Hello Everyone,
Today was the first in our series of shiurim dealing with the laws of the Sukkot holiday and we studied one of the laws of the etrog, specifically the status of an etrog which was grown on a grafted tree.
Most people know that the Torah prohibits grafting two different species of tree together, this is the prohibition of kilayim. The question regarding etrogim that are grafted is actually two-fold, is it prohibited to graft an etrog onto another type of citrus tree, and is the product of this grafting forbidden to use in the mitzvah of arba minim?
The need to graft the etrog tree is due to the fragile nature of the tree. Etrog trees are “flimsy” and short-lived. Grafting them makes the farmer’s life much easier. Interestingly the Gemarah does not discuss the status of a grafted etrog. The third chapter of masechet Sukkah is Lulav Hagazul, and while it discusses many. many possible flaws in an etrog it does not discuss a grafted etrog at all.
The question of grafted etrogim was first discussed in the 16th century. Two reasons were given for disallowing them. Rav Mordechai Yaffeh zt”l, the author of the Levush, wrote that since the grafted etrog is the product of a forbidden act (the act of grafting) the etrog can no longer be used in the performance of a mitzvah. Rav Moshe Alsheich zt”l of Safed wrote that the grafted etrog is the offspring of two different trees, the etrog tree and the tree onto which it was grafted (let’s say a lemon tree for our purposes). To be valid for use in the mitzvah of arba minim the etrog must be intact. Even if only the stem known as the pittum is missing, the etrog may not be used. As Rav Moshe Alsheich saw it, the grafted etrog is not “complete” since some fraction of it is derived from the lemon tree onto which it was grafted. Of course the grafted etrog looks intact and complete, but if we could physically remove the lemon-derived portion of the fruit it would of course be flawed. Since a lemon cannot be used as an etrog, we must view the etrog-lemon hybrid as flawed and unacceptable for use in performing the mitzvah.
The Chazon ish zt”l was one of the great Halachic authorities of the 20thcentury. He wrote extensively on all areas of the Halacha including agricultural issues so he naturally wrote on the laws of kilayim. Whereas the Levush took it for granted that the grafting of an etrog onto a lemon tree is forbidden, the Chazon Ish was not certain of this.[1] The halachot of kilayim are based on Chazal’s rules of taxonomy. The Chazon Ish felt that there are enough points of resemblance between lemons, etrogim, grapefruit and oranges, to say that it may not be forbidden to graft one of these types onto another. Nevertheless the Chazon Ish accepted that a grafted etrog is not be used for the mitzvah. The Torah dictates that the fruit used in fulfilling the mitzvah be פרי עץ הדר , so even if the fruit grown from the grafted tree resembles in all ways a “pure” etrog, that fruit grew on a lemon tree and is not what the Torah describes. The Chazon Ish takes the issue further and rules that even the fruit grown from the seeds on a grafted etrog (when those “descendants” of the grafted etrog are not themselves grafted) are not to be used.
Even though there were authorities who wrote that the prohibition of grafted etrogim is not so clear it became accepted to reject the use of grafted etrogim.
Etrogim, like all citrus fruit need to be grown in warm climates. It was very difficult to obtain etrogim in places like Poland and Russia and they were very expensive. Since etrogim were being grown by Gentiles so far from these Jewish communities rumors began to spread about the kashrut of one or another country’s etrogim due to the grafting issue. At sometime or another there arose the idea that “pure” etrogim could be identified by these signs:
- a) etrogim are bumpy while other citrus fruit are smooth
- b) the stem of an etrog extends out of a concavity, unlike other citrus fruit
- c) the rind of an etrog is very thick while it has very little pulp, again unlike other citrus fruit
While these signs gained wide currency the great 19th century authority, the Chatam Sofer said that they do not appear in the Gemarah and cannot be relied upon to prove an etrog’s purity.[2] The Chatam Sofer ruled that etrogim should only be purchased from reliable dealers who can reliably state that their etrogim did not grow on grafted trees.
During the 19th century and into the early 20th century the competition (and rumor-mongering) about various etrogim heated up. The island of Corfu was a leading producer of etrogim. The etrog growers of Corfu knew that the Jews prized their etrogim (the Encyclopedia אוצר ישראל records that according to a widely-held belief a person who did not use a Corfu etrog would die that year). Between the years 1881-1882 the price demanded by the Corfu growers was more than tripled with the belief that the Jews would still buy their produce. However the etrog dealers banded together to boycott the Corfu growers and stopped buying from them. In a rage the farmers in Corfu launched a pogrom and even a blood-libel against their Jewish neighbors but this marketing tactic failed to win the Jewish etrog brokers back.
During this turmoil Jewish pioneers began to return to Israel and one of the first things they did was to begin to raise etrogim. Etrogim grew naturally in Israel and it was taken for granted that these etrogim were never grafted. The leading Poskim of the period agreed that the etrogim of Israel were to be preferred over the etrogim grown in other countries both because of the certainty of their not being grafted and as an act of צדקה to help the nascent Jewish community there.
In our time with some exceptions, most people use etrogim grown in Israel, and these etrogim come with letters certifying that they are from particular stocks which are considered to be non-grafted.
We ended the shiur with a story told by Rav Chaim David Halevi zt”l who was the Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv. Rav Chaim David saw in his shul a man with a particularly nice etrog and asked him how much it cost. When the man replied that it only cost 30 shekels, Rav Chaim David was taken aback, since “pure” etrogim of such quality cost much more. Thinking that the man’s etrog may have been grafted, Rav Chaim David offered to let the man use his own etrog for the mitzvah. The man was deeply insulted by the rabbi’s offer. He asked the rabbi how he could even consider using an etrog that he did not pay for with his own money. The rabbi did not insist and on the next day the man returned to the synagogue with the same etrog and Rav Chaim David did not repeat his offer.
Rav Chaim David reflected on this incident and wrote a lengthy essay about it in the journal תחומין. Rav Chaim David said there were two conflicting issues that he needed to deal with. One was the mitzvah to have the ארבעה מינים on סוכות. The other mitzvah was to allow this man to rejoice on the holiday- ושמחת בחגיך. After analyzing the subject of grafted etrogim, Rav Chaim David came to the conclusion that there was no certainty that the man’s etrog was not kosher (perhaps it really was not grafted, perhaps grafted etrogim are kosher, etc…) but he certainly did detract from the man’s happiness on the holiday. While a person who has doubts about his own etrog’s kashrut should make every effort to use a non-grafted etrog, a person who has doubts about someone else’s etrog should remain silent.
Thanks to everyone who participated in the shiur. Stuart Fischman
[1] It needs to be pointed out that division of living things into categories is not an exact science. Every person who looked into this subject (from Pliny the Elder to Linnaeus and ever since) had their own basis for saying that “this is related to that.” This is the area of biology known as taxonomy.
[2] In general a fruit’s appearance is not altered by being grafted since grafting per se has no effect on the fruit’s genetic endowment.