etrog

With regard to when vegetables [are liable to tithes]: Cucumbers, gourds, water-melons, cucumber-melons, apples and etrogs are liable [for tithes], whether gathered in the earlier or later stages of ripening. Rabbi Shimon exempts the etrog in the earlier stages. The condition in which bitter almonds are liable [to tithes] is exempt in the case of sweet almonds, and the condition in which sweet almonds are liable [to tithe] is exempt in the case of bitter almonds.

An etrog is similar in three ways to [the fruit of an ordinary] tree, and in one way to a vegetable. It is similar to a tree in respect of orlah, fourth year plantings, and [the law of] the seventh year; And it is similar to a vegetable in one thing: that its tithing goes according to the time it is harvested, the words of Rabban Gamaliel. Rabbi Eliezer says: it is similar to a tree in all ways.

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.

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.

An etrog which is stolen or withered is invalid. One from an asherah or a condemned city is invalid. Of orlah or of unclean terumah it is invalid. Of clean terumah, he should not take it, but if he did take it, it is valid. Of demai (doubtfully-tithed): Bet Shammai says it invalid, And Bet Hillel says it valid. Of second tithe, it should not be taken [even] in Jerusalem, but if he took it, it is valid.

If a rash spread out on a majority of it, or if its pitom is removed, if it is peeled, split, or perforated so that any part is missing, it is invalid. If a rash spread out on a lesser part of it, if its stem was missing, or if it is perforated but no part of it is missing, it is valid. An etrog [which is black] as an Ethiopian is invalid. An etrog which is green as a leek: Rabbi Meir declares it valid And Rabbi Judah declares it invalid.

If a rash spread out on a majority of it, or if its pitom is removed, if it is peeled, split, or perforated so that any part is missing, it is invalid. If a rash spread out on a lesser part of it, if its stem was missing, or if it is perforated but no part of it is missing, it is valid. An etrog [which is black] as an Ethiopian is invalid. An etrog which is green as a leek: Rabbi Meir declares it valid And Rabbi Judah declares it invalid.

The minimum size of an etrog: Rabbi Meir says: the size of a nut. Rabbi Judah says: the size of an egg. The maximum [size] is such that two can be held in one hand, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Yose says, even one that can only be held with his two hands.

In a place where the custom is to repeat [verses], he should repeat; [Where the custom is] to say them only once, he should say them once. [Where the custom is] to recite a blessing afterwards, he should recite the blessing afterwards. Everything is dependent on local custom. One who purchases a lulav from his fellow in the sabbatical year, [the latter] should give him the etrog as a gift, since one is not permitted to purchase it in the sabbatical year.

If he gave him two perutahs and said, “Bring me for them an etrog,” and he brought for one perutah an etrog and for the other a pomegranate, both are guilty of sacrilege. Rabbi Judah says: the employer is not guilty of sacrilege for he could say, “I wanted a large etrog and you brought me a small and bad one.” If he gave him a golden denar and said to him, “Bring me a shirt,” and he brought him for three [silver selas] a shirt and for the other three a cloak, both are guilty of sacrilege. Rabbi Judah says: the employer is not guilty of sacrilege, for he can argue, “I wanted a large shirt and you brought me a small and bad one.”

If he gave him two perutahs and said, “Bring me for them an etrog,” and he brought for one perutah an etrog and for the other a pomegranate, both are guilty of sacrilege. Rabbi Judah says: the employer is not guilty of sacrilege for he could say, “I wanted a large etrog and you brought me a small and bad one.” If he gave him a golden denar and said to him, “Bring me a shirt,” and he brought him for three [silver selas] a shirt and for the other three a cloak, both are guilty of sacrilege. Rabbi Judah says: the employer is not guilty of sacrilege, for he can argue, “I wanted a large shirt and you brought me a small and bad one.”

If he gave him two perutahs and said, “Bring me for them an etrog,” and he brought for one perutah an etrog and for the other a pomegranate, both are guilty of sacrilege. Rabbi Judah says: the employer is not guilty of sacrilege for he could say, “I wanted a large etrog and you brought me a small and bad one.” If he gave him a golden denar and said to him, “Bring me a shirt,” and he brought him for three [silver selas] a shirt and for the other three a cloak, both are guilty of sacrilege. Rabbi Judah says: the employer is not guilty of sacrilege, for he can argue, “I wanted a large shirt and you brought me a small and bad one.”

