This article is an excerpt from our Sefer

   Buy now here or on Amazon.com

Chapter 8: The Hadassim

The Meaning of the Hadass: The unity within the Hadass:[1] The Hadass is only valid if it contains a majority of three leave sets that grow on the same line. This is unlike other leaves of a branch, in which the leaves grow in a scattered method, along the branch. This pattern followed by the leaves of the Hadass is the aspect of unity found in this branch, over that of other branches. The representation of the Hadass within Jewry: The Midrash[2] explains that the Hadass represents the people who spend their time performing Mitzvos and Gemilus Chassadim, but not learning Torah. Mitzvos correspond to the good smell found in the Hadass and not learning Torah as a full occupation.

 

1. The identity of the Hadass:[3]

The Torah[4] states that one is to take a Anaf Eitz Avos. The Sages learned from the words Anaf Eitz that this refers to a branch that is entirely covered with leaves. The leaves grow in a chainlike braid form, with the leaves resting on their faces, and resting one on top of the other like a chain, which covers most of the branch. This is unlike other branches in which the leaves do not braid or cover majority of the branch. This branch is referred to as the Hadass, myrtle.

Q&A Is there a more preferable species of Hadassim?[5] There are many species of Hadassim. Some have large leaves and others have short leaves. Some are particular to take only Tzefati Hadassim as they have many small leaves which fully cover the bark. Must the leaves of the Hadass fully cover the bark and reach the leaves above it?[6] This matter is disputed in Poskim. Some Poskim[7] rule that if the leaves of the Hadass do not cover the bark, the Hadass is invalid. Thus, if a lower set of leaves do not reach the upper set of leaves, the Hadass is Pasul. Other Poskim[8] completely negate this invalidation. Other Poskim[9] rule that so long as majority of the bark is covered it is valid. Must the leaves of the Hadass rest upwards, and actually cover the bark of the stem?[10] No. Thus, the Hadass remains valid even if the leaves rest flat, horizontally, and thus reveal the bark of the stem of the Hadass. A Hadass with long and wide leaves:[11] Some Poskim[12] rule that Hadassim with very wide and long leaves [i.e. larger than the middle section of the thumb] are considered a Hadass Shoteh and are invalid. Other Poskim[13], however, are lenient in this matter, and so is the practical ruling, although some are initially stringent. A Hadass with small leaves:[14] Some Poskim[15] rule that Hadassim with very small leaves [i.e. smaller than a barley] are to be avoided. Hadassim without a scent:[16] Some Poskim[17] rule that Hadassim without a scent are to be avoided. Is a Murkav/grafted Hadass Kosher?[18] No. This follows the same law as an Esrog. However, a questionable Murkav Hadass according to some opinions[19] is valid for the Mitzvah.   Hadassim during Shemita: Some Poskim[20] rule that Hadassim do not contain Kedushas Shevi’is. Other Poskim[21] rule it contains Kedushas Shevi’is and it follows the year of blossom.

2. Length:[22]

The length of the Hadassim must be at least three Tefachim [24 cm.]

How much is three Tefachim? Some Poskim[23] rule that every Tefach is 4 Agudlin and hence four Tefachim is 12 Agudlin [24.5 cm.[24]] Other Poskim[25] rules that each Tefach is 3.33 Tefach and hence four Tefach is 10 Agudlin [20 cm[26]]. Practically, we are stringent to follow the first opinion [of 24 cm]. However, in a time of need one may be lenient to use a Lulav that has a spine of 20 cm. Likewise, Bedieved, if one already used such a Hadass and then found one with 24 centimeters, he should shake it without a blessing being that he has already fulfilled his obligation according to one opinion.[27]

From what area of the Hadass is the 24 cm. measured?[28] The 24 cm is measured from the bottom of the stem of the Hadass in the area that leaves begins to grow until the top of the stem, excluding the leaves that extend past the top of the stem.

Is there a maximum length for the Hadass?[29] There is no maximum Shiur of height for the Hadass, and it may be as tall as one desires, although one must be careful that the Lulav spine always extends one Tefach above the Hadassim, as stated in Chapter 6 Halacha 2. [Thus, the longer the Hadass, the taller the Lulav must be. If the Hadass is too long and hence covers the top one Tefach area of the spine of the Lulav, then the Hadass is to be shortened from its bottom.]

3. Meshulash/Three Leaved:[30]

The Torah states that the Hadass must be Avos, braided. This means that there are three leaves that extend from each area of the branch and that these three leaves are symmetric to each other that they extend from the same horizontal line.[31] If two leaves are symmetric but the third leaf grows higher or lower than the other two, it is not considered braided. This form of Hadass is called a Hadass Shoteh and is invalid for use throughout all seven days of Sukkos.[32] It may not be used even in a time of need that no other Hadass is available, even if one desires to take it without blessing, being that it is not a species of a valid Hadass at all.[33]

How many leaves on the Hadass must be Meshulash?[34] Initially it is a Mitzvah to search for [i.e. purchase] a fully Meshulash Hadass. This means that the Hadass should be Meshulash with three symmetric leaves by every set of leaves for its entire Shiur of three Tefachim. Nevertheless, even if the Hadass is not entirely Meshulash, if it is Meshulash for majority of its length [i.e. 13 cm.] then it may even initially be used with a blessing.[35] This means that if majority of the sets of three leaves coming out of the branch have their stems coming out from the same horizontal line throughout the Shiur of three Tefachim, then the Hadass is valid and one may even initially recite a blessing over it. [This validation applies even if the head/top leaves of the Hadass is not Meshulash.[36] If, however, majority of the Hadass is not Meshulash throughout its Shiur of three Tefach, the Hadass is invalid.[37]]

Q&A From where on the bottom of the stem does one begin to measure the Meshulash leaves and until what area of the stem is it measured?[38] One measures the 24 cm. measurement of the Hadass and its status of being majority Meshulash from the bottom area of the stems where the leaves first begin to grow until the end [and not from the stem itself], until the top area of the stem where the last set of leaves grow [and not until the stem that extends above it]. If this area measures 24 cm, and contains majority Meshulash leaves, then it is valid. See next Q&A regarding if the branch is more than 24 cm in length.   Must majority of the Shiur [i.e. 24 cm] be Meshulash or majority of the entire branch?[39] Ø  Example: If the Hadass is seven Tefachim long and is majority/fully Meshulash within its Shiur of three Tefachim, but is not Meshulash for the remaining four Tefachim, what is the law? First three Tefachim are Meshulash:[40] We follow majority of the Shiur of three Tefachim and thus if the top three Tefachim of the Hadass are Meshulash, then it is valid. Likewise, regarding a fully Meshulash Hadass, so long as it is fully Meshulash for its entire measurement of three Tefachim from the top, then it is considered fully Meshulash even if the bottom part of the branch beyond the three Tefachim is not Meshulash.[41] First three Tefachim are not Meshulash but is Meshulash in majority of branch: Some Poskim[42] rule we follow majority of the Shiur of three Tefachim and thus in the above case the Hadass is invalid. Other Poskim[43], however, leave this matter in question and question to validate it if even 2.1 Tefachim is Meshulash throughout the branch. Other Poskim[44] rule it is valid. According to Admur[45], it is implied like the former opinion that the Hadass is only Kosher if majority of its Shiur is Meshulash irrelevant of whether majority of the branch is Meshulash. Must the majority of leaves be Meshulash or majority of the length of the branch that the leaves cover?[46] We follow majority of the leaves and not majority of the length of the wood. Must the majority Meshulash leaves be in order?[47] It is not necessary for the majority Meshulash leaves to be in order, and the Hadass is valid even if the majority sets of Meshulash leaves are scattered throughout the Hadass. Must the majority Meshulash leaves be large enough of a majority to be readily visible, or is even a slight majority upon measurement valid? So long as there are more leaved sets than un-leaved sets, the Hadass is Kosher, even if this is not a recognizable majority. Nonetheless, some Poskim[48] are particular that the majority Meshulash leaved sets be apparent at first sight.

