- This topic has 34 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
i’m trying to gather as much information about the trunculus techeiles as possible. if you have any info (pro or con) please post it here. (not about whether you should wear it or not. but about the evidence that it is or isn’t the chilazon)
Are you kidding? All we are going to talk about is whether you should wear it.
My take: before you start doing anything, look around and see who else is doing it. If most of the Rabbonim and Bnei Torah are, it’s likely a good idea.
popa: that is the wrong approach, doing proper halachick research is the better idea. after you do that then then you could make a decision. (as a rabbi in training that should have been your response.)
i think popa was telling him, in a non-controversial way and without appearing to give a psak, that it is probably not a good idea to wear it
besides the OP was CLEARLY asking for a discussion about the issue and not for a psak
In addition to what Mod-80 said, I’d like to quote Rav Gamliel Rabinowitz- “It says ‘asei lcha Rav’ not ‘asei lcha sefer'”. Halachic research is not for the hamonei am, it is for halachic authorities. For the rest of us we need to “look around and see who else is doing it. If most of the Rabbonim and Bnei Torah are, it’s likely a good idea.” to quote a wise saying.
Here is a site with the possible evidence:
http://tekhelet.com/criteria.htm
“possible” added by moderator
@oy vey –
You say that you wear tcheiles because your posek tsays you should. I think then, the appropriate person to ask for information relating to tcheiles and specifically why he says you should wear it would be your posek. It does not make sense to ask here.
I believe that the Radzyner Rebbe, who was the one to reintroduce the concept of wearing techeles, thought that the techeles dye came from a certain squid. Later, Rav Hertzog, the first cheif rabbi of Israel, reviewed this position and cocnluded that the squid did not pass the tests laid out by the gemara in order to be real techeles (for instance the color would fade when instered into certain solutions.) After arriving at these results, Rav Herzog searched and found this snail (which is used by most of the techeles factories) that he felt passed all of the tests.
Remember that today when people see techeles on tzitzis it could either be from that squid (primarily used by Breslover chasidim) or the from the snail and that is the one that is endorsed by many of the litvishe rabbonim.
In my family shul, the Rabbi and many congregants wear techeilet (snail kind). I saw a really good writeup on it the other day and I’ll see if I can find it.
oy vey:
I have some odd minhagim myself (who doesn’t?). When people ask why I do them, I say because my Rebbeim said to. And that is the real answer.
The Radziner thought the cuttlefish was the chilazon. I won’t go into it, but it was proven that that he was fooled by chemists. Since then, Many rabbonim simply don’t want to get involved in the topic because they are afraid to be proven wrong later.
I am not a Rov but I know how to learn a little. A number of years ago someone from E.Y. spoke in our shul about trunculus. I decided to write a maamar disproving him. After studying the topic in depth instead of writing the maamar, I started wearing it myself.
There are many many powerful proofs for this being the real tchelles. This is not the venue for going into all of them. I will share with you the strongest one.
There are ancient dyeing factories in northern E.Y. and Lebanon with ditches full of – not millions – but hundreds of millions of empty trunculus shells. There is no question by anyone that truclulus extract was used as an ancient dye.
The gemara says that Indigo (Kla Ilan) is so similar to Tcheles that the Ribono Shel Olam will punish someone that substitutes Kla Ilan for Tcheles from chilazon. (kla ilan – originally grown only in India – is much cheaper than trunculus extract – which is why trunculus fell into disuse eventually.)
Now, indigo dyed wool and trunculus dyed wool is so very similar that it is impossible for anything other than spectrographic analysis to tell them apart.
So if it is true – as some want to say – that trunculus is not the real tchelles, there must be another marine species that has an extract also similar to Indigo and trunculus. In that case, why didn’t Chazal warn us also about this other imposter – trunculus – which was very well known as a dye in ancient times and whose extract is also exactly the same color as tchelles?
You want to know why they didn’t? Because trunculus IS DEFINITELY tcheles. That’s why.
I am not even going into the numerous other proofs.
BTW every year more and more rabbonim, some very choshuve and well-known, are starting to wear this tcheles. Some open, some btsin’a . If you ask anyone of them that doesn’t, you will find that, for the most part, they simply don’t want to deal with the whole issue.
ive never looked into the controversy but im guessing the consensus of our Gedolim is not to wear it because we have lost the Mesorah, regardless of the wonderfulness of the proofs. wonderful proofs have been unproved many times in the past.
If you ask anyone of them that doesn’t, you will find that, for the most part, they simply don’t want to deal with the whole issue.
I doubt if that is Rav Elyashuvs reason.
Rav Elyashiv was asked five years ago and that is exactly what he said. He wont go into the issue and he can’t tell people to wear tchelles. Rav Zalman Nechemiah who did study it when asked is today wearing it.
that isnt AT ALL what he said
He didnt say he doesnt wear them because he just doesnt want to think about it. he said he wont publicly discuss the issue
there is a huge difference.
you dont know his reasons, and i dont know his reasons.
wonderful proofs have been unproved many times in the past.
Then they weren’t really proofs now, were they? 🙂
The Wolf
In retrospect.
Another thing to keep in mind when analyzing the authenticity of the modern day chilazon is how literally one should understand the various mamrei chazal that deal with techeles. For instance, the statement that the chilzaon only surfaces once in every seventy years and that it is very expensive as a result. Many positions hold (especially those in favor of the practice of wearing techeles) that it is unlikely that the animal only surfaces exactly once in 70 years, rather it means something that is rather scarce.
no they werent proofs.
but perhaps no alleged proof is ever a proof.
except perhaps in pure mathematics
For the person who started this thread, who wanted to defend his wearing of techeiles, this article by R’ Chaim Twerski is a good place to start:
http://www.tekhelet.com/pdf/tw01.pdf
There is also a great sefer from R’ Shlomo Yaakov Teitelbaum called “Lulaos Techeiles” but you have to buy it. Zundel Berman has it for $14 here:
There are two shi’urim on YU Torah (yutorah.org) that discuss techeiles. One is a shi’ur on if the techeiles is real techeiles or not. The second shi’ur is on the topic even if it’s only a safek, should we wear it anyways. It’s by R’ Aryeh Lebowitz in a category called “ten minute halacha” (each shi’ur is about 10 minutes). He brings arguments both ways but he is a talmid of R’ Schachter shlita and wears techeiles (R’ Schachter shlita wears techeiles also) so it might be a little biased towards wearing it.
To the moderator who “fixed” the link by wrapping it in code: Thank you. You made the page visible again.
HollyMoe: Your “proof” can be easily rejected.
If they found “hundreds of millions” of trunculus shells they obviously were not rare enough to even fit a “figurative” interpretation of the Gemara that they only surface every 70 years. Furthermore equating kala ilan with indigo is pure speculation. Additionally, the trunculus extract is NOT naturally blue, it is RED. Only after exposure to numerous chemicals and extended sunlight does it turn blue, and this is NOT mentioned in the (halacha not aggadata) Gemara that describes the process of producing techeiles.
Derech HaMelech, What in the world do you mean by, ” Halachic research is not for the hamonei am, it is for halachic authorities.?” Should I stop going to shiurim? We learn Torah so we can better understand how to follow HaShem’s commandments and that means learning as much halachah and hashkafah as we possibly can!
Holly Moe wrote, “I won’t go into it, but it was proven that that he was fooled by chemists.” It was none other than Rav Herzog z’tz’l who was responsible for that proof!
oy vey wrote, “R’ Schachter shlita wears techeiles also”. This is true. But not all his talmidim do.
hello99 wrote, “Furthermore equating kala ilan with indigo is pure speculation. ” Rav Herzog z’tz’l makes a rather convincing case otherwise.
It is a serious hashkafic and halachic shilah as to how to treat halachic information that comes through methods other than our direct mesorah. Rav Herzog z’tz’l made a pretty convincing case for having found the source of the techelet. But despite the fact that I think he is correct, I do not wear techelet. I talked with my Rav and it is not at all clear that we can change our practice based on new scientific information. A similar question comes up regarding the permissibility of killing body lice on Shabat. We know that they do not reproduce via spontaneous generation but that may not be enough to override the permssion that was granted by the sages of the past. There are good arguments on both sides of this issue. On the one hand, we have permanently lost the mesorah for techelet and unless we accept the idea that we can use scientific information such as that discovered by Rav Herzog z’tz’l we may never be able to fulfill this important mitzvah. On the other hand, scientific research by its nature is limited to the available data and while we are never again going to say that body lice *do* reproduce by spontaneous generation, the level of evidence for techelet is not quite permanently conclusive and the level of evidence in many other areas is not as strong. As a scientist I am personally hesitant to suggest changing our practice based on scientific evidence, and for that reason, I do not wear techelet despite my tremendous respect for Rav Herzog z’tz’l. At some point I might come to a different conclusion and I will discuss with my rav before making a change myself.
Thank you for this interesting thread.
“Derech HaMelech, What in the world do you mean by, ” Halachic research is not for the hamonei am, it is for halachic authorities.?” Should I stop going to shiurim? We learn Torah so we can better understand how to follow HaShem’s commandments and that means learning as much halachah and hashkafah as we possibly can!”
charliehall:
“…made a pretty convincing case for having found the source of the techelet. But despite the fact that I think he is correct, I do not wear techelet. I talked with my Rav…”
That is exactly what I mean.
Someone earlier suggested that by doing halachic research a person can decide for himself what minhagim or halachos to abide by. My opinion is that researching the halacha for the purpose of changing a minhag is best left to Rabbinical authorities and should be “talked [over] with [a] ..Rav”
Furthermore the Gemara Menachos 44a writes that it rises from the sea every 70 years and therefore it is expensive. Rashi there explains that it is valuable because of its rarity and unavailability the other 69 years. This does not correspond with your un-sourced assertion that during the Beis HaMikdash when it did come every 70 years it was plentiful. I would like to hear a source for your assertion; I searched the DBS Torah Library and did not find it in any Medrash or other sefer.
The Brisker Rov would not wear it as he had no Mesorah for it.
The Gemara in Shabbos describes how one would crack it and try to get the blood while it is alive, for then it is best. Does that match? Does the trunculus crack?
There is somewhat contradictory as to the true color. Some places in Chazal describe it as being similar to the sea, while in other places it seems to resemble grass, which resembles the sea.
Mass production of a product needed by all of Klal Yisroel does not prove its availability. It was obviously common enough for every person to be able to dye four strings of any article that needed it.
I really wonder about that part of it living in the “Dead” Sea. What does live there?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.