[Avodah] re'ach

[saul newman via Avodah]

in artscroll's daled minim sefer [ hebrew notes] , there is discussion on
the topic of eucalyptus as aravot. given the leaf shape and stem color ,
it is not clear why it doesnt qualify. one objection was based on the
smell , that aravot are supposed to be re'ach free.

in light of this , i wonder if anyone discusses the smell that aravot
acquire as they blacken , if this smell might likewise be considered a
psul....
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20141012/fa32c7d3/attachment.htm>

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 09:38:14AM -0700, saul newman via Avodah wrote:
: in artscroll's daled minim sefer [ hebrew notes] , there is discussion on
: the topic of eucalyptus as aravot... one objection was based on the
: smell , that aravot are supposed to be re'ach free.
:
: in light of this , i wonder if anyone discusses the smell that aravot
: acquire as they blacken , if this smell might likewise be considered a
: psul....

You would make a borei minei besamim on eucalyptus leaves, but not on
rotting/oxidizing (tea-makers would call it "fermenting", but chemists and
biologists wouldn't) willow leaves of the sort we usually use for aravos.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

[Zev Sero via Avodah]

On 14 October 2014 16:13, Micha Berger via Avodah <avodah at lists.aishdas.org>

Post by Micha Berger via Avodah
You would make a borei minei besamim on eucalyptus leaves, but not on
rotting/oxidizing (tea-makers would call it "fermenting", but chemists and
biologists wouldn't) willow leaves of the sort we usually use for aravos.

I don't understand the premise. The Torah says willows, not eucalyptuses.
All the simanim are for distinguishing willows from similar species, but no
siman is needed to distinguish them from such a dissimilar species that
nobody would mistake them for each other!

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:09:47PM -0400, Zev Sero wrote:
: I don't understand the premise. The Torah says willows, not eucalyptuses.

Actually, it says arvei nachal. One has to prove that the phrase refers
to a taxonomical species. We make hagafen on concord grapes (a cultivar
of the fox grape, Vitis lubrusca), despite their being a different
species than old world grapes (Vitis vinifera). Eucalyptus is actually
in the myrtle family and subfamily, closer to hadasim than aravos in
taxonomy. But I would need more than an assertion to accept that that's
more relevant than their looking enough like river willows for Hebrew
speakers who first encountered them to give them the same name.

: All the simanim are for distinguishing willows from similar species, but no
: siman is needed to distinguish them from such a dissimilar species that
: nobody would mistake them for each other!

And yet they're similar enough in appearance and in growing conditions for
Modern Hebrew speakers to call eucalyptus trees "aravos". If you look at
a eucalyptus branch (eg <http://www.crazyfortea.com/eucalyptustea.html> or
<http://karthikenterprises.tradeindia.com/eucalyptus-leaves-1022326.html>)
it does indeed look identical to a kosher aravah.

PERHAPS related: Birds and bats are described as being created on the
same day -- bats aren't part of day 6. But more likely (but still not
muchrach) related: we generally understand bats as among the ofos that
are listed in the chumash as non-kosher.

So, the question is does halakhah deal in species, or in appearances? I see
that as a question wothy of a teshuvah, and the matter isn't open-and-shut
to my eye.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha