ב"ה, ט' תמוז, תשי"ח
ברוקלין, נ.י.
הרה"ח אי"א נו"נ עוסק בצ"צ מו"ה חיים אלעזר שי'[1]
שלום וברכה!
... במש"כ ע"ד חלזון ותכלת בהנוגע לפועל עתה בציצית - הרי ידוע אשר הרעישו ע"ז והתנגדו לזה, וגם ע"פ נגלה, גדולי עולם בעת יצא חידוש זה מראדזין. וגם כ"ק אדמו"ר (מהורש"ב) נ"ע לא הסכים על החידוש בשו"א. ואין עתה תח"י מכתבו בזה. אבל זכורני שמביא שע"פ קבלה יהי' ענין התכלת רק לעת"ל. ואנו אין לנו אלא דברי כ"ק אדנ"ע.
ועיין ג"כ סוכה לב, סע"ב: ר"א הוה מהדר כו' הואיל ונפיק מפומי' דר"כ.
במש"כ במשנה סוף עדיות ממזר ת"ח קודם לכה"ג ע"ה - יעוין זח"ב צה, ב.
- 1 הבר, פתח תקוה.
B"H, 9 Tammuz, 5718.
Brooklyn, NY.
Haraha"ch iy"a nu"n oseik b'tzt"z mo"h Chaim Elazar
Shalom u'Vrachah!
Regarding what you wrote about the chilazon and tekhelet as it pertains to practical application in tzitzit today: It is well known that there was a great commotion about this and strong opposition to it. Also, according to nigleh (revealed Torah), the great Torah leaders of the world at the time when this innovation from Radzin emerged opposed it.
Furthermore, our Rebbe (the Rebbe Rashab) of blessed memory did not agree with this innovation under any circumstances. You do not have his letter on this matter at hand. However, I recall that he brings that according to Kabbalah, the matter of tekhelet will only be relevant in the future era. And we have only the words of our Rebbe to rely upon.
See also Sukkah 32b: "Rebbi Elazar would seek out... since it came from Rebbi Akiva's mouth."
Regarding what you wrote in Mishnah at the end of Eduyot: "A mamzer who is a Torah scholar takes precedence over a Kohen Gadol who is an ignoramus," see Zohar II 95b.
Summary
This letter clarifies that Radzin tekhelet was widely opposed by Torah authorities and specifically by the Rebbe Rashab. The writer stresses that according to Kabbalah, tekhelet will only return in the future era and instructs reliance on the Rebbe Rashab's position.