HALAKHAH: It was stated: A quarter of rice, an ukla of spices, a pound of vegetables, three qab carob, half a log of wine, a quarter of a log of olive oil, ten nuts, five peaches, two pomegranates, one etrog. What is the reason? (Deut. 26:12) “They shall eat in your gates and be satiated,” give him to satisfy him. Ḥizqiah asked his father: From where do we get all these amounts? He said to them, a pebble supports a tower. Rebbi Ḥananiah was sitting before Rebbi Ilaï, the latter was giving a reason and the former destroyed it, the latter was giving a reason and the former destroyed it, until he said to him, is it not depraved to destroy instead of building up?

This is a baraita: “Rebbi Yose says, baskets of figs, baskets of grapes, and boxes of vegetables, as long as they are sold en bloc, are free. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, the great Rebbi Yose sent me an etrog and said to me: this came into my hand from Caesarea. I understood from this three things: That it was certain, could become impure, and he did not have another one. That it was certain, because the fruits of Caesarea are certain. That it could become impure, because they sprinkle water on it. That he did not have another one, because if he had, he would have tithed from one on the other.” Why could he not have tithed from itself on itself? Because he was mindful of the saying of Bar Kappara, for Bar Kappara said that people do not send things that are defective to their friends. But is that not our Mishnah? “Rebbi Yose permits certain produce on condition that he inform him.” This tells you that, even though he disagreed with the rabbis, he did not act according to his own opinion.

“ Reeds, spiny bushes, roses, and way-thorn are trees and not kilaim in a vineyard. Reed-mace, rush, and bulrush, and all other plants growing in ashes are kinds of grasses and not kilaim in a vineyard.” But did Rebbi Hoshaiah not state: “The following are the kinds of grasses: artichoke, ḥalimah,demua, and lycium.” There for benedictions, here for kilaim. Rebbi Yose said, this means that while one says the benediction “Creator of the fruit of the tree” for an etrog, one says the benediction “Creator of kinds of grasses” for its tmrz.

HALAKHAH: “Any useless tree, etc.” Why did they mention fig trees? Because their fruits are large and they produce many. The Etrog tree has large fruits but it produces few of them. Olive trees produce much but its fruits are not large. But these produce much and its fruits are large. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, all trees produce one year less than another year but the fig tree produces every year.

Rebbi Assi said, if it was one-third ripe before the New Year’s Day of the World it is tithed for the past, after the New Year’s Day of the World it is tithed for the future. Rebbi Zeїra objected before Rebbi Assi: Some years are late and dates start to have sap after the New Year’s Day of the World but they are tithed for the past! Rebbi Zeїra said, Rebbi Assi did not say this on his own but following Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Samuel bar Abba: “If it was one-third ripe before the Fifteenth of Ševaṭ it is tithed for the past, after the Fifteenth of Ševaṭ for the future.” Rebbi Zeїra said, that is correct; for an etrog, did one not eliminate its budding but not its year; but here did one eliminate its year but not its budding?

Rebbi Ammi said, one has to be careful with what the creatures are careful. It is forbidden to put a coin into the mouth, or a dish under the bed, a bread in the arm pit, a knife in the middle of a radish, a knife into an etrog. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, all sweat that comes from a human is poison except the sweat of the face.

Rav Ḥuna asked: If an etrog tree was planted for its obligation, is it obligated for ‘orlah? Rav Ḥuna came back and said: An etrog tree planted for its obligation is obligated for ‘orlah. Did we not state there: (Lev. 23:40) “You shall buy for yourselves” and not from the obligation? There, “you shall buy for yourselves” with money, not from the obligation. But here, as you say in the matter of shofar, (Lev. 23:24) “a day of blasts it shall be for you”, from anywhere. And here, (Lev. 19:23): “Three years it shall be like ‘foreskin’ for you, it may not be eaten,” in any way. What is the difference between this and him who guards his fruits to use as wood? He wants the tree itself just as he wants the fruits. But here, he wants the fruit and is not interested in the tree. In addition, as Rebbi Ḥanina said, (Lev. 23:40) “fruit”; if you say it is part of the tree nobody can acquit himself of his obligation on the holiday! What can be compared to it? An olive tree planted for light on Ḥanukkah. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, one is biblical, the other rabbinic! And you say so? What can be compared to it? An olive tree planted to light the candelabrum; then both are biblical.

