Regarding the Techeiles Creature According to the Radzyner Rebbe zt”l – Followup – March 2000 | Beis Aharon V’Yisrael 125

Regarding the Techeiles Creature According to the Radzyner Rebbe zt”l

To the editors of Kovetz Beis Aharon V’Yisrael, shalom u’vracha.

In issue 119 I published an article regarding the identification of the creature from which Techeiles is produced, in an attempt to explain and strengthen the position of the Radzyner Rebbe zt”l.

In issue 123, R’ Yoel Katan responded. He writes that even the author — Meir Schlesinger — admits that the cuttlefish is not a chilazon, but that I claim that the cuttlefish was nevertheless referred to by Chazal as a chilazon.

For the reader’s convenience, I will briefly restate what I wrote regarding this point.

The Rambam, in his Peirush HaMishnayos to Keilim, writes that a chilazon is a living creature found inside a shell. However, in Hilchos Tzitzis the Rambam calls the chilazon a fish. To resolve this apparent contradiction, I suggested that there are two different concepts called chilazon. There is the ordinary chilazon, which is a shelled creature, and then there is the particular chilazon of Techeiles.

This fits the language of the Baraisa, “chilazon zeh” — “this chilazon” — which is the girsa of the Aruch. The Baraisa gives two identifying features of this particular Techeiles chilazon: first, that it resembles a fish; and second, that the color of the chilazon is blue. Both, however, are called chilazon. The ordinary chilazon is simply a shelled creature, but it does not resemble a fish and it is also not blue.

R’ Katan further writes that the opinion of the Radzyner Rebbe has been rejected by virtually all the lomdim and researchers who have dealt with the subject.

I myself, when I first began studying Techeiles, also rejected the Radzyner Rebbe’s position. That remained my view for a number of years, until I found what the holy R’ Shimshon of Ostropoli writes — that in the year 5408 [1648], someone would come and produce Techeiles.

I investigated whether this passage had a reliable source and concluded that it did, as I have already discussed in my earlier articles. At that point I developed an interest in trying to answer the difficulties raised against the Radzyner Rebbe’s approach, and over time I found answers to all the questions that had been raised against him.

I saw a great deal of siyata diShmaya in this matter.

On 8 Tishrei 5759 I went in to R’ Yisrael Yaakov Fisher zt”l and asked him what he thought of Radzyner Techeiles. He told me: “Today people no longer hold of his Techeiles. Today there is already a new Techeiles.”

Later, on 28 Tishrei 5759, I came back to him with my kuntres and presented the main points orally. He listened patiently, and on 5 Nissan 5759 he wrote me a haskamah.

Afterward, it was arranged min haShamayim that I spent several months in chutz la’aretz, and I went to the Rosh Yeshiva of Torah Vodaath, R’ Yisrael Belsky shlita. He too was convinced that the Radzyner Rebbe had been mistaken.

I debated the issue with him for approximately an hour or two, but I was unable to convince him. About every two weeks I would return and continue the discussion. In the end I returned to Eretz Yisrael without having persuaded him.

Then, min haShamayim, in the year 5760 I again spent several months in chutz la’aretz and resumed the discussions with him. Finally, on 5 Adar he told me that he agreed that the Radzyner Rebbe had been correct. On the night of 7 Adar I, 5760, he wrote his haskamah.

I likewise received haskamos from R’ Azriel Auerbach shlita, R’ Shaul Alter shlita, R’ Zalman Nechemia Goldberg shlita, R’ Moshe Halberstam shlita [zt”l], R’ Ephraim Fishel Hershkowitz shlita, R’ Ephraim Fishel Rabinowitz zt”l, R’ Tzvi Schreiber shlita, and others.

I am bringing here only the haskamos of R’ Fisher zt”l and R’ Belsky shlita because both of them initially held that the Radzyner Rebbe had been mistaken. Only after I presented them with all my answers to the objections against the Radzyner position did they give me their haskamos.

Incidentally, I will also mention that R’ Yitzchak Meir Morgenstern shlita had been wearing the newer Techeiles made from the Murex — the argaman keheh kotzim — but after, with siyata diShmaya, I spoke with him, he switched to the Radzyner Rebbe’s Techeiles made from the cuttlefish.

May Hashem bless His people with peace.

With respect,

Meir Schlesinger

Haskamah of R’ Yisrael Yaakov Fisher zt”l

B”H, Thursday, 5 Nissan 5759

To the distinguished Rav, R’ Meir Schlesinger shlita, shalom u’vracha and all good.

I have seen his kuntres, entitled HaTecheiles U’Mekoroseha, in which he seeks to explain and strengthen the position of the Radzyner Rebbe zt”l regarding the chilazon. His words are well presented and properly reasoned.

I bless him that he should merit to continue in this holy work until people are inspired to clarify the matter of Techeiles properly, including as it relates to the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash.

Written and signed for the honor of Torah,

Yisrael Yaakov Fisher

Haskamah of R’ Yisrael HaLevi Belsky zt”l

B”H, 7 Adar I, 5760

The distinguished Rav R’ Meir Schlesinger showed me his kuntres regarding Techeiles. I went through most of his arguments and also discussed the matter with him at length.

All of his words are presented with deep understanding and straight reasoning. He has accomplished something significant by clarifying and explaining the position of the holy Radzyner Rebbe zt”l and by showing a clear path toward answering the various questions that have been raised against his view.

Even more than this, through the approach presented in the present kuntres he has clarified statements of our Rishonim, from whose words we live — namely Rashi and the Rambam zt”l — and has resolved the apparent contradictions in a remarkable manner.

For this alone he deserves much credit, and it is proper that these ideas become known among the lomdim so as to enlighten their eyes and clarify the path of halacha.

With great esteem,

Yisrael HaLevi Belsky