Wordfile>>

Click here to view an updated version of this shiur with additional features
on the Deracheha website.

Did you know there's more to Deracheha than our shiurim? Sign up for our newsletter here and get all our content!

Have some feedback for us? Please click here!

What is the mitzva of taking arba'at ha-minim on Sukkot? Who takes arba'at ha-minim?
What are the halachot of hoshanot, and how do they apply to women?

By Laurie Novick

Rav Ezra Bick, Ilana Elzufon, and Shayna Goldberg, eds.

The Four Species

The holiday of Sukkot appears a number of times in the Torah, often in the company of the other pilgrimage festivals, and sometimes under its alias Chag Ha-assif (the Festival of Harvest-ingathering). But the Torah's discussion of its unique mitzvot—arba'at ha-minim (the four species) and yeshiva ba-sukka (dwelling in the sukka)—appears in only a few verses in Parashat Emor.

Starting with arba'at ha-minim, let's look at different aspects of these mitzvot and how they relate to women.

Vayikra 23:39-41

But on the fifteenth day of the seventh month when you gather in the produce of the land, you will celebrate the festival of God for seven days, on the first day a day of rest and on the eighth day a day of rest. And you shall take for yourselves on the first day a fruit of a beautiful tree [peri etz hadar, etrog (citron)], the fronds of date palms [kapot temarim, lulav] and the branch of a dense tree [anaf etz avot, hadas, (myrtle)] and willows of the stream, and you shall rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days. And you will celebrate it as a festival for God for seven days of the year, an eternal ordinance for your generations, in the seventh month you shall celebrate it.

The verses stipulate the festival's date, name, duration and agricultural context, a list of the four species to be "taken" and the timing of the mitzva. A rationale for why this specific mitzva takes effect on this specific holiday is notably absent. The Mishna helps to fill in the gap. In Eretz Yisrael, the rainy season begins just after Sukkot. Accordingly, the mishna relates that Sukkot is a day of judgment regarding water for the coming year:

Mishna Rosh Ha-shana 1:2

At four chapters [in time] the world is judged…and on the festival [Sukkot] we are judged concerning water.

In this vein, Rabbi Eliezer states that arba'at ha-minim—which represent the best of the Land of Israel,[1] and each of which clearly depends on water for its subsistence—serve as a way of appeasing God, so that our prayers for sufficient water are heard in all their vulnerability:

Ta'anit 2b

Rabbi Eliezer said: Since these four species come only to appease [God] regarding water, and just as it is impossible for these four species [to exist] without water, so it is impossible for the world [to exist] without water

According to a midrash, we take arba'at ha-minim to express our rejoicing at having been judged favorably:

Midrash Tanchuma Emor 18

Israel and the idolators enter into judgment on Yom Kippur and the people do not know who has triumphed. God said: take your lulavim in your hand that all will know that you merited in judgment, therefore David said "Then all the trees of the forest will give song…before God" (Tehillim 96:12-13). When? "When He comes, when He comes to judge the land" (Tehillim 96:13) on Yom Kippur. What does Israel do? They wait another five days in order that all know that Israel has merited, therefore it is written "and take for yourselves on the first day."

Arba'at ha-minim, then, enable us both to seek favorable judgement and to celebrate it.

Though the verses specify which four species are required for the mitzva, the brief descriptions are not always clear. In particular, the phrase "peri etz hadar" requires elucidation, and so the Talmud presents multiple textual derivations to link it with the etrog.

Rambam notes that all of these suggested derivations accept and bolster the traditional identification. Connecting accepted traditions, such as the identities of arba'at ha-minim, with verses is a characteristic feature of Torah She-be'al Peh:

Rambam, Introduction to the Mishna

They [the sages] said all the Torah in its entirety was said, its general rules and specifics and precise details at Sinai. But given that they are received [tradition] and undebated, one can learn these interpretations from precise reading of the Scripture that was given to us in the ways of logic and textual mnemonics and the hints and teachings that there are in Scripture. And when you see in the Talmud that they [the sages] give and take and debate in the manner of study, and that they bring a proof for one of these explanations and the like, as they said about Him (may He be Exalted) saying "peri etz hadar'…this is not because the matter is in doubt for them until they learn it through these proofs, but rather we saw without a doubt from Yehoshua until now that the etrog is what is taken with the lulav every year, and there is no debate regarding this, but they only investigated the teaching that there is in Scripture for this received explanation. And so, too, is their learning regarding the hadas.

Textual derivations from the verse by Rabbi Yishmael lead to the determination of how many of each species to take, as accepted by Halacha:

Sukka 34b

It was taught in a Baraita: Rabbi Yishmael says: "peri etz hadar"- one [etrog], "kapot temarim"-one [lulav], "anaf etz avot"- three [hadassim], "arvei nachal"- two [aravot].

The Torah refers to the etrog in singular, so we take one; the spelling of the word "kapot" is deficient, so we treat that word as singular and take a single lulav; we take one hadas each for the words "anaf etz avot;" "arvei" is clearly in the plural, so we take the smallest possible plural, two.[2]

Taking Arba'at ha-minim

The mitzva is "and you [pl.] shall take for yourselves." How does one perform this taking? According to the Talmud, we place the etrog in the left hand and the lulav in the right,[3] with the lulav, hadas, and arava bundled together.

