Halachos of the Four Species - Rabbi Shaul Rosenblatt shlita

00:02 Speaker 1 You’re listening to “Lema’an Yishme’u,” a podcast of Machon Halacha Chabad.

00:09 Speaker 2 Yes, let’s turn now to the laws of the esrog. The Mishnah says that a dried-out esrog is invalid. Why? Everyone understands: the verse says “the fruit of a beautiful tree.” If it’s dried out, it’s clearly not beautiful. How dry does it have to be? What is considered a dried-out esrog? The measure is that it gives off no moisture at all: if you were to squeeze it or cut it, no moisture would come out. But how are we supposed to check that? Squeeze it? Cut it? That would invalidate the esrog. So what do we do? In practice, an ordinary esrog that looks normal doesn’t need to be checked. But if we see that it’s shriveled, that raises a concern that it may be dry, and we need to check it. How? Thread a needle and pass the needle and thread through the esrog in a way that removes none of the esrog itself and does not go all the way through from one side to the other. Pass it through at the side. If the thread comes out dry, the esrog is dry; if it comes out a little damp, the esrog isn’t dry yet and is kosher. Now, since we’ve mentioned passing a needle through an esrog, doesn’t the needle invalidate it? No, it doesn’t. Why would it? Nothing was removed. An esrog with a hole that removes nothing is kosher. Only if even the slightest bit of the esrog is missing is it invalid on the first day. On the other days, even an esrog with holes and pieces missing is still kosher. Only on the

02:02 Speaker 2 first day is an esrog with a piece missing invalid. For example, this year, 5781, when the first day falls on Shabbos, in practice each of us can buy esrogim with all sorts of holes, cuts, and missing pieces; strictly speaking, those missing pieces do not invalidate them. But a hole that removes nothing is not kosher under all circumstances. If it is a hole that goes all the way through the esrog, from one side to the other, it invalidates the esrog. That is, if it goes through the middle of the esrog, through the seed chambers, and out the other side, the esrog is invalid. But some poskim say that even if the hole only reaches the seed chambers in the middle, that is already considered a hole that goes through, and it invalidates the esrog. The Alter Rebbe rules that we should be stringent according to that opinion: even a hole that removes nothing invalidates the esrog if it reaches the seed chambers. In short, we have two ways an esrog can be invalid. One is if even the slightest bit of the esrog itself is missing; then it is invalid even if the hole does not go through. If nothing is missing, only a hole that goes through invalidates it—and even a hole that merely reaches the seed chambers in the middle of the esrog counts for this purpose. If there is doubt whether a hole has removed anything, the esrog should be considered kosher. Sometimes you see a little indentation in an esrog and don’t know whether anything is missing, perhaps because someone tried to remove something there. In a case of doubt, we consider it kosher, since there are poskim who permit even an esrog with a piece missing if the hole does not go through. So when there is doubt, we

03:57 Speaker 2 consider it kosher. And if there are two doubts—whether anything was removed and whether the hole reaches the seed chambers—that too is kosher. Some poskim hold that a missing piece is kosher if the hole does not go through, and some hold that even a hole reaching the seed chambers is kosher. So the doubt remains, and it is kosher. Sometimes a bit of an esrog’s peel comes off. It gets knocked about, and a little of the peel comes off. What exactly has come off? If the peeling reaches the white layer of the rind, it is considered a missing piece and is invalid. But if it does not reach the white layer, and only the thin upper green peel comes off, then if it has all peeled off, the esrog is invalid; if some remains, it is kosher. Some say that an area the size of a sela—a coin called a sela—must remain. The Alter Rebbe says we should take their opinion into account and consider it kosher only if an area the size of a sela remains. But when is all this kosher? Only when the esrog retains its natural appearance. If the peeling changes its appearance, it can invalidate it. It depends: if most of the esrog has peeled and its appearance has changed, that appearance invalidates the esrog. If it affects a minority of the esrog, in just one place, the esrog is still kosher. If it is in two places, the esrog is considered mottled and is invalid. And even if it is just one small spot where the peel came off and changed the esrog’s appearance, if it is on the esrog’s chotem—what is the esrog’s chotem? It is the area from where the esrog begins to slope toward its tip—even

