Nignaz

Username: rhecht
Full Name: Rafi Hecht
Site Admin
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 4:34 am
Contact:

How can there be Techeiles if it was Nignaz? What does Nignaz even mean?
Username: Rimon
Full Name: Moshe Indik
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 12:01 pm
Contact:

who said it can't be un-nignaz?
Username: Guest

Depends how Nignaz is understood. Many understand it to mean simply set aside for a period of time, but not that it can't be found again without Moshiach.
Username: 613 mitzvot
Full Name: Yosef Malkiel
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2023 10:57 pm
Contact:

R’ Aryeh Leibowitz gave, in my opinion, a decent reply to how one could understand nignaz.

https://www.youtube.com/live/ZCUtZSw4gww?feature=share

Timestamp 49:53-53:38.

In brief summary, he says it depends how you read nignaz, either as being completely hidden until Mashiach or unavailable to the generation at that time.  He takes the latter view.
User avatar
Username: Yitzchok Mickler
Full Name: Yitzchok Mickler
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2023 7:25 pm
Location: Eretz Yisroel
Contact:

Nignaz means hidden. There is no time limit for something to be hidden.
To say hidden until Moshiach or until we have a Temple needs a proof otherwise it's hidden until it's found.
Wearing Techeiles out since Tammuz 5778
Username: 613 mitzvot
Full Name: Yosef Malkiel
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2023 10:57 pm
Contact:

A bit of a more specific question relating to nignaz; Murex snail dyeing historically was done in the Mediterranean through the 11th and 12th century.  How do early Meforshim such as Rambam and Rashi’s lack of clear explanation for what the chilazon is and how the dyeing process is performed for techeiles relate to the evident dye industry at that time. Even more so, the Rabbis of the gemara would have surely known about the Murex snails and their use if it was the chilazon.  How do we reconcile the d’Rabbanan nignaz of techeiles with the still alive Murex dye industry in the Mediterranean at that time?
Username: rhecht
Full Name: Rafi Hecht
Site Admin
Posts: 86
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 4:34 am
Contact:

There are a lot of unknowns from a historical perspective. I'm not going to disprove anything that was written but will add food for thought.

1. Just because there was a pocket of use in Constantinople in the 15th century (1453) does not mean the Jews knew anything about it - exile and lack of internet make life difficult. See here: https://www.tekhelet.com/pdf/HistoryMesorahNignaz.pdf (esp. Herzog references). We take internet, telephone, air flights etc. for granted and forget that lots of info wasn't as available back then. For example, see how German/Italian Jews met Yemenite Jews for the first time in 1901. That's the turn of the 20th century and even then this was a revelation: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2017-05-04/ty-article-magazine/first-ever-photos-of-yemens-jews-stunned-the-jewish-world/0000017f-e89b-df2c-a1ff-fedb60410000

2. We have no clue whether Rambam wore Techeiles, let alone saw it, for a couple of reasons. a) The Radzyner Rebbe himself assumed Rambam had Techeiles in his time since he eloquently explained that the blood was Shachor KiDyo. How else would be have known? b) Rambam and other Rishonim like the Baal HaMaor held that Techeiles and Tzitzis were one combined mitzva, and if one missed out on one you weren't fulfilling the mitzva at all. This ironically goes against the Mishna of Techeiles and Lavan not being MeAkev each other.

3. The prized color for the ancient Roman empire was purple and not blue. Blue was if anything considered to be a melancholy color. Therefore it was a lot more common to see purple from the murex snail family over any pure blue shades. As we know today, it's very possible, even without sunlight. I just did so (excuse the patches as the dye didn't fully permeate, separated the wool, then boiled it for three dips in hot water, in a paper cup where the peak temperature was 95C (from the hot water urn used on Shabbos). If anything, a professional vat dyeing job would have a fire underneath with a more constant temperature to boil it.
334022277_596126198704505_3899740439149257488_n.jpg
4. As per point 1., there were pockets of use but not necessarily mainstream knowledge of how to make it, especially when the whole guild was kept secret, especially from Jews. So it's also possible that we knew for many centuries that it was a snail yet forgot the process how to reduce it consistently to sky blue. And we know that it was a snail from at least five Rishonim! Raavya, Ibn Ezra, Tanchum Yerushalmi, R' Avraham ben HaRambam, and Yad Ramah. And there were many Acharonim that held that the Chilazon was a Purpura Schneck, namely Toafos Re'Em, Shiltei Giborim, and R' Shamshon Rephael Hirsch: https://www.techeiles.org/library/library-sources/ .
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
Username: Mr. Genugshoin
Full Name: Gimpel Genugshoin
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2022 8:27 pm
Location: Anshei Kartufel, Broom St.
Contact:

1. If I'm not mistaken, there was a thriving murex industry in Egypt during the times of the Rambam, which raises difficulty why he did not know of it.
2. R' Avrohom ben Harambam writes that we do not know what the chilazon is, so the Rambam couldn't have known
3. Rabbi Aryeh Levanon recently wrote an article claiming that the process of turning purple to blue did not work with Toporovitz snails- if so we would need to prove that the snails in EY are able to turn into blue (you probably used Ptil snails)
4. Where are the Raavya and Ibn Ezra? Tanchum Yerushalmi merely says it's from the same species; R' Avrohom ben Horambam compares it the opening nuts in that it is broken on a seam (nothing to do with cracking something hard); Yad Ramah says explicitly that it's a different species than "chalzum" in Arabic, meaning it's not a snail.
"Not a vacation, eviction!"
Duss is derech eretz???!! Zug mir--
It's a BULLZODER!! A bullzoder!!
Username: MIlanH
Full Name: Milan Herman
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:41 pm
Contact:

Yad Ramah says explicitly it is not a snail, and that is the simple reading of Reb Tanchum Hayerushalmi as well.
I haven't seen the other ones quoted, but I'm quite confident they either don't mention snail, or they're not referring to chilazon of techeiles. Aruch as well seems to say chilazon of techeiles is not a snail, though it's not "muchach" (proven) that he's saying that.
Username: MIlanH
Full Name: Milan Herman
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2023 8:41 pm
Contact:

613 wrote:Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:02 am A bit of a more specific question relating to nignaz; Murex snail dyeing historically was done in the Mediterranean through the 11th and 12th century.  How do early Meforshim such as Rambam and Rashi’s lack of clear explanation for what the chilazon is and how the dyeing process is performed for techeiles relate to the evident dye industry at that time. Even more so, the Rabbis of the gemara would have surely known about the Murex snails and their use if it was the chilazon.  How do we reconcile the d’Rabbanan nignaz of techeiles with the still alive Murex dye industry in the Mediterranean at that time?



 
This is a very strong question, although the murex supporters like to overlook it. Murex is a world famous common snail, yet not one rishon mentions that its the techeiles. 
there are sources (i.e. Philo) that clearly mention the murex as a source for argaman, yet don't say a word about techeiles.
If the "experts" would be more honest, they would admit that this is a strong problem.
 
 
Last edited by MIlanH on Thu Mar 09, 2023 11:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply