No mention of the huge techailes event in Boro Park on Chol Hamoed?!

Home Coffeeroom Bais Medrash No mention of the huge techailes event in Boro Park on Chol Hamoed?!

  • This topic contains 128 replies, has 24 voices, and was last updated by  Chacham 1 month ago.
Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 129 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1381392

    Tom Dick n Harry
    Participant

    There was a major event, and the silence of lack of coverage is deafening. We can discuss any topic in the world but not this?!

    #1381457

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Seems like we can discuss this too!
    Nu so discuss…

    #1381529

    Spreadthetruth
    Participant

    Any serious study of the tcheiles that is available now, leads to the conclusion that it is the real thing, and it should be worn by everybody. All the questions have already been answered (see Levush Ha’aron by Rav Hellman) and the the silence is deafening. What we need is more people to start wearing it in public (many talmidei chachomim wear it underneath) so that it becomes more accepted, and we reach a tipping point where it becomes the normal and accepted thing to do.

    #1381588

    Meno
    Participant

    There are plenty of poskim/gedolim/talmidei chachomim who hold that the techeiles that is available today should not be worn.

    #1381591

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    ” leads to the conclusion that it is the real thing, and it should be worn by everybody”

    even if a is true, that doesn’t mean b is true.

    #1381602

    iacisrmma
    Participant

    TDH: Did they pay to advertise it? If not, then who would know about it?

    #1381617

    apushatayid
    Participant

    it was such a big event, that nobody heard of it.

    #1381613

    ๐Ÿ‘‘RebYidd23
    Participant

    This issue was discussed in Aim magazine. Some of the points on this thread were addressed in that article. And please don’t describe the imaginary silence as “deafening”. If it wasn’t cliche before, it is now.

    #1381614

    Gadolhadorah
    Participant

    …please remember to include it (along with pushing during hakofos) as among the major issues facing the tzibur in these troubled times….I suspect a good percentage of CR readers either (i) have tuned out any further debate on this subject, having exhausted commentary in prior threads or (ii) have no clue what you are talking about when dealing with wearing/not wearing

    #1381640

    ontheright
    Participant

    I put on techeiles a year ago because of the DNA study. Yes, it does not have menorah, ask a dayan if you may ad a color to the tztitz, and you’ll find out that you can put any color unto it. If that is the case, why don’t people wear as a possible mitzvah. It won’t hurt!

    #1381667

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    ubiquitin: Your comment need explanation. premise A) all Jews must do every mitzvah possible. Premise B) techielis is a mitzvah. Premise C) this is the real techelis (which is your premise a). It therefore follows, if B and C then A.

    #1381665

    DaMoshe
    Participant

    R’ Hershel Schachter shlita holds that since there’s nothing to lose by wearing it, you should wear the techeiles nowadays.

    R’ Elyashiv zt”l was against it, as he held we did not have a mesorah for it, and so shouldn’t do it.

    R’ Chaim Kanievsky shlita holds that we won’t get techeiles until Mashiach comes, so the one we have is wrong. He also says, however, that he feels there is room to disagree with his view, and that if someone believes it is the correct techeiles, they have a chiyuv to wear it. (This differs from R’ Elyashiv, who said that even if we believed it was correct, we shouldn’t wear it due to a lack of mesorah for it.)

    At the end of the day, as usual, one should ask their own Rav what to do, as there are gedolim on both sides of the issue on whom to rely.

    #1381684

    apushatayid
    Participant

    back to the event….

    tell us about it

    #1381690

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    DaMoshe: Your statement in regards to Rav Eliyashiv ztz”l is incorrect. Rav Eliyashiv held (in his 1997 letter) that since we do not have a direct mesorah we cannot be mechayiv the population, not that we shouldn’t wear it. Furthermore now days that we have much more evidence even Rav Eliyashiv might agree,. In fact his biggest talmid Harav Karp does wear techielis.

    #1381691

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Thefakemavin

    Premise A isnt true (eg there is a mitzva to grant a get, not every Jew must grant a get)

    Granted techeiles isnt analagous to get. Yet even if your reword your premise a to something along the lines of “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible that if circumstances call for r”

    your conclusion STILL isnt true
    namely: “It therefore follows, if B and C then A.”

    Example:
    premise A) (reworded) all Jews must do every mitzvah possible if circumstances call for it
    . Premise B) Yibum is a mitzvah.
    Premise C) (not relevant)

    Yet it doesn’t follow that if B then A

    Here is a better and more analogous example. Suppose we dig up Moshe Rabbeinu’s Tefillin, We recognize his handwriting, all archaeologists recognize it as real etc etc. then Eliyahu Hanavi comes along and says these are Moshe Rabbeinu’s tefilin. and lo and behold they are Rabbeinu Tam’s. While certainly a fascinating find, this has exactly zero bearign on halacha lemaisah. halcah isnt decided by Archaeology nor by Eliyahu hanavi. We have a mesora and that doesnt include Techeiles.

    so while it is intersting, I dont think we should revise halachic practice based on archaeology. That is a ver y dangerous game

    #1381692

    Takes2-2tango
    Participant

    The sheytils women wear today also dont have a mesora of the original sheytil. Time to remove your sheytil.