06:02 Speaker 2 a small peeled spot there that changes the esrog’s appearance and is visible to the eye invalidates it. Now, we mentioned the pitam. Some esrogim grow with a pitam, and some grow without one. What is the pitam? As we can all see, it is a protruding woody stem at the top of the esrog, with a wider, flower-like part on it. In the language of the poskim, that part is called the shoshana; it too is part of the woody stem, and it has the shape of a flower. What is the law regarding it? If the entire pitam falls off, leaving a hollow or depression in the esrog, with nothing of the pitam remaining, the esrog is invalid. There is no doubt about it. It is invalid on the first day, on Chol Hamoed, and on the other days. It is completely invalid; there is no question about it. If not all of the pitam fell off, but half its thickness did, leaving half a hollow in the esrog, that too is considered a missing piece. And this is not just any missing piece: it also detracts from the beauty of the esrog. When a person sees an esrog, the first thing he looks at is the pitam; it is a central part of the esrog’s beauty. So this missing piece detracts from its beauty. It is not like an ordinary missing piece, which invalidates an esrog only on the first day. This kind of missing piece invalidates it on the other days of the festival as well, because it detracts from the esrog’s beauty. So in either of these two cases—whether the entire pitam fell off or half its thickness fell off, leaving half a hollow—the esrog is unquestionably invalid. But what if the pitam broke partway up, leaving a little of the woody stem

07:50 Speaker 2 protruding? This is what people get most alarmed about: their pitam breaks, they don’t know what to do, and they think the esrog is finished. Is that really so? There is a dispute among the poskim. Some early authorities hold that if the shoshana breaks off, and even if the stem breaks too, but a little remains covering the hollow—when you look into the hollow, you see the woody stem covering it—the esrog is kosher. That is what some poskim say. Other early authorities hold that even if only the upper shoshana falls off, with the rest of the pitam still intact, the esrog is invalid: it is no longer beautiful. The Alter Rebbe rules that the halacha does not follow their view. It follows the first opinion: even if almost all the pitam has fallen off, as long as a little remains inside, covering the hollow, the esrog is kosher. Nevertheless, ideally we should take the stricter opinion into account, which says that even if only the shoshana falls off, the esrog is invalid. What does that mean in practice? If I go to an esrog dealer and he has two esrogim of the same quality, alike in every respect and equally beautiful, one without a shoshana and one with one, of course I should take the one with the shoshana. But if they are not equally beautiful—if the one with the complete pitam and shoshana is not so beautiful and does not have all the qualities sought in an esrog, while the one whose shoshana fell off, with just a little of the pitam remaining to cover the hollow, is much more beautiful and more mehudar—then buy the one without the shoshana, with the broken pitam, because that is preferable. It is only

09:40 Speaker 2 Ideally, though, one should take into account those who disqualify it without the shoshanta. And of course, as we discussed at the beginning, based on what we said in the name of the Pri Megadim and the Bikkurei Yaakov: whenever there is a dispute about these matters, we disqualify it on the first day. On the remaining days—which nowadays are rabbinic, apart from in the Beis Hamikdash, which, with Hashem’s help, will be rebuilt, where the obligation is from the Torah—we can accept it even initially and make a blessing over it. In other words, strictly speaking, if an esrog’s pitam fell off but a little of it remains, according to the Alter Rebbe there is no question at all about using it for the rest of the festival. It is entirely acceptable. That is the practical conclusion regarding the pitam. What if it is not the pitam but the stem that breaks off? The stem is the part at the bottom by which the esrog hangs from the tree. If any part of the stem remains and covers the hollow—the opening where the stem is attached—the esrog is kosher. If it breaks off completely and nothing remains, leaving only a hollow with no stem at all, the esrog is disqualified. But only on the first day. On the second day, an esrog with no stem at all is completely kosher. There is a halachic category called a spotted esrog. What does that mean? It means an esrog with disqualifying colors, colors foreign to an esrog’s appearance, such as black or white spots, or several black spots. The Alter Rebbe rules that two black spots with a little space between them disqualify the esrog. Two

11:54 Speaker 2 black spots on an esrog make it “spotted” and disqualify it, because those spots are not of an esrog’s natural color. The same applies to two white spots. On the esrog’s upper slope—that is, from where it begins to narrow toward its tip—even a single spot, however small, disqualifies it if its color is foreign to an esrog’s appearance. The disqualifying colors are black, white, and red. Nesivei Gavriel notes that red disqualifies it only if it is a strong, distinctly red color. If it is more like the color of a date, he says it can be accepted. In any case, a color foreign to an esrog’s appearance makes it spotted and disqualifies it. Some poskim say that even spots of otherwise acceptable colors can make an esrog “spotted”: for example, yellow spots on a green esrog, or green spots on a yellow esrog. The Alter Rebbe does not rule that way. He says it must be a color foreign to an esrog’s appearance. And when does such a discoloration disqualify it? Only when the esrog itself developed that foreign coloring. If it was caused by thorns—the branches of the esrog tree have thorns, and when they prick the fruit they can produce various discolorations—it is not disqualified; it is kosher. But one needs to know how to tell the difference. It takes an expert. There are expert rabbis who can distinguish between them. The Alter Rebbe discusses

