presenting only one side, it was written quite well. He makes a very valid point which has actually bothered me all along. The standard Halacha will always start with the Gemara and Poskim and when necessary bring proof from outside sources. However, in this case it is very clear for whoever learnt the basic Gemara that this Murex snail doesn’t fit with any of the semanim chazal provide us. It’s not גופו דומה לים. It’s not מראהו כמין דג. It doesn’t come up אחת לשבעים שנה. And many more basic Gemaros that don’t match up at all with this snail. Now, they’re providing sources from historical information and other scientific proofs. And then they come to the Gemaros. The tirutzim they have are very weak but might be okay, but they can for sure not bring any proof from any siman which the Gemara provides. So they say they have some other mefarshim that might sound like they’re referring to this snail, but why is this the way we learn and pasken? It just doesn’t make sense!
fakemaven
“Can you please quoate where I said R’ Chaim believes that it is the techelis? All I’ve said is that I do not know what R’ Chaim holds with this issue,”
You didint, but you are twisting yourself into pretzels, and ruining your credibility (and by extention your position since without honesty you can’t weigh both sides accuratly) to cast doubts on his view. He doesn’t know what daas notah says maybe this may be that.
He is b”h alive and well. Many have discussed techeiles with him . (As can be seen from the video mentioned in the thread)
when told that some fellow is certain he knows which is techeiles. R’ Chaim doesnt reply, “Techeiles! tell me how to get it! I must wear it too”You are left with only three possible conclusions that I can think of
1) R’ Chaim doesn’t hold this is techeiles (for whatever reason, nignaz or something else)
2) HE holds its techeiles and secretly wears it
3) He just doesn’t care one way or the other, he can’t be bothered to look into mitzvos (On the last thread someone said #3, I dont think it was you)Fakemaven: Bringing proofs from the maharil’s definition of the word nignaz and general statements about the concept of “safek d’oraisa l’chumra” are lomdus points, not l’maaseh. The only l’maasehdik argument you have for the techeiles is to bring the actual poskim who were matir it, and they are few and far between as you know.
If we were debating something about electricity on Shabbos, bringing proofs from Reb Moshe and the Chazon Ish, and then you came in bringing your interpretation of a Rashi contradicting all shittas, would you really expect to be taken seriously? This is a contemporary issue and it needs to be decided by contemporary poskim who know the sources better than we do.
Neville, again this is not a sugya that was addressed head-on by the Gedolei Haposkim. The crux of Rav Elyashiv’s teshuva relates to the general question of נאמנות החוקרים, not the powerful evidence raised by talmidei chachamim today.
Importantly, Rav Elyashiv never rules out this is Techeiles. On נגנז he cites ישועות מלכו, who himself doesn’t consider his interpretation of נגנז conclusive (Chacham’s comment above and ישועות מלבו סי’ ג).
Rav Gershon Meltzer, when discussing Techeiles in his sefer Living Halacha on Hilchos Tzitzis, cites Rav Moshe Halbershtam who says someone who didn’t go through a Sugya doesn’t have a din of חכם שהורה.
Dayeinu: I hate to even dignify your latest arguments with a response, but just in the interest of getting you to stop repeating yourself:
You can’t just claim that every posek who doesn’t jive with you shittah didn’t properly learn the sugya. That’s the height of arrogance and absurdity. You’re actually outright claiming to be smarter that Rav Eliyashiv on this topic. At least the other commentators were implicit about it. Nobody here has said “the rabbis who are matir the techeles didn’t really learn the sugya and don’t know what they’re talking about.” Only you have sunk to that low, which is a new low for the CR.“Only you have sunk to that low, which is a new low for the CR.”
For what its worth it isn’t
More than one poster (or at least sn) made the same comment last time this discussion came upNeville wrote: “You can’t just claim that every posek who doesn’t jive with you shittah didn’t properly learn the sugya.”
>I don’t claim every posek who doesn’t hold of techeiles didn’t properly learn the sugya, but of those who did many or most support techeiles,
Neville wrote: “You’re actually outright claiming to be smarter that Rav Eliyashiv on this topic.”
Many lesser poskim have some technical knowledge on Techeiles which Rav Elyashiv didn’t profess to have. Rav Elyashiv’s Teshuva doesn’t conclude that techeilies today is impossible, only that the evidence presented in the question is insufficient.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.