    #1381698

    Gadolhadorah
    Participant

    Seems the consensus is that there is no consensus and like many such issues, you can always find a “gadol” on your side of the debate

    #1381764

    GingerKale
    Participant

    ubiquitin: “We have a mesora and that doesnt include Techeiles”

    so will we never fulfill this mitzvah again? or will that change with the coming of Mashiach? and if that latter, please explain how.

    we have a Torah, and that DOES include Techeiles.

    #1381773

    Joseph
    Participant

    TheFakeMaven: What changed in the last 5 years since Rav Elyashiv was niftar that you are so convinced would have changed his mind and had him don this after not having worn it all his life?

    #1381822

    Gadolhadorah
    Participant

    To argue we should follow some practice because it is not forbidden and MAY have some redeeming spiritual value and/or provide some segulah is borderline “new age” hashkafah along the lines of the “healing” properties of certain crystals worn around your neck etc. Given that most yidden struggle just keeping up with hundreds of mitzos asseh m’doraisah, coming up with new rules of general applicability seems to complicate our daily lives unnecessarily.

    #1381854

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    ubiquitin: I’m sorry but you are simply incorrect. Premises B and C dictate premise A without your addition. Premise A, all Jews must do all mitzvohs. Objection of Gitten and Yibud are fallicious, for Gitten is a mitzvah only if a divorce is needed. So to Yibbum or Chalitzah are circumstantial mitzvohs, as is tzitzis (if a beged of four corners is worn) Every circumstantial mitzvah is a mitzvah if and only if the circumstances call for it.

    Premise A in regards to Gitten would be such: Premise B, Gitten is a mitzvah ‘when it is needed’ (otherwise it is not a mitzvah). so if a get is needed it is a mizvah other wise it is not. Therefore your objections are as wrong as can be.

    As to archaeology, it is only used as a snif for techelis, the simanei chazal and testimony of the gentiles are the actual arguments.
    in conclusion: spreadthetruth is correct, whilst your wrong.

    #1381963

    DaasYochid โ˜•
    Participant

    the simanei chazal

    The simanei Chazal are a strong argument against murex trunculus.

    #1381971

    apushatayid
    Participant

    Assuming one decides to “wear techeiles”, does one follow the shitta of tosfos (2 of the 4 on each corner are techiles resulting in 4 blue and 4 white per corner) ), rambam (only 1/2 of the 4 should be techeiles resulting in 7 white and one blue per corner) or the raavad (who holds an entire string is blue resulting in 6 white and 2 blue per corner.

    once you decide that, then, there are many opinions how to tie the strings.

    #1382252

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Takes2ttango
    Im sorry Im not sure if our comment is addressed to me. I dont understand it or its relevance.

    Gingerkale
    “or will that change with the coming of Mashiach? and if that latter, please explain how.”

    I dont know. Im excited to find out though.

    “we have a Torah, and that DOES include Techeiles.”

    As mentioned it also includes Yibum. Last time you had a spot that you didint know what it was, did you go to a kohein (Mitzvah 169 in chinuch)? We dont practice wah tthe Torah says that was the Tzedoki approach. We practice the Torah as interpreted by torah shebal peh and as handed down ish mipi rabbo, and as codified by Rishonim/acronim

    The fake maven
    You are contradicting yourself You disagree with my rewording of your faulty premise “all Jews must do all mitzvohs” Yet concede “… only if a divorce is needed. …Every circumstantial mitzvah is a mitzvah if and only if the circumstances call for it.”

    which is almost verbatim my rewording “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible if circumstances call for it”
    So Im not sure what your disagreement is there.

    You then go on “Premise A in regards to Gitten …”
    But my example was yibum

    “As to archaeology…”
    I was using that as a generalization meaning modern research. and lol at “testimony of the gentiles”

    Of course I may be wrong. Though I am not alone, my rebeim felt that way. Rav Elyashiv felt that way. The Chazon ish was opposed to paskening based on manuscripts. R’ Yoshe Ber said we dont pasken from Genizahs (what he called the garbage can). while Admitedly the evidence for the murex is stronger than the cases made based on manuscrits and it isnt exactly the same. The principle holds

    #1382522

    thinker123
    Participant

    The premise that a mesorah is needed to be ืžืงื™ื™ื the mitzvah of techeiles is contrary to the das torah of the Maharil and more who say that its possible to find the chilozon. ื•ืื™ื“ืš ื–ื™ืœ ื’ืžื•ืจ

