String Ratios Discussed:
Bottom Line
Bottom Line: The discussion distinguishes between deliberately using kala ilan, which is known not to be genuine Techeiles, and using a dye that may actually be Techeiles but remains a safek. Saul Mashbaum argued from the laws of the Arba Minim that one should not establish a practice using a known substitute, lest it continue even after the genuine article becomes available. Micha Berger, however, questioned whether that concern applies to a safek Techeiles, where wearing it could mean fulfilling a Torah mitzvah now. Shlomoh Taitelbaum noted that the Biur Halacha rules that a doubtful murkav may be taken when no better option exists, suggesting that a doubtful candidate is not necessarily treated the same way as something known to be invalid.
Main Text
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:14:38 -0400
From: Kenneth G Miller <[kennethgmiller@juno.com](mailto:kennethgmiller@juno.com)>
Subject: Re: t’cheiles
I asked:
So it would be okay to have some strings which are either white or the color of the beged, and then instead of a techeles string(s) I could use pink or green?
And R’ Micha Berger answered:
Yes, I’m suggesting that the only problem would be “al tifrosh min hatzibbur”.
Thank you very much. I had always presumed that if one is not using techeles, then the same halachos apply to all the strings. I stand corrected.
I recall (but cannot find right now) that the Mishna Brurah says that if one does not have all four of the Arba Minim, he should take whatever he does have (without a bracha of course) as a “zecher” to this mitzvah. I think that same would be said if he did have all four but one was pasul.
I therefore wonder why it was never suggested (or maybe someone did suggest it?) that for lack of genuine techeles, we could use kla ilan or some other blue dye, so that the halachos of techeles would be remembered. And in fact, it seems the for lack of doing this, we have indeed forgotten some details, like how many of the eight strings should be so dyed.
My guess is that this “take the three minim anyway” idea is only for individuals under unusual circumstances. To institutionalize the other dyes – even if technically mutar as RMB explained – would not be proper. Any other ideas?
Akiva Miller
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:20:33 +0200
From: Saul Mashbaum <[smash52@netvision.net.il](mailto:smash52@netvision.net.il)>
Subject: Re: T’cheiles
Akiva Miller wrote:
I recall (but cannot find right now) that the Mishna Brurah says that if one does not have all four of the Arba Minim, he should take whatever he does have (without a bracha of course) as a “zecher” to this mitzvah. I think that same would be said if he did have all four but one was pasul.
I therefore wonder why it was never suggested (or maybe someone did suggest it?) that for lack of genuine techeles, we could use kla ilan or some other blue dye, so that the halachos of techeles would be remembered.
See OH 649:6 and MB there ot 53. It is clear from there that something which is not the right species (such as a murkav) should never be used, even if nothing else is available, in order that one not continue to use it in subsequent years, when all minim are available.
Clearly this applies to kala ilan as well — it should never be used in tzitzit, so that it not be continued to be used when genuine tcheilet becomes available.
Saul Mashbaum
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:33:39 -0400
From: Micha Berger <[micha@aishdas.org](mailto:micha@aishdas.org)>
Subject: Re: T’cheiles
On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 07:20:33PM +0200, Saul Mashbaum wrote:
See OH 649:6 and MB there ot 53. It is clear from there that something which is not the right species (such as a murkav) should never be used, even if nothing else is available, in order that one not continue to use it in subsequent years, when all minim are available. Clearly this applies to kala ilan as well — it should never be used in tzitzit, so that it not be continued to be used when genuine tcheilet becomes available.
I see your sevarah. The question is whether it would rule out using a safeiq techeiles. IOW, does the risk of future error outweigh the possibility of following the de’oraisa today?
-mi
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:54:41 +0200
From: “Shlomoh Taitelbaum” <[sjtait@barak-online.net](mailto:sjtait@barak-online.net)>
Subject: Re: T’cheiles
On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 07:20:33PM +0200, Saul Mashbaum wrote:
See OH 649:6 and MB there ot 53. It is clear from there that something which is not the right species (such as a murkav) should never be used, even if nothing else is available, in order that one not continue to use it in subsequent years, when all minim are available. Clearly this applies to kala ilan as well — it should never be used in tzitzit, so that it not be continued to be used when genuine tcheilet becomes available.
From: “Micha Berger” <[micha@aishdas.org](mailto:micha@aishdas.org)>
I see your sevarah. The question is whether it would rule out using a safeiq techeiles. IOW, does the risk of future error outweigh the possibility of following the de’oraisa today?
The Biur Halocho (OH 648:MB 5) writes that one should take a sofeik murkav if nothing else is avilable — but without a brocho.
Shlomoh Taitelbaum
