aravah

A stolen or withered aravah is invalid. One [take from an] asherah or from a condemned city is invalid. One whose tip was broken off or whose leaves were detached, or a tzatzefah is invalid. One that was shriveled or had lost some of its leaves, or one grown in a rain-watered soil, is valid.

Rabbi Ishmael says: three hadasim, two aravot, one lulav and one etrog, even if two [of the hadasim] have their tips broken off and [only] one is whole. Rabbi Tarfon says: even if all three have their tips broken off. Rabbi Akiva says: just as there is one lulav and one etrog, so too only one hadas and one aravah.

[The rituals of] the lulav and the aravah are for six or seven [days]; The Hallel and the rejoicing are for eight [days]; The sukkah and the water libation are for seven [days]; The flute is for five or six [days].

“The aravah seven days.” How is this? If the seventh day of [the ritual of] the aravah fell on Shabbat, [it lasts] seven days; if it fell on any other day, [it lasts only] six.

“The aravah seven days.” How is this? If the seventh day of [the ritual of] the aravah fell on Shabbat, [it lasts] seven days; if it fell on any other day, [it lasts only] six.

The mitzvah of the aravah how was it [performed]? There was a place below Jerusalem called Moza. They went down there and gathered tall branches of aravot and then they came and stood them up at the sides of the altar, and their tops were bent over the altar. They then sounded a teki’ah [long blast], a teru’ah [staccato blast] and again a teki’ah. Every day they went round the altar once, saying, “O Lord, save us, O Lord, make us prosper” (Psalms 118:. Rabbi Judah says: “Ani vaho, save us.” On that day they went round the altar seven times. When they departed, what did they say? “O altar, beauty is to you! O altar, beauty is to you!” Rabbi Eliezer said: [they would say,] “To the Lord and to you, O altar, to the Lord and to you, O altar.”

A lulav which is three handbreadths in length. Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The [minimum] length of the hadas and the aravah is three [handbreadths], and that of the lulav four, so that the lulav should extend one handbreadth beyond the hadas.

Come and hear: [We have learned: the [minimum] length of the hadas and the aravah is three [handbreadths], and that of the lulav four Is this not including the leaves? No, excluding the leaves.

The main text: The [minimum] length of the hadas and the aravah is three [handbreadths], and that of the lulav four. R. Tarfon says. A cubit consisting of five handbreadths.

Do not then two statements of Shmuel contradict one another, for here Rav Judah says in the name of Shmuel, The [minimum] length of the hadas and the aravah is three [normal handbreadths], and elsewhere R. Huna said in the name of Shmuel that the halakhah is in accordance with R. Tarfon? [Shmuel] was not precise. Say that we can say that one is not precise when [this results in] a stringency but not when [it results in] a leniency?

Mishnah. A stolen or withered aravah is invalid. One from an asherah or from a condemned city is invalid. One whose tip was broken off or whose leaves were detached, or a tzaftzefah is invalid. One that was shriveled or had lost some of its leaves, or one grown in rain-watered soil, is valid.

And the rabbis from where to they derive [the law of the willow] for the Temple? They learned a received tradition; for R. Asi said in the name of R. Yohanan, the laws of ten plants, the aravah and the water libation—are all a halakhah from Moses from Sinai.

Our rabbis taught: What is an aravah and what is a tzaftzefah? A willow its stem is red, its leaf is elongated and its edge is smooth; the tzaftzefah its stem is white, its leaf is round and its edge is like a sickle But has it not been taught: If it is like a sickle it is valid, if like a saw it is invalid? Abaye said: That was taught only with regard to the rounded aravah.

Our rabbis taught: What is an aravah and what is a tzaftzefah? A willow its stem is red, its leaf is elongated and its edge is smooth; the tzaftzefah its stem is white, its leaf is round and its edge is like a sickle But has it not been taught: If it is like a sickle it is valid, if like a saw it is invalid? Abaye said: That was taught only with regard to the rounded aravah.

Abaye said: deduce from here that a rounded aravah is valid for the hoshanna But is this not obvious? What might you have said? Since it has an accompanying name it would not be valid, therefore he informs us [that it is not so].

Mishnah: Rabbi Ishmael says: three hadasim, two aravot, one lulav and one etrog, even if two [of the hadasim] have their tips broken off and [only] one is whole. Rabbi Tarfon says: even if all three have their tips broken off. Rabbi Akiva says: just as there is one lulav and one etrog, so too only one hadas and one aravah.

Gemara. It has been taught: R. Ishmael said: "the fruit of a goodly tree" implies one; "branches of palm-trees" implies one; "the bough of a thick tree" implies three; "willows of the brook" implies two, and even if two [of the hadasim] have their tips broken off, and only one is whole [the lulav is valid] R. Tarfon said: : three, even if all have their tips broken off. R. Akiva said: Just as there is one lulav and one etrog, so there is one hadas and one aravah.