    #1382503

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    ubiquitin: it seems i must explain exactly what i mean. I did not rewrite premise A, rather I explained to you why you’re wrong. I’ll explain myself again. You’re under the impression that a when a person gets married he has a mitzvah of giving a get, that is simply incorrect. There is no mitzvah of getting divorced. the reason why one should not give a get is not because one should try doing the most mitzvahs he can, rather one has no mitzvah of giving a get unless he wants to. Big differnce. the same is with yibbum or any other circumstantial mitzvah.
    Which is why there was no difference in giving the example through gitten or yibbum, both of the there is NO MITZVAH UNLESS WANTED, not that one should try doing as many mitzvohs as one could.
    I hope this is clear and simple enough.

    as to the testimony of the gentiles. i’d advise you to look up the Pri Chadash (Y.D 80:2) and the Steipler (kisvei hachadashim 119:20) before dismissing anything lightly. It is an extremely irresponsible to give an opinion on something you have obviously done no research. And again all Rav Eliyashv said is that we can’t be mechayiv the world to carry, and that was before all the new evidence of recent times.

    #1382504

    Bobchka
    Participant

    You should search Rabbi Frand has a shiur on techales hachodosh where he shows why the murex is NOT correct. It’s not so simple that it is

    #1382515

    thinker123
    Participant

    ubiquitin
    I read your comments and I can’t make any sense of it. What ืฉื™ื™ื›ื•ืช does ื™ื‘ื•ื ื•ื›ื“ื•ืžื” have regarding this topic??!! Tzitzits is a mitzvah for everyone to do. Now even though a person doesn’t have to put on a beged with ื“ ื›ื ืคื•ืช do become mechuav in the mitzvah, but once you are wearing a pair of tzitzis and you don’t put on techeles you are being ืžื‘ื˜ืœ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ื ื‘ื›ืœ ืจื’ืข as though you are wearing ื“ ื›ื ืคื•ืช without tzitzis!! The ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืœื•ื™ says clearly that in such a case that you have techeles and you only put on white its an isurr ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื of ื‘ืœ ืชื’ืจืข!! In the sefer ืขืจื•ื’ืช ื”ื‘ื•ืฉื from one of the ื‘ืขืœื™ ืชื•ืกืคื•ืช it says that if a person only wants to go with white strings ืžื›ื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื• ืขื“ ืฉืชืฆื ื ืคืฉื• ื›ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื”.
    So its obvious that your whole pshetle makes no sense.
    So to rest of your words
    There are clear sources that state matter of factly that the murex is the ื—ืœื–ื•ืŸ ื”ืชื›ืœืช. For example ืจื‘ื™ ืื‘ืจื”ื ื”ืจื•ืคื ื‘ืกืคืจ ืฉืœื˜ื™ ื’ื‘ื•ืจื™ื, and the ื—ื•ื•ืช ื™ืื™ืจ ื‘ืกืคืจ ืžืงื•ืจ ื—ื™ื™ื. Plus there are no sources that disagree. So who can?!!
    All the gedolim that you mentioned none of the were ืžื‘ืจืจ ื”ื“ื‘ืจ. As they say themselves. R`chaim says to anyone who asks him that if they are sure thag this is techeles they MUST go with it.
    Anyone’s who is interested to study the topic should go to techeiles. org and see for himself

    #1382527

    DaasYochid โ˜•
    Participant

    #1382539

    iacisrmma
    Participant

    thinker123: I think that is the point. We can find the chilazon but are we sure we know it is the correct species?

    #1382551

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    whoa lots of comments from many people I shall go i order.

    thinker123
    “The premise that a mesorah is needed to be ืžืงื™ื™ื the mitzvah of techeiles is contrary to the das torah of the Maharil and more who say that its possible to find the chilozon”

    Im not familiar with the Mahril you mention, Even if it exists. halcha isnt decided based on what the Mahril held. R’ Chaim Kanievsky said it wont be found until Moshiach comes, R’ Elyashiv essentially said what said (that should be reversed obviously)

    Thefakemaven
    “Youโ€™re under the impression that a when a person gets married he has a mitzvah of giving a get…”
    I m under no such impression. Your premise simply isnt accuate, as you admit as there is no race to fullfil mitzvos. If you need to give a get you give a get if you have abeged with daled kanfos you wear tzizis if you come across a nest and want the eggs yo udo shiluach hakein etc etc. There are soem mitzvos that are incumbent no matter waht. not all are.

    ” the same is with yibbum or any other circumstantial mitzvah.”
    My point with yibum, is that even i a situation where there is a mitzvah of yibum (brother dies without children r”l) as you may or may not know, we STILL do not perfrom the mitzvah of yibum, instead chalitza is done. Even when the circumstance DOES call for yibum, we still forgo it.

