645 - תרמה דיני לולב ובו כ"א סעיפים

The Laws of Lulav

1. "And you shall take for yourselves on the first day the fruit of a beautiful tree, branches of date palms, boughs of thick-leaved trees, and willows of the brook, etc." (Vayikra 23:40).

The Sages expounded: "The fruit of a tree"—meaning a tree whose wood and fruit have the same taste. Which is this? The esrog, for the taste of its wood and its fruit are the same.

2. "Beautiful"—that it should be attractive and splendid in its appearance and in its growth, as will be explained in siman 648.

And since all four species are written in a single verse, they are compared to one another and we learn one from the other. Therefore, all four species must be attractive and splendid in their appearance and growth, as will be explained.

3. "Branches of date palms"—this refers to the lulav, which grows on the date palm tree.

And since the Torah wrote "branches" (kapos) and did not write "leaves of date palms," you learn from here that it must be those leaves that are fit to be bound and gathered together with the spine, because they are still soft. For there are no vowel points in the Torah, and its meaning is "bound" (kaput).

But if the lulav remained on the palm tree until its leaves hardened like wood, and they became separated and spread apart from the spine—for this is their nature, that the more they harden, the more they separate from the spine—and if they hardened so much that it is impossible to bind them together with the spine, then it is invalid.

4. But if they did not harden so much, even though whenever they are not bound they stand separated and distant from one another, nevertheless it is valid, even if they are not bound at all.

For the Torah only required that it be fit to be bound, but not that it actually be bound—for we do not read it as "bound" (kaput), but as "branches" (kapos).

5. Nevertheless, it is an optimal fulfillment of the mitzvah not to take a lulav whose leaves are separated from one another, even if they have not hardened at all, but because they have become slightly detached at their point of connection to the spine, they have separated from one another a little, even though they do not hang down at all but rise upward together with the spine.

6. But if they hang down and do not rise together with the spine unless they are bound with it, then this lulav is invalid by Torah law, even if the leaves have not completely detached from the spine but are still slightly attached. And even if one binds them with the spine, this is not considered beautiful ^[1].

7. These invalidations regarding the leaves that we have explained only invalidate if they affect the majority of the leaves of the lulav.

But if only a minority of the leaves are like this, and the majority remain attached to the spine and cover most of the spine, as will be explained, then it is valid—for everything follows the majority.

8. If the spine itself broke in its middle, but did not break completely into two parts, rather it bent over so that the upper part hangs downward, it is valid.

Nevertheless, it must be bound at the place of the bend so that its top does not hang downward.

9. The natural growth of the lulav leaves is as follows: as they grow, they grow in pairs, each opposite the other on both sides of the spine. Each leaf is folded in two and is joined at its back and open at its front.

If the majority of the leaves of the lulav split into two along most of their length—that is, most of the lulav leaves split at their back at the fold, so that each leaf is split along most of its length into two—then this lulav is invalid, for it is not beautiful.

Similarly, if from the outset of its growth, most of its leaves were not folded in two along most of their length, it is invalid.

10. All this applies to the other leaves of the lulav, except for the top, central leaf.

But the top, central leaf, which is higher than all the other leaves and is called the "head" of the lulav, is also normally folded like the other leaves. If it was not folded from the outset of its growth, it is invalid, even if all the other leaves are folded.

Similarly, if it was folded from the outset but later split into two along its entire length—that is, from its tip down to the point where the leaves emerge (for from that point downward it is not called the central leaf, but the body of the spine)—it is invalid.

And these invalidations regarding the top leaf are not because of the requirement for beauty, but because it says, "And you shall take," and the Sages expounded: "a complete and perfect taking." This leaf is the main part of the lulav, which a person sees at first glance, and it is normally folded in all lulavim. If it is split into two, it is evident and visible that it is not whole and complete at the place of the split.

11. When does this apply? When it is split along its entire length. But if it is only split along part of its length, it is valid.

And all this is after the fact, or if one has no other lulav—he does not need to recite the blessing on someone else's lulav on the first day of Sukkos. But ideally, it is an optimal fulfillment of the mitzvah to seek a lulav whose top leaf is not split at all, but is folded from its tip down to the point where the leaves emerge.