4. Leaves fell off:[49]

If leaves fell off a Kosher [i.e. Meshulash] Hadass that initially was fully or majority Meshulash, then as long as two leaves remain in majority of its sets within the Shiur of three Tefachim [24 cm], it is Kosher. This applies even if the leaves of some of the sets have completely fallen off, [and even if the top leaves have fallen off, as explained in Halacha 5[50]], as long as there is still a majority of leaves in the majority of sets. If it does not contain two leaves in majority of its sets, it is invalid.

Q&A What is status of the Hadass if majority of its leaves are split in half?[51] Some Poskim[52] rule that if majority of its leaves are split, then the Hadass is invalid. If only minority of the Hadass contains split leaves, it is valid.   What is status of the Hadass if majority of its leaves are broken?[53] Some Poskim[54] rule that if majority of its leaves are broken in their majority, then the Hadass is invalid. If only minority of the Hadass contains broken leaves, it is valid.   What is the law if the leaves of a Hadass are drooping downwards? See Halacha 6!

5. Top cut off:[55]

If the top of the Hadass, its branch and its leaves, were cut off, some Poskim[56] rule the Hadass nevertheless remains valid.[57] Other Poskim[58], however, rule that if the top branch was cut off [even partially[59]], then the Hadass is invalid.[60] Practically, one should be stringent to use another Hadass, if it is available. However, if another Hadass is not available, then one may use it with a blessing.[61] If the top leaves alone have been cut off [or fell off] but its stem is still intact, it may be used even initially. [Thus, even if the top leaves of the Hadass have fallen off, one is not to cut the bare top branch off the Hadass, as doing so invalidates according to the latter opinion.[62] Nevertheless, it is a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to use a Hadass which did not lose any of its top leaves.[63]]

Q&A A Hadass with a soft top:[64] Some Poskim[65] rule that if the top of the Hadass is soft and undeveloped, it is considered as if it is cut off, and invalid according to the stringent opinions. Practically, the custom is not like this opinion.[66] What is the law of a Hadass that grows with two top leave branches, may one of them be cut off?[67] Yes. So long as a single top branch remains, it remains valid. What is the law of a Hadas that has cracked and folded in half, but is still attached by a small amount of branch of skin? Seemingly, it is invalid.

6. Dryness:[68]

If the leaves of a Hadass have dried, the Hadass is invalid.[69] If, however, it is not Halachically considered dry, even though the leaves have withered, it remains valid.

What is the definition of dry?[70] If the leaves have dried to the point that they can be broken with one’s nail and they have lost all their greenness, becoming white, then they are considered dry, and it is Pasul.[71] If the leaves have not lost their greenness, even if they look very dry and can be broken with a nail, they are still Kosher.[72] [Likewise, if they are dry and white but cannot be broken with a fingernail, they are still valid.]

How many leaves must be dry to invalidate the Hadass?[73] If the top leaves have remained completely fresh, then even if majority of the leaves have dried, the Hadass is still Kosher.[74] However, if the top leaves have begun to wither and dry, even if they have not yet dried to the extent that invalidates them, some Poskim[75] rule that it does not have the power to validate a Hadass whose majority of leaves are dry and hence the Hadass is invalid.[76] Other Poskim[77], however, rule that even a withered top leaf validates a dry Hadass, so long as the top leaves have not dried. Practically, one should only rely to use such a Hadass from the second day of Sukkos and onwards.[78] If majority of the leaves [including the top] have dried to the point they can be broken with one’s nail, and have lost all their greenness, turning white, it is Pasul.

If only the top leaves are dry:[79] If the top leaves of the Hadass have dried to the extent to make them Pasul, some Poskim[80] rule the Hadass nevertheless remains valid.[81] Other Poskim[82], however, rule it is invalid, even if the rest of the leaves have remained fresh.[83] Practically, one should be stringent to use another Hadass if it is available. If another Hadass is not available, then one may use it with a blessing.[84]

On Chol Hamoed:[85] Even if the top leaves have begun to dry, as long as they are not completely dry, the Hadass is Kosher even if majority of its other leaves have dried.

Second day of Diaspora:[86] On the second day of Sukkos in the Diaspora, if no other Hadass is available, one may use a Hadass whose leaves have dried so long as its top is not completely dry.