    As for accepting testimony (I dont have immediate access to your sources) . Even of a Yid isnt neccesarily accepted. For example R’ Elazar reports how he saw the tzitz in rome yet we dont pasken like him.

    #1382554

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    thinker123

    “I read your comments and I canโ€™t make any sense of it.”
    hope I can help, though dont hold your breath.

    ” What ืฉื™ื™ื›ื•ืช does ื™ื‘ื•ื ื•ื›ื“ื•ืžื”have regarding this topic??!!Tzitzits is a mitzvah for everyone to do”
    And yibum is a mitzvah for a person whose brother dies childless to do. Yet he doesnt do it.
    (Im not saying it is a perfect comparison, it of course isnt. But it does demonstrate that this line “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible.” isnt 100% true.

    “but once you are wearing a pair of tzitzis and you donโ€™t put on techeles you are being ืžื‘ื˜ืœ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” ื‘ื™ื“ื™ื ื‘ื›ืœ ืจื’ืข as though you are wearing ื“ ื›ื ืคื•ืช without tzitzis!!”

    chas vesholam to be motzi laz on gnerations of kala Yisroel. They were yotzi the mitzva as am I. The halacha is techeiles eino meakev as halavan.
    “So its obvious that your whole pshetle makes no sense.”
    It isnt mine.

    “Plus there are no sources that disagree. So who can?!!”
    Ruba deruba of Gedolim can disagree both past and present.

    “R`chaim says to anyone who asks him that if they are sure thag this is techeles they MUST go with it.
    Anyoneโ€™s who is interested to study the topic should go to techeiles. org and see for himself”

    Yet Rav Chaim doesnt wear it himself, too bad R’ Chaim doesn’t have access to techeiles.org. Maybe you can print it out and persuade him.

    Also see DY’s excellent source. thank you DY for supplying it..

    #1382575

    DaasYochid โ˜•
    Participant

    You’re welcome.

    #1382588

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    ubiquitin: This is getting tedious, but I shall try to explain this simple concept to you one last time. ‘as you admit as there is no race to fullfil mitzvos…’ I have never ‘admitted’ such an absurd concept. Of course there is a ‘race to fulfill every mitzva possible, do you argue on the Mishna of ‘ืœืขื•ืœื ื”ื•ื” ืจืฅ ืœื“ื‘ืจ ืžืฆื•ื”’?! All I said was that a ืžืฆื•ื” ืงื™ื•ืžื™ืช meaning a mitzvah that there is no obligation to do unless wanted to, ืื™ืŸ ื—ื™ื•ื‘ ืงื™ื•ื ืžื•ื˜ืœ ืขืœ ื”ืื“ื. But of course he should do it if he can. But giving a get is NOT even a ืžืฆื•ื” ืงื™ื•ืžื™ืช, there is no reason why one should divorce if not needed, it is a last resort, if nothing else can help, but of ื”ืžื‘ื™ื ืฉืœื•ื ื‘ื™ืŸ ืื™ืฉ ืœืืฉืชื• ืื•ื›ืœ ืคื™ืจื•ืชื™ื”ื ื‘ืขื•ืœื ื”ื–ื”! As such every logical indivisual should understand the difference between Gitten and other mitzvohs.
    As for yibbum, again your comparison is fundamentally off. The reason why we do Chalitza over Yibbum is because Chazal knew that most people perform Yibbum the wrong way as it is CLEARLY written in Mesechtes Yevamos. it is not US who ‘forgo it’, Chazal have stated that we are not ืžืงื™ื™ื ืžืฆื•ืช ื™ื‘ื•ื ื›ื”ืœื›ืชื•. So again it is not a kiyum mitzvas Yibbum which we ‘forgo’ rather it is mitzvahs chalitza which CAN be done the correct way which takes precedence.
    But of course any mitzvah that CAN be done correctly, any person with half a mind should RUN and do it.ื—ื›ื ืœื‘ ืœืงื— ืžืฆื•ืช.
    DY: The Yehushuas Malko is irrelevant to the present discussion as the issues raised in the teshuva were only relevant to the Rezhiners techeilis. Sorry to bust your bubble.

    As to the Gedolim, again you miss the point. The Gedolim in question say that the have not been ืžื‘ืจืจ the ืžืฆื™ืื•ืช. And Rav Chaim Kenievzky said that one is entitled to disagree with him and should wear techilis.
    ื™”ื˜ ืื™ื™ืจ ืชืฉืข”ื‘ ื–”ืœ ื”ื’ืจ”ื— ืงื ื™ื‘ืกืงื™ ืฉืœื™ื˜”ื: ืื– ืื™ืจ ื”ืืœื˜ ืื– ืื™ืจ ื•ื•ื™ื™ืกื˜ ื‘ืจื•ืจ, ื–ืขื ื˜ ืื™ืจ ืžื—ื•ื™ื‘ ืขืœ ืคื™ ื“ื™ืŸ!

    as to the Pri Chadash etc, I know that you have not seen it, which is what I meant that before you write any comment do the research before.