Rav Ḥuna asked: If an etrog tree was planted for its obligation, is it obligated for ‘orlah? Rav Ḥuna came back and said: An etrog tree planted for its obligation is obligated for ‘orlah. Did we not state there: (Lev. 23:40) “You shall buy for yourselves” and not from the obligation? There, “you shall buy for yourselves” with money, not from the obligation. But here, as you say in the matter of shofar, (Lev. 23:24) “a day of blasts it shall be for you”, from anywhere. And here, (Lev. 19:23): “Three years it shall be like ‘foreskin’ for you, it may not be eaten,” in any way. What is the difference between this and him who guards his fruits to use as wood? He wants the tree itself just as he wants the fruits. But here, he wants the fruit and is not interested in the tree. In addition, as Rebbi Ḥanina said, (Lev. 23:40) “fruit”; if you say it is part of the tree nobody can acquit himself of his obligation on the holiday! What can be compared to it? An olive tree planted for light on Ḥanukkah. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, one is biblical, the other rabbinic! And you say so? What can be compared to it? An olive tree planted to light the candelabrum; then both are biblical.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Ismael says, three myrtle branches and two willow twigs, one lulav and one etrog; even two truncated and one not chopped off. Rebbi Tarphon says, even all three truncated. Rebbi Aqiba says, just as there is one lulav and one etrog so there is one myrtle branch and one willow twig.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Ismael says, three myrtle branches and two willow twigs, one lulav and one etrog; even two truncated and one not chopped off. Rebbi Tarphon says, even all three truncated. Rebbi Aqiba says, just as there is one lulav and one etrog so there is one myrtle branch and one willow twig.

MISHNAH: A robbed or dried up etrog is disqualified. Of an ashera or a seduced city, it is disqualified. Of `orlah, it is disqualified. Of impure heave, it is disqualified; of pure one should not take but if he took it is qualified. Of demay, the House of Shammai disqualify but the House of Hillel qualify; of Second Tithe in Jerusalem one should not take but if he took it is qualified.

HALAKHAH: It is written, a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor. Which one is that? This is the etrog. If you would say, the pomegranate, its (wood) [fruit] is splendor but its (fruit) [wood] is not splendor. If you would say, the carob, its wood is splendor but its fruit is not splendor. Which one is it? The etrog. Hadar; Rebbi Levi said, for it stays on its tree from one year to the next. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, Aquila translated הדָר by ‘ύδωρ ; a tree which grows on the water. “Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: You shall take for yourselves . . a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor; the smell of its fruit is the smell of its wood, the smell of its wood is the smell of its fruit; its fruit looks like its wood, its wood looks like its fruit. Which one is it? The etrog.”

HALAKHAH: It is written, a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor. Which one is that? This is the etrog. If you would say, the pomegranate, its (wood) [fruit] is splendor but its (fruit) [wood] is not splendor. If you would say, the carob, its wood is splendor but its fruit is not splendor. Which one is it? The etrog. Hadar; Rebbi Levi said, for it stays on its tree from one year to the next. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, Aquila translated הדָר by ‘ύδωρ ; a tree which grows on the water. “Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: You shall take for yourselves . . a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor; the smell of its fruit is the smell of its wood, the smell of its wood is the smell of its fruit; its fruit looks like its wood, its wood looks like its fruit. Which one is it? The etrog.”

HALAKHAH: It is written, a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor. Which one is that? This is the etrog. If you would say, the pomegranate, its (wood) [fruit] is splendor but its (fruit) [wood] is not splendor. If you would say, the carob, its wood is splendor but its fruit is not splendor. Which one is it? The etrog. Hadar; Rebbi Levi said, for it stays on its tree from one year to the next. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, Aquila translated הדָר by ‘ύδωρ ; a tree which grows on the water. “Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: You shall take for yourselves . . a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor; the smell of its fruit is the smell of its wood, the smell of its wood is the smell of its fruit; its fruit looks like its wood, its wood looks like its fruit. Which one is it? The etrog.”

MISHNAH: If scabs covered most of it, or its protuberance was removed, or it was perforated, or peeled, or cracked, if anything was missing it is disqualified. If scabs covered a smaller part, or the stem was removed, or it was perforated but nothing was missing, it is qualified. A black etrog is disqualified, and the green like leeks Rebbi Meïr qualifies but Rebbi Jehudah disqualifies.

“A black etrog is disqualified.” What comes from the black one is qualified.

MISHNAH: The measure of a small etrog, Rebbi Meïr says, like a walnut, Rebbi Jehudah says, like an egg. And a large one, so that he is able to hold the two of them in one hand, the words of Rebbi Jehudah; Rebbi Yose says, even one in both of his hands.

Rebbi Yose said, if there were written and date-palm palms, it would be correct. Only date-palm palms is written, even one in one hand and the other in the other hand. They said about Rebbi Aqiba that he entered the synagogue with an etrog on his shoulders.

MISHNAH: At a place where there is the custom to repeat, one repeats, to recite a blessing afterwards, one recites a blessing afterwards; everything follows local custom. If one buys a lulav from another in the Sabbatical year he has to give him the etrog as a gift since one is not permitted to buy it in the Sabbatical year.