Rabbi Yehuda views this bundling as obligatory on a Torah level, by textual comparison to the taking of a bundle of hyssop when applying the blood of the first Pesach offering to the doorposts and lintel.[4] In contrast, our sages view bundling as merely enhancing the mitzva, and consider taking the four species without bundling to be acceptable after the fact:

Sukka 11b

As we learn in a baraita: A lulav, whether bundled or not bundled, is fit for use. Rabbi Yehuda says: bundled is fit, not bundled is unfit. What is Rabbi Yehuda's reasoning? "Taking"-"taking" is learned from the bundle of hyssop. There [regarding the hyssop of the Pesach offering] is written: "Take a bundle of hyssop," and here is written "Take for yourselves on the first day." Just as over there it is in a bundle, so, too, here it is in a bundle. And our Rabbis [the first opinion cited in the baraita] don’t learn about [this] "taking" from [the other] "taking." According to who[se opinion] is that which is taught in a baraita: A lulav, it is a mitzva to bundle it, but if he did not bundle it, it is fit for use? If Rabbi Yehuda, when he did not bundle it, why is it fit? If our Rabbis, why [call it] "a mitzva"? In reality, it is our Rabbis' [opinion], and because it was said: "This is my God and I will glorify Him," beautify oneself before him with mitzvot.

Nowadays, we typically bundle with an aesthetically pleasing woven basketwork holder and ring-ties, all made of palm leaves.[5] The etrog stays out of the bundle because the verse does not connect it to the other minim with the conjunctive vav. Technically speaking, though, while one needs to take all arba'at ha-minim in order to satisfy the mitzva,[6] and should take them together, one can discharge the mitzva by taking them consecutively.[7]

Though the minim are taken together, the beracha on arba'at ha-minim only mentions the lulav, because it is the tallest.[8] Usually, we recite a beracha over a mitzva prior to performing the mitzva. In the case of arba'at ha-minim, we discharge the mitzva as soon as we lift them, unless something else interferes with fulfilling the obligation, such as holding one of the minim upside-down:

Sukka 42a

Behold, from when he lifts it [the set of arba'at ha-minim], he discharges [the obligation] through it. Abbaye said: When he turns it upside-down [he does not discharge the obligation].

Tosafot express reservations about reciting the beracha without holding the minim. On the other hand, taking hold of the minim could itself fulfill the mitzva, before one has a chance to recite the beracha. In order to be able to recite the beracha prior to fulfilling the mitzva, but with the minim in hand, they suggest lifting them at first either with one of the species missing or upside-down, or with intention not yet to fulfill the mitzva:

Tosafot Sukka 39a s.v. Prior to performing them

Prior to performing them - For this reason, one must recite the beracha over lulav before he takes it, for if after he takes it, "from when he lifts it, he discharges [the obligation]" as we say at the end of our chapter (42a). But nevertheless it does not make sense at all, for how will he recite a beracha over it while it is resting within a vessel…and at any point when the mitzva is not available in his hand to perform, it makes no sense at all to recite a beracha over it…And perhaps when he begins to take a lulav before he takes the etrog, he recites the beracha, and this is prior to performing it, since [arba'at ha-minim] hinder each other [from satisfying the obligation if one is absent]. Alternatively, after he takes both of them [the lulav-bundle and the etrog, he recites the beracha] but he turns one of them upside-down as we say at the end of our chapter (42a) "when he turns it upside-down"…and even if he holds it in manner that it grows [right-side up], it is possible that he intends not to discharge the mitzva with it until after the beracha.

Common practice is to hold the etrog upside-down while reciting the beracha. After the beracha, the etrog is righted, and the minim are shaken. The Torah commands us to "take" arba'at ha-minim and to "rejoice" with them (above, Vayikra 23:40).

The mishna states that we also shake arba'at ha-minim at certain points in Hallel.

Mishna Sukka 3:9

Where would they shake [arba'at ha-minim]? At "Hodu la-Shem" [give thanks to God] at the beginning and end [of the chapter], and at "Ana Ha-shem hoshi'a na" [please God save please], the words of Beit Hillel…

Building on the message of the midrash that we saw earlier, Tosafot suggest that we shake arba'at ha-minim as an expression of rejoicing that we have been judged favorably.

Tosafot Sukka 37b s.v. At Hodu La-shem at the beginning and end

Beit Hillel's reasoning is that even though "Ana Ha-shem hoshi'a na" is neither at the beginning of the chapter nor the end of the chapter, we shake because it is written "then the trees of the forest will give song before God, for He comes to judge the land" (Divrei Ha-yamim 16), and it is written after it "Give thanks [hodu] to God for He is good, for His lovingkindness is eternal" and it is also written after it "And say, 'Save us [hoshi'einu] God of our salvation."  And "they will give song" is that we shake the lulav and praise with "hodu" and "ana Ha-shem hoshi'a na." And now that they have the custom that the shali'ach tzibbur says "Yomar na Yisrael" [Say now, Israel] and the community responds "Hodu" and so with "Yomeru na Yir'ei Ha-shem," [Say now, those who fear Heaven] the community shakes for each and every "hodu" that they respond.

Tosafot note that our custom now is to respond with "Hodu" to the shali'ach tzibbur, and to shake "arba'at ha-minim" each time. Rabbeinu Asher (Rosh) infers from a couple of Talmudic passages that we also shake them immediately after reciting the beracha:

Rosh Sukka 3:26

At the time of the beracha we don’t find that he needs to shake [right] at the start of taking it, but since it says at the end of the chapter (42a) "a minor who knows how to shake is obligated in lulav," it implies that he shakes at the beginning of the taking even though he does not know how to read Hallel, and further, since it is taught in a baraita at the end of the fourth chapter of Berachot (30a) "If he got up early to go on his way, we bring him a shofar and he blows, [or] a lulav, and he shakes." Therefore, at the time of taking it, it requires shaking.

Why shake, aside from rejoicing? The motions of shaking – up and down, and in all four directions – are similar to the tenufa (waving) of various korbanot in Beit Ha-mikdash.[9] The Talmud compares shaking arba'at ha-minim specifically to the waving of the two loaves and two lambs on Shavuot. Both rituals gesture to God's omnipresence and serve as a sort of prayer for protection against destructive weather from all directions.

Sukka 37b

The two loaves and the two lambs of Shavuot, how does he do [their service]? He places the two loaves on top of the two lambs, and places his hand under them and waves, and brings forward and back, raises and lowers, as it is sad "that was waved and that was lifted." Rabbi Yochanan said: He brings forward and back, to He Who the four winds are His. He raises and lowers, to He Who heaven and earth are His. In the West [Israel] they taught thus: Rabbi Chama son of Ukva said Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Chanina [said]: He brings forward and back, in order to stop the bad winds. Raises and lowers, in order to stop the bad dews….And Rava said: So it is with lulav.

Shavuot is a day of judgment concerning produce from trees.[10] The Talmud's explanation of waving the loaves on Shavuot dovetails with the view that arba'at ha-minim serve to appease God on Sukkot, another day of judgment.

Women Taking Lulav

The mitzva of taking arba'at ha-minim appears in a baraita as an example of a paradigmatic positive time-bound commandment from which women are exempt:

Kiddushin 33b

Our rabbis taught in a baraita: What is a positive time-bound mitzva? Sukka, and lulav, shofar, and tzitzit…

Women are permitted, and even encouraged, to perform most such mitzvot despite the exemption. In some cases, voluntary mitzva performance can even become a binding custom (see here). What of women taking arba'at ha-minim? 

The mishna's discussion of placing a lulav in water on Shabbat or Yom Tov begins with the words "A woman receives [the lulav] from her son or from her husband." The Talmud explains that the mishna considers the possibility that perhaps, since they are designated for a mitzva from which women are exempt, the minim are considered muktzeh for women, and a woman may not receive them? The mishna clearly rejects that possibility. A woman may handle a lulav on Yom Tov.

Sukka 42a

Mishna: A woman can receive [arba'at ha-minim] from her son's hand or from her husband's hand and return it to water on Shabbat…Gemara: That is simple. What might you have thought? Since a woman is not subject to the obligation, I would say she may not receive it. It teaches us [otherwise].

While the categorization of arba'at ha-minim as muktzeh for women is rejected, the underlying understanding that women are exempt from the mitzva is not. It's clear from the assumption that women's handling of the minim would only be to place them in water that women of the Talmudic period were not voluntarily performing the mitzva.

Over the centuries, though, a custom developed for women to take arba'at ha-minim and to recite a beracha over this voluntary mitzva performance. We see this in Europe as early as the eleventh century, in a ruling reported in the name of one of Rashi's teachers, Rav Yitzchak Ha-Levi:

Machzor Vitry 359

Rav Yitzchak Ha-levi ruled that we do not prevent women from reciting a beracha on lulav and sukka…. If they desire to bring themselves into the yoke of the mitzva, the permission is in her hand. We do not rebuke her. For it is no worse than one who is not commanded and does. And since she fulfills a mitzva, it is impossible without a beracha.

Rav Yitzchak's wording suggests that taking arba'at ha-minim was not considered unusual for women of his time, though women's reciting a beracha voluntarily remained controversial.

Why is women's reciting a beracha over taking arba'at ha-minim debated?

In general, there is dispute over women reciting berachot over voluntary mitzva performance because of the concern of beracha le-vatala, a beracha in vain, as we discuss here. Rabbeinu Tam permits it, and the language of the Tosafot suggests that women taking lulav with a beracha had become a prevalent and widely accepted custom by his time (the twelfth century):

Tosafot Arachin 10b s.v. Eighteen days on which the individual recites a complete Hallel

[Of Rabbeinu Tam]…That women recite a beracha over taking lulav, for it is not in vain. Even though they [women] are exempt, in any case they are permitted to take it and this is not a beracha in vain…

Shulchan Aruch, on the other hand, permits women to perform positive time-bound mitzvot voluntarily, but does not permit reciting the beracha.[11] (See more here.) Although, in general, many Sefaradim follow this view, Chida specifically permits women to recite a beracha when taking arba'at ha-minim, influenced by a responsum by Rav Yaakov of Marvège (quoted infra).

