Today’s learning is Dedicated to Leslie Simpson, Paul Simpson, my dear Bubbles, and most of all to HaShem

Sponsor a day's learning (thousands of minutes!) for only $72 click here

https://www.flipcause.com/secure/cause_pdetails/ODUwOTU=

Summary

Beraisa: A dried out lulav is possul. Rabbi Yehuda: It is kosher.

Rava: An Esrog can certainly not be dried out because it must be “hadar - handsome”. Their debate is only regarding a lulav: the question is if it’s compared to esrog or not.

Challenge: We learned in the mishna (24.4) “Rabbi Yehuda: The lulav must be tied together”. Isn’t the reason so that it should be hadar?

Resolution: Rabbi Yehuda has a different reason, as we learned: “Rabbi Yehuda quoting Rabbi Tarfon: The word kapos which is used by the Torah with regard to lulav to denote branches, can also mean tied together; this teaches that the lulav must be tied.”

Challenge: But we learned: “Rabbi Yehuda: The lulav must be bound with its kind”. Isn’t that because the lulav has to be handsome?

Response: No, after all, Rava taught: “It can be bound even with a bark or root of its own kind.” These are obviously not hadar.

The reason a lulav must be bound with its own kind is because according to Rabbi Yehuda, lulav tzarich agad (25.1), since that’s the case, binding it with another kind would mean that you’re taking 5 minim instead of 4. (Tosfos adds that the minim must be taken derech gedeilasan, so if a lulav does not require binding, we wouldn’t be interested in a reed wound around it that is in horizontal position, since it’s not derech gedeilasan, and not part of the mitzvah. But since a lulav must be bound, the ‘binder’ must be horizontal, thus if a reed is used, it would be considered a fifth min). This podcast has been graciously sponsored by JewishPodcasts.fm. There is much overhead to maintain this service so please help us continue our goal of helping Jewish lecturers become podcasters and support us with a donation: https://thechesedfund.com/jewishpodcasts/donate