Rebbi Eleazar said, this follows the Elders of Galilea, for the Elders of Galilea say, it is forbidden to hand over food for two meals to a person suspect in matters of Sabbatical. Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it as opinion of everybody, in case that etrogim are sold at an elevated price. As the following: The cedrats were scarce there when Rav Naḥman bar Jacob gave an etrog as gift to his son and told him, if you have acquired it and fulfilled its obligation, return it to me.

Rav commanded to the House of Rav; there came Rav Hamnuna commanding the colleagues, if you are giving a gift on the holiday, only give it fully explicit. As the following: Rav Huna gave an etrog to his son. He told him, if today is holiday it is a gift to you, and if it is tomorrow it is a gift to you.

HALAKHAH: He said only minors, therefore not adults. Did not Rebbi Avinna say in the name of Rav, if an etrog became disqualified on the first day of the holiday one is permitted to eat it? Rebbi Yose said, there while he cannot use it to fulfill his obligation, others might use it to fulfill their obligation. But here neither he nor others can use it to fulfill their obligation.

Rebbi Ze`ira, Rebbi Ila, Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia. [One said,] already most of the rains of the entire year have passed, and also most of the season is gone. But the other one says, up to then they live from the rains of the past year, from then on they live from the water of the next year. But we do not know who said what. Since Rebbi Yasa, Rebbi Ila, Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia said, already most of the rains of the entire year have passed, and also most of the season is gone, it follows that Rebbi Ze`ira said, up to then they live from the rains of the past year, from then on they live from the water of the next year. “It happened that Rebbi Aqiba picked an etrog and observed for it the stringencies of the House of Shammai and those of the House of Hillel.” Why about a citron and not about any tree? It was stated “the stringencies of Rabban Gamliel and those of Rebbi Eliezer.” But do Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer not refer to the House of Hillel? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, explain it that it budded before the 15th of Shevaṭ` of the second year, and the third year came. In the opinion of Rabban Gamliel it is subject to tithe of the poor; in the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer it is subject to second tithe. How did he handle this? He gave a name to the tithe in it, redeemed it, and gave it to the poor.

“This is your bill of divorce on condition that you give it to me,” is invalid. “On condition that you return it to me,” is valid. Is that not the prior case? Rebbi Yose said, after you went to court. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, “after you have acquired all the rights for which it was made, return it to me.” Similar to that: Etrogim were scarce over there. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob gave an etrog to his son and said to him, if you have acquired it and fulfilled its obligation, return it to me.

Rebbi Immi said, one has to be careful with what the creatures are careful with: It is forbidden to put coins in one’s mouth, a bread under the armpit, a dish under one’s bed, and to stick a knife in an etrog, or a knife into a radish. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Bun said, all sweat that exudes from a human is deadly poison except the sweat of the face.

It was taught, "Dried are invalid; Rabbi Yehudah validates." Rava said, "This argument is regarding the Lulav, For the Sages thought, 'We compare the Lulav to the Etrog: Just like the Etrog requires beauty, so too the Lulav requires beauty.' And Rabbi Yehudah thought, 'We do not compare the Lulav to the Etrog.' But regarding the Etrog, everyone agrees that beauty is required."

It was taught, "Dried are invalid; Rabbi Yehudah validates." Rava said, "This argument is regarding the Lulav, For the Sages thought, 'We compare the Lulav to the Etrog: Just like the Etrog requires beauty, so too the Lulav requires beauty.' And Rabbi Yehudah thought, 'We do not compare the Lulav to the Etrog.' But regarding the Etrog, everyone agrees that beauty is required."

It was taught, "Dried are invalid; Rabbi Yehudah validates." Rava said, "This argument is regarding the Lulav, For the Sages thought, 'We compare the Lulav to the Etrog: Just like the Etrog requires beauty, so too the Lulav requires beauty.' And Rabbi Yehudah thought, 'We do not compare the Lulav to the Etrog.' But regarding the Etrog, everyone agrees that beauty is required."

It was taught, "Dried are invalid; Rabbi Yehudah validates." Rava said, "This argument is regarding the Lulav, For the Sages thought, 'We compare the Lulav to the Etrog: Just like the Etrog requires beauty, so too the Lulav requires beauty.' And Rabbi Yehudah thought, 'We do not compare the Lulav to the Etrog.' But regarding the Etrog, everyone agrees that beauty is required."

But regarding a Etrog, does Rabbi Yehudah really require beauty? And isn't it taught, "[Regarding] the four species in the Lulav [bundle], just as we may not take away from them, so too we may not add. If he could not find a Etrog, he should not bring: not a quince, not a pomegranate, and not any other thing. Wilted ones are valid, but dried ones are invalid. Rabbi Yehudah says, "Even dried [plants are valid].