    Please think before you answer this, and do not just answer off the cuff.

    #1382613

    thinker123
    Participant

    Joseph-
    Please reread fakemavens comment. The fact is that rav aliyashiv was not mevarer the metzius, as he says himself in the mentiond letter. Secondly, one of his biggest talmidim, rav Carp, wears techeiles.

    Gadolhadorah-
    โ€œTo argue we should follow some practice because it is not forbidden and MAY have some redeeming spiritual value and/or provide some segulah is borderline โ€œnew ageโ€ hashkafah along the lines of the โ€œhealingโ€ properties of certain crystals worn around your neck etc.โ€
    Please think before you write. We are not dealing with a segulah only a mitzvah ืขืฉื” ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื, that predates the creation of the universe. As I wrote before there is a ื—ืฉืฉ ื‘ื™ื˜ื•ืœ ืžืฆื•ื•ืช ืขืฉื” ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื, and the isur of ื‘ืœ ืชื’ืจืข , so of course who doesnโ€™t want to play it safe. Besides it almost ื‘ืจื•ืจ that we are dealing with the real thing. [let me just ask: how many esrogim do you use??]
    Das yochid.-
    The simanei Chazal are a strong argument pro the murex trunculus.

    Apushita yid โ€“
    In the same vein we shouldnโ€™t wear tefilin, there is also 4 shitos. [FYI: the Tur only brings down shitos tosafos, same with TAZ, and ืฉื•”ืข ื”ืจื‘ .]
    Regarding the method of tying, its not ืžืขื›ื‘.

    Das yochid- please explain what do you see in the ื™ืฉื•ืขื•ืช ืžืœื›ื•. You cauld have put up all 3 teshuvos?? [The murex is not a cuttlefish.]

    Iacisrmma-
    โ€œthinker123: I think that is the point. We can find the chilazon but are we sure we know it is the correct species?โ€
    I agree with you 100% what im saying is that we cant brush off the whole thing because we donโ€™t have a mesorah what is the chilozan. If after a careful research we find it, we have to wear it.
    Now back to ubiquitin
    โ€œIm not familiar with the Mahril you mentionโ€
    What?? Anyone who learnt a little about this topic would know it. So no, Iโ€™m not going to help you find it. Just learn about the topic before you write.
    โ€œEven if it exists. halcha isnt decided based on what the Mahril held. Rโ€™ Chaim Kanievsky said it wont be found until Moshiach comesโ€
    Pardon me, I think that the maharil is bigger then rav chaim. Do you realize that the Mahril is usually the mesorah of Ashknaz? But its irrelevant, rav chaim told a lot of people, if you hold this is techeiles, you MUST go with it. So how could you bring as proof to your point. [as is known rav chaim has sedorim back to back, so no, he never went through this topic which is ืชืœื•ื™ in a lot of things that are not ื‘ื™ืŸ ื›ื•ืชืœื™ ื”ื‘ื™ื”ืž”ื“]
    โ€œchas vesholam to be motzi laz on gnerations of kala Yisroel. They were yotzi the mitzva as am I.โ€
    They were yotzah, of course. But now if we found the techeiles we are ืžื—ื•ื™ื™ื‘ to go with it. [โ€œas I amโ€ ??? who says you were??]
    โ€œThe halacha is techeiles eino meakev as halavan.โ€
    If you would learn the topic you would see that it has nothing to do with it. There are clear gemaras that we see the ื—ื•ื™ื™ื‘ to go with techeiles if its obtainable. Besides I quoted clear sources who say what I mentioned. So โ€œits not mineโ€ either.
    โ€œPlus there are no sources that disagree. So who can?!!โ€
    Ruba deruba of Gedolim can disagree both past and present
    Very well, find me one who [went through the topic and] argues with them.
    โ€œAlso see DYโ€™s excellent source. thank you DY for supplying it.โ€
    Nothing new, your just proving the point that you never went thru the topic at all.

    #1382633

    Tom Dick n Harry
    Participant

    apushatayid,

    The event was on Teusday Chol Hamoed in Rabbi Steinworzel’s shul in Boro Park. It was jammed packed. The people who were there estimate that there were 1,000 people present at the same time listening to the shiurim. The shiurim were presented very clearly and powerfully. People walked away with a very strong feeling that this is correct and that it is an absolute chiyuv, and that it is an avaira to wear a talis without this techailes. If you inquire from people who were there, you will undoubtedly get this report.

