- This topic has 66 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
whats up with techeiles these days?
It’s blue.
The Wolf
There are so many threads on this already!!
According to the Gemara in Menachos you would not lose out on the mitzvah of tzitzis even if this is not the correct techeiles. They have done chemical tests from techeiles from the bees hamikdash and this techeiles and turns out its a match.. I happen to wear techeiles. A lot of people i know that don’t wear techeiles is only because there is no Gadol that does it, so there logic is “why should they.”
If you live in-town, follow the sheep, if you live out-of-town, do whatever you want.
purple is so your color.
The answer is speak to your Rav and not to a bunch of anonymous posters on the internet who may or may not know what they are talking about.
mamashtakah is absolutely correct but if we were to apply his standard to this place most posts are in violation.
the thing with techeiles is as follows: there are no halachic tools available to poskim to assist them in determining whether one should go out and wear it. the reasons to wear tekheleis are purely scientific.
that being said, it is clear among all poskim that there is no halachic violation in wearing blue non-tekheleis.
The kabbalists, however, caution against wearing blue and believe that in galus we must wear white for kabalistic reasons (something to do with blue bringing middas din on us which we cannot handle in galus).
the kabbalistic interpretation is troubling in some respects as it appears to use kabbalistic reasons to nullify a mitzvah de-orayssa
the kabbalists can maybe be understood to mean that the tekheles is surely not genuine because hashem has a reason to hide it from us.
in any event, since all of us wear blue shirts, suits, socks, etc., we do not live by the words of the kabbalists anyway.
maskunu: there is no way halacha can obligate us to wear it but it does not hurt to do it.
The answer is speak to your Rav and not to a bunch of anonymous posters on the internet who may or may not know what they are talking about.
He’s right. I should not have said it’s blue. Go ask your Rav what color it is.
The Wolf
look at the gaon is S”A on the relevant siman. He brings down a midrash lihalachah, meaning that it was nignaz. nignaz, as per rashi, means forgotten. you cannot figure it out.
Besalal: not evreyone agrees that it does no harm to wear it,I have seen a shitta that one is oiver lo sisgodidu (you can argue),but not everyone agrees.
I have seen a shitta that one is oiver lo sisgodidu (you can argue),but not everyone agrees.
In what way is wearing “techeiles” an issue of “Lo sisgod’du” but wearing a streimel or some other garb exclusive to chassidus (or any other subgroup) not?
The Wolf
Sam: I also heard of such a shitta but was never able to find one. Can you please direct me?
Wolf: The din of lo sisgodidu has actual rules; it isn’t just some vague notion.
Wolf: The din of lo sisgodidu has actual rules; it isn’t just some vague notion.
So, please educate me. Why might techeilis be an issue but other garments not.
The Wolf
Wolf: This is what he held, you can read it in Teshuvos V’hanhagos 1:26 he says he is concerned that it may be a problem of lo sisgodidu(in a community where most do not wear it),and then mentions a person who is unlearned might think they are for sure fulfilling the mitzva of techeiles,and that could be a problem of bal tosef.
So, please educate me. Why might techeilis be an issue but other garments not.
I don’t know. I know very little about lo sisgodidu.
wolf: A streimal is not considered lo sisgodidu or any chassidish minhagim because in places where there are many groups there is no one accepted shitta. By techeiles it seems that many did not accept to wear it and in places where no one wears it may be a problem for a yachid (this is how I understood it) .
Sam: thanks for cite. Interestingly, Rav ovadia holds that sticking your tzitzit out your pants if you are sefaradi can be an issur too.
I actually asked the question years ago to Rav Sheinberg in Yerushalayim. A maker of Biblical clothes challenged me to ask the Posek if he wears Techeilis. I asked him if I could wear Techeilis and he said: “Don’t do it.” I then asked he wore Techeilis and he said: “Don’t do it.”
So, I used to wear Techeilis when I became Chozer B’teshuvah but I no longer do because a Gadol told me not to.