Birkei Yosef OC 654:2

That which a few women practiced in the beautiful land [Eretz Yisrael], to recite a beracha over lulav, for many years I complained about this. For they took this practice upon themselves and we have accepted the rulings of Rambam and Maran [Rav Yosef Karo in Shulchan Aruch], and they ruled not to recite the beracha. And I asked the elder sages of our generation and they said that it is a mistaken custom, that some of them [the women] were accustomed thus without being aware [of the halacha], and one should nullify the practice…But after time a work by Rav Ya'akov of Marvège, came into my hands, from among the early sages…who would ask from heaven and receive a response. And it says there: "I asked about the women who recite a beracha over lulav and over teki'at shofar…and they answered that the generation is fit for it, 'all that Sara says to you, listen to her voice'…regarding lulav we also found support for  [it represents] that "one only has one heart for God in heaven"…Therefore, if they [women] came to recite a beracha for lulav and shofar, they are permitted.

Chida ultimately supports women reciting berachot specifically over lulav and shofar, where this was the custom among some women, in light of Rav Ya'akov's rationale that the mitzva itself highlights our faith in God. This would be favorable in awaiting God's judgment.

Loyal to the view of Shulchan Aruch, Rav Ovadya Yosef rejects these arguments, even for lulav and shofar. He laments the trend of encouraging women to take lulav with a beracha, while many women neglect obligatory berachot such as birkat ha-mazon. He also argues that the beracha over arba'at ha-minim, in particular, should not be recited voluntarily. On his view, questions about the validity of many of the etrogim currently in use raise the possibility of a beracha being a beracha le-vatala, so no one should recite it where not clearly necessary:

Responsa Yabi'a Omer I OC 42

It is also a mitzva to inform God-fearing men of valor that they be careful of giving the lulav to women to recite a beracha over it, out of concern for placing a stumbling block before the blind, since according to the view of our Rabbis Rambam and our Master [Rav Yosef Karo, Shulchan Aruch] it is a beracha in vain, and not as there are those who think themselves to be chasing after [mitzvot] through this, as though they are doing a mitzva to give merit to the masses, to encourage them to recite a beracha over it…and who would remove the dust from the sacred eyes of Chida and the later rabbinic authorities who followed after him. And they would see that almost the majority of these women who chase after reciting a beracha over the lulav, don’t recite at all the berachot in which they are obligated, and even birkat ha-mazon, which is a positive Torah commandment, they do not recite (and on the whole from a lack of knowledge)…And not only that, but because the mitzva of lulav that they are especially careful with, the doubts concerning it are many…

To this day, customs among women vary, and some Sefardi women do recite this beracha, while others do not. (Learn more here.) A woman taking arba'at ha-minim typically shakes them upon reciting the beracha, and again while reciting Hallel, if they are available to her then, though some express kabbalistic reservations about women shaking them.[12] For more discussion of women reciting Hallel on Sukkot, see here.

Making the Bundle

In a discussion of tefillin, the Talmud states that only one obligated in tefillin may write the parchments for them (or for a sefer Torah and mezuzot). Women, who are exempt from the mitzva of tefillin, may not do so. Rabbeinu Tam suggests broadening the application of this rule to the preparation of other mitzva objects, so that a woman also should not bundle arba'at ha-minim or tie tzitzit. Other Tosafot, including Rabbeinu Tam's nephew Ri,[13] reject this view, limiting the Talmud's statement to its original, more narrow, application:

Tosafot Gittin 45b

Whoever is included in binding [tefillin] is included in writing [them] - From here Rabbeinu Tam says that a woman does not bundle a lulav and make tzitzit, since she is not commanded. And it does not seem so, for since we disqualify tzitzit [made] by non-Jews at the beginning of the fourth chapter of Menachot (42a), for he expounds "benei Yisrael, and they should make" and not by non-Jews. The inference is that a woman is fit…And we expound this specifically regarding a sefer Torah and tefillin and mezuzot, since it is written [in juxtaposition] "and you shall tie"—"and you shall write."

