From ‘Pitom’ to Pepper: Etrog Requirements and the Interpretation of ‘Pri Etz Hadar’ (Mishnah Sukkah 3:5-7; Sukkah 34b-35a)

In honor of the upcoming holiday of Sukkot.

This sugya centers on the identity and requirements of the etrog (=citron), the fruit traditionally understood as referred to in Leviticus 23:40 as pri etz hadar (‘fruit of a beautiful tree’). The Mishnah opens by listing various disqualifications—both halakhic and physical—including stolen or dried etrogim, those from forbidden sources like orla or asheira, and ones with certain blemishes, size issues, or problematic status under teruma, demai, or ma’aser sheni.

The Talmud then moves beyond legal disqualification into midrashic identification. What exactly is this pri etz hadar?

The Talmud first suggests a botanical property: the etrog is unique in that both its fruit and tree share the same taste. Other candidates are tested—most notably, pepper—but rejected on practical and textual grounds. The sugya then shifts to a series of creative re-readings of the word hadar: R’ Yehuda HaNasi reads it as ha-dir (“the animal enclosure”), describing the etrog tree’s mixed fruit stages; R’ Abbahu reads it as ha-dar (“that dwells”), since the etrog stays on the tree year-round; Ben-Azzai connects it to the Greek idur (=hydra; “water”), highlighting its unique irrigation profile.

These drashot reflect a broader rabbinic method: resolving legal identity not only through halakhic analysis but through intuitive wordplay readings of Biblical language.

Outline

Intro

The Passage - From ‘Pitom’ to Pepper: Etrog Requirements and the Interpretation of ‘Pri Etz Hadar’ (Sukkah 34b)

Mishnah - Physical and Legal Disqualifications

1. Stolen, dried out, ‘asheira’, Impure teruma, Demai, Second tithe

2. Imperfections affect validity: blisters, missing protuberance (‘pitom’), peeled, cracked, or pierced

3. Color - Black; Green

4. Size - Minimum and Maximum size

Talmud - Which Fruit Is ‘Pri Etz Hadar’? (Leviticus 23:40)

1. “A tree whose wood and fruit taste alike”

2. Maybe it’s Pepper? (Leviticus 19:23; Deuteronomy 8:9)

3. Pepper is too small

4. Interpretive Re-Readings of “Hadar”

   1. R’ Yehuda HaNasi - “just as in the animal enclosure there are large/small/unblemished/blemished sheep”

   2. R’ Abbahu - “an item that dwells on its tree from year to year”

   3. Ben-Azzai - “in Greek, “water” is ‘idur’ ”

Appendix - Fact-check of the key scientific claims made in the sugya

The Passage

Sukkah.34b.8-35a.5

Mishnah - Physical and Legal Disqualifications

(=Mishnah_Sukkah.3.5-7)

Stolen, dried out, ‘asheira’, Impure teruma, Demai, Second tithe

The Mishnah lists categories of etrogim that are disqualified for use on Sukkot. These include:

1. Those that are stolen or dried out.

2. From prohibited sources: an ‘asheira’ (אשרה) tree, a city condemned for idolatry (עיר הנדחת), or during the orla period.

3. Impure teruma is invalid; pure teruma is discouraged but valid post factum.

4. Demai etrogim are a point of dispute: Beit Shammai disqualifies, Beit Hillel permits.

5. Second tithe etrogim in Jerusalem are also discouraged but valid if used.

1. אתרוג הגזול והיבש —

   1. פסול.

2. של אשרה ושל עיר הנדחת —

   1. פסול.

3. של ערלה —

   1. פסול.

4. של תרומה טמאה —

   1. פסול.

5. של תרומה טהורה --

   1. לא יטול,

   2. ואם נטל —

      1. כשר.

6. של דמאי —

   1. בית שמאי: פוסלין,

   2. ובית הלל: מכשירין.

7. של מעשר שני בירושלים —

   1. לא יטול,

   2. ואם נטל —

      1. כשר

1. An etrog that was stolen or is completely dry --

   1. is unfit.

2. One from a tree worshipped as idolatry [asheira] or from a city whose residents were incited to idolatry --

   1. is unfit.

3. An etrog that is fruit that grew on a tree during the three years after it was planted [orla] --

   1. is unfit, because it is prohibited to eat and derive benefit from it.

4. An etrog of impure teruma --

   1. is unfit.

5. With regard to an etrog of pure teruma,

   1. one may not take it ab initio,

   2. and if one took it --

      1. it is fit, and he fulfilled his obligation after the fact.

6. With regard to an etrog of demai, which is produce acquired from an am ha’aretz, who does not reliably tithe his produce --

   1. Beit Shammai deem it unfit,

   2. and Beit Hillel deem it fit.

7. With regard to an etrog of second tithe in Jerusalem --

   1. one may not take it ab initio;

   2. and if he took it —

      1. it is fit.