Summary: If the top leaves have remained completely fresh, then even if majority of the leaves have dried, it is Kosher. However, if the top leaves have begun to dry, even if they have not yet dried to the extent that invalidates them, some say it does not have the power to validate a Hadass whose leaves are majority dry. Practically one should only rely on such a Hadass from the second day of Sukkos and onwards. Top leaves: If the top [leaves with the stem] was cut off or the top leaves dried up [see above for definition] one should exchange the Hadass. Q&A What is the status of the Hadass if majority of its leaves droop downwards?[87] Some Poskim[88] rule the Hadass is invalid. However, from other Poskim[89] it is implied that it is valid.

7. A Hadass branch with fruits/grapes:[90]

The law of the Hadass:[91] It is common for Hadassim to grow a grape like fruit. If within the Shiur of three Tefachim, the branch contains more black or red grapes than leaves within this area, then it is invalid.[92] In such a case it is invalid even on the second day of Sukkos and onwards, on Chol Hamoed. If the grapes are a green color, similar to the color of the branch of the Hadass, then the Hadass is Kosher even if there are more green grapes than there are leaves within its Shiur of 24 cm. This validity applies even on the first day of Sukkos.

Plucking off the fruits:[93] If the Hadass is invalid due to having a majority of red or black grapes versus leaves, then it can be validated by simply plucking off enough of these grapes to make the Hadass be majority leaves over grapes. This applies whether one removed the grapes before Yom Tov, or on Chol Hamoed, and even if he transgressed and plucked the grapes on Yom Tov itself, as will be explained next. One may even initially use such a Hadass with a blessing.

Plucking off the fruits on Yom Tov:[94] It is forbidden to pluck the grapes off an invalid Hadass branch on Yom Tov of Sukkos if one is doing so in order to validate the branch. Furthermore, even if one is not doing so in order to validate the branch, but rather in order to eat the grapes, but this is the only Hadass branch one has to fulfill the Mitzvah, then nevertheless it is forbidden to do so.[95] If, however, one does need to use this Hadass for the Mitzvah, being he has other valid Hadassim available, then it is permitted to pluck the grapes from the Hadass for the purpose of eating them, being one is not fixing anything as he has no need for it.[96]

Random leaves/branches which grow wild on the Hadass:[97] Some Poskim[98] rule that random leaves or branches which grow on the Hadass and interfere with its sets of Meshulash leaves, can possibly invalidate the Hadass and are to be plucked off. Other Poskim[99] rule that there is no need to be particular to remove the random leaves, and that so is the custom. Practically, it is proper initially to be stringent to remove these leaves from before Yom Yov.[100] The above dispute only applies to leaves that grow amongst the actual sets of the three Meshulash leaves. However, leaves/branches that sporadically grow between sets, according to all do not need to be removed.[101]

8. Kashrus-Arla, Teruma Maaser:[102]

Lulavim are not subject to the restrictions of Arla, and do not require Terumos and Maasros to be removed from them, and therefore no such invalidation exists by the Lulav, unlike by an Esrog.

9. Shemita-Kedushas Shevi’is:

Some Poskim[103] rule that Hadassim do not contain Kedushas Shevi’is. Other Poskim[104] rule it contains Kedushas Shevi’is and it follows the year of blossom.

__________________________________________

[1] Siddur Im Dach Shaar Halulav p. 264

[2] Vayikra Raba 30:12

[3] Admur 646:1; Michaber 646:3; Sukkah 32b; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:1

[4] Vayikra 23:40

[5] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:1

[6] Kashrus Daled Minim p. 118; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:4

[7] Mur Uketzia, brought in Shaareiy Teshuvah 646:3

[8] Bikurei Yaakov; Rashash; Chaim Ubracha 59

[9] Chazon Ish 146:15

[10] Bikureiy Yaakov 646:11; Chazon Ish 146:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:4

[11] See Sdei Chemed Lamed 141:44; Chaim Ubracha 55; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:1

[12] Bahag Hilchos Lulav; Rav Haiy Gaon on Mishnayos Uktzin 3:4; Aruch

[13] Omitted from Shulchan Aruch

[14] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:1

[15] Tiferes Yisrael Chulin 3:1

[16] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:1

[17] Tiferes Yisrael Chulin 3:1

[18] P”M 649 M”Z 3; M”B 646:65

[19] See Poskim ibid; Chacham Tzevi 161; Shaareiy Teshuvah 646; Beir Heiytiv 646:8

