Комментарий к Сукка́ 3:5
אֶתְרוֹג הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ, פָּסוּל. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁרָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת, פָּסוּל. שֶׁל עָרְלָה, פָּסוּל. שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה טְמֵאָה, פָּסוּל. שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה טְהוֹרָה, לֹא יִטֹּל, וְאִם נָטַל, כָּשֵׁר. שֶׁל דְּמַאי, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִין. שֶׁל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם, לֹא יִטֹּל, וְאִם נָטַל, כָּשֵׁר:
Украденный или высушенный этрог пасуль. (Этрог) из ашеиры или из заблудившегося города (после идолопоклонства) - пасул. (Этрог) арла (запретный плод первых трех лет) - пасул, [пишется (Левит 23:40): «И возьми себе»—это должно быть тебе подходит.] (этрог) нечистой терумы - пасул. О чистых терумах—он не должен принимать это; но если он делает, это кашер. Демай (подозреваемый в том, что его не десятину)—Бет Шаммей управляет этим пасулом, а Бет Гилель управляет этим кашером, [он пригоден для бедных, как его учили: «Бедных можно накормить демай». ; но если он взял это, это кашер; [но не за пределами Иерусалима, потому что «для себя» должно быть удовлетворено, т. е. чтобы оно подходило вам.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Sukkah
English Explanation of Mishnah Sukkah
One from an asherah or a condemned city is invalid.
Of orlah or of unclean terumah it is invalid.
Of clean terumah, he should not take it, but if he did take it, it is valid.
Of demai (doubtfully-: Bet Shammai says it invalid, And Bet Hillel says it valid.
Of second tithe, it should not be taken [even] in Jerusalem, but if he took it, it is valid.
This mishnah deals with what makes an etrog invalid. Of the four species, only the etrog is a food and hence only an etrog is subject to the normal agricultural laws tithes, terumah, and orlah. The mishnah therefore focuses on these subjects.
Sections one and two: See mishnah one.
Section three: Orlah is fruit grown from a tree less than three years old. It is forbidden to eat such fruit or derive any benefit from it. Hence an etrog that is from an orlah tree cannot be used. Similarly, it is forbidden to eat or derive any benefit from unclean (impure) terumah. Therefore it too cannot be used in the performance of the mitzvah.
Section four: A pure terumah etrog should not be used to perform the mitzvah, although if it is used it is valid. In the Talmud they debate why it should not be used. The core of the reasoning seems to be that by using it he may ruin it from being a food and terumah is supposed to be eaten. Alternatively, by using a terumah etrog with the lulav he may cause the etrog to get wet and thereby susceptible to impurity [produce is susceptible to impurity only after it has been in contact with liquid].
Section five: Demai is doubtfully-tithed produce, produce that was purchased from someone who is suspected of not separating tithes. There is a frequent debate between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel over the use of demai produce in the performance of a mitzvah. The talmudic explanation is that demai can be eaten by the poor. Since anyone can renounce ownership over all his possessions and thereby become poor, Bet Hillel holds that anyone can use demai to perform a mitzvah. In other words, every person is potentially a poor person. Bet Shammai holds that since it cannot be eaten by anyone but the poor it cannot be used as part of the lulav.
Section six: Second tithe must be brought to Jerusalem and eaten there. Nevertheless, the mishnah says that even in Jerusalem he should not use a second tithe etrog as part of his mitzvah. The reasoning is the same as that in section four concerning pure terumah. However, if he did use it he has performed the mitzvah, again the same rule as with terumah.