    The people here who are commenting certain comments against, are clearly lacking the information that was presented there, as with that information such arguments are null.

    #1382622

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    The fake maven

    We are getting sidetracked by what I assume is amisunderstanding.
    you wrote “premise A) all Jews must do every mitzvah possible. ”
    I pointed out that this wasnt 100% accurate, but that reworded your point could still stand with merely that flaw.

    I wrote “Your premise simply isnt accuate, as you admit …” The punctuation was poor on my part, and Im sorry about that. I meant that Your premise A “all Jews must do every mitzvah possible.” Isnt 100% you now correctly differentiate between mitzvah kiyumis and chiyuvis.

    You agreed that that premise wasnt 100% accurate. for example you conceded “โ€œโ€ฆ only if a divorce is needed. โ€ฆEvery circumstantial mitzvah is a mitzvah if and only if the circumstances call for it.โ€”
    This is alomst verbatim what I corrected your premise to namely ” all Jews must do every mitzvah possible if circumstances call for it”

    what follows is ” there is no race to fulfill mitzvos” Though you havent admitted this point. It is of course accurate. Again there is no race to perform every mitzvah, as there is no race to perfrom a Get.

    Yes there are tirutzim why we dont do yibum, I didnt mention korbon Pesach as Ive heard many peshetlach explaining why we don’t do that either. Im surprised nobody mentioned the reason we arent mekayem showing nega to Kohanim is becasue they arent meyuchos which is the classic answer. These are peshetlach explaining existing practice. (As we should do Im not being Motzei Laz on whomever it is that woke up one day with what looked like a nega and said, forget this Im not going to the Kohein, see if I care)

    “And Rav Chaim Kenievzky said that one is entitled to disagree with him and should wear techilis.”

    He must not know the mishna “ืขื•ืœื ื”ื•ื” ืจืฅ ืœื“ื‘ืจ ืžืฆื•ื”” Why isnt he mevarer it

    “I know that you have not seen it, which is what I meant that before you write any comment do the research before”

    disagree completely! Im here to learn. and if I’m mistaken or you have new knowledge to share Im eager to learn.
    This isnt off the cuff, this is after years of discussing with My Rebbeim, Mesora to me is paramount. when New things are introduced Even with good intentions, it can have a devastating affect on everything.

    Out of curiosity say I proved to you that the Pri eitz Hadar mentioned by the Torah is actualy an Apple.(dont worry its not) We find archaeological evidence it turns out unlike Esrogim Apple bark tastes like Apples (again, not really) would you abandon the Esrog in place of the apple?

    #1382645

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    thinker 123
    “What?? Anyone who learnt a little about this topic would know it. So no, Iโ€™m not going to help you find it. Just learn about the topic before you write.”

    Foolishness. This may surprise you. Bu YWN coffee room isnt realy where I produce final ideas after researching Evrything. I am always eager to hear more. IF you dont want to help me find it . no problem there is always google. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction.

    “Pardon me, I think that the maharil is bigger then rav chaim. Do you realize that the Mahril is usually the mesorah of Ashknaz?”

    Yes. though again that sint how halacha gets decided.

    ” But its irrelevant, rav chaim told a lot of people, if you hold this is techeiles, you MUST go with it. So how could you bring as proof to your point. [as is known rav chaim has sedorim back to back, so no, he never went through this topic which is ืชืœื•ื™ in a lot of things that are not ื‘ื™ืŸ ื›ื•ืชืœื™ ื”ื‘ื™ื”ืžโ€ื“]”

    Cmon that is the weakest excuse. You cant possibly beleive that.

    ” [โ€œas I amโ€ ??? who says you were??]”
    We may be going in circles. But over a thousand years of mesora says so. and the again of course there is the inconvenient fact that most Gedolim today do not wear it. (including Rav Chaim)

    “If you would learn the topic you would see that it has nothing to do with it. There are clear gemaras that we see the ื—ื•ื™ื™ื‘ to go with techeiles if its obtainable. Besides I quoted clear sources who say what I mentioned. So โ€œits not mineโ€ either.”

    โ€œPlus there are no sources that disagree. So who can?!!โ€
    Ruba deruba of Gedolim can disagree both past and present
    Very well, find me one who [went through the topic and] argues with them.
    Gedolim? OR Rabbonim. Among Rabbonim are Rabbi Resiman who delivered a shiur a few years back. among Gedolim I dont know who was mevarer what. I do know that they dont wear it. Again an inconvenient fact you cannot just wish away. You say it is so easy to be mevarer just go to the website. They can be mevarer and choose not to. Care to explain why?
    Also feel free to answer my apple question posed to thefakemavin

    #1382660

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    I dont think i am saying anything that crazy.
    Here it is in short.
    We practice the way our parents practiced we dont introduce new innovations even if they seem correct.

