String Ratios Discussed:
Bottom Line
This 1998 exchange is useful for two reasons. First, Rick Turkel, a Ph.D. chemist who had followed the dye literature for years, says he regarded Murex Techeiles as most probably authentic, based on the chemistry and archaeological evidence. Second, R’ Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer shows that once people accepted the identification, the practical debate shifted to how many blue strings to use and how to tie them.
Bechhofer says he had originally followed P’til Tekhelet’s Raavad-based default, largely because it was what was readily available, but later intended to switch to a two-blue/two-white approach after concluding that this was supported by a larger group of Rishonim and later poskim. The exchange therefore gives an early snapshot of both scientific acceptance of Murex and the still-developing halachic practice of how to wear it.
Postscript: Despite writing in 1998 that he intended to switch away from the Raavad ratio, R’ Bechhofer still wears Techeiles according to the Raavad’s ratio today.
Main Text
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 13:58:26 -0400
From: Rick Turkel <rturkel@cas.org>
Subject: Tekhelet
Gut mo`ed.
There has been quite a lot of discussion here of late on tekhelet in general and the Murex tekhelet from Ptil Tekhelet in particular. As a Ph.D. chemist who has been following the development of the latter in the dye literature for almost twenty years, I’d like to add my $0.02-worth.
First of all, I agree that the Murex tekhelet is most probably the “real McCoy.” Although much of the basis for this is more dumb luck rather than masora, a good review of it can be found in a series of articles by I. Ziderman (the chemist from the Makhon LeSibim in Yerushalayim who did the research) in various dye journals. (I don’t have my bibliography handy, but can supply it on request.) He describes the serendipitous discovery of the dye on a trip to a snail fishery, I believe in Spain or Italy, where a fisherman smeared the clear liquid from a Murex snail on his white shirt; over a short period of exposure to sunlight the smear developed the characteristic blue color. He also describes archaeological sites up and down the Lebanese coast where there are dye factories surrounded by large piles of Murex shells broken in just the right spot to extract the fluid from which the tekhelet (and, incidentally argaman) is produced.
As for kalla ilan, Dr. Ziderman’s understanding is that it is chemically identical to tekhelet, i.e., the colorfast dye known today as indigo. That’s why it was such a big problem in Talmudic times – it is completely indistinguishable from the xilazon-derived material, yet clearly not useable because it comes from a vegetable rather than an animal source. That is also how he proves that the Radziner tekhelet is not the correct dye – chemical analysis shows the latter to be not an organic material at all, but rather the inorganic dye Prussian blue, a ferroferricyanide that is formed by their manufacturing process from any proteinaceous meterial, including egg white or pastrami!
At this point I’d like to pose a question to Rabbi Bechhofer and anyone else who holds by the Murex tekhelet, namely, exactly how is it to be used? The first set I got several years ago contained only the four strings to be used as shamashim, i.e., those that wrap around the others between the knots. When I tied those on my shabbat talit they were several inches longer than the other tzitzit on either end. I recently ordered another set via a friend who knows Baruch Sterman (one of the principals of Ptil Tekhelet), and that was a complete set which came with four white shamashim and four tekkelet strings that are the same length as the other eight white ones. My friend isn’t answering his email lately, and the email address I have for Baruch Sterman is an old one that no longer works. Can anyone tell me the proper way to tie the tekhelet or, failing that, a valid email address for someone who can?
Kol tuv.
-- Rick Turkel (___ _____ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ rturkel@freenet.columbus.oh.us| | \ ) |/ \ eyn |navi| be|iro\__) | rturkel@cas.org / | _| __)/ | ___) | ___|_ | _( \ | Rich or poor, it's good to have money. Ko rano rani | u jamu pada.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:00:45 -0500 (CDT)
From: “Shoshanah M. & Yosef G. Bechhofer” <sbechhof@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>
Subject: Tying Techeles
I am in the agonizing throes of change in this regard. At first I went with the default supplied by the Amuta myself, which was due to:
- That was the most available format at the time, so I assumed that was the way to go (Ra’abd).
- Ignorance on my part.
Now that I see that the overwhelming number of Rishonim (Rashi in Shas, RT, ROSH, Yerei’im) to name a few, and the GRAZ, Aruch HaShulchan and MB all seem to say two & two, I’m intending to switch over to that approach.
YGB
From: rturkel@cas.org (Rick Turkel)
At this point I’d like to pose a question to Rabbi Bechhofer and anyone else who holds by the Murex tekhelet, namely, exactly how is it to be used? The first set I got several years ago contained only the four strings to be used as shamashim, i.e., those that wrap around the others between the knots. When I tied those on my shabbat talit they were several inches longer than the other tzitzit on either end. I recently ordered another set via a friend who knows Baruch Sterman (one of the principals of Ptil Tekhelet), and that was a complete set which came with four white shamashim and four tekkelet strings that are the same length as the other eight white ones. My friend isn’t answering his email lately, and the email address I have for Baruch Sterman is an old one that no longer works. Can anyone tell me the proper way to tie the tekhelet or, failing that, a valid email address for someone who can?
Kol tuv.
Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
Cong. Bais Tefila, 3555 W. Peterson Ave., Chicago, IL, 60659
ygb@aishdas.org, http://www.aishdas.org/baistefila