Toi –If you would actually look in the Biur Hagra you will see he does not say the word nignaz rather he says Vachshav ain lanu ella halavan, which means today we only have white, but says nothing about nignaz. And as per Rashi’s interpretation of Nignaz see Rashi in Psachim 62b ????. ?????: But nobody ever said it cannot return. See Teshuvos Radvaz chelek 2 siman ???? that says clearly it is still around today. See teshuvos Maharil siman 5 ???? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ????? ????, ??”? ???? ???? ??”? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ????
If you want more mareh mekomos just ask.
About lo sisgodidoo The radziner in his sefer ain hatecheiles expounds on this and explains why there would be no problem since this din is only said by minhagim and not by dinim. but to be yotzie all the shittos tou could just wear it tucked in.
In Shu”t bais haleivi chelek 1 siman 42 says you are oiveer bal tigra by not wearing it when it is available.
Chacham: “See teshuvos Maharil siman 5 ???? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ????? ????, ??”? ???? ???? ??”? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ????
“
Rav Schachter also Paskens (I think he published this in Ginas Egoz) that you are Over on Bal Tigrah if you wear Lavan without T’cheiles and therefore he says that it’s better to wear no Tzitzis at all than to wear Lavan without T’cheiles.
Chacham: Some hold that there is no techeiles only bzman Bais hamikdash, http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1744&pgnum=3 See 1 and 2. According to the Bais Halevi one needs a postive mesora which we lost.
yes hello99 I did indeed read the Maharil. Pashtus he is coming from the Rambam who says it was found in the yam hamelach. But the obvious question on this is that the gemara says it was found in the chelek of Zevulun and from the sulomos of tzur to chaifah which obviously is talking about the yam Hagadol. So the ya’avetz in Mitpeches Seforim Perek 4 and reb chaim kanievski in kiryas melech explain we find many times that the word yam hamelach is used for yam hagadol. (see ramabam 10:1 of hilchos Klaiyim, Peirush hamishnayos Keilim 15:1 rabeinu Chanael in Pesachim 28a etc.)
sam4321- Well we know that the later amoraim did have which was some 500 years after the churban. (some say that ecen the rambam had techeiles) so is that not after the time of the bais hamikdash? so what does that ariza”l mean? And since when is the arizal able to be mevatel a mitzvah, even a navi can not do that. Ele mai the arizal is explaining to us why the mitzious is this way but is not telling us a psak. ( reb yaakov Hillel says that this is the derech of the arizal)
???”? ???? ??? ????”? ??? ????”? (??’ ?) ??? ??? ??? ?????”? ???? ???? ?????? ?”? ???? “??? ?? ???? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ?????”
“?; ???’ ????? ???”? ?????”? ??????? ???”? ???”? ???? ???? ??’ ?? ?, ????? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??????,
About Mesorah- the bais haleivi actually says the exact oppisite in a letter written to the radzhiner rebbe in the hakdama to eyn hatecheiles. this is the lashon
????? ?????”? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ????. ??”? ?? (?”? ????) “???? ?????”? ????? ????? ??’ ??? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????? ???? ????????? ?????? ????? ??? ???? ???”?, ???”? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?????, ?? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ????, ??? ???? ??? ???”? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????, ?? ???? ???????? ????? ???? ??????, ??? ?? ???? ?? ??? ??? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ??????, ???”? ?? ?????? ??????? ????? ???????, ??? ??? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ???????? ?? ?? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ?? ??”?, ?? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ???????, ??? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ????? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ??? ??????? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ???? ????? ?????, ??”? ?????” ??”? ?????”? ??????? ????”? ??
He says clearly that if you would prove to him that the rishonim did not know of this fish and choose not to wear than ?? ???? ???????? ????? ???? ??????,
Which Techeiles are you guys refering to? The Razhiner or the one they wear inthe old city(zilbermans)? And which one does Rav Shachter hold of? One more question: Exactly how many strings should be tcheiles?
