Study Sukkah folio 36A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
this Mishnah, where it states that if the etrog was peeled it is unfit, is in a case where all of it was peeled. That statement of Rava that if it was peeled it is fit is in a case where only part of it was peeled.
The Mishnah continues discussing the halakha of an etrog that was split or pierced. Ulla bar Ḥanina taught: An etrog that was pierced with a hole that completely goes through its body is unfit with any size hole. If the hole does not completely go through the etrog, it is unfit only with a hole the
Rava raised a dilemma: If signs of a tereifa developed in the etrog, what is its halakhic status? The Talmud clarifies: What is the dilemma that he is raising? There are similarities between the halakhot of the etrog in the Mishnah and some of the halakhot of a tereifa, a bird or animal with a con
The Talmud answers: When he raises the dilemma, it is with regard to a case like that which Ulla said that R' Yoḥanan said: A lung whose contents can be poured like a pitcher, i.e., whose tissue dissolved to the point of liquefaction, is not a sign of tereifa, and the animal is kosher. And Rava sa
The Talmud answers: Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma based on that which was taught in a baraita. An etrog that is tafuaḥ, saruaḥ, pickled, boiled, a black Cushite etrog, a white etrog, or a speckled etrog is unfit. An etrog shaped like a ball is unfit, and some say even a twin, conjoine