1) [The rituals of] the lulav and the aravah are for six or seven [days]; 2) The Hallel and the rejoicing are for eight [days]; 3) The sukkah and the water libation are for seven [days]; 4) The flute is for five or six [days].

6) “The aravah—seven days.” How is this? a) If the seventh day of [the ritual of] the aravah fell on Shabbat, [it lasts] seven days; if it fell on any other day, [it lasts only] six.

6) “The aravah—seven days.” How is this? a) If the seventh day of [the ritual of] the aravah fell on Shabbat, [it lasts] seven days; if it fell on any other day, [it lasts only] six.

The aravah for seven days. How so? Why does the [ritual of the] aravah on the seventh day override Shabbat? R. Yohanan said: In order to publicize the fact that it is a [commandment] of the Torah. But if so, let the lulav also override Shabbat in order to publicize the fact that it is a from the Torah?

The aravah for seven days. How so? Why does the [ritual of the] aravah on the seventh day override Shabbat? R. Yohanan said: In order to publicize the fact that it is a [commandment] of the Torah. But if so, let the lulav also override Shabbat in order to publicize the fact that it is a from the Torah?

In the case of lulav there is a restrictive enactment on account of the reason of Rabbah. But if so, let us make the same restrictive enactment with regard to the aravah also? In the case of the aravah the agents of the Bet Din would bring it but the lulav is entrusted to everyone.

In the case of lulav there is a restrictive enactment on account of the reason of Rabbah. But if so, let us make the same restrictive enactment with regard to the aravah also? In the case of the aravah the agents of the Bet Din would bring it but the lulav is entrusted to everyone.

But if so, ought it not override [the Shabbat] on any day? [If that were done] people would come to hold the lulav in light esteem. Let it [the aravah] override [Shabbat] on the first day of the Festival? It will not be clear [that it is the aravah that overrides Shabbat, for] people might say that it is the lulav which overrides it.

But if so, ought it not override [the Shabbat] on any day? [If that were done] people would come to hold the lulav in light esteem. Let it [the aravah] override [Shabbat] on the first day of the Festival? It will not be clear [that it is the aravah that overrides Shabbat, for] people might say that it is the lulav which overrides it.

Does not then the original difficulty arise? R. Joseph answered: Who says that [the ritual of] the aravah is [performed] by the taking of it? Perhaps it is done by its being stood up next [to the sides of the altar].

Abaye raised an objection against him: The lulav and the aravah are for six or seven days. Does [this not imply that the aravah is] as the lulav: just as the [ritual of the] lulav is [performed] by its being taken, so too [the ritual] of the aravah is performed by its being taken? What kind of argument is that? This one is performed in its way, and this one in its way.

Abaye raised an objection against him: The lulav and the aravah are for six or seven days. Does [this not imply that the aravah is] as the lulav: just as the [ritual of the] lulav is [performed] by its being taken, so too [the ritual] of the aravah is performed by its being taken? What kind of argument is that? This one is performed in its way, and this one in its way.

Abaye raised an objection against him: The lulav and the aravah are for six or seven days. Does [this not imply that the aravah is] as the lulav: just as the [ritual of the] lulav is [performed] by its being taken, so too [the ritual] of the aravah is performed by its being taken? What kind of argument is that? This one is performed in its way, and this one in its way.

Abaye raised another objection against him: Every day they circled the altar once, but on that day they walked round it seven times. Does not this mean, with the aravah? No, with the lulav. But did not R. Nahman state in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha ... [that they circled] with the aravah? He said to him: He told you with the aravah and I say to you with the lulav. It was stated: R. Elazar stated [that they circled the altar] with the lulav. Rav Shmuel bar Natan said in the name of R. Hanina: with the aravah. And so too said R. Nahman in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: with the aravah....

Abaye raised another objection against him: Every day they circled the altar once, but on that day they walked round it seven times. Does not this mean, with the aravah? No, with the lulav. But did not R. Nahman state in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha ... [that they circled] with the aravah? He said to him: He told you with the aravah and I say to you with the lulav. It was stated: R. Elazar stated [that they circled the altar] with the lulav. Rav Shmuel bar Natan said in the name of R. Hanina: with the aravah. And so too said R. Nahman in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: with the aravah....

Abaye raised another objection against him: Every day they circled the altar once, but on that day they walked round it seven times. Does not this mean, with the aravah? No, with the lulav. But did not R. Nahman state in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha ... [that they circled] with the aravah? He said to him: He told you with the aravah and I say to you with the lulav. It was stated: R. Elazar stated [that they circled the altar] with the lulav. Rav Shmuel bar Natan said in the name of R. Hanina: with the aravah. And so too said R. Nahman in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: with the aravah....