[20] Tzitz Kodesh 16; Hashemita 7:11; Mishnes Yosef 3; Minchas Yitzchak 1:130; Minchas Shlomo 1:52

[21] See Minchas Yitzchak ibid

[22] Admur 646:3; 650:1; Michaber 650:1; Sukkah 32b

[23] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur ibid; 3^rd opinion in Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; Tana Kama in Sukkah ibid

[24] Shiureiy Torah of Rav Avraham Chaim Na’ah, however according to the Chazon Ish, it needs to be 30 cm. tall. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[25] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; 1^st opinion in Michaber ibid; Raavad and Rosh; Rebbe Tarfon in Sukkah ibid

[26] Shiureiy Torah of Rav Avraham Chaim Na’ah, however according to the Chazon Ish, it needs to be 25 cm. tall. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[27] Admur ibid; Rama 650:1

[28] Piskeiy Teshuvos 650:1

[29] Admur 650:2; Michaber 650:1; Maharitz Geios

[30] Admur 646:2-3; Michaber 646:3; Sukkah 32b

The law of an Egyptian Hadass which grows with seven leaves in each set: The Hadass is valid. [Admur 646:5; Michaber 646:4; Sukkah 33a]

The law of a two-leaf set Hadass: Some Poskim rule that a Hadass with two leaf sets is valid, as a Hadass Shoteh is specifically when there is a third leaf that grows lower than the other two leaves, and not when there isn’t three leaves altogether. Practically, so is the custom in these countries in which a three leaf Hadass cannot be found. [Admur 646:6; Rama 646:3; Terumas Hadeshen 2:259; Maharik 41:2]

[31] Must the actual roots of the stem of each individual leaf be symmetric? Some Poskim rule that so long as the roots are symmetric in some area of their growth, even if they do not all begin to grow from the same horizontal line, and hence some leaves begin to grow higher than others, nonetheless it is valid. [Chazon Ish, brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:3]

[32] Admur ibid; M”A 646

[33] Admur ibid; Rama ibid

[34] Admur 646:3; Michaber 646:5; Tur 646 in name of Rosh 3:10; Raavad in Tamim Deim 228 and on Rambam 7:2; Levush 646; Chayeh Adam 150:2; M”B 646:18

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if the entire Hadass is not Meshulash it is invalid. [Geonim, brought in Tur ibid; Rav Hamagid on Rambam 7:2] Other Poskim rule that so long as there is even one set of Meshulash leaves the entire Hadass is valid. [Baal Haitur and Rambam, brought in Tur ibid] See Kaf Hachaim 646:36; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:5

[35] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid; Poskim ibid

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the Hadass is to be Meshulash for slightly more than two Tefachim. [P”M 646 M”Z 9]

[36] Rama 646:5; Tur in name of Rosh ibid in name of Ravad; Vetzaruch Iyun why Admur omitted this matter

[37] Michaber ibid; Taz 646:9

The reason: The area of the Hadass that is not Avus [Meshulash] is considered to be non-existent and hence the Hadass loses its Shiur. If, however, its majority is Meshulash then it does not lose its Shiur. [Taz 646:9]

[38] See M”B 650:1; Chazon Ish 146:8; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:5

[39] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:6

[40] Admur 646:3 “It is entirely Meshulash throughout its Shiur of three Tefachim…. Majority of its sets are Meshulash for its Shiur of three Tefachim..” Thus, according to Admur, the Hadass is Kosher so long as majority of its Shiur is Meshulash even if majority of the branch is not Meshulach; Bach 646; Bikureiy Yaakov 646, brought in Biur Halacha 646:5 “Leikuva”; See Taz 646:9 “When it is not Meshulash it loses its Shiur” thus implying that we only care about the top three Tefachim; See Peri Megadim 646 M”Z 9; Biur Halacha 646 Leikuva; Shevet Halevi 7:2 and Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:6; Kashrus Daled Minim p. 114

