Sukkah, Daf Lamed Vav, Part 3

 

Introduction

Today’s section deals with the baraita that was quoted above in section one of this week’s daf.

 

אתרוג הבוסר, רבי עקיבא פוסל וחכמים מכשירין. אמר רבה: רבי עקיבא ורבי שמעון אמרו דבר אחד. רבי עקיבא – הא דאמרן, רבי שמעון מאי היא דתנן רבי שמעון פוטר את האתרוגים בקוטנן. –

 

A half-ripe etrog: R. Akiva declares invalid, and the Sages declare it valid.

Rabbah said: Both R. Akiva and R. Shimon said the same thing.

R. Akiva [refers to] that which we just said.

R. Shimon to what does that refer? To that which we have taught: R. Shimon declares etrogs to be exempt [from tithes] when they are small.

 

In the baraita that was found in the beginning of the daf, R. Akiva said that a half-ripe etrog is not valid on Sukkot. Rabbah lumps R. Akiva’s ruling together with R. Shimon’s ruling made elsewhere, that when an etrog is still small, it need not be tithed, because it is not yet considered a fruit. Thus both tannaim seem to say the same thing an etrog is not considered halakhically to be a fruit until it is ripe.

 

אמר ליה אביי: דלמא לא היא, עד כאן לא קאמר רבי עקיבא הכא – דבעינן הדר וליכא. אבל התם – כרבנן סבירא ליה.

אי נמי: עד כאן לא קאמר רבי שמעון התם אלא דכתיב +דברים יד+ עשר תעשר את כל תבואת זרעך – כדרך שבני אדם מוציאין לזריעה, אבל הכא – כרבנן סבירא ליה. ותו לא מידי.

 

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

Alternatively, R. Shimon may have stated his view only there, since it is written, "You shall surely tithe all the increase of your seed" (Deuteronomy 14:22) that which people bring out for seed, but here he might agree with the Rabbis.

And there is nothing more [to say about it].

 

Abaye rejects Rabbah’s attempt to equate the positions of R. Akiva and R. Shimon. First of all R. Akiva might have disqualified an unripe etrog for Sukkot because it is not goodly, but when it comes to the obligation to tithe it, he would still hold that it is liable for tithes.

Second, R. Shimon might have stated that a half-ripe etrog need not be tithed because until it is ripe, its seed cannot be used. But when it comes to using it for Sukkot, he might agree with the sages that an unripe etrog can be used.

In short, both tannaim might have special requirements due to their interpretation of the verse at hand, either about Sukkot or about tithing. But this doesn’t mean that they always rule that an unripe etrog is not yet considered a fruit.

Abaye finishes his statement by saying that no more argument can be done. I’m not sure what gives him the right to say such a thing, but that’s just the way it is. There is nothing more to say about it!

גדלו בדפוס ועשאו כמין בריה אחרת פסול. אמר רבא: לא שנו אלא כמין בריה אחרת. אבל כברייתו – כשר. – פשיטא, כמין בריה אחרת תניא!

לא צריכא, דעבידא דפי דפי.

 

If it was grown in a cast, so that it has the appearance of another species, it is invalid.

Rava said: They taught this only in the case where it has the appearance of another species but if it has its natural shape it is valid.

But is not this obvious, seeing that it was taught: the appearance of another species!

It was necessary only in a case where it was cast in the shape of planks joined together.

 

The baraita invalidated an etrog that was grown in a cast such that its shape would look like another species. Rava emphasizes that this etrog is invalid only if it is made to look like another species. If it still looks like an etrog, it is valid. After all, it is an etrog.

The Talmud asks what Rava teaches us beyond that which is already taught in the baraita itself.

The answer is that if he grows it in the shape of "planks joined together" it is still valid, if it still looks like an etrog. Rashi explains that "planks" means that there are deep grooves in it, making it look like it is a series of joined planks. As long as the etrog still looks like an etrog, it is valid.