For there are those who invalidate even if only part of this top leaf is split. And although the halachah does not follow their opinion, it is nevertheless good to be stringent if possible.

12. If the spine split below this top leaf—that is, from the point where the leaves emerge and downward—and the two sides of the split separated so that they appear as two, it is invalid, for its defect is visible and it is not whole and complete.

13. The natural growth of the lulav is as follows: after one leaf emerges from the spine, immediately after about two fingerbreadths another emerges, and so on, one above the other, until it is completely covered with leaves on one side, and likewise on the other side.

If on one side it is completely covered with leaves and on the other side it is bare without leaves, it is invalid, for it is not beautiful.

14. Similarly, if it does not have many leaves one above the other, but from each side only one leaf emerges, starting from the base and going up to the top, it is invalid, for this too is not beautiful.

15. Similarly, if it has many leaves but they are not placed one above the other, but rather one beneath the other—that is, they are spaced far apart vertically, so that the upper leaf does not rest at all upon the lower one beneath it…

Laws of the Lulav

15. If the tip of one leaf reaches the base of the leaf above it, so that the entire spine of the lulav is covered by leaves, it is valid. But if the tip of one leaf does not reach the base of the next, it is invalid, for this is not considered beautiful (hadar).

16. If most of the spine of the lulav has dried out, or most of its leaves have dried out, it is invalid, for this is not considered beautiful.

What is the measure of dryness that invalidates it?

Some say: from the point that it crumbles under a fingernail when handled. Others say: from the point that all its green color is gone and its appearance has turned white—it is then called dry, even if it does not crumble under a fingernail, for this is a sign that all its moisture is gone.

The halachah follows the latter opinion.

Nevertheless, in a pressing situation, such as in these countries where lulavim are not readily available, one may rely on the first opinion (if it is impossible to find another lulav; see Beis Yosef, siman 389).

17. If its tip is cut off, it is invalid, for this is not considered beautiful.

What is its tip? It is the upper, middle leaf, which is higher than all the other leaves. If this leaf is cut at its tip, even the smallest amount, it is invalid.

Some say it is not invalid unless most of the length of this upper leaf is cut off.

One should be stringent in accordance with the first opinion. Nevertheless, in a pressing situation where it is impossible to find another lulav, one may rely on the latter opinion, and it is permitted to recite the blessing over a lulav whose upper leaf is cut only in a minority of its length. But if most of it is cut, one should not recite the blessing over it, even in a pressing situation—

unless it is in a place where the custom is to recite the blessing on all completely invalid species in a pressing situation, as will be explained in siman 389, see there.

18. If it has something like thorns protruding from its spine, or if it is shriveled and contracted, or if it is bent forward—that is, the side opposite the spine is bent and folded until its spine appears like the back of a hunchback—it is invalid, for this is not considered beautiful.

Similarly, if it is bent to one of its sides, it is invalid.

19. But if it is bent backward—that is, its spine is bent and folded in its middle toward its front—it is valid, for this is its natural form and beauty.

When does this apply? When it is bent and folded in its middle. But if its tip is bent like a reed, so that its tip is bent and drooping downward, whether it is bent toward its front or toward its back, it is invalid, for this is not beautiful.

20. All this applies when the spine itself is bent, but if only the leaves are bent, even if the upper, middle leaf is also bent, it is valid, for this is the way of many lulavim, that their leaves are bent.

Some invalidate if most of the lulav's leaves are bent at their tips, even slightly.

One should be stringent in accordance with their words.

But if it is a pressing situation, where it is impossible to find another lulav, one may rely on the first opinion, and it is permitted to recite the blessing over such a lulav, even if all its leaves are bent.

Similarly, from the second day of the festival and onward, when the obligation to take the lulav is only rabbinic and not from the Torah, one may be lenient according to the first opinion if it is not easy to find another lulav. See siman 386.

21. All this applies when only the tips of the leaves are bent, and the body remains longer than the leaves without bending. But if the body of the leaves is bent very much toward their middle, so that it appears as if the leaf is bent in two, it is invalid, for this is not beautiful at all.