13:45 Speaker 2 what are called bletlach, the marks we call bletlach today, and rules that they are kosher even if they protrude from the esrog and can be felt. Some poskim say that protruding marks disqualify it, but the Alter Rebbe accepts them even when they protrude—sorry, they are kosher. The reason is that this is common on many esrogim, so it is not a significant irregularity, and the esrog is kosher. Not every change in color disqualifies an esrog. When does a change in color disqualify it? Do I need to take a magnifying glass and search for black or white spots? No. A spot that I cannot see with the naked eye does not disqualify it. A disqualifying spot is one that an ordinary person sees at first glance, with the naked eye, while holding the esrog as one would normally hold an object. But if you have to bring it close to your eye and examine it, then however many black spots there are, they do not disqualify it—nor do white ones. What about brown spots? Nesivei Gavriel cites the poskim that brown is kosher if it does not tend toward black. An esrog grown in Eretz Yisroel is subject to terumos and maasros. What if someone comes on the first day of Yom Tov to make a blessing over his esrog and remembers that he has not separated terumos and maasros from it? He cannot make a blessing over it. Since it is not fit to be eaten, it does not count as “you shall take for yourselves.” He cannot eat it, so it is not considered his for this purpose, and he cannot make a blessing over it. It is unfit for the blessing and unfit for fulfilling the mitzvah.

15:28 Speaker 2 Some esrogim have two slopes: a broad slope, then the fruit becomes narrower and has another slope. They are shaped like a tower with two slopes. Which slope is the one where even a single spot, however small, disqualifies the esrog? The poskim write—and Nesivei Gavriel cites them—that only the upper slope has this rule, not the lower one. An esrog that is perfectly round like a ball, resembling a clementine or an orange, is disqualified. It does not have the appearance of an esrog. Twin esrogim: sometimes we find fruits that are joined together like twins. They are kosher, and one can hold both together and make a blessing over them. What is the required size of an esrog? There is no upper limit. As the Mishnah relates, Rabbi Akiva used to carry his esrog on his shoulder, in a sack or somehow; it was that large and heavy, and it was kosher. Many Yemenite esrogim reach a very large size, and they are kosher. What is the minimum? The size of an egg. Smaller than an egg is disqualified. Now, what about an esrog that is very, very green, with no yellow coloring at all? Strictly speaking, if it has already reached a reasonable size for an esrog, so that leaving it among apples or in the sun for a few days or even weeks would turn it yellow, it is kosher. But the Alter Rebbe says that since we are not sufficiently expert in judging exactly when it will turn yellow and when it will not, the custom is not to take an esrog unless it has already begun to turn yellow. So we…

17:29 Speaker 2 We can be confident that it will eventually turn entirely yellow. Of course, one must be especially careful about grafted esrogim. According to the basic law, a grafted esrog is not considered an esrog. That is why we buy esrogim only from established sources that have supervised the trees to ensure the esrogim are not grafted. Only then can we buy esrogim from them. Now we’ll turn to the laws of the lulav—the main laws as they appear in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch. We already said: Where does the lulav appear in the Torah? It says “branches of date palms.” Our Sages ask: Why does it say “branches of date palms” rather than “date-palm leaves”? To teach that the leaves must be capable of being bound together. That does not mean the lulav must actually be bound tightly. If it is still a soft branch, with leaves that rise alongside the spine and can be bound to it, it is kosher even if they have not been bound. But if the leaves have already hardened and spread away from the lulav so that they cannot be bound to the spine, the branch is invalid as a lulav. There is a law concerning a split tiyomes. What is the tiyomes? As you know, a lulav leaf is made up of two halves joined along their backs. What if the uppermost central leaf was never joined, but consists of two separate halves? That is one form of a split tiyomes, and it is invalid. Another is when it was joined but somehow split in two. If it split along its entire length—or if it was never joined along its entire length—it is invalid. If it was joined and then split along all or most of its length, it is also invalid. Why? The Torah says, “You shall take for yourselves,” implying a complete taking, with the lulav whole. This leaf is the main part of the lulav, the part you notice first. It is the head of the lulav; it is what a person sees at first glance.