[41] See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[42] Implication of Admur 646:3; Shevet Halevi 7:2; See Taz 646:9 “When it is not Meshulash it loses its Shiur” thus implying that we only care about the top three Tefachim

[43] See Peri Megadim 646 M”Z 9, brought in Biur Halacha 646 Leikuva who brings the opinions in this matter and does not give a final arbitration; and Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:6 concludes to be stringent

[44] Bikureiy Yaakov 646, brought in Biur Halacha 646:5 “Leikuva”

[45] Admur 646:3 “It is entirely Meshulash throughout its Shiur of three Tefachim….Majority of its sets are Meshulash for its Shiur of three Tefachim..”

[46] Implication of Admur ibid who explicitly writes that “majority of the sets of three leaves must be Mushulash.”; Beis Yosef 646; See Biur Halacha Kanim; Chazon Ish 146:1 and 4 and 8; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:5 footnote 22

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule we follow majority of the area of the wood of the branch. [M”B 646:18; See Biur Halacha ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid]

[47] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:5

[48] Kaf Hachaim 646:38 in name of Erech Hashulchan; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:5 footnote 19

[49] Admur 646:4; Taz 646:8; Tur; Bach; Rosh; Ran; Sukkah 32b

The law of an Egyptian Hadass which grows with seven leaves in each set: The Hadass is valid. If majority of the leaves fall off, then so long as three leaves remain in majority of their sets, it is valid. [Admur 646:5; Michaber 646:4; Sukkah 33a]

The law of a two-leaf set Hadass: Some Poskim rule that a Hadass with two leaf sets is valid, as stated above in Halacha 3 in the footnotes. If a single leaf fell off majority of its sets within its three Tefachim length, then it is invalid. [Admur 646:7; Taz 646:8; Bach 646]

[50] See Admur 646:11; Beis HaShoeiva 646:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:7

[51] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:2

[52] Bikureiy Yaakov 646:4 in name of Rosh and Baal Haittur; See M”A 647:2 regarding Aravos

[53] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:2

[54] Bikureiy Yaakov 646:4 in name of Raavad in Tamim Deim; Daas Torah 647

[55] Admur 646:11; Michaber 646:10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:7

[56] Stam opinion in Admur ibid; 1^st opinion in Michaber ibid; Rosh in name of Piskeiy Rid

[57] The reason: Now although whenever the head of one of the other Minim have been chopped off the species is invalid, nevertheless by a Hadass it remains valid. The reason for this is because the leaves of a Hadass cover over the top branch that was cut off and it is hence not noticeable that the Hadass has lost its head and its Hadar is thus not readily affected. [Admur ibid]

[58] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; 2^nd opinion in Michaber ibid; Raavad; Baal Hamaor; Reah; Ritvah; Ran

[59] Meaning, that if the entire width of the top part of the Hadass branch was cut off, then it is invalid. If, however, only part of the thickness of the branch has been cut off, while the rest remains, then it remains valid. [Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:7]

[60] The reason: As since the head of the Hadass is not Hadar the Hadass is invalid. [Admur ibid]

[61] Admur ibid; Rama 646:10; Taz 646:1; M”A 645:6; Yireim 422

[62] Beis Hashoeiva 646:19

[63] Chaim Ubracha 65

[64] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:8

[65] Iglei Tal Kotzer 32:59 based on Rashi and Raavad

[66] Kinyan Torah 6:45

[67] See Shaareiy Teshuvah 646:5 in name of Halachos Ketanos; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[68] Admur 646:8-11

[69] Admur 646:8; Michaber 646:6; Mishneh Sukkah 32b

The reason: As this is not considered Hadar. [Admur ibid]

[70] Admur 646:8; Michaber 646:7; Tur; Rosh; Raavad in Tamim Deim 232; M”A 646:6; Masas Binyamon 17

[71] The reason: As one is unable to have the Hadass return to its healthy state even if he leaves it in water for several days. [Admur ibid]

[72] Admur 646:8

The reason: Because one is still able to have the Hadass return to its healthy state by leaving it in water for several days. [Admur ibid]

