(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_________________________________________________________________
THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________
Gershon Dubin asked:
In the techeles section, you mention in one article that the reasons not to
wear techeles nowadays despite a seeming safek de'Oraisa, are beyond the
scope of the article. With all the attention on techeles these days because
of the daf yomi, I would imagine that I'm not the only person who'd like to
know.
Thank you.
Gershon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------
The Kollel replies:
You can find it in the Insights to the Daf. Here is a copy.
Best wishes,
Mordecai Kornfeld
http://www.dafyomi.co.il/menachos/techeles.htm - Special Techeles section
==========
2) HALACHAH: WEARING "TECHELES" TODAY
QUESTIONS: Nowadays, there are organizations that produce the Techeles for
Tzitzis according to the various opinions (see previous Insight). None of
the opinions have yet been proven correct beyond a doubt. Nevertheless, it
is possible that one of them might be the same Techeles that the Torah
commands us to wear and that our ancestors wore.
(a) Since there is a rule that in a case of a doubt concerning a Torah
obligation, we must conduct ourselves stringently, should we wear Techeles
out of doubt?
(b) In addition, even if there is no obligation to wear Techeles because of
the doubt, is there any reason to specifically *not* wear Techeles?
ANSWERS:
(a) The BEIS HA'LEVI wrote a response to the RADZINER REBBE's question
regarding the Techeles that he was producing from the dye of a squid (the
cuttlefish). He wrote that in a doubt regarding matters that involve a
Mesorah, an oral tradition, the rule of Safek d'Oraisa l'Chumra does not
apply. This argument is understood in two different ways.
1. The Radziner Rebbe understood the Beis ha'Levi's argument to be that the
rule of Safek d'Oraisa l'Chumra does not apply, because we have a tradition
that contradicts the hypothesis of the Radziner Rebbe that the Chilazon is
the cuttlefish. The Radziner's squid was known and available throughout the
generations, and yet none of the Chachamim considered it to be the
Chilazon. This is tantamount to a negative tradition that this is *not* the
Chilazon, and therefore there is no reason to be stringent and wear
Techeles from such a creature.
This negative tradition, however, does not apply to a species which was not
known by the Chachamim throughout the generations. The lack of any positive
tradition identifying this species as the Chilazon does not disqualify it.
Accordingly, the identification of the Chilazon as the Murex Trunculus, or
as the Janthina snail, is not subject to a negative tradition that it is
not the genuine Chilazon, and thus there should be grounds to be stringent,
following the rule of Safek d'Oraisa l'Chumra. (Indeed, some feel that it
is obligatory to wear Techeles from the Murex Trunculus in our time because
of this reasoning.)
2. The descendants of the Beis ha'Levi have a different tradition regarding
the Beis ha'Levi's argument (as recorded in "Shi'urim l'Zecher Abba Mori
z"l," by the Beis ha'Levi's great grandson, Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik,
vol. 1, p. 228). They claim that the Beis ha'Levi required a *positive*
tradition regarding the identification of the Chilazon. With no known
tradition that the Chilazon is the cuttlefish, or the Murex Trunculus, or
any other species, the possibility that this particular species might be
the authentic Chilazon is not considered a Safek d'Oraisa and does not
warrant acting stringently. The accurate identification of the Chilazon
will have to wait for Mashi'ach.
(b) The Poskim have given a number of reasons to suggest that Techeles not
be worn today.
1. RAV YOSEF SHALOM ELYASHIV shlit'a (cited in KOVETZ TESHUVOS #1) writes
that one should wear only white Tzitzis on a white garment. Regarding the
identification of the Techeles, he is quoted as saying, "It is known that
more than one hundred years ago, one of the great Admorim thought he found
the [identity of the] Chilazon... and he caused a great stir in the world,
questioning, 'Why are you refraining from doing a Mitzvas Aseh d'Oraisa [to
wear Techeles]?' However, the great sages did not agree with him, and after
some time researchers came and negated his findings. They decided that
something else was the Chilazon. After some more time, certain scientists
asserted that their predecessors' conclusions were inaccurate, and that
only *they* have discovered the true identity of the Chilazon. We do not
know if, after a few more years, other people will come and negate what
these researchers are saying.... The YESHU'OS MALKO (#1) points out that it
is written in the Sifri (Parshas v'Zos ha'Berachah), as well as in the
teachings of the Arizal, that Techeles can be present only when there is a
Beis ha'Mikdash."
Regarding Halachic problems with processing Techeles, Rav Elyashiv is
quoted as saying, "The process of the dyeing has not been clarified, as
Rashi holds that only the blood of the Chilazon can be in the pot without
any other chemical agents, while according to the Rambam one puts other
chemical agents into the same pot. Who can decide this question today?"
Regarding Halachic problems with wearing Techeles, Rav Elyashiv is quoted
as saying that by placing doubtful Techeles on the Tzitzis, one neglects
fulfilling the Mitzvah of Tzitzis in the proper way. The SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC
9:5) writes that it is preferable that the Tzitzis must be the same color
as the garment, and the BACH (OC 24), quoted by the MISHNAH BERURAH (OC
9:16) writes that one's Talis and Tzitzis should be white like the
"garment" of Hashem (as depicted in Daniel 7:9). If the Techeles that one
wears is not actually Techeles, then, according to the Shulchan Aruch, the
strings are not the same color as the garment, and, according to the Bach,
the string are not all white (see Insights to Menachos 41:2).
2. RAV MOSHE STERNBUCH shlit'a (in TESHUVOS V'HANHAGOS 1:26) writes, "I
suspect that one who wears it (Techeles) in our community, where people
have not been accustomed to be stringent [to wear Techeles], is
transgressing the prohibition of 'Lo Sisgodedu' by acting differently [and
wearing Techeles). Even though there is no Halachic problem when wearing
false Techeles (Kala Ilan), because it is known that he is doing this with
intention to fulfill the Mitzvah of Techeles, albeit in opposition to our
custom, nevertheless one should be concerned from the prohibition of 'Lo
Sisgodedu.'" (As Rav Sternbuch himself notes, this concern applies only to
people who live in a community wear Techeles is not commonly worn.)
Rav Sternbuch adds that there is another Halachic concern: "Unlearned
people will think that they are definitely fulfilling the Mitzvah of
Techeles, and having such intentions may raise questions of 'Bal Tosif'"
(see Rav Sternbuch's Teshuvah at length). (According to this argument, it
would be permitted to wear Techeles in private.) (Y. Montrose)
(For arguments supporting the opposing viewpoint, see SEFER LULA'OS
TECHELES by Rav Shlomo Teitelbaum.)
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with this text in the body of the message:
unsubscribe daf-discuss