    Thinker123
    you quoted the Beis halevei earlier. I found the source I was looking for
    R’ yoshe Ber quotes from his Grandfather (The beis Halevi) in Shiurim Lezeicher Aba Mari, chelek 1 page 228 that we dont prove based on research, when a specific item is required for a Mitzvah. This is why the Beis Halevi rejected the Radziner’s techeiles and the principle holds true with the murex as well.

    Dont feel bad if you havent come across this in your research, it in no way proves you never went thru the topic at all. It is a vast topic. With many dimensions. there is always more to share. and now you know.

    #1382668

    youdontsay
    Participant

    ubiquitin:
    “The Chazon ish was opposed to paskening based on manuscripts.”

    This is one of the most often misquoted statements said in the name in the Chazon Ish. Of course the CI allowed the use of manuscripts. The CI did not allow for the uprooting of halacha pesuka with a manuscript.

    Rโ€™ Yoshe Ber said we dont pasken from Genizahs (what he called the garbage can).

    This should never be said over in his name. This statement reflects extremely poor on him. Maybe the Rambam’s manuscript from the genizah is also garbage c”v.

    #1382672

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    youdontsay: well said!

    #1382671

    TheFakeMaven
    Participant

    ubiquitin: Again please think before you answer. No, it is neither verbatim or conceding a point! Premise A is that one has to do all mitzvos possible, that means every mitzvah. But let’s think for a moment, must one get married so he can divorce? Must one injure someone so that he can pay? Must one borrow so that he can repay? Obviously not, even though premise A is correct, these are not a mitzvah, meaning these are mitzvohs (M) if such and such happen (P). Now so long as P does not happen there is no M. the reason why one does not do M is not because one does not have to do M (as you have mistakengly understood), rather there is no M as long as P does not happen.
    There is a big ื ืค”ืž between these two ways of thinking, for according to your understanding of M, there is a concept of M, you just don’t need to do it. Whereas according to my (and the correct) explanation of M, so long as P does not happen THERE IS NO m AT ALL. So to reiterate, there was NO agreement to any of you ืกื‘ืจื•ืช ื›ืจืกื™ื•ืช.

    “what follows is โ€ there is no race to fulfill mitzvosโ€ Though you haven’t admitted this point. It is of course accurate. Again there is no race to perform every mitzvah, as there is no race to perform a Get.”
    I take it that you have no problem arguing with Shlomo Hamelech who stated ื—ื›ื ืœื‘ ื™ืงื— ืžืฆื•ื•ืช, or with the Tanna who has stated ืœืขื•ืœื ื”ื•ื” ืจืฅ ืœื“ื‘ืจ ืžืฉื ื”, wince, we have no mesorah for this… [I think it self understood that you have nothing to say on this topic since you have clearly not addressed this point other than restating this concept which is against the whole ‘mesorah’ of yiddishkeit].
    [as an aside, I now understand why Chazal had to give a special name for one that does not put on Tefilin ืงืจืงืคืชื ื“ืœื ืžื ื— ืชืคืœื™ืŸ, since seeing that their are frum people such as yourself, who do not see an issue with not doing mitzvohs, since, after all there is no race, they would not even put on teffilin if not for the statement of ืงืจืงืคืชื…].

    As for yibbum, I can’t believe you really meant what you said. Terutzim?! Do you consider not blowing shofar on shabbos because of the gezaira a ‘terits?! We don’t do yibbum because Chazal told us not to! it’s not a kahya teritz! seriously, even for you….

    you can stop with your excuse of mesorah, the only place in HALACHA that we find the concept of mesorah is with birds, for everything else we rely on a sefer which you may or may not have heard of, it is called the Shulchan Aruch. There cannot be a mesorah against techeilis as there was no techeilis to speak of….

    As for Rav Chaim, explain to me, do you have a different explanation of the mishana?! Why Rav Chaim is not meverer is simply because since he from the Gedoei Hador and has real limited time…..

    “disagree completely! Im here to learn. and if Iโ€™m mistaken or you have new knowledge to share Im eager to learn.”
    So go to techelis.com, don’t sstart writing nonsense. It is quite clear you have an agenda….

    as for the Esrog, it’s a moot point, there has never and would never be such a thing,

    #1382674

    youdontsay
    Participant

    ubiquitin: “I dont think i am saying anything that crazy. Here it is in short. We practice the way our parents practiced we dont introduce new innovations even if they seem correct.”

    You simply miss the point. This issue is not innovation.

    #1382689

    Joseph
    Participant

    Chazal never told us to avoid doing Yibum. Only Ashkenazim have a custom to only to Chalitza. Sephardim can still do Yibum today.

    #1382695

    Tzvi hersh
    Participant

    The religious Zionist wear techeylus. Another good reason to avoid it.