Hagahot Maimoniyot reports that Maharam was also concerned about women tying tzitzit, because the verses regarding tzitzit mention "benei Yisrael" which is sometimes taken to exclude women:

Hagahot Maymoniyot, Laws of Tzitzit 1:12:9

From here Ri and Rabbeinu Yehuda ruled that women are able to make tzitzit, since [the Talmud] only excludes non-Jews. And so Rabbeinu Yehuda instructed his wife to make tzitzit, but in the name of my teacher [Maharam] may he live I found that they [women] may not make tzitzit since it is written "benei Yisrael…and they shall make," but the other preparations of the tallit and the spinning of the threads they are able to do…

Shulchan Aruch permits women to tie tzitzit. Rema in Darchei Moshe and in his glosses,[14] suggests being stringent le-chatchila regarding tzitzit. He does not present an explicit ruling regarding women bundling the lulav:[15]

Darchei Moshe OC 14:1

To me it seems that certainly if she [a woman] made tzitzit one should not disqualify them, but le-chatchila one should be careful in accordance with the words of Maharam…

Magen Avraham states that the rulings on tzitzit and lulav are interconnected, and thus implies that a woman should not bundle arba'at ha-minim. He argues that even though bundling is not required be-di'avad (after the fact), beautification is considered part of the mitzva, so that only one who is obligated in the mitzva should beautify it through bundling:

Magen Avraham 649:8

It implies that le-chatchila a non-Jew should not bundle them as he wrote OC 14 regarding women… and it requires study, for we maintain that a lulav does not require bundling, and if so the bundle is not part of the mitzva [obligation] and see Sukka 11b. And one must say that since it is beautification for the mitzva, it is considered like the mitzva itself and see 39:2.

In his Bei'ur Halacha, Mishna Berura understands Rema as not referring to arba'at ha-minim.[16] Therefore, Mishna Berura rules that it is merely a stringency to take care that specifically a man be the one to insert arba'at ha-minim into the basketwork holder at the bottom. The fundamental halacha is not to be concerned for this.

Mishna Berura 649:14

That a non-Jew bundled - he means that even though le-chatchila it is a mitzva to bundle it out of beautification of the mitzva, in any case it is fit for use [if bundled] by a non-Jew, and see Magen Avraham, whose opinion is that le-chatchila he [a non-Jew] should not bundle it, and the reason is that whoever is not obligated in a matter is not permitted to prepare it and for this reason a woman also should not bundle the lulav le-chatchila. And see there in Bei'ur Halacha that we clarified that in accordance with strict law there is no concern with the matter, but it is still good to be careful with this. And specifically regarding the lower attachment, for there one bundles all of the species together, for there is the fundamental mitzva of bundling, but we are not particular with what they bundle higher up.

Rings and Chatzitza

Halacha requires that we take arba'at ha-minim by holding them directly in our hands. That's why the basketwork holder and ring-ties are made of palm leaves, which are the same material as the lulav and thus don't constitute a halachic chatzitza (barrier) that interferes with holding it.[17]

What of taking lulav with something else on our hands? Sefer Ha-aguda explains that we should hold the minim with bare hands, and mentions that a woman should therefore remove any rings before taking lulav. However, he adds that removing barriers is only strictly necessary when a barrier covers the whole hand:

Ha-aguda Pesachim 4:55

Something that intervenes between the lulav and the hand is a chatzitza [which interferes with fulfilling the mitzva]. Therefore, we remove tzitzit and tefillin from the hand and women [remove] their rings. Indeed, it seems to me that one does not need to remove for this reason, for specifically when one wraps the whole hand [as with a glove, there is an issue].

Rema rules that stringent practice is to remove rings before taking lulav, but fundamentally one can rely on Sefer Ha-aguda.

Rema OC 651:7

Gloss: And they have the custom to be stringent to remove tefillin and rings from their hands, but the fundamental law is not to be concerned, since not the entire hand is not covered by them (Ha-aguda Pesachim ch.4).

What is the reasoning behind this ruling? Magen Avraham explains that something on the hand that does not cover the hand is considered nullified in relation to it, as if it is a part of the hand:

Magen Avraham 651:18

It seems to me that Ha-aguda thinks that anything that the entire hand is not covered with is nullified with respect to the hand…

Still, Mishna Berura recommends that, even after the fact, one who took lulav with rings on the hand take it a second time without the rings and without a beracha.

Mishna Berura 651:36

But the fundamental law is not to be concerned etc. - And a number of later authorities wrote that even according to the fundamental law there is a concern about this on account of chatzitza, even though the whole hand is not covered with them. And therefore if one took before removing the tefillin from his hand or the rings, he should go back and take it without a beracha.

Aruch Ha-shulchan, however, argues that there is no issue when the lulav can be held without the ring touching it:

Aruch Ha-shulchan 651:20

This which he wrote, that whenever the hand is not covered it is not a chatzitza – even though for [mikveh] immersion it is a chatzitza even if [covering] a little bit, this is because the entire body requires immersion, but here one does not need to hold the entire length of the lulav. And even if he holds the etrog at its tip it is considered taking it. And therefore, if just a little bit of the hand is exposed, he can hold it with this little bit.

By that logic, a single ring on a woman's finger would not present a halachic issue.  Even according to Mishna Berura, if a woman has a ring that she never removes, even for mikveh immersion or netilat yadayim, it is not considered a chatzitza and there is no need to remove it for netilat lulav.

The First Day

Another significant halacha pertaining to taking lulav is specific to the first day of Sukkot. To understand it, let's look back at the verse about arba'at ha-minim, focusing on the timing of the mitzva.

Vayikra 23:39

And you shall take for yourselves on the first day a fruit of a beautiful tree [peri etz hadar, etrog (citron)], the fronds of date palms [kapot temarim, lulav] and the branch of a dense tree [anaf etz avot, hadas, (myrtle)] and willows of the stream, and you shall rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days.

According to the verse, the mitzva of arba'at ha-minim entails taking the four species "for yourselves (lachem) on the first day", and rejoicing with them "before God," for seven days. Why does the beginning of the verse specify the first day, while the end refers to seven days? A midrash halacha explains that the phrase "before the Lord your God" refers specifically to Beit Ha-mikdash.

Sifra Emor 12:16:9

"And you will rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days," and not outside of the Temple area for all seven days…

It is only following the destruction of Beit Ha-mikdash that Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai institutes a broad enactment to take arba'at ha-minim for the final six days of the holiday, in all locales:

Mishna Sukka 3:12

At first the lulav was taken in the Mikdash for seven [days] and in [the rest of] the land for one day. After Beit ha-mikdash was destroyed, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai enacted that the lulav be taken in [the rest of] the land seven [days] as a commemoration of the Mikdash…

In other words, taking arba'at ha-minim is a Torah-level obligation on the first day, and rabbinic thereafter. This has halachic implications. For example, arba'at ha-minim need to meet more stringent physical standards to be used on the first day.[18]

In addition, the Torah uses the word "lachem" "for yourselves," specifically for the first day. Our sages understand this to mean that one must take one's own set of arba'at ha-minim on the first day of Sukkot. Someone seeking to use another's set of arba'at ha-minim may not borrow them, but must receive them as a gift:

Mishna Sukka 3:13

For the sages said: A person does not discharge his obligation on the first Yom Tov of the festival [Sukkot] with the lulav of his fellow, but on the other days of the festival a person discharges his obligation with the lulav of his fellow.

Sukka 41b

Whence do these words come? As our rabbis Taught in a baraita: "You shall take"- that there should be taking in the hand of each and every one. "For you"- from what is yours, to exclude the borrowed and the stolen. From here the sages said: A person does not discharge his obligation on the first Yom Tov of Sukkot with the lulav of his fellow, unless he [the owner] gave it to him as a gift. And there is a story of Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya and Rabbi Akiva, who were aboard a ship, and only Rabban Gamliel had a lulav, which he had purchased for a thousand zuz. Rabban Gamliel took it and discharged [his obligation] with it, and gave it as a gift to Rabbi Yehoshua. Rabbi Yehoshua took it and discharged [his obligation] with it and gave it as a gift to Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya took it and discharged [his obligation] with it, and gave it as a gift to Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva took it and discharged [his obligation] with it, and returned it to Rabban Gamliel. Why does it state that he returned it? It teaches us something in passing: A gift conditional on return is considered a gift.

What if the original owner of the set wishes to get it back? On subsequent days of Sukkot, one may simply loan out the set. On the first day, though, as the Talmud clarifies, one may give it on condition that a recipient will subsequently re-gift the set of arba'at ha-minim to their original owner. This is called a matana al menat le-hachzir, a gift conditional on return.

Ba'al Ha-ittur notes that the Talmudic story does not mention any verbal stipulation that the gift was a matana al menat le-hachzir. He thus concludes that such a gift takes effect even when the condition is not explicitly stated:

Sefer Ha-ittur, Aseret Ha-dibberot, Laws of Lulav p. 92

For the recipient of a gift knows that the giver does not give as an absolute gift, for he still needs it to discharge [his obligation] with it and he doesn’t have another lulav with which to discharge [his obligation]; he does not need to say explicitly to him [that it is] conditional on return but rather gives it to him without specifying and the recipient returns it without specifying and there is no need for a[n explicit verbal] condition, for Rabban Gamliel gave as a gift to Rabbi Yehoshua and didn’t say to him "as a gift conditional on return"… 

Shulchan Aruch rules accordingly.[19] When one or more people contribute as partners toward the purchase of a set of arba'at ha-minim, it is assumed that they intend for each of them to acquire all shares of it al menat le-hachzir when discharging the obligation on the first day.[20]

Children and the Requirement of "Lachem"

One challenge that arises with respect to this halacha is giving arba'at ha-minim to young children. One could give arba'at ha-minim to a child without any condition, if one did not wish to receive them back or for others to be able to use them on the first Yom Tov. But a child does not have the halachic ability to transfer ownership to another person, because that requires a level of cognizance, or da'at, that the Torah does not ascribe to children, and that rabbinic law does not ascribe to young children. Since a child cannot halachically give a gift, one cannot give a child a matana al menat le-hachzir.

Sukka 46b

Rabbi Zeira said: A person should not transfer ownership of a hoshana [arba'at ha-minim] to a child on the first day of Yom Tov. What is the reason? That regarding acquisition, a child acquires, but regarding transferring ownership [to another, a child] does not transfer, with the result that he [the one who receives it from the child attempts to] discharge [his obligation] with a lulav that is not his.