But regarding a Etrog, does Rabbi Yehudah really require beauty? And isn't it taught, "[Regarding] the four species in the Lulav [bundle], just as we may not take away from them, so too we may not add. If he could not find a Etrog, he should not bring: not a quince, not a pomegranate, and not any other thing. Wilted ones are valid, but dried ones are invalid. Rabbi Yehudah says, "Even dried [plants are valid].

Still, as it taught, Rabbi Yehudah says [that] Even dried ones are valid. Does [this] not [refer] to the Etrog? No. [This refers] to the Lulav.

A Master said, "If he did not find an Etrog, he should not bring: not a pomegranate, not a quince, and not any other thing." This is obvious[! Why would any other fruit be acceptable?]! You might have said, "We should bring it so that the instruction regarding the Etrog will not be forgotten." We learn from the [above statement], that sometimes destruction comes from this [as people will forget the Etrog and bring this new fruit instead].

A Master said, "If he did not find an Etrog, he should not bring: not a pomegranate, not a quince, and not any other thing." This is obvious[! Why would any other fruit be acceptable?]! You might have said, "We should bring it so that the instruction regarding the Etrog will not be forgotten." We learn from the [above statement], that sometimes destruction comes from this [as people will forget the Etrog and bring this new fruit instead].

A Master said, "If he did not find an Etrog, he should not bring: not a pomegranate, not a quince, and not any other thing." This is obvious[! Why would any other fruit be acceptable?]! You might have said, "We should bring it so that the instruction regarding the Etrog will not be forgotten." We learn from the [above statement], that sometimes destruction comes from this [as people will forget the Etrog and bring this new fruit instead].

Come and hear: "An old Etrog is invalid, and Rabbi Yehudah validates it." This is a rejection of Rava, and [his opinion that Rabbi Yehudah invalidates a dry Lulav] is rejected.

But do we not teach, "[An Etrog] green as turquoise, Rabbi Meir validates, and Rabbi Yehudah invalidates?" Is [Rabbi Yehudah's opinion] not because he requires beauty? No. It is because it has not ripened yet [and is not a complete Etrog].

But do we not teach, "[An Etrog] green as turquoise, Rabbi Meir validates, and Rabbi Yehudah invalidates?" Is [Rabbi Yehudah's opinion] not because he requires beauty? No. It is because it has not ripened yet [and is not a complete Etrog].

Come and hear, "The minimum size of an Etrog: Rabbi Meir says, 'Like a walnut;' Rabbi Yehudah says, 'Like an egg.'" Is [Rabbi Yehudah's opinion] not because he requires beauty? No. It is because it is not fully ripened [and is not considered a complete Etrog].

Come and hear, "The minimum size of an Etrog: Rabbi Meir says, 'Like a walnut;' Rabbi Yehudah says, 'Like an egg.'" Is [Rabbi Yehudah's opinion] not because he requires beauty? No. It is because it is not fully ripened [and is not considered a complete Etrog].

Come and hear: "And [regarding] a big [Etrog, the maximum is small enough] so that he can hold two in his one hand; the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Yose says, 'Even [if the Etrog is so big that he can only hold] one in his two hands.'" What is the reasoning [of Rabbi Yehudah]? Is it not because he requires beauty? No. Seeing as Rabba said, "The Lulav [is held] the right [hand] and the Etrog is in the left." Sometimes, they will be switched, and so you will flip them, and [if the Etrog is as large as Rabbi Yose allows,] you will invalidate it [by dropping it and breaking the Pitom].

Come and hear: "And [regarding] a big [Etrog, the maximum is small enough] so that he can hold two in his one hand; the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Yose says, 'Even [if the Etrog is so big that he can only hold] one in his two hands.'" What is the reasoning [of Rabbi Yehudah]? Is it not because he requires beauty? No. Seeing as Rabba said, "The Lulav [is held] the right [hand] and the Etrog is in the left." Sometimes, they will be switched, and so you will flip them, and [if the Etrog is as large as Rabbi Yose allows,] you will invalidate it [by dropping it and breaking the Pitom].

Come and hear: "And [regarding] a big [Etrog, the maximum is small enough] so that he can hold two in his one hand; the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Yose says, 'Even [if the Etrog is so big that he can only hold] one in his two hands.'" What is the reasoning [of Rabbi Yehudah]? Is it not because he requires beauty? No. Seeing as Rabba said, "The Lulav [is held] the right [hand] and the Etrog is in the left." Sometimes, they will be switched, and so you will flip them, and [if the Etrog is as large as Rabbi Yose allows,] you will invalidate it [by dropping it and breaking the Pitom].