Abaye raised another objection against him: Every day they circled the altar once, but on that day they walked round it seven times. Does not this mean, with the aravah? No, with the lulav. But did not R. Nahman state in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha ... [that they circled] with the aravah? He said to him: He told you with the aravah and I say to you with the lulav. It was stated: R. Elazar stated [that they circled the altar] with the lulav. Rav Shmuel bar Natan said in the name of R. Hanina: with the aravah. And so too said R. Nahman in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: with the aravah....

Abaye raised another objection against him: Every day they circled the altar once, but on that day they walked round it seven times. Does not this mean, with the aravah? No, with the lulav. But did not R. Nahman state in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha ... [that they circled] with the aravah? He said to him: He told you with the aravah and I say to you with the lulav. It was stated: R. Elazar stated [that they circled the altar] with the lulav. Rav Shmuel bar Natan said in the name of R. Hanina: with the aravah. And so too said R. Nahman in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: with the aravah....

He raised an objection against him: The lulav overrides Shabbat on the first day, and the aravah on the last day. On time the seventh day of the [ritual of the] aravah fell on Shabbat, and they brought saplings of aravot on the eve of Shabbat and placed them in the courtyard of the Temple. The Boethusians discovered them and took them and hid them under some stones.

He raised an objection against him: The lulav overrides Shabbat on the first day, and the aravah on the last day. On time the seventh day of the [ritual of the] aravah fell on Shabbat, and they brought saplings of aravot on the eve of Shabbat and placed them in the courtyard of the Temple. The Boethusians discovered them and took them and hid them under some stones.

The next day the ammei ha’aretz discovered them and removed them from under the stones, and the priests brought them in and stood them up on the sides of the altar. For the Boethusians do not admit that the beating of the aravah overrides Shabbat.

Thus we see clearly that [the aravah ritual] is in the taking of it? This is a refutation.

Abaye said to Rabbah: Why in the case of the lulav do we perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple, whereas in the case of the aravah we do not perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple? He answered him: Since one fulfils the obligation [of taking the aravah] with the aravah on the lulav. He said to him: But that one he does on account of the lulav? And if you will answer that one first raises it once and then raises it again, is it not a daily occurrence that we do not do so?

Abaye said to Rabbah: Why in the case of the lulav do we perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple, whereas in the case of the aravah we do not perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple? He answered him: Since one fulfils the obligation [of taking the aravah] with the aravah on the lulav. He said to him: But that one he does on account of the lulav? And if you will answer that one first raises it once and then raises it again, is it not a daily occurrence that we do not do so?

Abaye said to Rabbah: Why in the case of the lulav do we perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple, whereas in the case of the aravah we do not perform the ritual for seven days in memory of the Temple? He answered him: Since one fulfils the obligation [of taking the aravah] with the aravah on the lulav. He said to him: But that one he does on account of the lulav? And if you will answer that one first raises it once and then raises it again, is it not a daily occurrence that we do not do so?

R. Zevid said in the name of Rava: In the case of the lulav which is a Torah commandment we perform the ceremony for seven days in memory of the Temple in the case of the aravah which is only a rabbinic commandment, we do not perform the ceremony for seven days in memory of the Temple.

According to whom? If you will say, According to Abba Shaul,did he not say: It is written, “willows of the brook” implying two, one referring to the [aravah in the] lulav and the other to [the aravah for use in] the Temple? If you will say it is according to the rabbis, did they not have it as an accepted tradition, since R. Assi said in the name of R. Yohanan who said it in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan: The laws of the ten plants, the aravah and water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai.

According to whom? If you will say, According to Abba Shaul,did he not say: It is written, “willows of the brook” implying two, one referring to the [aravah in the] lulav and the other to [the aravah for use in] the Temple? If you will say it is according to the rabbis, did they not have it as an accepted tradition, since R. Assi said in the name of R. Yohanan who said it in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan: The laws of the ten plants, the aravah and water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai.

According to whom? If you will say, According to Abba Shaul,did he not say: It is written, “willows of the brook” implying two, one referring to the [aravah in the] lulav and the other to [the aravah for use in] the Temple? If you will say it is according to the rabbis, did they not have it as an accepted tradition, since R. Assi said in the name of R. Yohanan who said it in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan: The laws of the ten plants, the aravah and water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai.

