Sukkah, Daf Lamed Bet, Part 6
Introduction
Today’s section moves on to the next mishnah, one concerning the hadas.
משנה. הדס הגזול והיבש – פסול. של אשרה ושל עיר הנדחת – פסול. נקטם ראשו, נפרצו עליו, או שהיו ענביו מרובות מעליו – פסול. ואם מיעטן – כשר. ואין ממעטין ביום טוב.
A stolen or withered hadas is invalid.
One [that came from] an asherah or a condemned city is invalid.
If its tip was broken off, or its leaves were detached, or its berries were more numerous than its leaves, it is invalid.
But if he diminished them it is valid.
But one may not diminish them on the festival.
The first two lines are the same as the previous mishnah concerning a lulav. The remainder of the mishnah is specific to the physical qualities of the hadas. The Talmud will discuss these as we proceed over the next few pages.
גמרא. תנו רבנן: +ויקרא כג+ ענף עץ עבת – שענפיו חופין את עצו. ואי זה הוא – הוי אומר זה הדס.
ואימא זיתא!
בעינן עבת וליכא.
ואימא דולבא!
בעינן ענפיו חופין את עצו וליכא.
ואימא הירדוף!
אמר אביי: +משלי ג+ דרכיה דרכי נעם וליכא.
רבא אמר מהכא: +זכריה ח+ האמת והשלום אהבו.
Gemara. Our Rabbis taught, "Branches of a thick tree" [means] [the kind of tree] whose branches completely cover its trunk. Now what [tree] is this? You must say that it is the myrtle (hadas).
But perhaps it is the olive?
It must be wreathed, but [the olive] is not.
But perhaps it is the plane tree?
The branches must cover its trunk, which is not the case [with the plane tree].
But perhaps it is the oleander? Abaye said, "Its ways are the ways of pleasantness" and [with the oleander] this is not the case.
Raba said [the same] from the following verse, "Therefore love truth and peace."
As the Talmud did with regard to the various parts of the lulav, it asks how we know that the Torah refers to the myrtle. After all Leviticus 23:40 only states "the branches of a thick tree." How do we know that the tree is a myrtle?
The word for "thick" can also mean "interwoven." So an olive branch is ruled out because its leaves are not "wreathed" or "interwoven."
The plane tree is ruled out because the branches must cover the trunk in order to be a "thick" tree.
The oleander is ruled out because its branches are thorny. This is the same reason that the spiky parts of the palm cannot be used. The Torah’s mitzvoth are pleasant and peaceful. Using a thorny branch to perform a mitzvah would not be pleasant.
תנו רבנן: קלוע כמין קליעה ודומה לשלשלת – זהו הדס. רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר: ענף עץ עבת – עץ שטעם עצו ופריו שוה, הוי אומר זה הדס.
Our Rabbis taught: Plaited like a plait and similar to a chain that is the myrtle. R. Eliezer b. Yaakov said "The branches of a thick tree" [means] a tree the taste of whose wood and whose fruit is similar: Say, then, it is the myrtle.
The first section of this baraita is an interpretation of the word "avot" from Leviticus 23:40. "Avot" means plaited and like a chain these are the leaves of the myrtle (hadas).
R. Eliezer b. Yaakov says that the leaf (anaf) and the wood (etz) must taste the same and this, in his opinion, is true of the hadas.
תנא: עץ עבות – כשר, ושאינו עבות – פסול.
היכי דמי עבות? אמר רב יהודה: והוא דקיימי תלתא תלתא טרפי בקינא.
רב כהנא אמר: אפילו תרי וחד.
רב אחא בריה דרבא מהדר אתרי וחד, הואיל ונפיק מפומיה דרב כהנא.
אמר ליה מר בר אמימר לרב אשי: אבא, לההוא הדס שוטה קרי ליה.
A Tanna taught: A tree which is "avot" is valid, and which is not "avot" is not valid.
What constitutes "avot"? Rav Judah said: When three leaves grow out of one spot.
R. Kahana said: Even two and then one.
R. Aha the son of Raba tried to find one [whose leaves grew] two and then one, since that was what R. Kahana said.
Mar b. Amemar said to R. Ashi: "My father used to call that a wayward hadas."
A baraita says that the hadas must be "avot" the word used to describe the hadas in the Torah.
R. Judah says that "avot" means that three leaves must all grow from the same spot. Today, the best hadasim have this quality. But R. Kahana says that a hadas where two leaves grow together and then one is separate is either also okay, or perhaps even better. R. Aha, a later amora, seeks out such a hadas because he holds R. Kahana in such esteem.
The section ends though, with Mar b. Amemar telling R. Ashi that a hadas that doesn’t have three leaves coming out of one spot is a wayward hadas. It seems that such a hadas would not be valid.
תנו רבנן: נשרו רוב עליו ונשתיירו בו מיעוט – כשר, ובלבד שתהא עבותו קיימת.
הא גופא קשיא; אמרת נשרו רוב עליו כשר, והדר תני ובלבד שתהא עבותו קיימת, כיון דנתרי להו תרי – עבות היכי משכחת לה?
אמר אביי: באסא מצראה, דקיימי שבעה שבעה בחד קינא, דכי נתרי ארבעה פשו להו תלתא.
Our Rabbis taught: If most of its leaves fell off and the lesser part remained, it is valid, provided that its plaited quality remains.
But is not this self-contradictory? You said that if the majority of its leaves fell off it is valid and then it is stated, "provided that its plaited quality remains." But since two [of the three leaves] have fallen off, how is it possible to have it "avot"?
Abaye said: It is possible with the Egyptian hadas which has seven [leaves] in each nest, and [therefore] when four fall off, there are still three left.
The baraita seems to contradict itself. How can a hadas have most of its leaves fall off and still be plaited? Usually there are three leaves per "nest" (spot on stem). So if 2/3 fall off, the plaited look will certainly be gone!
Abaye solves the problem by saying that the baraita refers to an Egyptian hadas which begins with seven leaves per nest! Even if four fall off, the hadas is still plaited by the three leaves in one spot.
אמר אביי: שמע מינה, האי אסא מצראה – כשר להושענא.
פשיטא! – מהו דתימא: הואיל ואית ליה שם לווי – לא מתכשר, קא משמע לן.
ואימא הכי נמי! – עץ עבות אמר רחמנא, מכל מקום.
Abaye said, [From this] we can deduce that the Egyptian myrtle is valid for the hoshanna.
But is not this obvious? I might have said that since it has an accompanying name, it is not valid, therefore he teaches us [that it is valid].
But perhaps it is indeed so? The Torah says, "branches of a thick tree," of any kind.
Since the above baraita must refer to the Egyptian hadas, Abaye deduces that this type of hadas is valid for use in the "hoshanna," an Aramaic word for the hadas, usually in reference to the hadas used on Sukkot. But this seems obvious on what grounds would we have disqualified this hadas? The answer is that under certain circumstances if something has an accompanying name, it doesn’t count as part of the category (see for instance Mishnah Parah 11:7). But in this case, since the Torah doesn’t specifically use the word hadas, rather calling it the "thick tree" any "thick tree" will do.
תנו רבנן: יבשו רוב עליו ונשארו בו שלשה בדי עלין לחין – כשר. ואמר רב חסדא, ובראש כל אחד ואחד.
Our Rabbis taught: If the larger part of its leaves were withered, and only three bunches of green leaves remained, it is valid.
And R. Hisda added: [Provided] that they are at the top of each [twig].
If most of the leaves have withered but only three bunches of green leaves remained, the hadas is still valid, as long as they are at the top of each twig, according to R. Hisda.