Come and hear: "And [regarding] a big [Etrog, the maximum is small enough] so that he can hold two in his one hand; the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Yose says, 'Even [if the Etrog is so big that he can only hold] one in his two hands.'" What is the reasoning [of Rabbi Yehudah]? Is it not because he requires beauty? No. Seeing as Rabba said, "The Lulav [is held] the right [hand] and the Etrog is in the left." Sometimes, they will be switched, and so you will flip them, and [if the Etrog is as large as Rabbi Yose allows,] you will invalidate it [by dropping it and breaking the Pitom].

And rather, for Rabbi Yehuda, does it not say [in reference to the Etrog] "Beautiful ['Hadar']"?

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.

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.

R. Eliezer said to him: It is possible that the etrog should be bound with them in one bundle, [to this] you can say, is it written, "the fruit of a goodly tree and branches of palmtrees"? It says only, "branches of palm-trees." And from where do we know that lack of fulfillment of one prevents fulfillment of the others? Scripture says, "And you shall take" [implying] that the taking must be complete.

1) An etrog which is stolen or withered is invalid. 2) One from an asherah or a condemned city is invalid. 3) Of orlah or of unclean terumah—it is invalid. 4) Of clean terumah, he should not take it, but if he did take it, it is valid. 5) Of demai (doubtfully-tithed): a) Bet Shammai says it invalid, b) And Bet Hillel says it valid. 6) Of second tithe, it should not be taken [even] in Jerusalem, but if he took it, it is valid.

7) If a rash spread out on a majority of it, or if its pitom is removed, if it is peeled, split, or perforated so that any part is missing, it is invalid. 8) If a rash spread out on a lesser part of it, if its stem was missing, or if it is perforated but no part of it is missing, it is valid. 9) An etrog [which is black] as an Ethiopian is invalid. 10) An etrog which is green as a leek: a) Rabbi Meir declares it valid b) And Rabbi Judah declares it invalid 11) The minimum size of an etrog: a) Rabbi Meir says: the size of a nut. b) Rabbi Judah says: the size of an egg. 12) The maximum [size] is such that two can be held in one hand, the words of Rabbi Judah. a) Rabbi Yose says, even one that can only be held with his two hands.

7) If a rash spread out on a majority of it, or if its pitom is removed, if it is peeled, split, or perforated so that any part is missing, it is invalid. 8) If a rash spread out on a lesser part of it, if its stem was missing, or if it is perforated but no part of it is missing, it is valid. 9) An etrog [which is black] as an Ethiopian is invalid. 10) An etrog which is green as a leek: a) Rabbi Meir declares it valid b) And Rabbi Judah declares it invalid 11) The minimum size of an etrog: a) Rabbi Meir says: the size of a nut. b) Rabbi Judah says: the size of an egg. 12) The maximum [size] is such that two can be held in one hand, the words of Rabbi Judah. a) Rabbi Yose says, even one that can only be held with his two hands.

7) If a rash spread out on a majority of it, or if its pitom is removed, if it is peeled, split, or perforated so that any part is missing, it is invalid. 8) If a rash spread out on a lesser part of it, if its stem was missing, or if it is perforated but no part of it is missing, it is valid. 9) An etrog [which is black] as an Ethiopian is invalid. 10) An etrog which is green as a leek: a) Rabbi Meir declares it valid b) And Rabbi Judah declares it invalid 11) The minimum size of an etrog: a) Rabbi Meir says: the size of a nut. b) Rabbi Judah says: the size of an egg. 12) The maximum [size] is such that two can be held in one hand, the words of Rabbi Judah. a) Rabbi Yose says, even one that can only be held with his two hands.

The rabbis taught: "The fruit of a goodly tree" (Leviticus 23:40) a tree the taste of whose ‘fruit’ and ‘wood’ is the same. Say then that it is the etrog.

R. Abbahu said: Read not hadar, but ha-dar, a fruit which lives upon its tree from year to year. Ben Azzai said: Read not hadar, but hudor for in Greek water is called hudor. Now what fruit is it that grows by every water? Say it is the etrog.

Now you should think that the one who insists on permission to eat it [in order for it to be valid] does not insist upon [its having] monetary value, and that the one who insists upon monetary value does not insist upon permission to eat it It was taught: [An etrog] of unclean terumah, is invalid. This goes well according to him who explains, because there is no permission to eat it, but according to him who explains [that it can't be used] because it has no monetary value, why not? Behold he can kindle it under his cooking!