In his ruling on the subject, Shulchan Aruch notes that, according to some opinions, an older child (from age six) can receive a matana al menat le-hachzir.

Shulchan Aruch OC 658:6

One should not give it on the first day to a minor before one has discharged one's obligation with it, because the minor acquires and does not transfer ownership to others on a Torah level, with the result that if he [the minor] returns it to him it is not returned. And there is one who says that if [the child] has reached the stage of pe'utot [approx. age six], it is permissible. And if he holds it along with the child, since it did not leave his hand, it is fine.

In any case, the preferred solution is for children to have their own set of arba'at ha-minim. If need be, children can recite the beracha on all the days of the festival, including the first, over a borrowed set. Given that children are not obligated in the mitzva, this may suffice for them:

Mishna Berura 658:28

There are those among the later authorities who think that the mitzva of education is fulfilled even with a borrowed [set of species] for behold also with this the son is educated for mitzvot…

A Married Couple

What of a married couple? It is simplest for each spouse to have their own set of arba'at ha-minim.[21]

Even if only the man has a set, he can give his wife a gift, with or without conditions, and that gift is considered hers according to Halacha:[22]

Bava Batra 51b

Rav said: One who sells a field to his wife, she has acquired it and the husband has rights to its profits. [One who has given a field to his wife] as a gift, she has acquired it and the husband does not have rights to its profits. And Rabbi Elazar said: This and that one, she has acquired it and the husband does not have rights to its profits.

Therefore, a man can give his wife his arba'at ha-minim as a matana al menat le-hachzir on the first day of Sukkot, and she can fulfill the mitzva with them. A wife can also give her own set to her husband.

When another person wishes to give a married woman arba'at ha-minim on the first day of Sukkot, the halacha is arguably more complicated. This is because our sages assumed that a husband would be in charge of the household's finances, and enacted that a man would automatically receive property rights to his wife's acquisitions (unless the couple stipulate otherwise):

Kiddushin 23b

There is no acquisition for a wife without her husband [acquiring it].

When a married woman receives a gift without stipulations, her acquisition is only partial. The principle remains hers, while her husband has rights to the profits). But if the giver stipulates that the gift is for the wife and not the husband, for a specific purpose, then the husband has no rights to it, because the wife's acquisition is well-defined and limited.[23]

Shulchan Aruch EH 85:11

If someone gave her a gift on condition that the husband have no rights to it, the husband has acquired it [the gift], and behold it is like other property acquired by her during the marriage to which she retains rights to the principle, unless the giver made a condition that the principle of the gift be for such and such [purpose], for example that he say to her: Behold the coins are given to you on condition that you dress yourself with [things bought by] them or on condition that you do what you wish [with them] without the husband's authorization.

In accordance with this ruling, Rav Yaakov Ettlinger maintains that someone giving arba'at ha-minim to a married woman on the first day, who wishes to enable the woman to fulfill the mitzva and return them without her husband's intervention, should stipulate "this is a gift to you for you to use for the mitzva and your husband has no rights to it:"[24]

Bikkurei Ya'akov 657:5

Indeed, it is certainly clear that she is permitted to recite a beracha only when she fulfills the mitzva as enacted as it is fitting for a man, and otherwise it is a beracha in vain. And I saw [fit] to investigate how a married woman can recite a beracha over the lulav on the first day, for we need "lachem" [personal ownership]…For we say (Kiddushin 23b): "There is no acquisition for a wife without her husband [acquiring it]"…We find that she can take lulav and recite a beracha over it on the first day as when her husband gave it to her as a gift, for through this she has fully acquired it…But that she should recite a beracha over another's lulav that was given to her as a gift, we only find when he said to her…that for the purpose of taking [lulav] he gives it to her and also on condition that the husband have no rights to it.

Earlier halachic authorities do not raise this concern, however. As we have seen, Halacha usually ascribes proper intention to one who gives another arba'at ha-minim for use on the first day. Indeed, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach explicitly dismisses Bikurei Ya'akov's argument, although for another reason. The husband acquires rights to the profits from gifts to his wife, but not to the principle. A woman's exclusive rights to the principle might suffice for her to fulfill the mitzva on the first day.

Halichot Shlomo: Mo'adei Ha-shana Laws of Sukka 11:10

One who gives a lulav to a married woman does not need to make a condition that her husband has no rights to them. Note 14: Since it is only an acquisition of the profit [for the husband] but the principle remains hers, behold it is her lulav and this suffices for her to discharge the obligation.

That may be one reason why Rav Moshe Sternbuch concurs with Rav Auerbach and notes that common practice is not to make any special condition in this case:

Teshuvot Ve-hanhagot 4:159

Taking lulav with a beracha for a married woman on the first day of Yom Tov.

A married woman who desires to fulfill the mitzva of lulav on the first Yom Tov, Bikkurei Ya'akov wrote…when another gives it to her he must say to the woman, "I hereby give it to you as a gift on condition to return it, on condition that your husband have no rights to it"…And it seems that his words are a wondrous novelty and we have not heard of being careful with this. 

