## Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah Chapter 3 ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:1) **משנה:** לוּלָב הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ פָּסוּל. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁירָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת פָּסוּל. נִקְטַם רֹאשׁוֹ נִפְרְצוּ עָלָיו פַּסוּל. נִפְרְדוּ עָלָיו כָּשֵׁר. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר יְאַגְּדֶנּוּ מִלְמַעְלָה. צִינֵּי הַר הַבַּרְזֶל כְּשֵׁירוֹת. כָּל לוּלָב שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ שְׁלשָׁה טְפָחִים כְּדֵי לְנַעְנֵעַ בּוֹ כָּשֵׁר: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** A robbed or dried up *lulav*¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27). is disqualified. Of an *ashera*² or a seduced city³13:13–18., it is disqualified. If it was truncated, its leaves broken out, it is disqualified. If its leaves were spread out, it is qualified; Rebbi Jehudah says, he shall tie them at the top⁴. The stone palms of Iron Mountain are qualified. Any *lulav* three hand-breadths long to shake it⁵, *Ps.* 113–118. is qualified. footnotes: ¹ Lev. ² A tree worshipped as a pagan deity, forbidden for all use. ³ An apostate city practicing idolatry which has to be destroyed and all its property burned, forbidden for all usufruct, Deut ⁴ As long as the leaves are connected they can be tied together to produce the desired shape of a solid tube. ⁵ As explained in Mishnaiot 8 ff., the main use of the “four kinds” mentioned in the verse is to shake them during the recitation of Hallel ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:2) **הלכה:** לוּלָב הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ פָּסוּל כול׳. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. וּלְקַחְתֶּם לָכֶם. מִשֶׁלָּכֶם. וְלֹא הַגָּזוּל. אָמַר רִבִּי לֵוִי. זֶה שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵל לוּלָב גָּזוּל לְמָה הוּא דוֹמֶה. לְאֶחָד שֶׁכִּיבֵּד אֶת הַשִּׁלְטוֹן תַּמְחוּי אֶחָד וְנִמְצָא מִשֶׁלּוֹ. אָמְרוּ. אִי לוֹ לָזֶּה שֶׁנַּעֲשֶׂה סֻנֵיגוֹרוֹ קַטֵּיגוֹרוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** “A robbed or dried up *lulav* is disqualified,” etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: *You shall take for yourselves*¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27)., from what is your own⁶17(2). The paragraph is a much shortened version of *Lev.**r*. 30(6), starting with R. Ḥiyya’s statement and ending with the lesson “woe to this one …”. Rebbi Levi said, to what is one compared who takes a robbed *lulav*? To one who honored the ruler with a basket and it turned out that it belonged to the latter. One says, woe to this one whose defender⁷ became his prosecutor⁸. footnotes: ¹ Lev. ⁶ Babli 29b; Sifra Emor Pereq ⁷ Greek συνήγορος. ⁸ Greek κατήγορος. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:3) שׁוֹפָר שֶׁלְעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְשֶׁלְעִיר הַנִּידַּחַת. רִבִּי לָעְזְר אָמַר. כָּשֵׁר. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. כָּשֵׁר. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. פָּסוּל. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בַּלּוּלָב שֶּׁהוּא פָסוּל. מַה בֵין שׁוֹפָר וּמַה בֵין לוּלָב. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. בַּלּוּלָב כָּתוּב וּלְקַחְתֶּם לָכֶם. מִשֶׁלָּכֶם. לֹא מִשֶּׁלְאִיסּוּרֵי הֲנָיָיה. בְּרַם הָכָא יוֹם תְּרוּעָה יִהְיֶה לָכֶם. מִכָּל מָקוֹם. אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזְר. תַּמָּן בְגוּפוֹ הוּא יוֹצֵא. בְּרַם הָכָא בְקוֹלוֹ הוּא יוֹצֵא. וְיֵשׁ קוֹל אָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָיה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** ⁹12:2 (Notes 50–59,**ז**). A ram’s horn of idolatry¹⁰ or a seduced city¹¹28a, agrees.. Rebbi Eleazar said, it is qualified. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, it is qualified. Rebbi Hoshaia stated, it is disqualified¹²28a, disagrees in this case since a ram's horn in a “seduced city” must be burned and therefore is considered to be ashes even if not burned. Arguments of this kind are absent in the Yerushalmi.. Everybody agrees about a *lulav* that it is disqualified. What is the difference between a ram’s horn and a *lulav*? Rebbi Yose said, about a *lulav* it is written: *You shall take for yourselves*¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27)., from what is your own⁶17(2). The paragraph is a much shortened version of *Lev.**r*. 30(6), starting with R. Ḥiyya’s statement and ending with the lesson “woe to this one …”. Not from what is forbidden for usufruct. But here, *a day of horn blowing it shall be for you*¹³. 29:1.. Rebbi Eleazar said, there he fulfills his obligation by the thing itself¹⁴ § 274). Therefore it is the robber’s property and even in the case of a *lulav* could be used on the holiday.. But here he fulfills his obligation by the sound. Is there a sound which is forbidden for usufruct? footnotes: ⁹ This paragraph is part of a text in Yebamot ¹⁰ The ram's horn used on New Year's Day. ¹¹ The usufruct of any implements of idolatrous worship is forbidden. The horn is only permitted since Divine Commandments are not for enjoyment or use. The Babli, Roš Haššanah ¹² The Babli, Roš Haššanah ¹ Lev. ⁶ Babli 29b; Sifra Emor Pereq ¹³ Num ¹⁴ It is a general rule that a stolen or robbed object has to be returned in kind to its owner only if it is unchanged. Once the thief or robber has changed it so its original shape cannot be restored, it becomes the property of its current holder and the original owner only has a claim for its money’s worth and eventual fines (Or zarua ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:4) מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּשֶׁגְּזָלוֹ מְשׁוּפֶּה. אֲבָל אִם גְּזָלוֹ וְשִׁיפֵּהוּ. דָּמִים הוּא חַיָיב לוֹ. גָּזַל לוּלָב מִיכָּן וְהָדָס מִיכָּן וַעֲרָבָה מִיכָּן וַאֲגָדָן. נִישׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. סּוּכָּה גְזוּלָה. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. כְּשֵׁירָה. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. פְּסוּלָה. רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. מָאן דְּאָמַר. כְּשֵׁירָה. בְּשֶׁגָּזַל קַרְקַע. מָאן דְּאָמַר. פְּסוּלָה. בְּשֶׁגָּזַל פְּסָל. וְאֵיפְשַׁר שֶׁלֹּא יִיקָּשֵׁר. בִּמְיַישֵּׁב מִלְּמַעֲלָן. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בֵּין זֶה וּבֵין זֶה פְּסוּלָה. אֵי זוֹ הִיא גְזוּלָה פְסוּלָה. כָּל שֶׁהוּא נִכְנַס בְּתוֹךְ סוּכָּתוֹ שֶׁלְחֲבֵירוֹ שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ. כְּהָדָא. גַּמְלִיאֵל זֶוּגָא עֲבַד לֵיהּ מַטַלָּא גַּו שׁוּקָא. עֲבַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. מָאן שְׁרָא לָךְ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Where do they disagree¹³. 29:1.? If he robbed it smoothed. But if he robbed it and smoothed it, he owes him money¹⁴ § 274). Therefore it is the robber’s property and even in the case of a *lulav* could be used on the holiday.. If he robbed a *lulav* from one, a myrtle branch from another, and a willow branch from a third and tied them together¹⁵? Let us hear from the following: A robbed *sukkah*, there are Tannaim who stated, it is qualified; there are Tannaim who stated, it is disqualified. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: He who said, it is qualified, if he robbed the real estate¹⁶ on it. The Babli 31a disagrees since (1) real estate cannot be robbed since the owners eventually will be able to reclaim their property by proving their title in court (a principle accepted in the Yerushalmi, *Peah*2:7 Note 132, *Kilaim*7:5 Note 72, *Bava qamma*10:6 Note 66) and (2) the *sukkah* is only a temporary building.. He who said, it is disqualified, if he robbed the agricultural waste. It is impossible that he not tie them together¹⁷. If he places it from the top. The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: In every case it is disqualified¹⁸. What is the robbed one which is disqualified¹⁹”?? Any time a person enters another’s *sukkah* without his knowledge²⁰. As the following. Gamliel the twin made himself a *sukkah* on the market²¹ without proper authorization is robbing the public.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish passed by and told him, who gave you permission? footnotes: ¹³ Num ¹⁴ It is a general rule that a stolen or robbed object has to be returned in kind to its owner only if it is unchanged. Once the thief or robber has changed it so its original shape cannot be restored, it becomes the property of its current holder and the original owner only has a claim for its money’s worth and eventual fines (Or zarua ¹⁵ The Babli 30a holds that this case certainly is disqualified since the tie is reversible and a reversible change does not transfer ownership. ¹⁶ Since he changed the real estate by building a sukkah ¹⁷ Therefore even if he robbed the material for the roof it should become the robber’s property. ¹⁸ They hold that only permanent change can effect a transfer of ownership, the doctrine of the Babli. ¹⁹ This question does not contradict the statement of the rabbis from Caesarea. Accepting their reasoning, what are the limits of “robbing a sukkah ²⁰ The Babli 31a characterized this as R. Eliezer’s minority opinion. ²¹ Using public property for a sukkah ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:5) יָבֵשׁ פָּסוּל. רִבִּי אַבִּין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי. הַיָּבֵשׁ פָּסוּל עַל שֵׁם לֹא הַמֵּתִים יְהַלְלוּ יָהּ. תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה. הַיָּבֵשׁ עַצְמוֹ כָשֵׁר. אָמַר לָהֶן רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. וַהֲלֹא בְכַרַכֵּי הַיָּם מוֹרִישִׁין לוּלְבֵיהֶן לִבְנֵיהֶן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. אֵין לְמֵידִין מִשְּׁעַת הַדּוֹחַק. בְּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אֲבִינָּא. יָבְשָׁה צִיצִּיתוֹ מָהוּ מַה בֵינוֹ לְקָטוּם. אֲמַר לוֹן. זֶה הִדּוּר וָזֶה אֵינוֹ הִדּוּר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** “Dried up is disqualified.” Rebbi Abbin in the name of Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi: The dried-up is disqualified because *the dead ones cannot praise the Eternal*²² 115:17.. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, “the dried up one is qualified. Rebbi Jehudah told them, do they not have their sons inherit their *lulavim* in the port cities overseas²³ every year. כרך is Greek χάραξ “palisade”. Tosephta 2:9, Babli 31a/b.? They told him, one does not make inferences from emergency situations.” They asked before Rebbi Avinna, if its fringe was dried up²⁴, what? What is the difference to when its head was chopped off? He told them, the first is splendor²⁵, the second is not splendor. footnotes: ²² Ps. ²³ Northern ports in countries without palm trees, where it may be impossible to get a new lulav ²⁴ If the top leaves were wilted. ²⁵ While “splendor” is mentioned only for the fruit of the splendor tree, if at all possible the entire bundle has to look its best. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:6 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:6) רִבִּי מָלוּךּ בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. נֶחֱלַק הַמַּתְאִים כְּמִי שֶׁנִּפְרְדוּ הֶעָלִין. כַּפּוֹת תְּמָרִים. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר. כַּפּוֹת תְּמָרִים. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. כַּפּוֹת תְּמָרִים כִּשְׁמָן. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוּמֵר. אִם נִפְרָד יְאַגְּדֶנּוּ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Maluk in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: If the spine is split it is as if the leaves were spread out²⁶. *Date-palm palms*¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27).. Rebbi Tarphon says, tied date-palms²⁷. Rebbi Aqiba says, *palms of date palms* as they are called²⁸. Rebbi Jehudah says, if they are spread out he shall tie them together²⁹16(4).. footnotes: ²⁶ In this case, the Mishnah states that it is qualified. In the Babli 32a R. Matun in the name of R. Johua ben Levi is reported to state that it is disqualified. ¹ Lev. ²⁷ While in biblical Hebrew כַּפּוֹת is the plural of כַּף “palm, hand”, in rabbinic Hebrew (and Aramaic) there exists a verb כפת “to tie down”. R. Tarphon reads the verse in rabbinic Hebrew and disqualifies palm branches which are not tied tightly, a position attributed to R. Jehudah in Tosephta 2:10. ²⁸ He reads the verse in biblical Hebrew and accepts the palm branch even if its leaves are spread out. ²⁹ In principle he agrees with R. Tarphon (Babli 31a, 32a) but he requires actual tying only if otherwise the leaves would be spread out. Attributed to R. Tarphon in Sifra Emor Pereq ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:7 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:7) אֵילּוּ הֵן צִינֵּי הַר הַבַּרְזֶל שֶׁהֵן כְּשֵׁירוֹת. כָּל שֶׁרֹאשָׁהּ שֶׁלָּזֶה מָגִּיעַ לְצַד עִיקָּרָהּ שֶׁלְּזוֹ. תַּנֵּי. חָרוּת פְּסוּלָה. דּוֹמֶה לְחָרוּת כָּשֵׁר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** The following are the stone palms of Iron Mountain which are qualified: Any of which the top of one reaches the root of the next³⁰. It was stated: Burned is disqualified, looking like burned is qualified³¹. footnotes: ³⁰ There is no lower limit on the length of the leaves, but the spine of the branch has to be completely covered by leaves. Babli 32a. ³¹ “Burned” means not really burned but stone dry and dark. As long as there is moisture in the spine, the color is irrelevant. Babli 32a. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:8 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:1:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:1:8) רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. כֵּינִי מַתְנִיתָא. כְּדֵי לְנַעְנֵעַ בּוֹ כָּשֵׁר. תַּנֵּי. הֲדַס וַעֲרָבָה שְׁלֹשָׁה וְלוּלָב אַרְבָּעָה. תַּנֵּי. בָּאַמַּת חֲמִשָּׁה. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים. בָּאַמָּת שִׁשָּׁה. עַל דְּרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן פּוֹשְׁכִין רַבְרְבִין. עַל דַּעְתְּהוֹן דְּרַבָּנִן פּוֹשְׁכִין דַּקִּיקִין. רִבִּי יוֹנָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה נְשִׂיָיא. לוּלָב טֶפַח. רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. אֵזוֹב טֶפַח. רִבִּי זְעִירָה בָעֵי. לוּלָב טֶפַח. אֵזוֹב טֶפַח. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. קִיְימָהּ רִבִּי סִימוֹן. רִבִּי חִינְנָא רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. לוּלָב טֶפַח. אֵזוֹב טֶפַח. שׁוֹפָר טֶפַח. שִׁילְיָיא טֶפַח. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים. אַף דוֹפָן שְׁלִישִׁית טֶפַח. רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בָעֵי. לוּלָב טֶפַח (וּבִלְבַד) [מִלְּבַד] שִׁיזְרָה. אֵזוֹב טֶפַח חוּץ מִגִּבְעוֹלִין. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה רִבִּי טָבִי בְשֵׁם רַב רִבִּי חִינְנָא רִבִּי פַּרְנָךְ רַב מַתָּנָה יוֹסֵי בַּר מָּנִישָׁא בְשֵׁם רַב. לוּלָב טֶפַח (וּבִלְבַד) [מִלְּבַד] שִׁזְרָה. אֵזוֹב טֶפַח חוּץ מִגִּבְעוֹלָיו. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan. So is the Mishnah: If one can shake it, it is qualified³² must be large enough so that one may hold it in his hand, and it visibly bends somewhat if one shakes it.. It was stated: Myrtle and willow twig three, and *lulav* four³³. It was stated, by the cubit of five {hand-breadths}, the words of Rebbi Tarphon, but the Sages are saying, by the cubit of six. For Rebbi Tarphon, large hand-breadths³⁴; in the opinion of the Sages, thin hand-breadths. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Jehudah the Patriarch: The *lulav* a hand-breadth³⁵. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: the hyssop³⁶ a hand-breadth. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, the *lulav* a hand-breadth, the hyssop a hand-breadth? Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Simon confirmed it. Rebbi Ḥinena, Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: the *lulav* a hand-breadth, the hyssop a hand-breadth, the ram’s horn a hand-breadth³⁷, the placenta a hand-breadth³⁸, and some are saying, also the third wall a hand-breadth³⁹. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, the *lulav* a hand-breadth except the spine⁴⁰ has to be formed by its leaves, not the spine. Similarly, the top of the hyssop dipped in the purifying water is not counted for the minimum length.? The hyssop a hand-breadth except for the stalk? Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rav; Rebbi Ḥinena, Rebbi Parnakh, Rav Mattanah, Yose bar Manisha in the name of Rav: The *lulav* a hand-breadth except for the spine; the hyssop a hand-breadth except for its stalks. footnotes: ³² The lulav ³³ Since the numerals are in the masculine they denote hand-breadths. ³⁴ The standard is the cubit, 1/8000 of an Egyptian parasang. The hand-breadth of the vessel standard, 5 to a cubit, is 6/5 of the hand-breadth of the distance standard, 6 to a cubit. ³⁵ Exceeding the accompanying branches by a hand-breadth. The Babli 32b identifies this with Rebbi Joḥanan’s criterion (Note 32). ³⁶ Needed to sprinkle, e. g., the water to purify a person healed from skin disease.. ³⁷ The ram’s horn for New Year’s Day must extend one hand-breadth outside the hand which holds it. ³⁸ As sign of a miscarriage. ³⁹ Tosephta 1:13; Chapter 1 Note 10. ⁴⁰ The excess length of the lulav ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:2:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:2:1) **משנה:** הֲדַס הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ פָּסוּל. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁירָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת פָּסוּל. נִקְטַם רֹאשׁוֹ נִפְרְצוּ עָלָיו אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ עֲנָבָיו מְרוּבּוֹת מֵעָלָיו פָּסוּל וְאִם מִיעֲטָן כָּשֵׁר. וְאֵין מְמַעֲטִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** A robbed or dried up myrtle is disqualified. Of an *ashera*² or a seduced city³13:13–18., it is disqualified. If it was truncated, its leaves broken out, or its berries more than its leaves, it is disqualified; if one reduced their number it is qualified but one may not reduce on the holiday. footnotes: ² A tree worshipped as a pagan deity, forbidden for all use. ³ An apostate city practicing idolatry which has to be destroyed and all its property burned, forbidden for all usufruct, Deut ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:2:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:2:2) **הלכה:** כְּתִיב וַעֲנַף עֵץ עָבוֹת. עַץ שֶׁעֲנָפָיו חוֹפִין אֶת רוּבּוֹ וְעוֹלֶה כְּמִין קְלִיעָה. וְאֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה הֲדַס. אִין תֵּימַר זֵיתָא. עוֹלֶה כְּמִין קְלִיעָה וְאֵין עֲנָפָיו חוֹפִין אֶת רוּבּוֹ. אִין תֵּימַר זַרַגּוּנָה. עֲנָפָיו חוֹפוֹת אֶת רוּבּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ עוֹלֶה כְּמִין קְלִיעָה. וְאֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה הֲדַס. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** It is written, *and a branch from the rope tree*¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27)., a tree whose branches cover it and it rises like plaiting⁴¹. Which one is this? The myrtle. If you would say the olive tree, it rises like plaiting but its branches do not cover it. If you would say the vine⁴²)., its branches cover it but it does not rise like plaiting. Therefore, which one is this? The myrtle. footnotes: ¹ Lev. ⁴¹ The tops of the leaves look like forming a spiral. ⁴² Arabic (from the Persian) זרגון “gold colored”, used for branches of the vine (French sarment ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:2:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:2:3) חִיָיה בַּר אָדָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. בְּמַשְׁחִירוֹת שָׁנוּ. לָמָּה. מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵינָן דּוֹמוֹת לְעֵצוֹ אוֹ מִשֵּׁם שֶׁנִּגְמַר פִּרְיוֹ. מַה נְפַק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. הָיָה דַּרָכּוֹ לְגַדֵּל יְרוֹקִים. אִין תֵּימַר. מִשֵּׁם שֶׁאֵינָן דּוֹמוֹת לְעֵצוֹ הֲרֵי אֵינָן דּוֹמוֹת לְעֵצוֹ. הֲוֵי. לָא טַעֲמָא דִי לָא מִשֵּׁם שֶׁנִּגְמַר פִּרְיוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Ḥiyya bar Ada in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They taught⁴³ about the blackish ones. Why? Because they do not resemble its wood or because its fruit is ripened? What is the difference between these? If it is used to grow green ones. If you are saying, because they do not⁴⁴ resemble its wood, they do not resemble its wood. Therefore the reason must be because its fruit is ripened. footnotes: ⁴³ That the berries of the myrtle twig have to be removed. ⁴⁴ Clearly this has to be deleted. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:3:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:3:1) **משנה:** עֲרָבָה גְזוּלָה וִיבֵישָׁה פְּסוּלָה. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁירָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת פְּסוּלָה. נִקְטַם רֹאשָׁהּ נִפְרְצוּ עָלֶיהָ וְהַצַּפְצָפָה פְּסוּלָה. כְּמוּשָׁה וְשֶׁנָּשְׁרוּ מִקְצַת עָלֶיהָ וְשֶׁל בַּעַל כְּשֵׁירָה: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** A robbed or dried up willow twig is disqualified. Of an *ashera*² or a seduced city³13:13–18., it is disqualified. If it was truncated, its leaves broken out, or the osier⁴⁵ are disqualified. Wilted, and of which part of the leaves have fallen off, and from an unirrigated place⁴⁶., are qualified. footnotes: ² A tree worshipped as a pagan deity, forbidden for all use. ³ An apostate city practicing idolatry which has to be destroyed and all its property burned, forbidden for all usufruct, Deut ⁴⁵ Arabic צפצפ “osier, willow from whose twigs one makes baskets.” ⁴⁶ A field which gets its water exclusively from the rain, called ba`al ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:3:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:3:2) **הלכה:** כְּתִיב. וְעַרְבֵי נָחַל. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא שֶׁל נַחַל. שֶׁלְבַּעַל וְשֶׁלְהָרִים מְנַיִין. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְעַרְבֵי. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר. עַרְבֵי נָחַל שְׁתַּיִם. עֲרָבָה לְלוּלָב וַעֲרָבָה לַמִּקְדָּשׁ. אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר וְעַרְבֵי נָחַל. פְּרָט לְצַפְצֶפֶת. אֵי זֶהוּ שֶׁלְצַפְצֶפֶת. הָעֲשׂוּיָה כְמִין מַגָּל. תַּנֵּי. כְּמִין מַגָּל פְּסוּלָה. כְּמִין מֶסֶר (פְּסוּלָה) [כְּשֵׁירָה]. אֵי זוֹ הִיא עֲרָבָה פְסוּלָה. עָלֶה עָגוֹל וְקָנֶה לָבָן. אֵי זוֹ הִיא עֲרָבָה כְשֵׁירָה. עָלֶה אָרוֹךְ וְקָנֶה אָדוֹם. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** ⁴⁷16(6), Babli 34a.“It is written, *and brook-willows*¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27).. I admit not only from a brook, from where also from an unirrigated place or from mountains? The verse says, *and willows*⁴⁸. Abba Shaul says, *brook-willows*, two. A willow twig for the *lulav* and a willow twig for the Temple⁴⁹ but also to surround the altar (Mishnah 4:4). This explains both the plural and the prefixed “and”..” Then why was it written *and brook-willows*? To exclude the osier. ⁵⁰“What is an osier? If its is like a sickle. It was stated: Like a sickle it is disqualified, like a plane it is (qualified) [disqualified]⁵¹. What is a disqualified willow twig? The leaf is round and the stem white. What is a qualified willow twig? The leaf is long and the stem red.” footnotes: ⁴⁷ Sifra Emor Pereq ¹ Lev. ⁴⁸ The plural and the prefixed “and” indicate the inclusion of two additional kinds of willow twig. ⁴⁹ He disputes the admission of willow twigs from trees growing far from water by pointing out that willow twigs were needed not only for the “4 kinds” tied to the lulav ⁵⁰ Babli 34a, Tosephta 2:7. ⁵¹ The correct text is the (scribe’s); the [corrector’s] clearly is erroneous. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:4:1) **משנה:** רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר שְׁלשָׁה הֲדַסִּים וּשְׁתֵּי עֲרָבוֹת לוּלָב אֶחָד וְאֶתְרוֹג אֶחָד וַאֲפִילּוּ שְׁנַיִם קְטוּמִים וְאֶחָד שֶׁאֵינוֹ קָטוּם. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר אֲפִלּוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן קְטוּמִים. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר כְּשֵׁם שֶׁלּוּלָב אֶחָד וְאֶתְרוֹג אֶחָד כָּךְ הֲדַַס אֶחָד וַעֲרָבָה אַחַת: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:4:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל דָּרַשׁ. פְּרִי עֵץ הָדָר אֶחָד. כַּפּוֹת תְּמָרִים אֶחָד. וַעֲנַף עֵץ עָבוֹת שְׁלֹשָׁה. וְעַרְבֵי נָחַל שְׁתַּיִם. וּשְׁתֵּי דְּלִיּוֹת. אַחַת שֶׁאֵינָהּ קְטוּמָה. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר. אֲפִלּוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן קְטוּמִין. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִימִּי. כְּמַה דְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל מַרְבֶּה בַהֲדַס יַרְבֶּה בִשְׁאָר כָּל הַמִּינִין. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. מִיסְבּוֹר אַתְּ סְבַר. עָל דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל קָטוּם הָדָר. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר אֲפִלּוּ שְׁלָשְׁתָּן קְטוּמִין. לֵית בַּר נַשׁ אֲמַר. אֲפִילּוּ. אֶלָּא דְהוּא מוֹדֶה עַל קַדְמִיתָא. רִבִּי חַגַּיי בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מַה בָא רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן לְהוֹסִיף עַל דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אָמַר לֵיהּ. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל לֹא סָבַר קָטוּם הִדּוּר. וְרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן סָבַר קָטוּם הִדּוּר. רִבִּי יָסָא כַד סְלַק לְהָכָא חַמְתּוֹן מְבַחֲרִין הֲדַסָּה. אָמַר. לָמָּה בְנֵי מַעֲרָבָא מְבַחֲרִין הֲדַסָּה. וְלֹא שְׁמִיעַ דְּאָמַר רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. וַאֲשֶׁר יַשְׁמִיעוּ וְיַעֲבִירוּ קוֹל בְּכָל עָרֵיהֶם וגו'. לֹא הִיא הֲדַס וְלֹא הִיא עֵץ עָבוֹת. אֶלָּא הֲדַס לְסוּכָּה. וְעֵץ עָבוֹת לְלוּלָב. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה הֲוָה תְקַע לָהּ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** ⁵²15(7), Babli 34b.“Rebbi Ismael explained, ¹23:40: *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day a fruit of the splendor tree, date-tree palms, a branch of the rope tree, and brook-willows*. The *lulav* is the young palm branch. While in the verse it is called “palm”, because the leaves of the palm-tree spread out from the spine of the branch like fingers of a hand, it is traditional to take a young branch with the leaves still tightly clinging to its spine. From this the name **לולב** “tube” (cf. Note 27).*a fruit of the splendor tree*, one. *Date-palm roped*, one⁵³. *A branch of the rope tree,* three⁵⁴. *And brook-willows*, two⁵⁵. And two lifted ones; one which is not truncated. Rebbi Tarphon says, even if all three are truncated.” Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked before Rebbi Immi: Since Rebbi Ismael adds for the myrtle⁵⁶ and only one *etrog* instead of two each., should he not add for the other kinds? He answered, you are thinking that Rebbi Ismael thinks that truncated is splendor, and we have stated, “Rebbi Tarphon says, even if all three are truncates.” Nobody says “even” if he does not accept the preceding statement⁵⁷. Rebbi Ḥaggai asked before Rebbi Jose: What does Rebbi Tarphon add to the words of Rebbi Ismael? He answered him, Rebbi Ismael does not think that truncated is splendor, but Rebbi Tarphon thinks that truncated is splendor. When Rebbi Yasa came up here he saw them being selective about myrtle branches⁵⁸. He said, why are the Westerners selective about myrtle branches? He had not heard thar Rebbi Simon said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: *And they made known and proclaimed in all cities*⁵⁹. 8:15. In the verse, myrtle and branches of the *`avot* tree are mentioned separately. How can they be identified? etc. *Myrtle* is not the same as *rope tree*, but myrtle is for the *sukkah*, and *rope tree* for the *lulav*⁶⁰. Babli 12a.. Rebbi Ze`ira blew it⁶¹ blowing on New Year’s Day he instructed on the requirement for a qualified myrtle.. footnotes: ⁵² Sifra Emor Pereq ¹ Lev. ⁵³ He reads the verse in accordance with R. Tarphon, Note 27. The clause is in the singular. ⁵⁴ While “branch” is in the singular, there are three words to describe the myrtle branch. ⁵⁵ As always, an unspecified plural means “2”, the smallest number 1. ⁵⁶ While R. Ismael seems to accept that only one myrtle branch is really needed since עֲנַף is a singular, the additional two being inferred from the additional words used in his characterization requiring two additional branches, it is difficult to understand why he requires only one lulav ⁵⁷ Since R. Tarphon and R. Ismael agree in the interpretation of the verse, the requirement that one branch be not truncated for R. Ismael is a rabbinic requirement, not derived from the verse. ⁵⁸ That they should not be truncated and tightly cover the stem of the branch. ⁵⁹ Neh ⁶⁰ Since the rope tree was mentioned in the Torah as part of the “four kinds” to be taken on the first day, “myrtle” must refer to a kind not satisfying the criteria specified in Halakhah 2 which only may be used for roofing the sukkah ⁶¹ At the time of shofar ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:4:3) הָעוֹשֶׂה לוּלָב לְעַצְמוֹ אוֹמֵר. בָּרוּךְ אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְמִצְוֹתָיו וְצִיוָּנוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת לוּלָב. לְאַחֵר. לַעֲשׂוֹת לוּלָב לִשְׁמוֹ. כְּשֶׁהוּא נוֹטְלוֹ מָהוּ אוֹמֵר. בָּרוּךְ אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְמִצְוֹתָיו וְצִוָּנוּ עַל נְִטִילַת לוּלָב. נִתַפַּלֵּל בּוֹ אוֹמֵר. בָּרוּךְ שֶׁהָחֱיָינוּ וְקִיְימָנוּ וְהִגִּיעָנוּ לַזְּמַן הַזֶּה. וּמְבָרֵךְ עָלָיו כָּל שָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא נוֹטְלוֹ. כֵּיצַד מְבָרְכִין עַל נֵר חֲנוּכָּה. רַב אָמַר בָּרוּךְ אֲשֶׁר קִדְּשָׁנוּ בְמִצְוֹתָיו וְצִוָּנוּ עַל מִצוַת [הַדְלָקַת] נֵר חֲנוּכָּה. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין בְּיוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר. עַל נְִטִילַת לוּלָב. מַה פְלִיגִין. בִּשְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. עַל נְִטִילַת לוּלָב. רִבִּי יְהוּשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר. עַל מִצְוַת זְקֵנִים. מַה אָמַר רַב בְּלוּלָב. מָה אִם חֲנוּכָּה שֶׁהִיא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן הוּא אוֹמֵר. עַל מִצוַת נֵר חֲנוּכָּה. לוּלָב שֶׁהוּא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן. מַה אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי בַחֲנוּכָּה. מַה אִם לוּלָב שֶׁהוּא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה אוֹמֵר. עַל מִצְוַת זְקֵינִים. חֲנוּכָּה שֶׁהִיא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן. לֹא צוֹרְכָא דִילֹא מַה אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בַּחֲנוּכָּה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** ⁶²6:10, *Yerushalmi Berakhot* 9:3, Note 185; Babli *Sukkah* 46a. He who makes a *lulav* for himself says, praise to Him who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us to make a *lulav*. For another, to make a *lulav* in his name⁶³. When he takes it he says, praise to Him who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us about taking the *lulav*. If he prayed with it he says, praise to Him Who let us live, and kept us, and let us reach this time. He says the benediction every time when he takes it. How does one recite the benediction for the *Ḥanukkah* light? Rav said, praised to Him who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us the commandment [to kindle]⁶⁴23a. the light of *Ḥanukkah*. Everybody agrees that on the first day he says, about taking the *lulav*. What do they disagree about? The remaining days. Rebbi Joḥanan said, about taking the *lulav*. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, about commandments of the Elders⁶⁵ 23:40.. What did Rav say for the *lulav*? Since for *Ḥanukkah* which is from their words he is saying, about the commandment of the light of *Ḥanukkah*, for *lulav* which is from the Torah⁶⁶ not so much more? What did Rebbi Joshua ben Levi say on *Ḥanukkah*? Since for *lulav* which is from the Torah he is saying, about commandments of the Elders, for *Ḥanukkah* which is from their words not so much more? The only problem is, what did Rebbi Joḥanan say on *Ḥanukkah*? footnotes: ⁶² The first sentences of this paragraph are in Tosephta Berakhot ⁶³ Cf. Chapter 1, Note 124. ⁶⁴ Corrector’s addition, to be deleted as shown by the quote later in the paragraph. The mention of “kindling” is Babylonian, Babli Šabbat ⁶⁵ Since, as explained in Mishnah 3:12, the biblical commandment to take the “four kinds” for seven days is restricted to “before the Eternal”, i. e., at the Temple. Without a Temple the obligation at other places is purely rabbinical except for the first day mentioned in Lev. ⁶⁶ Everywhere, at least for the first day of the festival. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:4:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:4:4) חִיָיה בְרֵיהּ דְּרַב מְבָרֵךְ עַל כָּל פַּעַם וָפַעַם. רַב חוּנָה לֹא מְבָרֵךְ אֶלָּא פַעַם אַחַת בִּלְבַד. רִבִּי חוּנָה בְשֵׁם רַב יוֹסֵף. טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרַב חוּנָה. דְּמַאי מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן. מַה דְמַיי אֵין מְבָרְכִין עָלָיו אַף שְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים אֵין מְבָרְכִין עָלָיו. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Ḥiyya the son of Rav was reciting the benediction every single time⁶⁷ 3:3, Note 131.. Rav Ḥuna recited it only once. Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rav Joseph: The reason of Rav Ḥuna. *Demay*⁶⁸. is from their words and the remaining days are from their words. Since for *demay* one does not recite a benediction⁶⁹23a., also for the remaining days one does not recite a benediction. footnotes: ⁶⁷ Accepted as general practice Berakhot ⁶⁸ Produce of the Land of which one may be sure that heave was taken but probably not tithes (nor heave of the tithe). Cf Introduction to Tractate Demay ⁶⁹ When separating heave of the tithe. Rejected by the Babli, Šabbat ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:5:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:5:1) **משנה:** אֶתְרוֹג הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ פָּסוּל. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁירָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת פָּסוּל. שֶׁל עָרְלָה פָּסוּל. שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה פָּסוּל וְשֶׁל טְהוֹרָה לֹא יִטּוֹל וְאִם נָטַל כָּשֵׁר. וְשֶׁל דְּמַאי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין. וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. וְשֶׁל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם לֹא יִטּוֹל וְאִם נָטַל כָּשֵׁר: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** A robbed or dried up *etrog*⁷⁰, identified as “fruit of the Hadar tree”. is disqualified. Of an *ashera*² or a seduced city³13:13–18., it is disqualified. Of `*orlah*⁷¹, it is disqualified. Of impure heave⁷², it is disqualified; of pure one should not take⁷³ but if he took it is qualified. Of *demay*⁶⁸., the House of Shammai disqualify⁷⁴ to be given even to the poor without separating the heave of the tithe, it is not edible at this moment. but the House of Hillel qualify; of Second Tithe in Jerusalem⁷³ one should not take but if he took it is qualified. footnotes: ⁷⁰ The Persian name of cedrat, citrus medica ² A tree worshipped as a pagan deity, forbidden for all use. ³ An apostate city practicing idolatry which has to be destroyed and all its property burned, forbidden for all usufruct, Deut ⁷¹ An edible fruit produced during the first three years of the tree’s planting, forbidden for all usufruct. ⁷² Forbidden as fruit, must be burned. ⁷³ Since by biblical commandment heave and Second Tithe in Jerusalem have to be consumed. ⁶⁸ Produce of the Land of which one may be sure that heave was taken but probably not tithes (nor heave of the tithe). Cf Introduction to Tractate Demay ⁷⁴ Since they do not permit demay ⁷³ Since by biblical commandment heave and Second Tithe in Jerusalem have to be consumed. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:5:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:5:2) **הלכה:** כְּתִיב פְּרִי עֵץ הָדָר. עֵץ שֶׁפִּרְיוֹ הָדָר וְעֵצוֹ הָדָר. אֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה אֶתְרוֹג. אִין תֵּימַר רִימּוֹנָא. (עֵצוֹ) [פִּירְיוֹ] הָדָר וְאֵין (פִּירְיוֹ) [עֵצוֹ] הָדָר. אִין תֵּימַר חָרוּבָה. עֵצוֹ הָדָר וְאֵין פִּירְיוֹ הָדָר. אֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה אֶתְרוֹג. הָדָר. אָמַר רִבִּי לֵוִי. שֶׁהוּא דָר בְּאִילָנוֹ מִשָּׁנָה לַחֲבֵירָתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. תִּירְגֵּם עֲקִילַס. הָדָר הִידוֹר. אִילָן שֶׁהוּא גָדֵל עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. וּלְקַחְתֶּם לָכֶם פְּרִי עֵץ הָדָר. עֵץ שֶׁפִּרְיוֹ הָדָר וְעֵצוֹ הָדָר. טַעַם פִּרְיוֹ כְטַעַם עֵצוֹ. טַעַם עֵצוֹ כְטַעַם פִּרְיוֹ. פִּרְיוֹ דוֹמֶה לְעֵצוֹ. עֵצוֹ דוֹמֶה לְפִירְיוֹ. וְאֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה אֶתְרוֹג. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **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 splendor⁷⁵. 8:8) and certainly tastes much better than carob pods.. 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 next⁷⁶/ and make no difference between ד nd דּ since he reads הָדָר “splendor” as הַדָּר “who dwells”.. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, Aquila translated הדָר by ‘ύδωρ ⁷⁷/ or as Polish /*ó*/.; 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*.”⁷⁸16(4), with different name traditions. footnotes: ⁷⁵ It is difficult to decide whether the text of the (scribe) or that of the [corrector] is the correct one. The corrector’s is preferable since (1) it is not parallel to the next sentence and (2) the pomegranate, while not easy to eat, is on the list of preferred fruits of the Holy Land (Deut ⁷⁶ His Hebrew must pronounce ־ָ as /a ⁷⁷ “Water.” This again makes no difference between ד and דּ but reads ־ָ either as /o ⁷⁸ Babli 35a; Sifra Emor Pereq ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:5:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:5:3) רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב דְּרוֹמִיָיא בָעֵי. מַתְנִיתָא דְלָא כְבֵית שַׁמַּי. דְּתַנִּינָן. וְשֶׁלְדְּמַאי בֵּית שַׁמַּי פּוֹסְלִין וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. וְשֶׁלְמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁינִי בִּירוּשָׁלַםִ לֹא יִטּוֹל. וְאִם נָטַל כָּשֵׁר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** ⁷⁹ Chapter 3, Notes 76–78. If the text is read as relevant to the discussion here, the question must be why the use of Second Tithe in Jerusalem, while disapproved of, is accepted by everybody when it should be disqualified by the House of Shammai. Rebbi Jacob the Southerner asked, is our Mishnah not following the House of Shammai? As we have stated, “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 valid.” footnotes: ⁷⁹ This paragraph does not belong here; it is copied from Eruvin ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:6:1) **משנה:** עָלְתָה חֲזָזִית עַל רוּבּוֹ נִיטְּלָה פִיטְמָתוֹ נִיקַּב נִקְלַף נִסְדַּק חָסַר כָּל שֶׁהוּא פָּסוּל. עָלְתָה חֲזָזִית עַל מִעוּטוֹ נִיטַּל עוּקְצוֹ נִיקַּב וְלֹא חָסַר כָּל שֶׁהוּא כָּשֵׁר. אֶתְרוֹג הַכּוּשִׁי פָּסוּל. הַיָרוֹק כְּכַרְתָן רִבִּי מֵאִיר מַכְשִׁיר וְרִבִּי יְהוּדָה פּוֹסֵל: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** If scabs covered most of it⁸⁰., 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. footnotes: ⁸⁰ The etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:6:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. כְּל הַפְּסוּלִין אֵינָן פּוֹסְלִין אֶלָּא בְיוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּלְבַד. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. רוּבּוֹ מִצַּד אֶחָד. חוֹטְמוֹ כְרוּבּוֹ לִפְסוֹל. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Samuel: All disqualifications only disqualify on the first day of the holiday⁸¹. There, they are saying, most of it on one side; its protuberance is disqualifying like most of it⁸² is disqualified if either on one side most of it is covered by scab, as noted here, or if all around it has infected spots, as noted in the next Halakhah. Therefore if the top was covered by scab it is covered on all sides and therefore disqualified.. footnotes: ⁸¹ When the standards have to be biblical. Quoted by Tosaphot 35b s. v. עלתה. ⁸² The etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:6:3) נִיטְּלָה פִיטְמָתוֹ. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. שׁוֹשַׁנְתּוֹ. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר חֲקוּלָא אָמַר. פִּיקָא. נִּיקֵּב וְלֹא פִילֵּשׁ מִבִּפְנִים כָּשֵׁר. כַּהִיא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. נִיטַּל עוּקְצוֹ נִיקַּב וְלֹא חָסַר כָּל שֶׁהוּא כָּשֵׁר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** “If its protuberance was removed.” There, they say: its lily. Rebbi Isaac bar Ḥaqula said, the peak⁸³ has to beheld so that the protuberance is the top.. If it was perforated but not pierced inside it is qualified, as we have stated there, “if the stem was removed, or it was perforated but nothing was missing, it is qualified.” footnotes: ⁸³ Arabic פוק “acme”. The etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:6:4) אֶתְרוֹג הַכּוּשִׁי פָּסוּל. הַבָּא מִן הַכּוּשִׁי כָשֵׁר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** “A black *etrog* is disqualified.” What comes from the black one is qualified⁸⁴ is infected and probably inedible; its seeds may produce normal trees and normal fruit.. footnotes: ⁸⁴ The black etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:6:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:6:5) הַיָרוֹק כְּכַרְתָן. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִימִּי. כָּהֵן כָּרְתִּינוֹן אוֹ דְדָמִי לָהֶן כָּרְתִּינוֹן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. כָּהֵין כָּרְתִּינָן. אֵי זֶהוּ יְרַקְרַק שֶׁבִּירוֹקִים. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אוּמֵר. כְּשַׁעְוָה וּכְשׁוֹשַׁנַּת קַרְמָל. סוּמֲכוֹס אָמַר. כַּכַנְפֵי טַוָוס. אֵי זֶהוּ אֲדַמְדָּם שֶׁבָּאֲדוֹמֵים. זֶה זְהוֹרִית עֲמוּקָה. וָכָא הוּא אָמַר הָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי פִינְחָס. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא תַּמָּן דִּכְתִיב יְרַקְרַק. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** “The green like leeks.” Rebbi Ze`ira asked before Rebbi Immi: Leek-colored or like leek-colored⁸⁵? He told him, leek-colored. What is the deepest ירק⁸⁶ 13:49, cf. *Sifra Tazria Pereq* 14(2).? Rebbi Eleazar said, like wax⁸⁷ and like the flower of the *qarmal* tree; Symmachos says, like a peacock’s wings. What is the deepest red? That is deep crimson. And here, he says so⁸⁸ but yellow for skin disease?? Rebbi Phineas said, there is a difference there because it says, *deepest green*. footnotes: ⁸⁵ Somewhat less dark. ⁸⁶ Lev. ⁸⁷ Yellow colored. In biblical Hebrew both green and yellow are subsumed under ירק. The word used in modern Hebrew for yellow, צָהוֹב, biblically means “shiny, shiny red.” ⁸⁸ Why is it green for the etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:7:1) **משנה:** שִׁעוּר אֶתְרוֹג קָטָן רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר כָּאֱגוֹז. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר כַּבֵּיצָה. וְהַגָּדוֹל כְּדֵי שֶׁיֶֹּאֱחוֹז אֶת שְׁנֵיהֶם בְּיָדוֹ אַחַת דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר אֲפִילּוּ אֶחָד בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדָיו: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** The measure of a small *etrog*, Rebbi Meïr says, like a walnut, Rebbi Jehudah says, like an egg⁸⁹. And a large one, so that he is able to hold the two of them⁹⁰ and the *lulav* together. in one hand, the words of Rebbi Jehudah; Rebbi Yose says, even one in both of his hands. footnotes: ⁸⁹ A chicken egg. ⁹⁰ The etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:7:2) **הלכה:** אֶתְרוֹג הַבּוֹסֶר. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. אֵינוֹ פֶרִי. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים. פֶּרִי. רִבִּי אִילָא רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. אַתְיָיא דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן כְּשִׁיטַּת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה רַבּוֹ. כְּמַה דְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אָמַר. אֶתְרוֹג בּוֹסֶר אֵינוֹ פֶרִי. כֵּן רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָמַר. אֶתְרוֹג בּוֹסֶר אֵינוֹ פֶרִי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. וְכִי כָל שֶׁהוּא כָשֵׁר בַּלּוּלָב חַיָיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ כָשֵׁר בַּלּוּלָב אֵינוֹ חַיָיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת. הָתִיבוֹן. הֲרֵי מְנוּמָּר. הֲרֵי הוּא גָדַל בִּדְפוּס. הֲרֵי הוּא עָשׂוּי כְכַדּוּר. הֲרֵי הוּא פָסוּל בְּלוּלָב וְחַיָיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת. מִסְתַּבְּרָא רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן יוֹדֶה לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה לֹא יוֹדֵי לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן יוֹדֵי לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. דִּכְתִיב פְּרִי. וְאֵינוֹ פֶרִי. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה לֹא יוֹדֵי לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. הֲרֵי מְנוּמָּר. הֲרֵי גָדַל בִּדְפוּס. הֲרֵי הוּא עָשׁוּי כְכַדּוּר. הֲרֵי הוּא פָסוּל בְּלוּלָב וְחַיָיב בְּמַעְשְׂרוֹת. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** ⁹¹ 1:4, Notes 99–106, **ע**. A parallel but different discussion is in the Babli 36a/b. Rebbi Aqiba says an unripe cedrat is not a fruit, but the Sages say it is a fruit. Rebbi Hila, Rebbi Yasa, in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: It follows that Rebbi Simeon⁹²1:4 he frees unripe *etrog* from tithes. follows the argument of his teacher, Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba said it is not a fruit, so Rebbi Simeon said it is not a fruit. Rebbi Yose said, is everything qualified for *lulav* subject to tithes and everything disqualified for *lulav* not subject to tithes? Did they not object, there is the spotted one⁸² is disqualified if either on one side most of it is covered by scab, as noted here, or if all around it has infected spots, as noted in the next Halakhah. Therefore if the top was covered by scab it is covered on all sides and therefore disqualified., one that grew in a form⁹³, or one shaped like a ball, which are disqualified for *lulav* but subject to tithes! It is reasonable {to hold that} Rebbi Simeon agrees with Rebbi Aqiba but Rebbi Aqiba does not agree with Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Simeon agrees with Rebbi Aqiba since it is written *fruit*⁹⁴23:40. and it is not a fruit. Rebbi Aqiba does not agree with Rebbi Simeon, there is the spotted one, one that grew in a form, or one shaped like a ball, which are disqualified for *lulav* but subject to tithes. footnotes: ⁹¹ The origin of the paragraph is in Ma`serot ⁹² In Mishnah Ma`serot ⁸² The etrog ⁹³ Greek τύπος. ⁹⁴ Lev. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:7:3) אֲנָן תַּנִּינָן כָּאֱגוֹז. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. עַד כָּאֱגוֹז. מָאן דְּאָמַר. כָּאֱגוֹז. כָּאֱגוֹז עַצְמוֹ כָשֵׁר. מָאן דְּאָמַר. עַד כָּאֱגוֹז. כָּאֱגוֹז עַצְמוֹ פָּסוּל. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** We have stated, “like a walnut.” There are Tannaim who state, “up to a walnut.” He who says “like a walnut”, as a walnut itself is qualified. He who says “up to a walnut”, as a walnut itself is disqualified. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:7:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:7:4) אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אִילּוּ הֲוָה כְתִיב וְכַפּוֹת תְּמָרִים. יְאוּת. לֵית כְּתִיב אֶלָּא כַּפּוֹת תְּמָרִים. אֲפִילוּ זֶה בְיָדוֹ אַחַת וְזֶה בְיָדוֹ אַחַת. אָמְרוּ עָלָיו עַל רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה שֶׁנִּכְנַס לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת וְאֶתְרוֹג עַל כְּתֵיפָיו. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Yose⁹⁵ must be kept separate from the other items is ascribed to R. Eleazar (the Tanna) in *Sifra Emor Pereq*15(7). 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 shoulders⁹⁶. footnotes: ⁹⁵ This possibly might refer to R. Yose the Tanna. The argument that the omission of the connective “and” in the list indicates that the etrog ⁹⁶ Babli 36b. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:8:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:8:1) **משנה:** אֵין אוֹגְדִין אֶת הַלּוּלָב אֶלָּא בְמִינוֹ דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר אֲפִילּוּ בִמְשִׁיחָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מֵאִיר מַעֲשֶׂה בְאַנְשֵׁי יְרוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹגְדִין אֶת לוּלְבֵיהֶן בְּגִימוֹנִית שֶׁל זָהָב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ בְּמִינוֹ הָיוּ אוֹגְדִין אוֹתוֹ מִלְּמָטָּה: וְאֵיכָן הָיוּ מְנַעְנְעִין בְּהוֹדוּ לַיי׳ תְּחִילָּה וָסוֹף וְאַף בְּאָנָא ה׳ הוֹשִׁיעָה נָּא כְדִבְרֵי הִלֵּל. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים אַף בְּאָנָּא יי׳ הַצְּלִיחָה נָּא. אָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה צוֹפֶה הָיִיתִי בְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וּבְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שֶׁכָּל הָעָם מְטָרְפִין בְּלוּלְבֵיהֶן וְהֵם לֹא נִיעְנְעוּ אֶלָּא בְאָנָּא יי׳ הוֹשִׁיעָה נָּא בִלְבַד. מִי שֶׁבָּא בַדֶּרֶךְ וְלֹא הָיָה בְיָדוֹ לוּלָב כְּשֶׁיִּכָּנֵס לְבֵיתוֹ יִטּוֹל עַל שׁוּלְחָנוֹ. אִם לֹא נָטַל בַשַּׁחֲרִית יִטּוֹל בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם שֶׁכָּל הַיּוֹם כָּשֵׁר לַלּוּלָב: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** One ties the *lulav* only with its own kind⁹⁷, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Meïr says, even with a string⁹⁸. Rebbi Meïr said, it happened that the people of Jerusalem did tie their *lulavim* with golden jewels⁹⁹. They told him, under these they tied it with its own kind. Where did they move¹⁰⁰ is the recitation of *Hallel*, *Pss*. 113–118, where the *lulav* is moved at the recitation or repetition of designated verses.? At *thank the Eternal*¹⁰¹ 118:1,29. beginning and end, and also at *please, Eternal, please save*¹⁰² 118:25., following the words of the House of Hillel. The House of Shammai say, also at *please, Eternal, please give success*¹⁰² 118:25.. Rebbi Aqiba said, I was watching Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Joshua, when all the people were shaking their *lulavim* but they moved them only at *please, Eternal, please save*. If somebody returns from a trip where he had no *lulav*, when he enters his house he can take it at his table¹⁰⁴. If he did not take it in the morning he may take it in the afternoon since the entire day is qualified for the *lulav*. footnotes: ⁹⁷ One ties myrtle and willow branches to the palm branch only with palm leaves, myrtle or willow branches, in order not to add an unauthorized kind to the 4 authorized ones. ⁹⁸ In his opinion the tying of myrtle and willow branches to the palm branch is common usage, not biblical commandment, and the string never is counted as another kind. ⁹⁹ Arabic גִמָאנ “jewels”. ¹⁰⁰ In the synagogue the main service involving the lulav ¹⁰¹ Ps. ¹⁰² Ps. ¹⁰² Ps. ¹⁰⁴ And make the benediction (Note 67). ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:8:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:8:2) **הלכה:** הָא בְהוֹדוּ לֹא. לְהוֹצִיא. אַף בְּאָנָּא יי׳ הַצְּלִיחָה נָּא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Therefore not at *thank*¹⁰³ at the beginning and the end of *Ps.* 118, which is accepted by all traditions and was never in doubt? The answer is that he only excludes action following the House of Shammai.? To exclude also at *please, Eternal, please give success*. footnotes: ¹⁰³ Does R. Aqiba imply that Rabban Gamliel and R. Joshua did not move their lulav ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:8:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:8:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:8:3) רַב חִיָיה בַּר אַשִּׁי בְשֵׁם רַב. זֶה שֶׁהוּא מַשְׁכִּים לָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ נוֹטֵל לוּלָב וּמְנַעְנֵעַ. שׁוֹפָר וְתוֹקֵעַ. לִכְשֶׁתַּגִּיעַ עוֹנַת קִרְיַת שְׁמַע הֲרֵי זֶה קוֹרֵא אֶת שְׁמַע וּמִתְפַּלֵּל. תַּנֵּי. צָרִיךְ לְנַעְנֵעַ שְׁלֹשָׁה פְעָמִים. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בָעֵי. הָכֵין חַד וְהָכֵין חַד אוֹ הָכֵין וְהָכֵין חַד. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. צָרִיךְ לְכַסְכֵּס שְׁלֹשָׁה פְּעָמִים בֵּין כָּל דָּבָר וְדָבָר. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בָעֵי. הָכֵין חַד וְהָכֵין חַד אוֹ הָכֵין וְהָכֵין חַד. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: If one rises early to go on a trip, he takes a *lulav* and moves it, or the *shofar* and blows it¹⁰⁵30a.. When the time arrives to read the *shema`*¹⁰⁶, he reads and prays. It was stated, he was to move three times. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, so one and so one, or so and so one one¹⁰⁷ is to move it away and return it near one’s body. The question is whether this counts as one or as two motions.? There, we have stated¹⁰⁸9:7. In a test of a stain whether it is from blood or not one has to move each chemical three times over the stain. The same question arises, are forth and back counted as two or one motions? Babli *Niddah*63a; also *Menaḥot*76a, *Bava qamma*119b, in the name of R. Ze`ira’s student R. Jeremiah.: “He has to rub each kind three times.” Rebbi Ze`ira asked, so one and so one, or so and so one? footnotes: ¹⁰⁵ Babli Berakhot ¹⁰⁶ At dawn. ¹⁰⁷ The movement of the lulav ¹⁰⁸ Mishnah Niddah ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:9:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:9:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:9:1) **משנה:** מִי שֶׁהָיָה עֶבֶד אוֹ אִשָּׁה אוֹ קָטָן מַקְרִין אוֹתוֹ עוֹנֶה אַחֲרֵיהֶן מַה שֶּׁהֵן אוֹמְרִין וּתְהִי לוֹ מְאֵירָה. אִם הָיָה גָדוֹל מַקְרֶא אוֹתוֹ עוֹנֶה אַחֲרָיו הַלְלוּיָהּ: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** A person to whom a slave, or a woman, or a minor, read for him, repeats after them what they say, and it should be a curse for him. If a male adult reads for him, he answers *halleluja* after him¹⁰⁹ by heart, must have the psalms recited to him to make the movements prescribed in Mishnah 8. If a person who is not obligated to recite the Hallel and to move the *lulav*(a slave, woman, or minor) recites for him, he does not fulfill his duty by listening to them; he must repeat word for word. He is cursed for being an adult illiterate. If an obligated person reads for him, he is not different from people listening to the reader in the synagogue and answers *halleluja*123 times (cf. *Šabbat* Chapter 16, Note 59).. footnotes: ¹⁰⁹ An illiterate who does not know the Hallel ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:9:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:9:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:9:2) **הלכה:** תַּנֵּי. אֲבָל אָמְרוּ. אִשָּׁה מְבָרֶכֶת לְבַעֲלָהּ וְעֶבֶד לְרַבּוֹ וְקָטָן לְאָבִיו. נִיחָא אִשָּׁה מְבָרֶכֶת לְבַעֲלָהּ. עֶבֶד לְרַבּוֹ. קָטָן לְאָבִיו. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶן נְהוֹרַיי. כָּל שֶׁאָמְרוּ בְקָטָן כְּדֵי לְחַנְּכוֹ. תִּיפְתָּר. בְּעוֹנֶה אַחֲרֵיהֶן אָמֵן. כַּהִיא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. מִי שֶׁהָיָה עֶבֶד אוֹ אִשָּׁה אוֹ קָטָן מַקְרִין אוֹתוֹ וְעוֹנֶה אַחֲרֵיהֶן מַה שֶּׁהֵן אוֹמְרִין וּתְהֵא לוֹ מְאֵירָה. [וְעוֹד אָמְרוּ.] תָּבוֹא מְאֵירָה לְבֶן עֶשְׂרִים שֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לְבֶן עֶשֶׂר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** ¹¹⁰3:3, Notes 153–157, **ב**. It also is copied in *Roš Haššanah*3:10, **ר**. It is stated: ¹¹¹20b; Tosephta *Berakhot*5:11.“In truth, they said a woman may say Grace for her husband, a slave for his master, and a minor for his father. One understands a woman for her husband, a slave for his master¹¹². A minor for his father? Did not Rebbi Aḥa say in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Nahora: All they said about a minor is for the latter's education¹¹³? Explain it that he recites after him, as we stated there¹¹⁴ 118:21–29 are customarily recited twice; either everybody recites them twice or the reader sings them first and the congregation repeats after him; cf. the author’s *The Scholar’s Haggadah*, p.368. In the Yemenite rite, also the starting clauses of *Pss*. 114, 116, 117, 118 are repeated by the congregation.: “A person to whom a slave, or a woman, or a minor, read for him, repeats after them what they say, and it should be a curse for him.” [Also they said,] there should be a curse on the man of twenty years who needs the child of ten. footnotes: ¹¹⁰ This Halakhah is copied from Berakhot ¹¹¹ Babli 38a, Berakhot ¹¹² Since they are obligated to say Grace after a meal. The Yerushalmi has no problem with women or slaves but for the Babli the question remains whether women may in fact recite Grace for males who have an obligation from the Torah, i. e., who actually ate their fill. ¹¹³ The minor must be educated; there is an obligation on the father to teach him all religious obligations but the minor himself is not obligated and therefore cannot perform any religious duty for others. ¹¹⁴ Verses Ps. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:10:1) **משנה:** מָקוֹם שֶׁנָּהֲגוּ לִכְפּוֹל יִכְפּוֹל לִפְשׁוֹט יִפְשׁוֹט לְבָרֵךְ אַחֲרָיו יְבָרֵךְ. הַכֹּל כְּמִנְהַג הַמְּדִינָה. הַלּוֹקֵחַ לוּלָב מֵחֲבֵרוֹ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶתְרוֹג בְּמַתָּנָה לְפִי שֶׁאֵין רַשַּׁאי לִיקְחוֹ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** At a place where there is the custom to repeat, one repeats¹¹⁴ 118:21–29 are customarily recited twice; either everybody recites them twice or the reader sings them first and the congregation repeats after him; cf. the author’s *The Scholar’s Haggadah*, p.368. In the Yemenite rite, also the starting clauses of *Pss*. 114, 116, 117, 118 are repeated by the congregation., to recite a blessing afterwards, one recites a blessing afterwards¹¹⁵113–118.; 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 year¹¹⁶ may not be sold separately; one sells the 4 kinds together and declares that payment is taken only for the three inedible kinds.. footnotes: ¹¹⁴ Verses Ps. ¹¹⁵ At the conclusion of the recitation of Pss. ¹¹⁶ Edible fruits of the Land in the Sabbatical year are not the private property of the owner of the land; they cannot be objects of trade. But the branches of palm, myrtle, and willow are not edible and therefore can be objects of trade. In the Sabbatical year the etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:10:2) **הלכה:** רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל. חַד אָמַר הַלְּלוּ יָ׳הּ. וְחוֹרָנָה אָמַר הַלֵּלוּיָהּ. מָאן דְּאָמַר הַלְלוּ יָ׳הּ. נֶחֱלַק וְאֵינוֹ נִמְחָק. מָאן דְּאָמַר הַלֵּלוּיָהּ. נִמְחָק וְאֵינוֹ נֶחֱלַק. וְלָא יָדְעִין מָאן אֲמַר דָא וּמָאן אֲמַר דָא. מִן מַה דַאֲמַר רַב. שְׁמָעִית מִן חָבִיבִי. אִם יִתֵּן לִי אָדָם סֵפֶר תִּילִים שֶׁלְרִבִּי מֵאִיר מוֹחֵק אֲנִי אֶת כָּל הַלְלוּיָהּ שֶׁבּוֹ. שֶׁלֹּא נִתְכַּוֵון לְקַדְּשָׁן. הֲוִי דוּ אָמַר הַלֵּלוּיָהּ. מִילֵּיהוֹן דְּרַבָּנִן פְלִיגִן. דְּאָמַר רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. בַּעֲשָׂרָה לְשׁוֹנוֹת שֶׁלְשֶׁבַח נֶאֲמַר סֵפֶר תִּילִים. בְּאִישׁוּר בְּנִיצּוּחַ בְּנִיגוּן בְּשִׁיר בְּמִזְמוֹר בְּהַשְׂכֵּל בְּרִינָּה בְתוֹדָה בִתְפִילָּה בִבְרָכָה. הַמְאוּשָּׁר שֶׁבְּכוּלָּן הַלְלוּיָה. שֶׁהַשֵּׁם וְהַשֶּׁבַח כְּלוּלִין בּוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** ¹¹⁷1:11 (fol. 72a, מ). Cf. Babli *Pesaḥim*117a. Rav and Samuel. One said *hallelu yah*, and the other one said *hallēluja*. For him who said *hallelu yah* it is split but cannot be erased¹¹⁸. 12:4, referring to vv. 2,3.). For him who said *hallelujah* it may be erased but cannot be split¹¹⁹. We do not know who said what. Since Rav said, I heard from my uncle¹²⁰, if somebody would give me a book of Psalms written by Rebbi Meïr I could erase all *hallelujah* in it since he did not intend to sanctify them. This implies that he said *hallelujah*. The words of the rabbis disagree, as Rebbi Simon said in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, the book of Psalms was said with ten expressions of praise, with “hail”¹²¹, with “excellence”¹²², with melody, with song, with chant, with instruction,¹²³ with shout, with thanksgiving, with prayer, with blessing. The most beatific of all of them is *hallelujah* since both the Name and praise are contained in it¹²⁴ cannot be erased since it contains the Name.. footnotes: ¹¹⁷ The source of the text for this and the next paragraphs is Megillah ¹¹⁸ Since the name of God may not be erased (Deut ¹¹⁹ Biblical spelling does not admit splitting of words. ¹²⁰ R. Ḥiyya the elder. ¹²¹ Psalms starting with אֲשְׁרֵי. ¹²² Psalms starting with לַמְנַצֵּחַ. ¹²³ Psalms starting with מַשְׂכִּיל. ¹²⁴ Therefore hallelujah ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:10:3) רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בָעֵי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. מַה נַעֲנֵי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ [רִבִּי אַ]בָּא כִּיפָה (קוֹמָךְ) [קוֹמִי]. רִבִּי יוֹנָה עֲנִי הָכֵין וְהָכֵין. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר לָא עֲנִי הָכֵין וְהָכֵין. רַב בְּשֵׁם רַב אַבָּא בַּר חָנָה בְשֵׁם רַב. וְהוּא שֶׁעָנָה רָאשֵׁי פְרָקִים. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בָעֵי. וְהַיי לֵין אִינּוּן רָאשֵׁי פְרָקִים. הַלְלוּיָהּ הַלְלוּ עַבְדֵי י׳י הַלְלוּ אֶת שֵׁם י׳י. בְּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא. מְנַיִין אִם שָׁמַע וְלֹא עָנָה יָצָא. אַמַר לוֹן. מִן מַה דַאֲנָן חַמְיָין רַבָּנִין רַבְרְבַיָיא קַיימִין בְּצִיבּוּרָא וְאִילֵּין אָמְרִין בָּרוּךְ הַבָּא. וְאִילֵּין אָמְרִין. בְּשֵׁם י׳י. וְאֵילוּ וָאֵילּוּ יוֹצְאִין יְדֵי חוֹבָתָן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Ze`ira asked before Rebbi Abbahu: He told him, (as it comes in the mouth before you) [Rebbi Abba is on top before you.]¹²⁵, is the only one which makes sense. One may answer either *hallelu yah* or *hallelujah*. Rebbi Jonah answered both ways. Rebbi Eliezer¹²⁶ read: Eleazar. did not answer any way¹²⁷“As it was stated: if he heard but did not answer he fulfilled his obligation, if he answered but did not hear he did not fulfill his obligation.”. Rav in the name of Rav Abba bar Ḥana ¹²⁸8:9, Notes 177–182,**ב**. Babli 38b. in the name of Rav: Only if he answered at the start of the Chapters. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, what are the starts of Chapters? *Hallelujah, praise, servants of the Eternal, praise the Name of the Eternal*¹²⁹ 113:1. In Yemenite prayer books the instructions for the recitation are, with the responses added in brackets: *Hallelujah [hallelujah], praise, servants of the Eternal, [hallelujah], praise the Name of the Eternal [hallelujah]*. Babli 38b.. They asked before Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: From where that he who heard but did not answer has fulfilled his obligation? He told them, since we are seeing great rabbis standing among the public when these say *praised be he who* comes and the others say *in the name of the Eternal*¹³⁰ 118:26. Approved in the Babli 38b. Yerushalmi *Berakhot*8:9 Note 178., and both have fulfilled their obligation. footnotes: ¹²⁵ The scribe’s text, supported by the text in Megillah ¹²⁶ With the text in Megillah ¹²⁷ Here is a sentence missing, which is found in the origin in Megillah: ¹²⁸ Again a clause missing from the parallel sources: {Some say, Rav Abba bar Ḥama} in the name of Rav. Both statements are possible; the authors were cousins. Here starts a parallel in Berakhot ¹²⁹ Ps. ¹³⁰ Ps. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:10:4) תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. עוֹנֶה הוּא אָדָם אָמֵן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל. אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר. בָּרוּךְ שֶׁאָכַלְנוּ. אִם לֹא אָכַל. תַּנֵּי. אֵין עוֹנִין אָמֵן יְתוֹמָה וְלֹא אָמֵן קְטוּפָה. אֵי זוֹ הִיא אָמֵן יְתוֹמָה. אָמַר רִבִּי הוּנָא. הָהֵן דְּחַיָיב לְמִבְרְכָה וְהוּא עֲנִי וְלָא יְדַע מָהוּ. תַּנֵּי. גּוֹי שֶׁבֵּירַךְ אֶת הַשֵּׁם עוֹנִין אַחֲרָיו אָמֵן. בַּשֵּׁם אֵין עוֹנִין אַחֲרָיו אָמֵן. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. אִם בֵּירַכְךָ גוֹי עֲנֵה אַחֲרָיו אָמֵן. דִּכְתִיב בָּרוּךְ תִּהְיֶה מִכָּל הָעַמִּים. גּוֹי אֶחָד פָּגַע בְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל וּבֵירְכוֹ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. כְּבָר מִילָּתָךְ אֲמִירָה. אַחֵר פָּגַע בּוֹ וְקִילְלוֹ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. כְּבָר מִילָּתָךְ אֲמִירָה. אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ תַּלְמִידוֹי. רִבִּי. הֵיךְ מַה דְאָמְרָת לְדֵין אָמְרָת לְדֵין. אֲמַר לוֹן. וְלָא כֵן כְּתִיב. אוֹרֲרֶיךָ אָרוּר וּמְבָרֲכֶיךָ בָּרוּךְ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** ¹³¹8:9. Rebbi Hoshaya stated: One answers Amen even if he did not eat¹³²7:2., but he may not say: “Let us praise Him, of Whose bounty we ate,” except if he did eat. It is stated¹³³3:27, Babli *Berakhot* 47a.: “One answers neither an orphan Amen, nor a plucked¹³⁴ Amen. What is an orphan Amen? Rebbi Huna said, that is one who is obligated to recite a blessing, he answers Amen, and is not conscious for what he answered Amen. It is stated: One answers Amen after a Gentile who recited a benediction for the Eternal, but if he recited a benediction with the Name one does not answer¹³⁵. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, if a Gentile blesses you, answer after him Amen since it is written¹³⁶. 7:14. *You shall be blessed by all peoples*. A Gentile met Rebbi Ismael and blessed him. He answered: The word about you has already been said. He met a second one who cursed him; he answered: The word about you has already been said. His students said to him: Rebbi, did you say to the one what you said to the other? He said to them, so it is written¹³⁷. 27:29. *Those who curse you are cursed, but those who bless you are blessed*. footnotes: ¹³¹ It seems that the original of this paragraph is in Berakhot ¹³² A person hearing other people reciting Grace has to say Amen; obviously he cannot participate in reciting part of the text; cf. Berakhot ¹³³ Tosephta Megillah ¹³⁴ Amen not completely pronounced.The other sources have here an addition: “Ben Azai said, if one answered an orphan Amen, may his children be orphans; hurried, may the end of his days be hurried; plucked, may his soul be plucked off. For a long Amen, they lengthen his days and years in a good way.” ¹³⁵ Since the Gentile is not subject to our rules, if he praises the Eternal, one answers after him Amen. But if he uses a Jewish formula one may not answer after him Amen unless one has ascertained that he conformed with our rules (S. Liebermann.) ¹³⁶ Deut ¹³⁷ Gen ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:10:5) רִבִּי הָיָה כוֹפֵל בָּהּ דְּבָרִים. רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן פְּרָטָא פּוֹשֵׁט בָּהּ דְּבָרִים. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi used to repeat things in it; Rebbi Eleazar ben Proteus recited simply in it¹³⁸. footnotes: ¹³⁸ In Mishnaic times the order of recital of Hallel was not uniform; uniformity was not intended. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:6 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:10:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:10:6) אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. דְּזִקְנֵי הַגָּלִיל הִיא. דְּזִקְנֵי הַגָּלִיל אוֹמְרִים. אָסוּר לִמְסוֹר לְמִי שֶׁהוּא חָשׁוּד עַל הַשְּׁבִיעִית מָזוֹן שְׁתֵּי סְעוּדוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָיה. תִּיפְתָּר. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל. כְּשֶׁהְיוּ אֶתְרוֹגִים נִמְכָּרִין בְּיוֹקֶר. כְּהָדָא. תְּרוֹנְגַּיָיא הֲווֹן מְצַפְצְפִין תַּמָּן וַהֲוָה רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יַעֲקֹב יְהַב אֶתְרוֹגָא מַתָּנָה לִבְרֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. לִכְשֶׁתִּזְכֶּה בוֹ וּבְמִצְוָתוֹ הַחֲזִירֵהוּ לִי. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 Sabbatical¹³⁹ from a person trading in Sabbatical produce. The Elders of Galilee do not permit to deal with such a person except for the absolute necessities of sustenance.. Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it as opinion of everybody, in case that *etrogim* are sold at an elevated price¹⁴⁰ in the Sabbatical year. The only way not to “put a stone before a blind man”, in this case to prevent the non-observant from trading in *etrogim*, is to eliminate all considerations of money from the transfer of possession of the *etrog*.. ¹⁴¹2:3, Note 68. As the following: The cedrats¹⁴², Farsi תרנגִ *toranj*, used for all citrus fruits. 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 me¹⁴³ must be the personal property of the user may be satisfied even by a gift given on condition that it be returned; therefore certainly a permanent gift as described in the Mishnah.. footnotes: ¹³⁹ This refers to the last part of the Mishnah, where one has to be careful in a Sabbatical year not to buy the edible etrog ¹⁴⁰ In this case there are great incentives to trade in etrogim ¹⁴¹ Gittin ¹⁴² Persian turung ¹⁴³ This proves that the requirement that the etrog ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:11:1) **משנה:** בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה הַלּוּלָב נִיטָּל בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ שִׁבְעָה וּבַמְּדִינָה יוֹם אֶחָד. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי שֶׁיְּהֵא לוּלָב נִיטָּל בַּמְּדִינָה שִׁבְעָה זֵכֶר לַמִּקְדָשׁ. וְשֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הֶנֶף כּוּלּוֹ אָסוּר: יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חַג שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בַּשַּׁבָּת כָּל הָעָם מוֹלִיכִין אֶת לוּלְבֵיהֶן לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת לַמָּחֳרָת מַשְׁכִּימִין וּבָאִין כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מַכִּיר אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וְנוֹטֵל. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמְרוּ אֵין אָדָם יוֹצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בְּלוּלָבוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵרוֹ בְּיוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חַג. וּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הֶחָג אָדָם יוֹצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בְּלוּלָבוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ: רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חַג שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בַּשַּׁבָּת שָׁכַח וְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַלּוּלָב לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים פָּטוּר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוֹצִיאוֹ בִרְשׁוּת: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** Originally the *lulav* was taken in the Temple for seven {days} and in the country¹⁴⁴ one day. After the destruction of the Temple, Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai instituted that the *lulav* be taken in the country for seven {days} as remembrance of the Temple, and that the day of waving be entirely forbidden¹⁴⁵ sacrifice of newly cut barley, by pharisaic tradition on the 16 of Nisan; *Lev.* 23:14. In the Temple the sacrifice was brought early in the morning; therefore new grain was permitted on that day. Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai instituted that new grain should not be used until it automatically became permitted on the 17.. If the first day of Tabernacles is a Sabbath, everybody brings their *lulav* to the synagogue¹⁵¹ may not be carried in the public domain on the Sabbath. As Mishnah 4:3 shows, this refers to any place outside the Temple Mount, where the obligation to take the *lulav* is biblical only on the first day.. The next day they come in the morning and everybody recognizes his own and takes it, since they said that nobody can fulfill his obligation with another person’s *lulav* on the first day of Tabernacles; but on the other days of the holiday a person can fulfill his obligation with another person’s *lulav*¹⁵², implying it need not be yours on any other day.. Rebbi Yose says, if somebody forgot and took the *lulav* into the public domain on the first day of Tabernacles which is a Sabbath he is not liable¹⁶⁰ since he took it out with permission¹⁶¹ which would be *muqṣeh* if the Sabbath were on another day of the holiday week.. footnotes: ¹⁴⁴ Anywhere in the world outside of the Temple Mount. ¹⁴⁵ New flour is permitted for consumption by the `omer ¹⁵¹ On Friday afternoon since the lulav ¹⁵² Since the verse says: You shall take for yourselves on the First Day ¹⁶⁰ He is not liable for a purification sacrifice even though bringing an object from the private into the public domain is a Sabbath violation (Mishnah Šabbat 1:1). ¹⁶¹ Not that he has permission to violate the Sabbath, but to take up the lulav ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:11:2) **הלכה:** כְּתִיב וּשְׂמַחְתֶּם לִפְנֵי יְי אֱלֹהֵיכֶם שִׁבְעַת יָמִים. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. בְּשִׂמְחַת לוּלָב הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. בְּשִׂמְחַת שְׁלָמִים הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. מָאן דְּאָמַר. בְּשִׂמְחַת שְׁלָמִים הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. בַּיּוֹם הָרִאשׁוֹן דְּבַר תּוֹרָה וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. וְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי מַתְקִין עַל דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. מָאן דְּאָמַר. בְּשִׂמְחַת לוּלָב הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר. בַּיּוֹם הָרִאשׁוֹן דְּבַר תּוֹרָה וּשְׁאָר כָּל הַיָּמִים מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי מַתְקִין עַל דִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְיֵשׁ הַתְקָנָה אַַחַר הַתְקָנָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** It is written¹⁴⁶ 23:40, the verse about the *lulav* and the 4 kinds.: *and you shall enjoy before the Eternal, your God, for seven days*. There are Tannaim who state, the verse speaks of the enjoyment of well-being sacrifices¹⁴⁷. 16:11,15) is read as referring to the joyous family meals connected with the holiday pilgrimage to the Temple. This interpretation would read the verse as duplicate of the same exhortation in *Deut*. 16:15.. There are Tannaim who state, the verse speaks of the enjoyment of the *lulav*¹⁴⁸ 23:40 separate from *Deut*. 16:15, commanding a *lulav* festivity in the Temple, “*before the Eternal*”, in addition to the requirement of taking the *lulav* on the first day, independent of location. Babli 43a.. For him who is saying, the verse speaks of the enjoyment of well-being sacrifices, the first day is from a word of the Torah and the other days are from a word of the Torah, and Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai instituted on basis of a word from the Torah¹⁴⁹”. Since in this case there is a biblical requirement to take the *lulav* for seven days in the Temple, taking the *lulav* for seven days has biblical roots, and the statement about Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai makes sense.. For him who is saying, the verse speaks of the enjoyment of *lulav*, the first day is from a word of the Torah and the other days are from their words, and Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai instituted on basis of their words. But is there institution after institution¹⁵⁰ anywhere, Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai would have extended a purely customary observation from the Temple to the outside world. Since rabbinic extensions of Biblical prescriptions are legitimate only as “fences around the law”, extending any of these is unnecessary. Therefore Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai must have held that *Lev.