It may be concluded that it is R. Assi who said that the reason is that it has no monetary value, since R. Assi said: An etrog of second tithe according to R. Meir, a person cannot fulfill his obligation on the Festival, and according to the Sages he may fulfill his obligation with it on the Festival. This is proved

The main text: R. Assi said: An etrog of second tithe, according to R. Meir, a person cannot fulfill his obligation on the Festival with it, and according to the Sages he may fulfill his obligation with it on the Festival. Matzah of second tithe, according to R. Meir, a person cannot fulfill his obligation on Pesah with it, and according to the Sages one may fulfill his obligation with it on Pesah. Dough of second tithe, according to R. Meir, is exempt from hallah and according to the Sages it is liable to hallah.

R. Papa raised a difficulty: his is well with regard to dough, since it is written, "The first of your dough" (Numbers 15:20). And with regard to the etrog also it is written, "To you" it must be yours. But with regard to matzah, does Scripture say, "your matzah"? Rabbah bar Shmuel, or as some say, R. Yemar bar Shelemia said: It can be deduced from the word "bread" which is common to both passages. It is written here, "The bread of affliction" (Deuteronomy 16:3) and there it is written,

If a rash spread out on the majority of it [it is invalid]. R. Hisda said: The following was said by our great Master, may God be his help! This was taught only [where they were] in one place, but if they were in two or three places, [the etrog] is valid. Rava said: On the contrary! If they were in two or three places the etrog is as though it is striped and it is invalid.

If a rash spread out on the majority of it [it is invalid]. R. Hisda said: The following was said by our great Master, may God be his help! This was taught only [where they were] in one place, but if they were in two or three places, [the etrog] is valid. Rava said: On the contrary! If they were in two or three places the etrog is as though it is striped and it is invalid.

Rather if the statement was at all made, it was made in connection with the latter part [of the mishnah]: if on its lesser part it is valid. R. Hisda said, The following was said by our great Master, may God be his help! This was taught only [if they were] in one place, but if in two or three places the etrog is as speckled and invalid. Rava said: And if it is on its nose, even the smallest rash, the etrog is invalid.

Rather if the statement was at all made, it was made in connection with the latter part [of the mishnah]: if on its lesser part it is valid. R. Hisda said, The following was said by our great Master, may God be his help! This was taught only [if they were] in one place, but if in two or three places the etrog is as speckled and invalid. Rava said: And if it is on its nose, even the smallest rash, the etrog is invalid.

If it is peeled. Raba ruled: An etrog which was peeled so as to resemble a red date is valid. But have we not learned, if it is peeled . . . It is invalid? There is no difficulty:

Rava asked: If there developed in an etrog the symptoms [which render an animal] terefah, what is the law? What is he asking about? If it is peeled, have we not [already] learned it? If it is split have we not learned it also? If it was pierced have we not learned it also?

Come and hear: An etrog which is swollen, decayed, pickled, boiled, Ethiopian (black), white or speckled, is invalid. An etrog which is round as a ball is invalid. And some say: also if two are grown together. An etrog which is half-ripe, R. Akiva declares it invalid, and the sages valid. If it was grown in a cast, so that it has the appearance of another species, it is invalid.

Come and hear: An etrog which is swollen, decayed, pickled, boiled, Ethiopian (black), white or speckled, is invalid. An etrog which is round as a ball is invalid. And some say: also if two are grown together. An etrog which is half-ripe, R. Akiva declares it invalid, and the sages valid. If it was grown in a cast, so that it has the appearance of another species, it is invalid.

Come and hear: An etrog which is swollen, decayed, pickled, boiled, Ethiopian (black), white or speckled, is invalid. An etrog which is round as a ball is invalid. And some say: also if two are grown together. An etrog which is half-ripe, R. Akiva declares it invalid, and the sages valid. If it was grown in a cast, so that it has the appearance of another species, it is invalid.

At any rate it teaches "swollen or decayed." Is it not, swollen from without and decayed from within? No! Both refer to the outside, and yet there is no difficulty. One refers to a case where the etrog is swollen even although it is not decayed; the other to a case where it was decayed without being swollen.

The Master has said: An Ethiopian etrog is invalid. But has it not been taught: If it is Ethiopian it is valid, if it is like an Ethiopian, it is invalid? Abaye answered, In our Mishnah also we learned of one that is like an Ethiopian. Raba answered, There is no difficulty. The former refers to us, the latter to them.

A half-ripe etrog: R. Akiva declares invalid, and the Sages declare it valid. Rabbah said: Both R. Akiva and R. Shimon said the same thing. R. Akiva [refers to] that which we just said. R. Shimon—to what does that refer? To that which we have taught: R. Shimon declares etrogs to be exempt [from tithes] when they are small.

Abaye said to him: But perhaps it is not so. R. Akiva may have stated his view only here, since the etrog must be "goodly," while [an unripe etrog] is not, but there he may agree with the sages

Abaye said to him: But perhaps it is not so. R. Akiva may have stated his view only here, since the etrog must be "goodly," while [an unripe etrog] is not, but there he may agree with the sages

It was stated: An etrog which has been gnawed by mice: Rav said: It is not "goodly." Is this so? Did not R. Hanina taste a part of it, and fulfilled his obligation [with the remainder]? But isn't our Mishnah a difficulty against R. Hanina?

There are those who say: Rav ruled that "goodly" since R. Hanina tasted a part [of an etrog] and fulfilled his obligation [with the remainder]. But is not our Mishnah a difficulty against R. Hanina? There is no contradiction since the former refers to the first day of the Festival, while the latter refers to the second day.

The minimum size of an etrog: Rafram b. Papa said: As is the dispute here, so is the dispute with regard to rounded pebbles. For it has been taught, It is permitted on Shabbat to carry three rounded smooth pebbles into [a field] lavatory. And what must be their size? R. Meir ruled, The size of a nut, R. Judah ruled, That of an egg.

The maximum size etc. It was taught: R. Yose said: It happened with R. Akiva that he came to synagogue with his etrog on his shoulder. R. Judah said to him: Is this a proof? They in fact said to him, That etrog is not goodly

The maximum size etc. It was taught: R. Yose said: It happened with R. Akiva that he came to synagogue with his etrog on his shoulder. R. Judah said to him: Is this a proof? They in fact said to him, That etrog is not goodly

Rabbah further stated: It is forbidden to smell a hadas [used] for the [fulfilment of the] commandment, but it is permitted to smell an etrog [used] for the [fulfilment of the] commandment. What is the reason? — The hadas since it is used for its smell, when he sets it aside [for the mitzvah] it is set aside from use for its fragrance. The etrog, however, since it is used as food, when he sets it aside [for the mitzvah] it is set aside [only] from [use as] food.

Rabbah further stated: It is forbidden to smell a hadas [used] for the [fulfilment of the] commandment, but it is permitted to smell an etrog [used] for the [fulfilment of the] commandment. What is the reason? — The hadas since it is used for its smell, when he sets it aside [for the mitzvah] it is set aside from use for its fragrance. The etrog, however, since it is used as food, when he sets it aside [for the mitzvah] it is set aside [only] from [use as] food.

Rabbah further stated: A hadas attached to the ground, it is permitted to smell it; an etrog attached to the ground, it is forbidden to smell it. What is the reason? — The hadas, since it is used for its smell, if you permit it [to be smelled], he would not come to cut it down. The etrog which is used for food, if you permit it [to be smelled] he might be tempted to cut it.

Rabbah further stated: A hadas attached to the ground, it is permitted to smell it; an etrog attached to the ground, it is forbidden to smell it. What is the reason? — The hadas, since it is used for its smell, if you permit it [to be smelled], he would not come to cut it down. The etrog which is used for food, if you permit it [to be smelled] he might be tempted to cut it.

Rabbah further stated, The lulav [must be held] in the right hand and the etrog in the left. What is the reason? This one is three commandments and this is only one. R. Yirmiyah asked of R. Zerika: Why do we bless only "To take the lulav"? Since it is higher than the others. Let him lift up the etrog and recite the blessing over it? He said to him: Since as a species it naturally is higher than the others.

Rabbah further stated, The lulav [must be held] in the right hand and the etrog in the left. What is the reason? This one is three commandments and this is only one. R. Yirmiyah asked of R. Zerika: Why do we bless only "To take the lulav"? Since it is higher than the others. Let him lift up the etrog and recite the blessing over it? He said to him: Since as a species it naturally is higher than the others.

One who purchases a lulav from his fellow in the sabbatical year, [the latter] should give him the etrog as a gift, since one is not permitted to purchase it in the sabbatical year.

GEMARA. What happens if he doesn't want to give it to him as a gift? R. Huna said: He should include the price of the etrog in that of the lulav. But why should he not pay him directly?

But if so, the lulav also [should not be bought]? The lulav is a product of the sixth year which entered the seventh. But if so, might not the etrog also a product of the sixth year which entered the seventh? In the case of the etrog we compute from the time of its gathering.

But if so, the lulav also [should not be bought]? The lulav is a product of the sixth year which entered the seventh. But if so, might not the etrog also a product of the sixth year which entered the seventh? In the case of the etrog we compute from the time of its gathering.