Halacha Headlines

I wish these comments wouldn’t reformat my text. It was laid out so nicely and now its crunched and hard to read!

Additional Proofs Mentioned by the Host (Starts at 49:21) Following the interview, the host lists several more powerful proofs that support the Murex snail. 49:23: Extraction from a Living Creature (MiChayim): The Gemara in Shabbos (75a) states that the dye is better when extracted while the creature is still alive. This is true for the Murex snail, as the dye-producing gland degrades almost immediately after death. This is not a known characteristic of the cuttlefish. 49:43: Resemblance to Indigo (Domeh l’Kala Ilan): The Gemara states that techeiles is identical in appearance to kala ilan (indigo), a common and cheap plant-based dye. Chemically, the dye from the Murex is dibromo-indigo, which has the exact same chemical structure as indigo, making them look identical. The Radzyner color is a much darker, different shade. 50:25: Colorfastness: The Gemara describes a test to differentiate real techeiles from fake indigo: real techeiles is extremely hard to wash out, while indigo is not. The dye from the Murex is famously permanent and colorfast; it can even withstand bleach. (Side note: the process in the ancient days of indigo dying is not like industry standards today. Back then they soaked and squeezed indigo leaves as can be found across YouTube in water and the dye was not as permanent, hence why indigo dye today is permanent.) 50:47: The Nartik (Shell/House): The Medrash says that the Chilazon lives in a nartik (a house or a shell). The Murex is a snail with a shell. The cuttlefish (Radzyner) does not have an external shell. 51:19: Buries Itself in the Sand: Another Medrash states that the Chilazon buries itself in the sand. This is a known and documented behavior of the Murex snail.

(Rabbi Halberstam continued...) 2. The Definition and Linguistics of the Word Chilazon The second major proof, introduced at 42:35, is that the very word used in the Torah and Talmud for the creature, Chilazon, is consistently defined as a snail. 42:50: Rishonim (Early Commentators): Authorities like Rashi define Chilazon with the Old French word limace, which the Bach clarifies means shneck (snail). 43:17: Medrashim: Various midrashic texts use the word Chilazon interchangeably with chomet and shablul, both of which mean snail. One Medrash says the Chilazon emerges from its bayis shel chomet (house of snail). 43:51: Sefer Tevias Ha’Aretz: Explicitly states, ”haChomet al Chilazon” (a snail upon a snail), showing the terms are synonymous. 44:02: Ma’ari Cohen (Son-in-law of the Maharal of Prague): Medresh Tehillim Defines Chilazon zeh Chomet (Chilazon is a snail). 3. Archeological and Historical Evidence The physical evidence on the ground in the location mentioned by the Sages strongly supports the Murex snail (introduced at 44:31). 45:04: Location: The Gemara states that the Chilazon is found in the sea between Tyre (Tzur) and Haifa. 45:17: Tyrian Purple: This specific region was world-famous in antiquity for its production of an incredibly valuable purple-blue dye known as ”Tyrian Purple,” which historians confirm came from the Murex snail. 45:43: Tyrian Coins: Ancient coins minted in Tyre over a period of several hundred years feature the clear image of the Murex snail, indicating it was the symbol of the city’s wealth and industry. 47:51: Murex Hill: Archaeologists discovered a massive hill, hundreds of meters long, near Tyre composed entirely of discarded Murex shells from the ancient dyeing factories.

Rabbi Halberstam presents his case in three primary categories of proof, which he outlines at 33:53. 1. Mesorah (Direct Tradition) from Major Rabbinic Authorities (Gedolei HaKadmonim) Rabbi Halberstam introduces this as his most powerful and conclusive proof at 33:57. 33:56: We have a direct Masorah from Gedolim HaKadmonim who clearly identify the Murex as the Chilazon of Techeiles. 34:09: The Chavas Yair (החוות יאיר) (lived approx. 350 years ago) (מקור חיים הלכות ציצית סי’ י”ח סעיף ג): Clearly writes that the Purpura is the Chilazon (the creature for techeiles). 34:19: The Shiltei Giborim (שלטי הגבורים) (approx. 400 years ago) (הרב אברהם הרופא, נדפס ב 1612-פ’ ע”ט): Quoted by the Tosfos Yom Tov, also identifies the source of the dye with this name. 36:54: Reb Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, in V’Zos HaBracha (Deuteronomy 33:18 mentions the Purpurschnecke (Shnecke is German/Yiddish for snail) as the source. 37:06: Rabbi Yaakov Emden (the Ya’avetz): Refers to secular history books that describe the famous dyeing industry in Tyre and states that this is the source of the biblical techeiles. 37:30: The Radal (Rabbi David Luria): Echoes Rabbi Yaakov Emden, confirming that the dye from Tyre is the authentic techeiles. 37:40: Toafot Re’em (401:17 has a Peirush explaining that its from the פורפור שנעקע (written about 150 years ago)

I wish you would’ve had all 3 debate instead of having them speak one-by-one. That would’ve made for a REALLY INTERESTING DEBATE!! Personally, it makes the most sense to me that Techeiles is truly the Hexaplex Trunculus 🐌🐚 (formerly known as the Murex), whereas the Cuttlefish is REALLY stretching things. Splitting my comment into multiple parts since it won’t let me post large comments: Anyways, for those coming here and want the gist (courtesy of AI): Rabbinic Opinions on Murex Techeiles 20:17: Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky: States that since the tradition for techeiles was lost, we should wait for Moshiach to reveal its true identity. 20:40: Rabbi Mendel Shafran: Believes the Murex is the correct source but explains that the established Ashkenazi tradition is not to make such changes, an approach so strong it has prevented the reinstitution of other commandments. 21:36: Rabbi Dovid Cohen: Argues that the Jewish people as a whole did not accept the reintroduction of techeiles. He cites the Beis Halevi’s position that once a tradition for a mitzvah is lost, the obligation ceases. 25:18: Rabbi Hershel Schachter: Cites the Beis Halevi that wearing tzitzis with only white strings might be a violation of ”do not subtract” (bal tigra) from a mitzvah. He concludes it’s better not to wear a four-cornered garment at all than to wear one without techeiles. 28:34: Rabbi Nissin Kaplan: Personally believes the proofs for Murex are strong but does not wear it because Rabbi Elyashiv, the leading halachic authority of the generation, did not. Reasons include the uncertainty of how to tie it and the break from established tradition. 31:55: Rabbi David Yosef: Points out that the mitzvah can be fulfilled without techeiles, and due to the doubts among different opinions, the mainstream custom is not to wear it.

Blue butterflies exist