Sukkah, Daf Lamed Vav, Part 2
Introduction
Today’s brief section deals with the line from the baraita that disqualified an Ethiopia etrog.
אמר מר: אתרוג כושי פסול. והתניא: כושי – כשר, דומה לכושי פסול!
אמר אביי: כי תנן נמי מתניתין – דומה לכושי תנן.
רבא אמר: לא קשיא, הא – לן והא – להו.
The Master has said: An Ethiopian etrog is invalid.
But has it not been taught: If it is Ethiopian it is valid, if it is like an Ethiopian, it is invalid?
Abaye answered, In our Mishnah also we learned of one that is like an Ethiopian. Raba answered, There is no difficulty. The former refers to us, the latter to them.
The first baraita disqualifies an Ethiopian etrog. In contrast, the second baraita says that an Ethiopian etrog is valid; only one that is like an Ethiopian etrog is invalid. Rashi explains that an Ethiopian etrog is one that grows in Ethiopia. But an etrog that is like an Ethiopian is one that grows in Israel, but is like the Ethiopian ones. An Ethiopian etrog is valid, because that’s just the way they look there in Ethiopia. But if such an etrog grows elsewhere, it is not natural and it is invalid.
Abaye answers the difficulty by simply stating that the mishnah also refers to a case where the etrog is like an Ethiopian one. True Ethiopian etrogs are always valid.
Rava answers that the mishnah refers to a true Ethiopian etrog, which the mishnah indeed invalidates. However, it invalidates it for people living in Israel who are far from Ethiopia. But Babylonia is closer (according to Rashi) to Ethiopia, and therefore Ethiopian etrogim are valid there. But an etrog similar to an Ethiopian one is unnatural and therefore invalid.