Rather, R. Zevid said in the name of Rava: In the case of the lulav, which has its Torah origin when performed in the provinces, we perform it for seven days in memory of the Temple; in the case of the rite of the aravah, which has no Torah origin for its performance in the Provinces, we do not perform it for seven days in commemoration of the Temple. Resh Lakish said:

Kohanim with physical blemishes enter between the Sanctuary and the altar in order to fulfil the mitzvah of the aravah. Rabbi Yohanan to him: ... Who said so? ‘Who said so?’ id he not himself say so, since R. Assi said in the name of R. Yohanan who said it in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan: The laws of the ten plants, the aravah and the water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai?

Kohanim with physical blemishes enter between the Sanctuary and the altar in order to fulfil the mitzvah of the aravah. Rabbi Yohanan to him: ... Who said so? ‘Who said so?’ id he not himself say so, since R. Assi said in the name of R. Yohanan who said it in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan: The laws of the ten plants, the aravah and the water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai?

He rather meant this: Who said that [the mitzvah is fulfilled] by taking, perhaps it is fulfilled by standing [the aravah] up [next to the altar]? Who said that it may be done by priests with a blemish, perhaps it [may be done] only by unblemished priests?

It was stated: R. Yohanan and R. Joshua b. Levi disagree: One holds that the aravah is an institution of the prophets, the other holds that the aravah is a custom of the prophets. It can be concluded that it was R. Yohanan who said: It is an institution of the prophets since R. Abbahu stated in the name of R. Yohanan: The rite of the aravah is an institution of the prophets. This is conclusive.

It was stated: R. Yohanan and R. Joshua b. Levi disagree: One holds that the aravah is an institution of the prophets, the other holds that the aravah is a custom of the prophets. It can be concluded that it was R. Yohanan who said: It is an institution of the prophets since R. Abbahu stated in the name of R. Yohanan: The rite of the aravah is an institution of the prophets. This is conclusive.

It was stated: R. Yohanan and R. Joshua b. Levi disagree: One holds that the aravah is an institution of the prophets, the other holds that the aravah is a custom of the prophets. It can be concluded that it was R. Yohanan who said: It is an institution of the prophets since R. Abbahu stated in the name of R. Yohanan: The rite of the aravah is an institution of the prophets. This is conclusive.

R. Zera sad to R. Abbahu, Did R. Yohanan really say that? Did not R. Yohanan say in the name of R. Nehunya of the Valley of Beth Hovartan that ‘the law of the ten plants, the aravah ... and the water libation were given to Moses on Mount Sinai? He was silent for a while (Daniel 4:16), and then he answered: They were forgotten and the prophets re-instituted them.

R. Ami said: The aravah must have a minimum size, it must be taken separately only, and one does not fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav. Since the Master said: It must be taken separately only is it not obvious that one cannot fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav?

R. Ami said: The aravah must have a minimum size, it must be taken separately only, and one does not fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav. Since the Master said: It must be taken separately only is it not obvious that one cannot fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav?

R. Ami said: The aravah must have a minimum size, it must be taken separately only, and one does not fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav. Since the Master said: It must be taken separately only is it not obvious that one cannot fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav?

What might I have said? That that applies only where one does not lift [the lulav] a second time, but not where one does lift it a second time [he would fulfill his obligation], therefore he teaches us that it is not so. R. Hisda said in the name of R. Yitzchak: One may fulfill his obligation with the aravah in the lulav.

Aibu said: I was once standing in the presence of R. Elazar b. Zadok when a man brought an aravah before him, and he took it and shook it over and over again without reciting any blessing, or he was of the opinion that it was merely a custom of the prophets. Aibu and Hezekiah, the sons of the daughters of Rav, brought an aravah before Rav, and he shook it over and over again without reciting a blessing, for he was of the opinion that it was merely a custom of the prophets.

Aibu said: I was once standing in the presence of R. Elazar b. Zadok when a man brought an aravah before him, and he took it and shook it over and over again without reciting any blessing, or he was of the opinion that it was merely a custom of the prophets. Aibu and Hezekiah, the sons of the daughters of Rav, brought an aravah before Rav, and he shook it over and over again without reciting a blessing, for he was of the opinion that it was merely a custom of the prophets.

The mitzvah of the aravah—how was it [performed]? 1) There was a place below Jerusalem called Moza. They went down there and gathered tall branches of aravot and then they came and stood them up at the sides of the altar, and their tops were bent over the altar. They then sounded a teki’ah [long blast], a teru’ah [staccato blast] and again a teki’ah. 2) Every day they went round the altar once, saying, “O Lord, save us, O Lord, make us prosper” (Psalms 118: 25). 3) Rabbi Judah says: “Ani vaho, save us.” 4) On that day they went round the altar seven times. 5) When they departed, what did they say? “O altar, beauty is to you! O altar, beauty is to you!” 6) Rabbi Eliezer said: [they would say,] “To the Lord and to you, O altar, to the Lord and to you, O altar.”

May we return to you Chapter: Lulav and Aravah