[Avodah] ID of chilazon vs. chagavim

[Richard Wolpoe]

On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 8:08 AM, Dov Kay <dov_kay at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>  R. R. Wolpoe wrote <<Or to put it another way, if resarch can ID a
> chilazon w/o a precedent -
> why not Chagavim?>>
>
> See footnote 19 of this article by R. Shaul Yonatan Weingort, originally
> published in Techumin: http://www.tekhelet.com/pdf/bein.pdf.
>
> The author argues for a distinction between simanim d'oraisa and simanim
> d'rabbanan.  The former may be relied upon without a mesora (eg fins and
> scales in fish), while the latter may not (eg birds).  With respect to
> chagavim, the Gemara explicitly states that "u'sh'mo chagav", which the SA
> then codifies as the requirement for a mesora.  In other words, the
> requirement for a mesora is built into the simanim for chagavim. This is not
> the case with techeles.
>
> May I respectfully ask that R. Wolpoe pay just a little more attention to
> the accuracy of his typing, as the typos are sometimes so egregious as to
> make his excellent posts hard to understand.
>
> Kol tuv
> Dov Kay
>

I apologize for the typos. What ARE the d'oraisso simanim for Hilazon?
Where is the Hilazon in the Torah anyway?

Re: The quoted Rambam re: consenus on Esrog etc.
AFAIK thought there are at least TWO forms of Techeilet today!

With regard to the Esrog we have a consensus THIS IS an esrog and this isn't

With regard to a Hilazon we have a shrug of the shoulders. Who can say for
sure which is which?

I'm sorry I have not the time to complete this interesting artcile

-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
see: http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20080806/4b257317/attachment-0002.htm>