Imperfections affect validity: blisters, missing protuberance (‘pitom’), peeled, cracked, or pierced

• Invalid if the etrog is mostly afflicted with blisters (ḥazazit), has lost its blossom-end protuberance,¹ is peeled, cracked, or pierced in a way that removes material.

• Valid if blemishes are minor, stem (ukatz) is removed, or if pierced without loss of substance.

1. עלתה חזזית על רובו,

2. נטלה פטמתו,

3. נקלף,

4. נסדק,

5. ניקב

6. וחסר כל שהוא —

פסול.

1. עלתה חזזית על מיעוטו,

2. נטל עוקצו,

3. ניקב ולא חסר כל שהוא —

כשר.

1. If boil-like blemishes arose on the majority of the etrog;

2. if its pestle-like protuberance on the upper, blossom end was removed;

3. if the etrog was peeled,

4. split,

5. or pierced

6. and is missing any amount --

it is unfit.

1. However, if boil-like blemishes arose only on its minority;

2. if its stem, which connects it to the tree, was removed;

3. or it was pierced but is not missing any amount --

it is fit.

Color - Black; Green

• A black (“Cushite”) etrog is invalid.

• A green² etrog is debated: R’ Meir permits, R’ Yehuda disqualifies.

אתרוג הכושי —

פסול,

והירוק ככרתי —

רבי מאיר: מכשיר

ורבי יהודה: פוסל.

A Cushite etrog, which is black like a Cushite --

is unfit.

And with regard to an etrog that is leek green --

R’ Meir deems it fit

and R’ Yehuda deems it unfit.

Size - Minimum and Maximum size

• Minimum size: walnut (R’ Meir) or egg (R’ Yehuda).

• Maximum: enough to hold two in one hand (R’ Yehuda); no maximum (R’ Yosei).

שיעור אתרוג הקטן --

רבי מאיר אומר: כאגוז,

רבי יהודה אומר: כביצה.

ובגדול —

כדי שיאחז שנים בידו.

דברי רבי יהודה,

ורבי יוסי אומר: אפילו אחד בשתי ידיו.

What is the minimum measure of a small etrog?

R’ Meir says: It may be no smaller than a walnut-bulk.

R’ Yehuda says: It may be no smaller than an egg-bulk.

And in a large etrog --

the maximum measure is so that one could hold two in his one hand;

this is the statement of R’ Yehuda.

R’ Yosei says: It is fit even if it is so large that he can hold only one in his two hands.

Talmud - Which Fruit Is ‘Pri Etz Hadar’? (Leviticus 23:40)

“A tree whose wood and fruit taste alike”

A baraita asserts the etrog is meant by “fruit of a beautiful tree” because it comes from a tree whose wood and fruit taste alike (an unusual property).

תנו רבנן:

״פרי עץ הדר״,

עץ שטעם עצו ופריו שוה —

הוי אומר זה אתרוג.

A baraita states that

the verse states: “Fruit of a beautiful tree,”

meaning, a tree that the taste of its tree trunk and the taste of its fruit are alike.

What tree is that?

You must say it is the etrog tree.

Maybe it’s Pepper? (Leviticus 19:23; Deuteronomy 8:9)

The Talmud questions this by suggesting that pepper (פלפלין) also fits this definition.

Indeed, R’ Meir uses this equivalence to derive that pepper trees are subject to orla.

ואימא פלפלין?

כדתניא,

היה רבי מאיר אומר:

ממשמע שנאמר ״ונטעתם כל עץ״,

איני יודע שהוא עץ מאכל?

מה תלמוד לומר ״עץ מאכל״?

עץ שטעם עצו ופריו שוה —

הוי אומר זה פלפלין.

ללמדך ש:

הפלפלין חייבין בערלה.

ואין ארץ ישראל חסרה כלום,

שנאמר: ״לא תחסר כל בה״.

The Talmud asks: And say that it is referring to the pepper tree, since the taste of its trunk and the taste of its fruit are alike,

as it was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “When you enter the land and plant any tree for food you shall regard its fruit as orla” (Leviticus 19:23).

R’ Meir would say that

by inference from that which is stated “and plant any tree,”

don’t I know that it is referring to a tree that produces food?

Rather, for what purpose does the verse state: “Any tree for food”?

It is to include a tree that the taste of its tree trunk and the taste of its fruit are alike.

And which tree is this?

You must say this is the pepper tree.

This comes to teach you that

the peppers, and even its trunk, are edible, and therefore the tree is obligated in the prohibition of orla.

And Eretz Yisrael lacks nothing,

as it is stated: “A land where you shall eat bread without scarceness, you shall lack nothing” (Deuteronomy 8:9).

From where, then, is it derived that the Torah commands the taking of an etrog as one of the four species? Perhaps the verse is referring to peppers.

Pepper is too small

The Talmud rejects peppers as the intended species because they are too small—taking one is unnoticeable; taking two or three violates the singular “fruit” in the verse.