19:29 Speaker 2 When it is not joined, the lulav is not considered whole. Since that leaf is not whole, this is not considered a complete taking. What if only a small part of it has split? According to most early authorities, it is kosher, but some disqualify it even if the split is tiny. The Alter Rebbe therefore says that, ideally, one should take their opinion into account and buy a lulav whose tiyomes is completely closed and whole. But if someone has already said the blessing over a lulav with a slight split, or has no other lulav, he may say the blessing over it. He does not need to use a friend’s lulav. The law about a split tiyomes applies only on the first day. On the other days, even if it is completely split—for example, this year, 5781, one may, according to the basic law, buy a lulav whose central leaf is completely open. There is no concern under the basic law, because the requirement of a complete taking applies only on the first day. Nevertheless, people customarily go beyond the letter of the law. They want a lulav whose leaf is completely closed, so they are stringent about this on the other days too. In practice, though, that is only a hiddur. On the other days, there is no problem. What about the second day of Yom Tov in the Diaspora? The Alter Rebbe rules that if the leaf has split completely, one should take the lulav without a blessing. If only a small part has split, it would seem that one may say the blessing over it, since even on the first day avoiding such a lulav is only a stringency. A dried-out lulav is invalid. Why? Because it is not beautiful. What does “dried out” mean? If most of its spine has dried out, or most of its

21:38 Speaker 2 leaves have dried out, it is called a dried-out lulav. How dry must it be? The early authorities disagree. Some say it must crumble under a fingernail when touched; others say that all its green color must have disappeared, indicating that all its moisture is gone. The Alter Rebbe rules according to the latter view: if it has turned white and lost all its green color, it is invalid. A lulav whose tip has been cut off is invalid. What is its tip? The tip of the central leaf, which rises above all the others—the tiyomes we discussed earlier. If its tip has been cut off, it is invalid. How much must be cut off to invalidate it? Some say most of it, while others disqualify it if any amount has been cut off. The Alter Rebbe rules that one should be stringent even if only a tiny amount has been cut off, provided one can find another lulav with an intact tip. But if most of it has been cut off, the Alter Rebbe says it cannot be deemed kosher even in pressing circumstances. What if only one of the two halves of the tiyomes has been cut off? Later authorities disagree about this. So, of course, it is proper not to say a blessing over it on the first day. On the other days, there would seem to be room to permit it. As the Pri Megadim says, whenever there is a dispute about something on the first day, one may be lenient on the other days. One may therefore say the blessing over it. Sometimes there is a long, thorn-like point at the top of the uppermost leaf, and that gets cut off. This is not considered a lulav whose tip has been cut off, because that point is not part of the leaf. It is an appendage to the leaf, and its removal does not invalidate the lulav. A lulav that curves forward or to the sides is invalid. What does “curves” mean? It must be markedly bent, like the back of a hunchback—a large, conspicuous curve. But if it has a slight curve, not like a hunchback’s back, the lulav is still kosher. If it curves backward—when we hold the lulav with its spine facing us—even as much as a hunchback’s back, the lulav is still kosher. If the spine is straight but the leaves are bent, it is invalid when most of the leaves are bent. If most are not bent, it is kosher. In other words, if only the upper leaves are bent and most of the leaves remain straight, the lulav is kosher. Chabad custom is not to take a lulav with bent leaves. This is what is called an esrog with knaflach—bent leaves. We take a lulav with straight leaves; that is Chabad custom. The required length of a lulav is four tefachim, which, according to Rabbi Chaim Naeh’s measurement, is 32 centimeters. That is the preferred length. After the fact, if it was shorter—around 26 or 27 centimeters, the measure of thirteen and a third thumbbreadths—some authorities consider that the required length of a lulav, so it is kosher. The same applies to the other species: the hadassim and aravos should be three tefachim, or 24 centimeters according to Rabbi Chaim Naeh’s measurement. But if they measure only ten fingerbreadths, meaning 20 centimeters or two and a half tefachim, they are also kosher after the fact. Nevertheless, if he still has a lulav and hadassim that meet the larger measure, he should take them again and shake them without a blessing, since there is