[73] Admur 646:9-10

[74] Admur 646:9; 1^st opinion in Michaber 646:8; Sukkah 33a

The reason: The reason for this is because the main beauty of the Hadass is the top which is what one sees at first sight and thus so long as the top of the Hadass remains dry it is considered Hadar and is valid. [Admur ibid]

[75] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur 646:10; 1^st opinion in Michaber 646:9; Raavad; Ran

[76] This is despite the fact that even if the entire Hadass has withered but not dried, it is nevertheless valid. [Admur ibid]

[77] 2^nd opinion in Admur 646:10; 2^nd opinion in Michaber 646:9; Tur; Rosh; Ritva

[78] Admur 646:10; Vetzaruch Iyun if a blessing may be recited on the second day.

[79] Admur 646:11; Michaber 646:10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:7

[80] Stam opinion in Admur ibid; 1^st opinion in Michaber ibid; Rosh in name of Piskeiy Rid

[81] The reason: Now although whenever the head of one of the other Minim have been chopped off the species is invalid nevertheless by a Hadass it remains valid. The reason for this is because the leaves of a Hadass cover over the top branch that was cut off and it is hence not noticeable that the Hadass has lost its head and its Hadar is thus not readily affected. [Admur ibid]

[82] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; 2^nd opinion in Michaber ibid; Raavad; Baal Hamaor; Reah; Ritvah; Ran

[83] The reason: As since the head of the Hadass is not Hadar, the Hadass is invalid. [Admur ibid]

[84] Admur ibid; Rama 646:10; Taz 646:1; M”A 645:6; Yireim 422

[85] Admur 646:10; 649:19 #6

[86] Admur 646:10; 649:21; Vetzaruch Iyun if a blessing may be recited on the second day.

[87] Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:2

[88] Chazon Ish 146:35

[89] Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid based on M”A 647:2 who applies such an invalidation only to Aravos and only as a stringency

[90] See Admur 646:12-14

[91] Admur 646:12; Michaber 646:2; Mishneh Sukkah 32b and Gemara 33b; M”A 646:4

[92] The reason: As the black or red colored grapes make the Hadass, which is green, be considered Menumar/spotted, which is not Hadar. [Admur ibid]

[93] Admur 646:13; Michaber 646:2; Mishneh Sukkah 32b

[94] Admur 646:13-14; See Michaber 646:11; Mishneh Sukkah 32b; M”A 646:2

[95] Admur 646:13; Poskim ibid

The reason: This prohibition is due to Tikkun Keli, of which it is forbidden to be done even if one has no intent to do so, [being that one does plan to benefit from the vessel that his action created].

[96] Admur 646:13; M”A ibid; Taz 646:5; Sukkah ibid

[97] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 646:9; Nitei Gavriel 16:7

[98] Machatzis Hashekel 646:1 in name of Ran, according to Pirush of Reah and Raavad in the opinion of Rebbe Tarfon that he is not arguing on the Mishneh of Niktam Rosho, and that so applies according to all; Bashamayim Rosh 74; Chayeh Adam 150:8; Bikureiy Yaakov 646:2; M”B 646:33 and Shaar Hatziyon 646:35-36

[99] Karban Nesanel, brought in Shaar Hatziyon 646:37, that according to those Poskim who understand Rebbe Tarfon to argue on Mishneh, and validate Niktam Rosho, there is no need to pluck off the random leaves; Shaar Hatziyon ibid that so is implied from the fact that this law was omitted from Michaber and Admur in 646

[100] Conclusion of Shaar Hatziyon ibid; Nitei Gavriel ibid

[101] Machatzis Hashekel ibid that everyone agrees that such leaves do not need to be removed; Chaim Ubracha 61; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid; Nitei Gavriel ibid

[102] See Rashi Sukkah 33b; Michaber Y.D. 294; Piskeiy Teshuvos 649:6

A Hadass of Mudar Hanah: See Admur 649:16 and 19 that it is invalid on the first day, although is valid on the other days.

[103] Tzitz Kodesh 16; HaShemita 7:11; Mishnes Yosef 3; Minchas Yitzchak 1:130; Minchas Shlomo 1:52

[104] See Minchas Yitzchak ibid

Bookmark