משנה: אֶתְרוֹג הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ פָּסוּל. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁירָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת פָּסוּל. שֶׁל עָרְלָה פָּסוּל. שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה פָּסוּל וְשֶׁל טְהוֹרָה לֹא יִטּוֹל וְאִם נָטַל כָּשֵׁר. וְשֶׁל דְּמַאי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין. וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. וְשֶׁל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם לֹא יִטּוֹל וְאִם נָטַל כָּשֵׁר׃ MISHNAH: A robbed or dried up etrog70The Persian name of cedrat, citrus medica, identified as “fruit of the Hadar tree”. is disqualified. Of an ashera2A tree worshipped as a pagan deity, forbidden for all use. or a seduced city3An apostate city practicing idolatry which has to be destroyed and all its property burned, forbidden for all usufruct, Deut13:13–18., it is disqualified. Of `orlah71An edible fruit produced during the first three years of the tree’s planting, forbidden for all usufruct., it is disqualified. Of impure heave72Forbidden as fruit, must be burned., it is disqualified; of pure one should not take73Since by biblical commandment heave and Second Tithe in Jerusalem have to be consumed. but if he took it is qualified. Of demay68Produce of the Land of which one may be sure that heave was taken but probably not tithes (nor heave of the tithe). Cf Introduction to Tractate Demay., the House of Shammai disqualify74Since they do not permit demay to be given even to the poor without separating the heave of the tithe, it is not edible at this moment. but the House of Hillel qualify; of Second Tithe in Jerusalem73Since by biblical commandment heave and Second Tithe in Jerusalem have to be consumed. one should not take but if he took it is qualified.
הלכה: כְּתִיב פְּרִ֨י עֵ֤ץ הָדָר֙. עֵץ שֶׁפִּרְיוֹ הָדָר וְעֵצוֹ הָדָר. אֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה אֶתְרוֹג. אִין תֵּימַר רִימּוֹנָא. (עֵצוֹ) [פִּרְיוֹ] הָדָר וְאֵין (פִּרְיוֹ) [עֵצוֹ] הָדָר. אִין תֵּימַר חָרוּבָא. עֵצוֹ הָדָר וְאֵין פִּרְיוֹ הָדָר. אֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה אֶתְרוֹג. הָדָר. אָמַר רִבִּי לֵוִי. שֶׁהוּא דָר בְּאִילָנוֹ מִשָּׁנָה לַחֲבֵירָתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. תִּירְגֵּם עֲקִילַס. הָדָר הִידוֹר. אִילָן שֶׁהוּא גָדֵל עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. וּלְקַחְתֶּ֨ם לָכֶ֜ם פְּרִ֨י עֵ֤ץ הָדָר֙. עֵץ שֶׁפִּרְיוֹ הָדָר וְעֵצוֹ הָדָר. טַעַם פִּרְיוֹ כְטַעַם עֵצוֹ. טַעַם עֵצוֹ כְטַעַם פִּרְיוֹ. פִּרְיוֹ דוֹמֶה לְעֵצוֹ. עֵצוֹ דוֹמֶה לְפִרְיוֹ. וְאֵי זֶה זֶה. זֶה אֶתְרוֹג. HALAKHAH: It is written, a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor. Which one is that? This is the etrog. If you would say, the pomegranate, its (wood) [fruit] is splendor but its (fruit) [wood] is not splendor75It is difficult to decide whether the text of the (scribe) or that of the [corrector] is the correct one. The corrector’s is preferable since (1) it is not parallel to the next sentence and (2) the pomegranate, while not easy to eat, is on the list of preferred fruits of the Holy Land (Deut. 8:8) and certainly tastes much better than carob pods.. If you would say, the carob, its wood is splendor but its fruit is not splendor. Which one is it? The etrog. Hadar; Rebbi Levi said, for it stays on its tree from one year to the next76His Hebrew must pronounce ־ָ as /a/ and make no difference between ד nd דּ since he reads הָדָר “splendor” as הַדָּר “who dwells”.. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, Aquila translated הדָר by ‘ύδωρ 77“Water.” This again makes no difference between ד and דּ but reads ־ָ either as /o/ or as Polish /ó/.; a tree which grows on the water. “Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai stated: You shall take for yourselves . . a fruit of the splendor tree, a tree whose fruit is splendor and its wood is splendor; the smell of its fruit is the smell of its wood, the smell of its wood is the smell of its fruit; its fruit looks like its wood, its wood looks like its fruit. Which one is it? The etrog.”78Babli 35a; Sifra Emor Pereq16(4), with different name traditions.
רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב דְּרוֹמִייָא בָעֵי. מַתְנִיתָא דְלָא כְבֵית שַׁמַּי. דְּתַנִּינָן. וְשֶׁלְדְּמַאי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. וְשֶׁלְמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁינִי בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם לֹא יִטּוֹל. וְאִם נָטַל כָּשֵׁר׃ 79This paragraph does not belong here; it is copied from Eruvin Chapter 3, Notes 76–78. If the text is read as relevant to the discussion here, the question must be why the use of Second Tithe in Jerusalem, while disapproved of, is accepted by everybody when it should be disqualified by the House of Shammai. Rebbi Jacob the Southerner asked, is our Mishnah not following the House of Shammai? As we have stated, “of demay, the House of Shammai disqualify but the House of Hillel qualify. Of Second Tithe in Jerusalem one should not take but if he took it is valid.”