* 23:40 refers to *lulav*(Note 149). Babli *Šabbat*11a.? footnotes: ¹⁴⁶ Lev. ¹⁴⁷ The general exhortation to enjoy the holidays (Deut ¹⁴⁸ This interpretation reads Lev. ¹⁴⁹ It is obvious that instead of “well-being sacrifices” one has to read “lulav ¹⁵⁰ Here one has to read “well-being sacrifices”. If the verse does not force a 7-day observation of lulav ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:11:3) חֲבֵרַיָיא בְעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹנָה. הֵיךְ מַה דְאַתְּ אֲמַר תַּמָּן. וְהִקְרַבְתֶּם אִשֶּׁה לַיי שִׁבְעַת יָמִים. אֵין שִׁבְעָה בְלֹא שַׁבָּת. וְדִכְוָותָהּ וּשְׂמַחְתֶּם לִפְנֵי יְי אֱלֹהֵיכֶם שִׁבְעַת יָמִים. אֵין שִׁבְעָה בְלֹא שַׁבָּת. אֲמַר לוֹן. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא. דִּכְתִיב וּלְקַחְתֶּם לָכֶם בַּיּוֹם הָרִאשׁוֹן. חָלַק הָרִאשׁוֹן מֵהֶן. מֵעַתָּה בַמִּקְדָּשׁ יִדָּחֶה. בִּגְבוּלִין לֹא יִדָּחֶה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. אִילּוּ הֲוָה כְתִיב וּלְקַחְתֶּם לִפְנֵי יְי אֱלֹהֵיכֶם הָיִיתִי אוֹמֵר. כָּאן מִיעֵט וּבְמָקוֹם אַחֵר רִיבָה. אֶלָא וּלְקַחְתֶּם לָכֶם. מִכָּל מָקוֹם. וּשְׂמַחְתֶּם לִפְנֵי יְי אֱלֹהֵיכֶם שִׁבְעַת יָמִים בִּירוּשָׁלִַם. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** The colleagues asked before Rebbi Jonah: Since you are saying there, *and you shall offer a gift to the Eternal seven days*¹⁵³ 23:8., there are no seven without a Sabbath¹⁵⁴. 28–29, it is written in v. 28:24 that on the Holiday of unleavened bread there have to be sacrifices for seven days. Therefore the mention of the seven days of sacrifices in *Lev.* 23:8, in the holiday list whose emphasis is not on the sacrifices, can be read as emphasizing that these sacrifices have to be offered also on the Sabbath, the Sabbath prohibition being not applicable in this regard., why not similarly *and you shall enjoy before the Eternal, your God, for seven days*, there are no seven without a Sabbath¹⁵⁵ on a Sabbath which is the first day of the holiday, since it was established in the preceding paragraph that the second part of *Lev.* 23:40 also refers to *lulav*.? He answered them, there is a difference, for it is written *You shall take for yourselves on the First Day*, He separated the first from them¹⁵⁶ 23:40 must refer to *lulav*.. Then it should push aside in the Temple, it should not push aside in the country¹⁵⁷23:8 and *Num*. 28:24 refer to the Temple service, the argument should be transferable to *Lev.* 23:40.. Rebbi Jonah said, if it had said, “you shall take before the Eternal, your God,” I would have said, here he excluded and at another place included¹⁵⁸ to the Temple.. But *you shall take for yourselves* everywhere, *and you shall enjoy before the Eternal, your God, for seven days*, in Jerusalem¹⁵⁹. 14:26); by the previous argument this cannot apply to lifting the Sabbath rules on the first day, and, therefore, not to any other day.. footnotes: ¹⁵³ Lev. ¹⁵⁴ In the detailed list of the holiday sacrifices, Num ¹⁵⁵ By the argument of the preceding note, it should follow that the Sabbath prohibitions are nonexistent for taking the lulav ¹⁵⁶ Since there is no direct evidence that the second part of Lev. ¹⁵⁷ Since both Lev. ¹⁵⁸ It would be reasonable to restrict the rules of lulav ¹⁵⁹ Since the first part of 23:40 is addressed to everybody everywhere, it excludes differentiating between Temple and outside for the rules of the first day. Since the rules “before the Eternal” refer either to the Temple, as in matters of sacrifices, or to the place of the Temple, as in the rules of Second Tithe (Deut ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:11:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:11:4) חֲבֵרַיָיא אָמְרִין. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. שֶׁמִּצְוַת עֲשֵׂה דוֹחָה לְמִצְוָה בְלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. אֲמַר לוֹן רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. לָא מִן הָדָא אֶלָּא מִן הָדָא דַאֲמַר רִבִּי אִילָא וּתְנַיי תַמָּן. כָּךְ הָיָה הַמִּנְהַג בִּירוּשָׁלִַם. אָדָם הוֹלֵךְ לְבֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת וְלוּלָבוֹ בְיָדוֹ. קוֹרֵא אֶת שְׁמַע וּמִתְפַּלֵּל וְלוּלָבוֹ בְיָדוֹ. נִכְנַס לְבַקֵּר אֶת הַחוֹלֶה וְלוּלָבוֹ בְיָדוֹ. לָשֵׂאת אֶת כַּפָּיו וְלִקְרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה נוֹתְנוֹ לַחֲבֵירוֹ. הִנִּיחוֹ בָאָרֶץ אָסוּר לְטַלְטְלוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּן. זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָיה. תַּנֵּי. מְטַלְטְלִין עֲצֵי בְשָׂמִים לְהָרִיחַ בָּהֶן לְחוֹלֶה בַשַּׁבָּת. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיְסָרִין אָמְרִין. עֲרָבָה מוּתָּר לְהָנִיף בָּהּ לְחוֹלֶה בַשַּׁבָּת. אַף בְּסַכִּין שֶׁלְמִילָה כֵן. אַף בְּמַצָּה כֵן. מִן מַה דְאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אֲפִילוּ פִירֵשׁ חוֹזֵר אֲפִילוּ עַל הַצִּיצִין שֶׁאֵינָן מְעַכְּבִין אֶת הַמִּילָה. הָדָא אָמְרָה. אֲף בְּסַכִּין שֶׁלְמִילָה כֵּן. אֲף בְּמַצָּה כֵן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** The colleagues say, the words of Rebbi Yose¹⁶⁶ are that a positive commandment pushes aside a prohibition¹⁶⁷ has precedence over the prohibition of work on the Sabbath.. Rebbi Yose¹⁶⁸ told them, it is not from this¹⁶⁹ but as Rebbi Ila said and as is stated there¹⁷⁰: “This was the usage in Jerusalem, a person goes to the synagogue with his *lulav* in his hand, goes to visit the sick with his *lulav* in his hand. he recites the *shema`* and prays with his *lulav* in his hand. To lift his hands¹⁷¹ or to read in the Torah, he hands it to another person¹⁷². If he put it down on the floor it is forbidden to move it¹⁷³, if a person takes up the *lulav* and takes it outside when he does not need it any more on that day, he is liable for a Sabbath violation also for R. Yose..” Rebbi Abun said, this implies that it is forbidden for usufruct. It was stated: One moves fragrant wood¹⁷⁴ to let a sick person smell it on the Sabbath. The rabbis of Caesarea are saying, one may wave the myrtle branch for a sick person on the Sabbath. ¹⁷⁵19, Notes 140–141; also *Pesaḥim*6:7, *Yebamot* 8:1 Notes 106–107. Does the same hold for a knife for circumcision, the same for unleavened bread? Since Rebbi Joḥanan said, the words of Rebbi Yose, even if he finished he may return for fibers which do not invalidate the circumcision; this implies the same even for a knife for circumcision, the same for unleavened bread. footnotes: ¹⁶⁶ The Tanna. ¹⁶⁷ The obligation to take the lulav ¹⁶⁸ The Amora. ¹⁶⁹ Since the Sabbath involves both a prohibition of work and an obligation of rest, the argument of the colleagues is not applicable. ¹⁷⁰ Babli 41b, Tosephta 2:10. ¹⁷¹ A Cohen to pronounce the Priestly Blessing. ¹⁷² In the Babylonian sources (Note 170): “Puts it down on the floor.” ¹⁷³ In the Tosephta: Once he has completed his obligation he is forbidden to move it. In both versions of the baraita ¹⁷⁴ Which is neither food nor implement and therefore not anything for which a general permission is given to be moved on the Sabbath. ¹⁷⁵ The text from here to the end of the paragraph is from Šabbat ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:12:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:12:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:12:1) **משנה:** מְקַבֶּלֶת אִשָּׁה מִיַּד בְּנָהּ וּמִיַּד בַּעְלָהּ וּמַחֲזֶרֶת לַמַּיִם בַּשַּׁבָּת. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר בַּשַּׁבָּת מַחֲזִירִין וּבְיוֹם טוֹב מוֹסִיפִין וּבַמּוֹעֵד מַחֲלִיפִין. כָּל קָטָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ דַּעַת לְנַעְנֵעַ חַיָיב בַּלּוּלָב: **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** A woman may receive¹⁶² when the men have performed the prescribed motions, since if it is not *muqṣeh* for one person it cannot be *muqṣeh* for another. from her son’s hand or her husband’s hand and return it to the water on the Sabbath. Rebbi Jehudah says, on the Sabbath one returns, on the holiday one adds, on the intermediate days one exchanges¹⁶³ and twigs fresh.. A minor who knows how to move is obligated¹⁶⁴ for the *lulav*. footnotes: ¹⁶² The lulav ¹⁶³ The water which keeps lulav ¹⁶⁴ The obligation is not the minor’s but his father’s; cf. Note 113. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:12:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Sukkah 3:12:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Sukkah/r/3:12:2) **הלכה:** יוֹדֵעַ לְנַעְנֵעַ חַיָיב בְּלוּלָב. יוֹדֵעַ לְהִתְעַטֵּף חַיָיב בַּצִּיצִית. יוֹדֵעַ לְדַבֵּר אָבִיו מְלַמְּדוֹ לְשׁוֹן תּוֹרָה. יוֹדֵעַ לִשְׁמוֹר אֶת יָדָיו אוֹכְלִין עַל יָדָיו תְּרוּמָה. אֶת גּוּפוֹ אוֹכְלִין עַל גּוּפוֹ טָהֳרוֹת. אֲבָל אֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּיבָה וְאֵינוֹ נוֹשֵׂא אֶת כַּפָּיו וְאֵינוֹ עוֹמֵד עַל הַדּוּכָן עַד שֶׁיִּתְמָלֵא זְקָנוֹ. רִבִּי אוֹמֵר. וְכוּלְּהֵם מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וּמַעֲלָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַיַּעֲמִידוּ אֶת הַלְוִיִּם מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה לְנַצֵּחַ עַל מְלֶאכֶת בֵּית יְי. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** If he knows how to move¹⁰⁰ is the recitation of *Hallel*, *Pss*. 113–118, where the *lulav* is moved at the recitation or repetition of designated verses. he is obligated for *lulav*. If he knows how to dress, he is obligated for *ṣiṣit*¹⁷⁶2b; Tosephta *Ḥagigah*1:2.. If he knows how to talk, his father teaches him the language of the Torah¹⁷⁷. If he knows how to keep his hands clean, one eats heave on his hands¹⁷⁸. If he knows how to keep his body clean, one eats food in purity on his body¹⁷⁹. But he does not go before the Ark¹⁸⁰, nor lift his hands¹⁷¹, nor stands on the podium¹⁸¹, before he grows a beard. Rebbi says, all of them at the age of twenty years¹⁸², as it is said¹⁸³3:8. The age limit was established for the second Temple, therefore it is valid for the future. The pentateuchal age limit for Levites was 25 years; *Num*. 8:24.: *They appointed the Levites, twenty years or older, to direct the work of the Eternal’s House*. footnotes: ¹⁰⁰ In the synagogue the main service involving the lulav ¹⁷⁶ To have the tassels at the four corners of his toga. Babli 42a, Arakhin ¹⁷⁷ Biblical Hebrew. ¹⁷⁸ If he washes his hands and then touched heave, the latter is not impaired by his touch and may be eaten by pure Cohanim. ¹⁷⁹ If he knows what brings impurity and states that he is pure, the touch of his body does not contaminate food prepared in purity. ¹⁸⁰ As an appointed reader to lead the congregation in prayer. ¹⁷¹ A Cohen to pronounce the Priestly Blessing. ¹⁸¹ A Levite singing in the Temple. ¹⁸² Irrespective of whether he grew a beard or not. ¹⁸³ Ezra