23:46 Speaker 2 Large and noticeable. But an ordinary bend—a bend like a hunchback’s back—does not invalidate the lulav. And if it bends toward its back, meaning that when we hold the lulav with its spine facing us, it curves backward, even like a hunchback, the lulav is still kosher. If the leaves are bent while the spine is straight, then if most of the leaves are bent, it is invalid; if most are not bent, it is kosher. In other words, if only the upper leaves are bent and most of the leaves are still straight, the lulav is kosher. The Chabad custom is not to take one with bent leaves. It’s like an esrog with a knöpfel—all these details: our custom is to take a lulav with straight leaves. The required length of a lulav is four tefachim, which, according to Rabbi Chaim Naeh’s measurement, is 32 centimeters. That is the preferred length. After the fact, if it was shorter—about 26 or 27 centimeters, the length of thirteen and a third thumbbreadths—there are halachic authorities who hold that this is the required length of a lulav, so it is kosher. The same applies to the other species: the hadassim and aravos should be three tefachim, which is 24 centimeters according to Rabbi Chaim Naeh’s measurement, the measurement we follow. But if they were only ten fingerbreadths long, meaning 20 centimeters—two and a half tefachim, which is ten fingerbreadths—then after the fact they are also kosher. Still, if he has a lulav and hadassim of the longer required length, he should take them again and wave them without a bracha, because there is

26:00 Speaker 2 We say that he has fulfilled his obligation with the smaller minimum size. We mentioned at the beginning that the verse says, “And a branch of a thick-leaved tree.” Our Sages explain that this refers to the hadas. It is a tree whose branches are entirely covered with leaves, and “thick-leaved” means that its leaves are arranged like a braid. The hadas is arranged like a braid. What does that mean? How many leaves must there be, and how must they be positioned? Our Sages say: at least three leaves from one whorl. That is what the Gemara says. What does “three leaves from one whorl” mean? The Alter Rebbe brings the view of Tosafos: it does not mean that they literally emerge from one hollow or from one spot on the branch. Each leaf has its own place, but they emerge in a circle, close to one another, at the same height. That is the meaning of three leaves in one whorl. One must not be lower and another higher; all three must emerge at the same height on the stem. That is called thick-leaved. But if only two are together and the third is above or below them, it is called a hadas shoteh, and one may not make a blessing over such a hadas even under pressing circumstances. How much of the hadas must have this arrangement? Must the entire branch be thick-leaved? Ideally, yes. The minimum length of a hadas is three tefachim, and ideally all three tefachim should have this arrangement. But according to the basic law, even if only most of the hadas has it, that is also

28:04 Speaker 2 kosher. What does “most” mean? It does not mean most of the hadas’s length. Say that within these three tefachim—which, according to our practice, are twenty-four centimeters—I have ten whorls, ten rows of three leaves. If six of those ten have three leaves at the same height, the hadas is kosher, and one may make a blessing over it without reservation. Those six do not have to be consecutive. Within the twenty-four centimeters, I may have ten rows of three leaves: the first is properly arranged, the second is not, the third is, and in total six of them are properly arranged. That is a kosher hadas, and one may make a blessing over it. And what if those six are at the top of the hadas, where the leaves are small, so that only a third of the hadas’s length has this arrangement? That does not matter. Since most of the whorls have three leaves at the same height, the hadas is kosher. What if the hadas originally had three leaves in each whorl, but during use over Sukkos it dried out somewhat, and only one leaf remained from each whorl? It no longer has three leaves together at all. That does not matter: since it originally did, and most of it remains, it is still kosher. More than that, even if only six out of the ten whorls originally had three leaves at the same height, and only one leaf remains from each of those six, the hadas is still kosher. The next law: if its leaves dried out, it is invalid. If the hadas’s leaves dried out, the hadas is invalid. But if they merely wilted—meaning they have become a little limp, as we know happens when they lose a little moisture—then it is

30:08 Speaker 2 kosher. What is considered dry? There are two conditions that must both be met for us to rule stringently that a leaf is dry. First, the leaves crumble when you touch them with a fingernail. Second, they have turned white. But if they crumble and are still green, or have turned white but do not crumble, the hadas is still kosher. If most of the hadas’s leaves have dried out, it is invalid; if a minority have dried out, it is kosher. So here again, we follow the majority: if most are dry, it is invalid. But there is another interesting law. If all the leaves have dried out, and only three moist leaves remain on the entire hadas, then if those are the leaves at its tip, the hadas is kosher. Why? Because, as the Alter Rebbe says, the tip of the hadas branch is the main part of its beauty, the part a person sees at first glance. That is what stands out about the hadas. So if those three leaves remain green, the hadas is kosher. That is a very interesting law we have learned in the laws of hadas. Now, what if those three leaves at the tip are not dry, but they are not moist either—they are wilted? Here there is a dispute among the early authorities. According to the Raavad, they do not save the hadas from being invalid: for that, they must actually be moist. The Itur, citing the Rosh, rules that it is kosher even in this case. What is the law? The Alter Rebbe rules that on the first day, when the obligation is from the Torah, it is invalid; on the remaining days, when the obligation is rabbinic, it is considered kosher. The next law concerns a hadas whose tip was cut off. Is it kosher or invalid? Here, too, there is a dispute among the early authorities. The Rosh considers it kosher. Why? Because

32:05 Speaker 2 the cut is not noticeable. The hadas’s leaves grow upward and cover the cut, so you cannot see it. Therefore, the hadas is kosher: the cut is not noticeable. The Raavad rules that it is invalid. The Alter Rebbe rules stringently, like the Raavad. That is, if another hadas is available, this one is ruled invalid; but if another cannot be found, one may rely on the Rosh and follow the first opinion. On the remaining days, one can certainly rely on it, as we mentioned earlier: the Pri Megadim and the Bikurei Yaakov say that in any dispute among the halachic authorities, one may be lenient on the remaining days. If the hadas’s tip is cut off, it is kosher on the remaining days of Sukkos. What about the opposite case? Earlier, we discussed a hadas whose leaves were all dry except for the moist leaves at the top. Now suppose all its leaves are moist, but the three top leaves are dry. Here, too, the Raavad rules that it is invalid. He says that since the upper leaves are the main part of the hadas, they are like the pitam of an esrog, so it is invalid. The Alter Rebbe rules that one should be stringent where another hadas can be found. But of course, since there is a dispute and some authorities consider it kosher, one may be lenient in this case on the remaining days—on every day except the first. Now let us turn to the laws of the aravah. We mentioned earlier that the verse says “willows of the brook.” What does that mean? The Alter Rebbe cites the Rambam, who writes that this is a known species called kan[?]. It is a species that mostly grows by a brook. But even if the aravah grew in the mountains or in a courtyard where there is no brook at all, it is kosher, because it belongs to a species that grows by brooks. The Gemara cites a baraisa that gives three identifying features of an aravah.

34:08 Speaker 2 First, its stem is red. Second, its leaf is not round but long and narrow, like a brook. Third, the edge of its leaf is smooth, without notches. Even if the stem is actually green, it is still kosher. Why? Because when the sun shines on it, it will turn red. So it is kosher even while it is green, since it is the same species of aravah. The Gemara mentions a certain kind of aravah that does not have the third feature, a smooth leaf edge. Instead, it has small notches, like the teeth of a small sickle. It, too, is kosher, because the main identifying features are the first two: a red stem and a long, narrow leaf. Those are the essential features. In the Gemara, this species is called chilfa gila. It is also a kosher species of aravah. An aravah whose tip has been cut off is invalid. What does “its tip” mean? Not the top leaf. Even if the tip of that leaf was cut off, or the entire leaf was cut off, even along with its small stalk, the aravah is still kosher. “Its tip was cut off” means that the woody stem at the top of the aravah, from which the leaf emerges, was cut off. Then the aravah is invalid. But as long as that stem remains, even if the top leaf fell off, was shed, was cut off, or whatever happened to it, the aravah is still kosher. Aravos also often have various holes, whether from animals, the weather, or other causes. If most of the leaves remain intact, if most of the leaves are still there, the aravah is kosher. If most of the aravah’s leaves have fallen off, if most of its leaves have been shed,

36:07 Speaker 2 The aravah is invalid. We need to pay attention to this, because sometimes, when people shake the hoshanos in shul, you see that most of the leaves have fallen off. It also dries out a little; most of the leaves fall off, and then the aravah is invalid. Ideally, when choosing an aravah, we should take a whole one, without even a single leaf missing. But after the fact, as long as most of the leaves within the required three tefachim remain, the aravah is still valid. If most of its leaves have dried out, the aravah is invalid. What counts as dried out? Here there is only one definition: the leaves have turned white. They do not have to crumble under a fingernail; that is not what it says. It says that they have turned white. But if the leaves have merely wilted, as we often see with an aravah after a day or two, the aravah is valid. There is another situation: sometimes most of the leaves of the hadas are split in two along most of their length. That hadas is also invalid. In general, we need to pay attention to the aravah. Sometimes people buy the Four Species and spend a great deal of money. They buy an esrog for hundreds of shekels and expensive lulavim, and then buy the aravah for a few shekels without checking whether it is valid. It could be that they have not fulfilled the mitzvah at all, because most of its leaves have fallen off or it has dried out. So the thing to watch most carefully throughout Sukkos is the aravah: check whether it has dried out, and replace it during Chol Hamoed once, twice, however often necessary to make sure it remains valid. Now we will discuss the mitzvah of taking the Four Species as a whole. Until now we have discussed each of the Four Species on its own: what makes it valid, what its requirements are,

