Parallel
סוכה 34:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
Abba Saul says, Willows [in the plural means] two, one for the lulab and one for the Sanctuary. And whence do the Rabbis deduce [the law of the willow] for the Sanctuary? — They had this as an accepted tradition; for R. Assi said in the name of R. Johanan, The laws of ten plants, the willow-branch and the water libation were given to Moses upon Mount Sinai. Our Rabbis taught, ‘Willows of the brook’ means those that grow by the brook excluding the zafzafah which is a willow that grows on the mountains. R. Zera said, Where is its Scriptural support? — He placed it beside many waters, he set it as a zafzafah. Abaye said to him, Is it not possible that [the latter part] is merely an explanation: ‘He placed it beside many waters’, and what was it? A zafzafah? — If so, what was the need for ‘he set it’? R. Abbahu explained it: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, I intended that Israel should be before Me as something placed beside many waters, that is, a willow, but they have made themselves as a zafzafah of the mountains. Some teach this verse in connection with the Baraitha: ‘He placed it beside many waters, he set it as a zafzafah’. To this R. Zera demurred, Is it not possible that [the latter part] is merely an explanation: ‘He placed it beside many waters’ and what was it? A zafzafah? — If so, what could be the meaning of ‘he set it’? R. Abbahu explained it: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, I intended that Israel should be before Me as something placed beside many waters, that is, a willow, and they have made themselves as a zafzafah of the mountains. Our Rabbis taught, What is a willow and what a zafzafah?--The willow has a red stem, an elongated leaf and a smooth edge; the zafzafah has a white stem, a round leaf and an edge serrated like a sickle. But has it not been taught, If it is like a sickle it is valid, if like a saw it is invalid? — Abaye said. That was taught only with regard to the rounded willow. Abaye said, Deduce therefrom that a rounded willow is valid for the hoshanna. But is not this obvious? — I would have said that since it has a distinctive name it would be thereby invalid, therefore he informs us [that it is not so]. But perhaps it is indeed so? — ‘Willows of the brook’, says the Divine Law, implying from any place. R. Hisda said, Since the destruction of the temple the following three things have had their names interchanged. [What was formerly called] hilpetha [is now called] ‘arabta, and what was called ‘arabta, is now called hilpetha. What does that legally matter?-With regard to the lulab. [What was before called] shifora [is now called] hazozerah, and what was hazozerah is now shifora. In what respect does this legally matter? — In respect of the shofar for the New Year. [What was formerly called] pathora [is now called] pathorta, and what was pathorta is now pathora. In what respect does this matter legally? — In respect of business transactions. Abaye said, l also add [that what was formerly called] be kase [is now called] hublila, and the former hublila is now be kase. In what respect does this legally matter? — In respect of a needle found in the fleshy part of the second stomach. Raba b. Joseph said, I also add that [what was formerly called] Babylon [is now called] Borsif and the former Borsif is now Babylon. In what legal respect
—