Sam2: I asked him about that psak once. He told me that bal tigra only applies if it is efshar for you as an individual. Thus you should still wear white if you have techeiles but can’t wear it for whatever reason (in the wash, etc.)
Rambam holds the color of the garment has to be the same as the non-techeles threads. This would be a problem if the techeles is not genuine.
I’m not saying that we pasken that way, just an example of something there is to lose out on…
longarekel– We (or at least I) am reffering to the Murex techeiles which is used by the zilbermans and Rav Shachter and basically anybody who wears techeiles and is not chassidish.
The Radzyner was proven wrong by Rav Yitzchag Isaac Haleivi Herzog after a chemical test revealed that the dye was Prussian Blue and had very little to do with the fish. The only difference between that and Prussian Blue was the source of Nitrogen which in prussian blue it came from a horse’s blood. Therefore it would make no sense to make a gezeira on kla ilan if you could use anything else. Thre were many other problems as well such as that the medrash is clear that there is a shell and that the dye binds very strong -neither of them being fulfilled with the radzyner Sepia.
Rav Herzog suggested that it could be the Murex just he had a few problems. 1- The shell was not the color of the sea as the gemara seems to say (acc. to rashi in menachos 44a) 2. the color extracted from the snail was purple not blue. 3. The dye did not stick strongly. So because of this He suggested another fish called the Janthina (which has many other problems such as that you cannot use it to dye and it is missing a lot of the ikar simanim)
Some 20 years ago it was discovered the answer to all of rav herzogs problems. 1- the shell IS the color of the sea when you take it out of the water and for the next few hours. After a while it looses that color and turns white we must assume that he only saw a snail that was out of the water for a while.
2- It was discovered if you keep it in the sunlight the dye turns blue and not purple.
3- The mitzious is that the scientists all agree that The murex is from the fastest dyes out there. However when dyed on a non wool material that it it does not bind very well at all, like described by the Sefer Hachinuch in 386 ??? ????? ?? ??? [????] ??? ????? ????? ??? ????
Besides for all this there are many rayos to the Murex including That the Chavos ya’ir in Mekor Chaim siman 18:3 and the Yaavetz In Mitpechehes Seforim 4 clearly say that the techeiles was made from the Purpura (the greek word for the Murex)
About Minyan Hachutim this is a machlokes rishonim between rambam, Raavad, and Rashi (and many other rishonim who go like Rashi)
The Rambam ( Hilchos Tzitzis 1:6) says one of eight should be made from Techeiles ( half a string).
The Raavad (ibid.) argues and says one full string should be blue meaning two out of eight.
Most of the Rishonim however say that half of the strings are techeiles.
Most of the people who wear today follow the Raavad’s opinion being that the gra was maachria like him. However I believe Rav Belsky, who should be zoche to a full recovery and Raav Shachter are noheg to wear 4 out of eight techeiles.
Itche- I think that psak is actually found in bais haleivi 1:42 and quoted in eyn hatechailes. My shayala is is bal tigra like bal tosef that it only applies if you have kavana to be mosef on the mitzva ( ie therefore there is no problem with RT tefiin or succa shmini atzeres) or even if you are oiver with out the kavana to be mevatel like any other mitzvah?
Rav Schachter also Paskens (I think he published this in Ginas Egoz) that you are Over on Bal Tigrah if you wear Lavan without T’cheiles and therefore he says that it’s better to wear no Tzitzis at all than to wear Lavan without T’cheiles.
And the berdichiver would mistama say that is why all the non frum men don’t wear tzitzis. (I’m not sure why he would say the non frum women do wear tzitzis.)
Chacham: There are two versions of what the Bais Halevi held and according to the other version which I qouted (needing a postive mesora) one would have to wait to mashiach(zicrhron avi mori-I think).
popa- it is more likely he would say they are being makpid on the opinion of the baal meor who paskens techailes is meakeiv lavan
Rav Nisson Kaplan from the Mir gave a shiur saying that the proof points to the Murex Trunculus being the ?????, however the Gedolim didn’t accept it. http://www.tekhelet.com/mml-RavKaplan-I.html.
