Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Zeh Keli V'Anveihu third post

Yesterday we answered the first question of Tosafos on Rashi. Rashi said that lulav hayavesh is pasul even b'dieved because of zeh keli v'anveihu. The question was isn't zeh keli v'anveihu only a din l'chatchila? We answered that there are two dinim in zeh keli v'anvehu. One is a din in the cheftza shel mitzvah that if it's not v'anvehu it is pasul even b'dieved. The second din is in the gavra, that one should try to beautify mitzvos. That din applies to binding a lulav and is not m'akev. The second question of Tosafos is that isn't it an explicit gemara that lulav hayavesh is pasul because of a hekesh to esrog where it says hadar. I never really got a great answer to this question. One possibility is that we know yavesh is a psul cheftza from esrog but the actual source of the psul by lulav is from zeh keli v'anvehu. If that is the case, so the hekesh from esrog is just a gilui milsa on the nature of the psul of yavesh. (I believe I saw something like this in Reshimos.) A second possibility is that, in fact, hadar is used for different things on 35a, and that's what motivated Rashi. Finally, we can also point out that by Rashi saying the psul of lulav hayavesh is from zeh keli v'anvehu he gets out of tosafos' question on 29b as to why lulav hayavesh is pasul all 7 days when other psulim are only for the first day. Rashi can simply say that yavesh is different b/c it is learnt from v'anvehu.