38:06 Speaker 2 and what it needs to be like. Now we will discuss the mitzvah of taking the Four Species. If someone took all four species in one hand, some say he has not fulfilled his obligation. Why? Because the Torah says, “And you shall take for yourselves the fruit of a beautiful tree,” and does not say “and branches of palm trees” there. The fruit of a beautiful tree stands on its own. Then it says, “branches of palm trees, boughs of leafy trees, and willows of the brook.” In other words, the palm branch—the lulav—and the hadassim and aravos go together, while the esrog stands on its own. So one should hold the lulav, hadassim, and aravos in one hand, the right hand, and the esrog in the other. Which hand holds the lulav? The right hand, because it contains three mitzvos. Those three have special importance, so they go in the right hand. The esrog, which is one mitzvah, goes in the left hand. If he reversed them, holding the lulav in his left hand and the esrog in his right, he has fulfilled his obligation, but it is best to take them again in the proper way without a blessing. Just to clarify what we said about not fulfilling the obligation: some say that he has fulfilled it. Therefore, if he held them all in one hand, he should take them again in two hands, out of concern for the opinions that say he has not fulfilled his obligation, but without a blessing. When a blessing is in doubt, we do not recite it, so he should take them again without a blessing. There is another interesting halachah. We discussed how many of the Four Species we need to take: one esrog, one lulav, three hadassim, and two aravos. What if someone could not find three valid hadassim? He found only one valid hadas, just one of the three. In a pressing situation, he fulfills his obligation with a single hadas branch, because some halachic authorities hold that one hadas is enough. Accordingly,

40:05 Speaker 2 a single hadas is enough. Even if the tip of that hadas has been cut off, we have already mentioned that there are opinions that a hadas whose tip has been cut off is valid. So after the fact, if he cannot find others, he fulfills his obligation with one hadas, even one whose tip has been cut off. It is preferable to bind the lulav together with the hadassim and aravos, because of “This is my G-d, and I will beautify Him”: we should beautify the mitzvos before Him. When they are bound together, it adds beauty, so it is a mitzvah to bind the lulav with the hadassim and aravos. What should we use to bind them? We all know that nowadays everyone customarily binds them with lulav leaves. Could I bind them with some attractive ribbon or a nice cord instead? According to the basic law, yes. The binding is not part of the mitzvah; it is only a way of beautifying the mitzvah, so it does not matter what it is made of. If the binding were part of the mitzvah, adding another species that is not among the Four Species could violate the prohibition against adding to a mitzvah. But since it is only a way of beautifying the mitzvah and is not part of the mitzvah itself, it can be made from anything. Why, then, use lulav leaves? Because they make it more beautiful and more mehudar. How do we bind the Four Species? Some have the custom of placing the hadassim to the right of the lulav and the aravos to the left. According to the Arizal, there should be one hadas on the right, one on the left, and one in the middle, with one aravah on the right and one on the left, between the hadassim. This is also the Chabad custom: a hadas on the right, a hadas on the left, a hadas in the middle, and the aravos between them. Of course, our custom is to add

41:55 Speaker 2 more hadassim, as the halachic authorities also say one may do. So our custom is to add hadassim, and in one year the Rebbe asked that at least six hadassim be added for each person. Some add even more. The Rebbe would take thirty-six hadassim. In any case, that is how the Four Species are arranged when bound together. The Chabad custom is to make two loops on the lulav itself, and then bind all the species together with three loops, with the hadassim covering part of the upper loop on the lulav as well. What is the procedure for making the blessing over the lulav? We have a problem: how do we make the blessing? There is a rule that the blessing over every mitzvah is said immediately before performing it. That is how it is with tefillin, with affixing a mezuzah, and with putting on a tallis: we make the blessing before doing the mitzvah. On the other hand, when making a blessing over an object used for a mitzvah, we also need to be holding it. We do not make the blessing over tefillin while they are in their bag or on the table. We make the blessing when they are on the arm, before fastening them. So what do we do here? If we hold the lulav, we have already fulfilled the mitzvah, and the blessing would no longer be before performing it. The halachic authorities therefore give three ways to do this. One way is to hold the lulav and make the blessing, and then pick up the esrog. We have begun the mitzvah by holding the lulav, but have not completed it, so the blessing still comes before its completion. A second way is to hold the esrog upside down. When the esrog is upside down, the mitzvah has not yet