However it’s important to point out that most gedolim who actually looked through the facts wear ???? and are very positive about other people wearing ???? as well (i.e. Rav Belsky, Rav Elya Ber, Rav Moshe Mordechai Karp Rav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg etc).
Rav Shlomo Zalman wrote a letter about ???? a copy is posted on:
http://www.tekhelet.info/111037/????-????-????????
15 years ago Rav Feivel Cohen sent a letter to Rav Elyashiv asking being that:
1:
there is nothing to lose by wearing fake ????
2:
“????? ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ????”
would it then be ???? to wear the dye?
Rav Elyashiv responded that being that this is the 3rd proposal ???? we don’t have to belive the ??????.
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=50106&pgnum=4
It’s important to point out Rav Elyashiv was addressing Rav Feivel Cohen’s question about ?????? ???????, not the specific proofs for the murex trunculus (Rav Feivel Cohen said that at the time he didn’t even know the arguments and it certainly not part of his question).
And the berdichiver would mistama say that is why all the non frum men don’t wear tzitzis. (I’m not sure why he would say the non frum women do wear tzitzis.)
Good point.
There is a girl who sometimes comes to my weekday shachris minyan, and she wears tefillin and a tallis.
Why a tallis? She isn’t married!
So mistama the pshat is that she doesn’t wear a tallis kotton, so figures she should wear a tallis gadol for davening at least. I suppose that makes sense.
But why doesn’t she wear a tallis kotton then? Doesn’t she want to be like a man? I don’t know.
I’m also a bit surprised that she comes at all. If she would daven at home, she could pretend she is equal. But since she comes, she sees blatantly how she is not counted toward the minyan and other things. (One day this week we were 9 plus her.)
Plus, sometimes I spit on her, if I need to spit during davening.
sam4321– we actually do have a mesora from the chavos yair and the yaavetz as I pointed out earlier.
But either way I already pointed out the lashon of the Maharil in teshuvos siman 5 and the radvaz etc. that all say clearly it is possible to find it. What this taaneh that you need a mesorah probably means that it needs more than to fit with the simanim. The radzhiner techeiles had no rayas at all, rather it just ”fit” with all the simanim of chazal. The yeshuos malco said about it ??? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? (??’ ??”? ?????? ???? ??’ ?). So for that the Bais haleivi said you need more of a mesorah. However, the Murex has loads of strong rayas and is not just a guess. When the Chazon Ish was asked about his esrog which had no mesorah, he said He has so many rayas it is better than mesorah.
Chacham:it is in shiurim lezecher abba mori 1:pg 228. It means once we don’t know what the chilozon is the only way to say this thing is the chilozon is with a mesorah which was lost. Even with raiyos one needs a mesora. I am sure you read the kovetz tshuvos and tshuvos vhanhagos ,to me they a convincing arguments.
the sugya in gemara about lo sisgodidu is by halachah, so i dont know what your talking about. chacham, i understand this is a touchy subject with you, but im not going to be chozer from what i heard from rabbeim. and as for rashi, i was coming from pesachim there. not sure what you want. nishtakach means forgotten right? you cant remember what they forgot long time ago.
Poppa bar abba: why is such a pious holy man such as yourself paying such close attention to the woman’s section?
Toi-
1. about Lo sisgodidoo–If you are interested in where i am coming from see the radzihner in eyn hatecheiles. Although I may have been wrong about the minhag part, he clearly explains why it is not nogea by techeiles. But either way Lo sisgodidoo cannot patur you from a mitvas asey dioraysa especially if you can get out of the lo sisgodidoo problem by wearing btzineh
2– If nignaz means forgotten then in theory it can be found. Now all Techeiles dudes agree it was forgotten. That is metzious and we do not deny metzious. However, as I have quoted from the maharil previously it is not impossible to find it.
