Does the oral tradition that identifies the hilazon as the source of tekheles necessarily indicate that one could not create the indigo-colored wool by other means? The gemara certainly indicates that the color-equivalent, plant-derived kala ilan is not valid (e.g. Menachot 40a, 43a, Bava Metzia 61b) but it also implies that this particular dye was not as fast and permanent as true tekhelet (and therefore, implicitly, was not its molecular equivalent). If that is the case, if one was able to create a dye that was chemically indistinguishable from true tekhelet, considering that torah shebiksav (the Written Law) never explicitly mentions the source of tekhelet, might that not also be acceptable?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
readings - Appending 内 to a company name is read ない or うち?
For example, if I say マイクロソフト内のパートナーシップは強いです, is the 内 here read as うち or ない? Answer 「内」 in the form: 「Proper Noun + 内」 is always read 「ない...
-
The verb わかる can be written using either 分かる, 判る, or 解る - what's the semantic difference between these forms, if any? Answer The answe...
-
I'm just learning about Fourier Transforms and as an input I'm using a WAV file (Matlab) and taking one channel of it and performing...
-
Shalom friends do the Jews believe that prophet Muhamned is their prophet do the Jews follow his teachings also what do the Jews think of pr...
-
I have occasionally heard and read instances, where a person has referred to themselves as これ. My Japanese dictionary also lists "Me, I...
No comments:
Post a Comment