    #1382696

    thinker123
    Participant

    ubiquitin
    โ€œI am always eager to hear more. IF you dont want to help me find it . no problem there is always google. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction.โ€

    If you really are interested I already told you were to look. My point is if your lazy to go thru the topic, Iโ€™m not going to help you.

    โ€œCmon that is the weakest excuse. You cant possibly believe that.โ€

    You have another explanation? Itโ€™s a fact the bigger the gadol the less time he has. And because almost all people when they hear about it, they donโ€™t believe it, [until they research it themselves], the same with rav chaim he is not going to spend his time on it.

    โ€œWe may be going in circles. But over a thousand years of mesora says so.โ€

    Huh??!! Your not going to find someone who disagrees with you. But what does that have to do with it, its very possible that now we found it. [as the maharil says that its possible].

    โ€œand the again of course there is the inconvenient fact that most Gedolim today do not wear it.โ€œ

    And again you keep on leaving out the inconvenient fact that most of the gedolim were not mevarer. And from those that were, most came to the same conclusion: techeiles is back!!

    Regarding Rabbi Resiman. Just look on the mentioned website.

    โ€œyou quoted the Beis halevei earlier. I found the source I was looking for
    Rโ€™ yoshe Ber quotes from his Grandfather (The beis Halevi) in Shiurim Lezeicher Aba Mari, chelek 1 page 228 that we dont prove based on research, when a specific item is required for a Mitzvah. This is why the Beis Halevi rejected the Radzinerโ€™s techeiles and the principle holds true with the murex as well.
    Dont feel bad if you havent come across this in your research, it in no way proves you never went thru the topic at all. It is a vast topic. With many dimensions. there is always more to share. and now you know.โ€

    The ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืœื•ื™ I quoted is in the teshuvas. Regarding what you are quoting, [realy sorry but a know it already]. I usually try not to waste time on all the brisker bubeh maises, especially when thy are not compatible with the letter the ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืœื•ื™ sent the radziner rebbe, what is printed his the sefer. There he says a slightly different reason from what is said in his name ื‘ื‘ื™ืช ื‘ืจื™ืกืง, and changes the whole perspective, and would not apply regarding the murex. So no, if have to pick between what the ื‘ื™ืช ื”ืœื•ื™ said to what is said in his name, its obvious the latter is out the window. [as would every sane person].
    By the way, I donโ€™t know if Iโ€™ll be wasting more of my time debating someone who never went thru the topic.

    #1382708

    DaasYochid โ˜•
    Participant

    DY: The Yehushuas Malko is irrelevant to the present discussion as the issues raised in the teshuva were only relevant to the Rezhiners techeilis. Sorry to bust your bubble.

    Actually, some of his points are relevant to murex as well.

    #1382715

    thinker123
    Participant

    Tzvi hersh
    They also keep other mitzvos. Maybe we should stop keeping the torah ch”v

    #1382710

    youdontsay
    Participant

    DaasYochid: “Actually, some of his points are relevant to murex as well.”

    Since you seem to know the Yeshuos Malko so well, why don’t you share with us how his teshuva is relevant to the murex. Why so ambiguous?

    #1382737

    yekke2
    Participant

    I’m not getting involved in the particulars of the shailah – my research on “Techeiles” consists of listening to one or two shiurim a year ago, and some minimal browsing online. I don’t profess to know anything about the Murex, or about Techeiles.

    For years, I had shver why we don’t wear techeiles at least ืžืกืคืง. Surely the dictum of ืกืคืง ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื ืœื—ื•ืžืจื obligates us to wear something which MAY be the techeiles, even if we are not convinced that it is! I find it a chiddush to say that the fact we have no Mesorah stops any ืœื™ื“ืช ื”ืกืคืง.

    I think the answer to this is R’ Chaim’s vort. R’ Chaim explained that ืกืคืง ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื ืœื—ื•ืžืจื only obligates an action that will remove you from the ืกืคืง. For example – nobody who davens Nusach Ashkenaz will say Krias Shema in Sefardi or Temani pronunciation, although it is a ื—ื™ื•ื‘ ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื and there is certainly a chance that the Temani mesorah is correct. So why doesn’t ืกืคืง ื“ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื ืœื—ื•ืžืจื obligate you to say Shema in as many pronunciations as you can? The answer is – since even after you say Shema a second time, you still will not have ื•ื“ืื™ been yotze the chiyuv, you are not obligated.

    Once we establish that you are not mechuyav ืžื“ื™ืŸ ืกืคืง, you are only obligated if you really are convinced that you are wearing Techieles. And even if you are 100% without a shadow of doubt sure that the Murex is Techeiles, you still have no idea whether to wear them like Tosfos, like the Ra’avad, or any of the other shittas.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 129 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Trending