The issue is that one is not allowed to perform work, during shmitta, for improving the quality of the lulav, for the sake of the mitzva. So Rav Elyashiv paskened that if the work was performed for the purpose of improving the lulav, better not to take this lulav (note that in the letter below he does not say it is assur, but says ""ra'ui le'hader" better [not to]). If however, work was performed for other reasons that are allowed (such as preservation of the tree I assume), than using the lulav would be ok, even though it was also improved in quality.
How is a person buying arba minim supposed to know the difference?
ReplyDeletethat is where the business of hechshers comes in, mostly to be led by Rav Elyashiv's right hand man, Rav Efrati
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that one of the hachrazot describes itself as "psak halacha", and the other as "daas torah". Are they aimed at different communities - the first at those who are committed to halacha, but sceptical about rabbinic hegemony over all decisions we make in life, and the second at those whose hashkafa is based on following "daas torah" in all matters of life? Just a thought. I'm probably reading too much into it.
ReplyDeleteinteresting observation... don't know.
ReplyDeletebut I think both are under the header of psak halacha, and then there is the sub-category of 1. ne'evad -lulav and 2. daas torah
the part titled "daas torah" does not appear to be signed by RYSE in any case. is that R' S. Wosner's signature?
ReplyDelete