43:59 Speaker 2 The mitzvah is fulfilled, because the species must be held the way they grow. But, yes, that is the second way. The third way, mentioned by the early authorities, is that one can hold the lulav and esrog in the usual way and still not fulfill the mitzvah, because he has in mind: “I do not want to fulfill the mitzvah until after the blessing.” So he has not yet fulfilled it. Different Jewish communities follow different practices. The Chabad custom is to hold only the lulav, and to take the esrog after the blessing. On the first day, after reciting the blessing, one takes the esrog in the left hand and then recites Shehecheyanu. When reciting Shehecheyanu, one brings the lulav and esrog together and then waves them. For a left-handed person, right and left are the reverse of everyone else’s: he holds the lulav in his right hand, which is everyone else’s left, and the esrog in his left hand, which is everyone else’s right. Another important halachah: the lulav’s spine must extend a tefach above the hadassim and aravos. If the hadassim and aravos are three tefachim tall, the lulav’s spine must be four tefachim tall, as we mentioned in the laws of lulav. And if the hadassim and aravos are five or six tefachim tall, the lulav’s spine must be seven tefachim tall. It must extend a tefach above the hadassim and aravos. The Alter Rebbe writes in section 651, paragraph 11: “One must be very careful that the spine of the lulav extends a tefach above the hadassim and aravos.” This implies that otherwise one does not fulfill the mitzvah. If he says one must be very careful, that indicates that without it, one does not fulfill the mitzvah. And so it is written in [unclear] that one does not fulfill it at all, even after the fact. Some authorities hold that one does fulfill it after the fact, and several

45:56 Speaker 2 authorities hold that one does not. It would seem that the Alter Rebbe, too, holds that even after the fact, one does not fulfill the mitzvah this way. Now, regarding binding the lulav: our custom is to bind the lulav on the eve of Yom Tov, in the sukkah, and for each person to try to bind his own lulav. That is the Chabad custom. Another important halachah to note: on the first day, one does not fulfill the mitzvah with borrowed arba minim. If someone does not have arba minim and asks a friend, “Lend me yours; I want to recite the blessing,” he may do so on any of the other days. But on the first day, when the mitzvah is from the Torah, the verse says, “You shall take for yourselves on the first day”—they must be yours. If you merely lend them to me, they are not mine. So they must be given as a gift on condition that they be returned. It is good to say explicitly, “I am giving them to you as a gift on condition that you return them.” And after reciting the blessing, the recipient must actually return them. In any case, according to Chabad custom, we say, “I am giving them to you as a gift on condition that you return them,” even on the other days, and especially on the first day. On the first day of Yom Tov, we make a point of rising early to fulfill the mitzvah of lulav, and reciting the blessing over it before davening, while still in the sukkah. Taking the lulav in the sukkah is the ideal way to perform the mitzvah. The Alter Rebbe writes in the siddur to recite the blessing over the lulav before davening, in the sukkah, because taking it in the sukkah is the ideal way to perform the mitzvah. According to the basic halachah, one may eat before taking the lulav, provided that if it is grain-based food, such as mezonos, one eats less than an egg’s volume. But if it is only a drink or fruit, there is no

47:43 Speaker 2 set amount. Nevertheless, the Chabad custom is not to eat or drink at all before taking the lulav. We do not eat or drink at all before taking the lulav on any of the days, and especially on the first day. There is another important point on the first day: do not give the arba minim to a young child before all the adults in the home have recited the blessing. Why? Because when someone transfers ownership to a child, the child acquires it according to Torah law. But the child can transfer it back only by rabbinic law. So on the first day, when the Torah requires the arba minim to be ours, acquiring them back from the child would make them ours only by a rabbinic acquisition. In other words, even a child who has reached the relevant age, around six, can transfer ownership by rabbinic law, but that is only a rabbinic acquisition. According to Torah law, no acquisition has taken place. Therefore, one must be careful to give the arba minim to children only after everyone has recited the blessing.