התם משום דלא אפשר,

היכי נעביד?

ננקוט חדא —

לא מינכרא לקיחתה.

ננקוט תרי או תלתא —

(אחד) אמר רחמנא,

ולא שנים ושלשה פירות,

הלכך לא אפשר.

The Talmud answers: There, with regard to the four species, it is clear that the Torah is not referring to peppers, due to the fact that it is not possible to utilize peppers for this purpose.

How shall we proceed?

If we take 1 pepper --

its taking is not noticeable due to its small size.

If we take 2 or 3 peppers --

the Torah said one fruit and not 2 or 3 fruits.

Therefore, it is impossible. The verse “the fruit of a beautiful tree” cannot be referring to peppers.

Interpretive Re-Readings of “Hadar”

R’ Yehuda HaNasi - “just as in the animal enclosure there are large/small/unblemished/blemished sheep”

R’ Yehuda HaNasi offers a play on words: read “hadar” as “ha-dir” (דיר - “sheep pen”). Just as a pen contains large and small, blemished and unblemished animals, the etrog tree bears diverse fruit simultaneously.

רבי אומר:

אל תקרי ״הדר״,

אלא ״הדיר״.

• מה דיר זה --

  • יש בו גדולים וקטנים, תמימים ובעלי מומין —

• הכי נמי --

  • יש בו גדולים וקטנים, תמימים ובעלי מומין

[…]

R’ Yehuda HaNasi says:

Do not read the verse as it is written, hadar, meaning beautiful,

but rather read it ha-dir, meaning the sheep pen.

And it means,

• just as in this pen --

  • there are large and small sheep, unblemished and blemished sheep,

• so too, this tree --

  • has large and small fruits, flawless and blemished fruits.

[…]

R’ Abbahu - “an item that dwells on its tree from year to year”

R’ Abbahu reads “hadar” as “ha-dar” (דר - “dwells”), referring to a fruit that remains on the tree throughout the year.

רבי אבהו אמר:

אל תקרי ״הדר״,

אלא ״הדר״ —

דבר שדר באילנו משנה לשנה.

R’ Abbahu said:

Do not read it hadar,

but rather read it ha-dar --

meaning “one that dwells”, referring to an item that dwells on its tree from year to year.

Ben-Azzai - “in Greek, “water” is ‘idur’ ”

Ben-Azzai proposes a Greek etymology: read “hadar” as “idur” (אידור), Greek for water.³ Since the etrog grows “on all water” (על כל מים - i.e. with all water sources), it fits this label.

בן עזאי אומר:

אל תקרי ״הדר״,

אלא ״אידור״,

שכן בלשון יווני קורין למים אידור,

ואיזו היא שגדל על כל מים?

הוי אומר זה אתרוג.

Ben Azzai says:

Do not read it hadar,

but rather read it idur,

as in the Greek language one calls water idur.

And which is the fruit that grows on the basis of all water sources, and not exclusively through irrigation or rainwater?

You must say it is an etrog.

Appendix - Fact-check of the key scientific claims made in the sugya

While some empirical features of the etrog are reasonably accurate (e.g., its persistence on the tree), others (like shared taste with the tree or universal water adaptation) are not correct.

1. Etrog tree: taste of wood and fruit is the same

   • Claim: The etrog (Citrus medica) is defined by having wood and fruit with the same taste.

   • Fact-check: Botanically dubious. While the peel and outer layers of the etrog may have similar aromatic compounds to parts of the tree (due to shared oils), the wood itself does not have a comparable taste to the fruit in any sensory or culinary sense.

2. Pepper tree (פלפלין) as a candidate for pri etz hadar

   • Claim: Pepper tree’s wood and fruit taste alike, qualifying it for pri etz hadar status.

   • Fact-check: Likely refers to the black pepper plant (Piper nigrum) or perhaps a capsicum species. These are vines, not trees, and their stems may have some pungency, but the claim is exaggerated.

3. Etrog remains on the tree year-round (R’ Abbahu)

   • Claim: Etrogim remain on the tree from year to year.

   • Fact-check: Largely accurate. Etrog fruits can linger on the tree for extended periods if not harvested, and some cultivars bear new fruit while old ones still cling to branches. This aligns with observed behavior in Citrus medica, especially in warm climates.

4. Etrog grows on ‘all water’ sources (Ben Azzai)

   • Claim: Etrog grows with all water sources, not just rain.

   • Fact-check: Partially true. Etrog trees require consistent moisture and can be sustained through various irrigation methods (rain, canals, etc.), but they are also sensitive to overwatering and salinity. The statement isn’t especially agronomically precise.

1. פטמתו - ‘pitom’.

2. ירוק ככרתי - literally: “green/yellow as a leek”.

The Hebrew ‘yarok’ has the semantic range covering both green and yellow, hence “as a leek” is needed to disambiguate.

3. Compare ‘hydra’.