The Maharil seems to think you can find forgotten things. his Lashon in siman 5 of teshuvos is
“…????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ????? ????, ??”? ???? ???? ??”? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ???’.”
The Chemdas Shlomo ??”? ??’ ? ?? seems to agree with that and says “??? ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???”? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??????? ??? ??????? ????”? ?”? ???’ ?????.”
The Malbim in his sefer Artzos chaim (OC 9 41) says the same thing
[????? ???? ???”?].
To sam4321 and Toi Shruikin:
??? ?????”? (??”? ?????? ??’ ?): …????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ????? ????, ??”? ???? ???? ??”? ????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ????? ????
??? ??? ????? ???? (??”? ??’ ? ??) “??? ???? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???”? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??????? ??? ??????? ????”? ?”? ???’ ?????.”
??????? ????? (???’ ????”?, ??’ ? ??) ??? “???’ ???”? ????”? (??’ ????) [????] ????? ??? ???? ??? [-??????] ???? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ??”? ????”? ?”? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ????? [????? ???? ???”?].”
What more do you need to understand that we don’t need a Mesorah for t’cheiles and that it’s not ???? the way you understand it.
Oh, reb Toi i forgot to mentions that the rif and the rosh both bring down the halachos of techeiles even though they never bring down halachos that are not nogea bizman hazeh.
Now let us Hondle the biur hagra you quoted earlier.
The Mechaber In Orach Chaim Siman 9 Sif 2 says ????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ??? ?????
The Biur hagra on the words ???? ??? ????? ???? says ?’ ?”? ?’ ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??? ???? ??
We can probably all agree that the gra does not quote a medrash to ”prove” the mitzious that we have no techailes today. Everybody knows that the gra tells us his opinion in a few words which normally is just a mareh makom. So what does the gra mean?
Well, The Gra tells us to look at the Medrash. So let’s look at it. The lashon is like this
??? ???? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????
????? ????. ????? ??? ??? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???.
The Medrash says the mitzvah of tzitzis is to put on lavan and techeiles. When does this apply? when there was techeiles. But today we only have lavan because the techeiles was nignaz (forgotten) so the mitzvah is with lavan.
All I think the gra is saying is that when you do not have techeiles their is still a mitzvah with lavan.
The mesora is lost, let’s move on. When Eliyahu comes he will reestablish mesora, until then it’s conjecture, you are not yotze a mitzva when the possibility if it is rotted in conjecture. It’s not a sofek it a shot in the dark. Next.
(don’t compare this to the chazon ish and esrogim, where we know what an esrog is, we know what it looks like, but we want a mesora on a spesific esrog that it’s not from a murkav. That is what he said he rayos are as so good that the esros can be treated as if there is a mesoroa on it that it’s not murkav. over here, we don’t know the color, we don’t know the species, we don’t know the process, can be yotze tzitzis, etc.)
Bsalel;What makes you think the guy’s a holy dude??
Zvei dinim: There is a machlokes it is not clear cut as your saying. I can at least appriciate that there is a machlokes,but to say that one does not exist is not fair.
If the Gra was coming to tell us that he couldve quoted mifurassh’ mishnayos in Menachos. He’s going on leka tcheiles and says nignaz. So I think hes saying that its nignaz.
The idea that you need a mesorah in order to do a mitzvah is one I find quite silly. Put aside everything for a second and think about it. If the Torah says do something then its a mitzvah to do it. It’s really as simple as that.
However, in order to passkin lehalacha that one is obligated to do anything you MUST follow the structure and rules of halacha which may very likely require case precedent. The evidence of techeiles is purely scientific. there are no halachic tools available today to poskim which allow them to weigh this science. Therefore there is no way, without what you call mesorah, to pakin that one must wear techeiles.
Since there is no aveira involved in wear blue and science suggests you are doing a mitzvah then why not take the chance that maybe you are doing one?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.