Other Days

On the other days of the festival, an adult can freely use another's arba'at ha-minim, even without the owner's knowledge, since we presume that people are happy to facilitate others' mitzva observance:[25]

Shulchan Aruch OC 649:5

All of these that we said that they are unfit because of blemishes that we explained or because of theft or robbery, is on the first Yom Tov only, but on the other days, everything is fit. Rema: And there are those who disqualify stolen [species] all seven days, and thus is the custom, but one discharges the obligation with a borrowed [set]. And it is permissible to take the lulav of his fellow without his fellow's knowledge, on the other days, for it suits people that a mitzva be done with their property, and it is like a borrowed set.

Does this halacha also apply to women using others' arba'at ha-minim, given that women are exempt from the obligation to take them? Rav Moshe Feinstein rules that it does, since a woman in this case nevertheless fulfills the mitzva:[26]

Responsa Iggerot Moshe OC 2:106

That which his honor was in doubt concerning a woman who is exempt from the mitzva of lulav and wants to fulfill the mitzva, if she is also permitted to take someone else's lulav without his knowledge on the other days [of Sukkot], for perhaps the reason of Rema (649:5), that it is permissible to take without his knowledge, since [the presumption that] it suits a person for a mitzva to be done with his property is just for a man, who is obligated in the mitzva, and not for a woman, who is not obligated. It seems correct in my humble opinion that, since in any case she has a mitzva and she has a reward for this, it also falls under the halachic presumption that it suits a person for a mitzva to be done with his property.

Hoshanot and Hoshana Rabba

In the Mikdash, in addition to rejoicing with the lulav for seven days, there was an additional mitzva, mitzvat arava. Tall willow branches were erected around the altar, and the kohanim encircled the altar, once on a regular day of Sukkot, and seven times on Hoshana Rabba (following the general pattern of encircling Yericho):[27]

Mishna Sukka 4:5

The mitzva of the willow, how is it [performed]? There was a place below Jerusalem and it was called Motza. They would go down there and gather willow branches from there and come and stand them up at the sides of the altar, with their tops bent over the altar. They would blow a tekia, a teru'a and a tekia. Every day they would circle the altar one time and say "Ana Hashem Hoshi'a na. Ana Hashem hatzlicha na." ["Please God, save us please. Please God, cause us to succeed please"]. Rabbi Yehuda says: "Ani Va-ho Hoshi'a na" ["God, save us please."] And that day [Hoshana Rabba] they would circle the altar seven times.

This mitzva was considered by the sages to be a halacha le-Moshe mi-Sinai, a Torah level mitzva with no record in the verses.

Sukka 44a

For Rabbi Assi said Rabbi Yochanan [said] in the name of Rabbi Nechunya man of the valley of Beit Churtan: Ten plantings, arava, and water libation, are halacha le-Moshe mi-Sinai. But Rav Zavid said in the name of Rava: Lulav, which has a Torah basis outside of the Mikdash, we do for seven [days] in commemoration of the Mikdash. Arava, which has no Torah basis outside of the Mikdash, we don't do for seven days in commemoration of the Mikdash.

As the Talmud relates, we do not observe mitzvat arava without Beit Ha-mikdash. A custom developed in ge'onic times, however, for the men of a congregation to circle the bima, with a Torah on it or alongside it, reciting a special liturgy, what we call Hoshanot.[28]

Aruch Ha-shulchan OC 660:1,3,4

The matter of the Hoshanot is a commemoration of the Mikdash, as it is taught (Sukka 45a): Every day they circle the altar one time, and on the seventh day seven times. In the Mikdash, they learned this from Yericho, as is found in the Yerushalmi there [4:3], and in Midrash Shochar Tov on the verse "Hear, God, justice" [Tehillim 17:1]. Therefore, we also circle the bima with our lulavim and etrogim, one time every day and seven times on Hoshana Rabba. And we place the sefer Torah on the bima and cry out "Hoshana," meaning, Please save Your people, the remnant of Israel, from all the troubles that surround them, in the merit of the Torah and in the merit of Your great name that, as it were, "I am with him in adversity," and please save for Your sake, our God, etc….And on Shabbat, we do not circle because there is no lulav on Shabbat, and in the Mikdash they also did not circle on Shabbat, and we do not place the sefer Torah on the bima on Shabbat, but we say Hoshanot even on Shabbat, as our master Beit Yosef wrote in 660:3, "There is an opinion that we do not say Hoshana on Shabbat, and practice is not thus." And thus is Ashkenazi custom, and the Sefaradim do not say [Hoshanot on Shabbat]. The practice is that someone without a lulav circles, and some say that someone without a lulav does not circle, and thus we practice…

According to some opinions, even when others circle the bima with a lulav, one without a lulav does not join them.[29]The bima is also not circled on Shabbat,[30] as we do not observe zecher le-mikdash involving arba'at ha-minim on Shabbat. In Ashkenazi synagogues, Hoshanot are still recited on Shabbat. They retain their significance as prayer, even without circling.

On Hoshana Rabba, the bima is circled seven times, as the altar was. Next, we put arba'at ha-minim aside, take willow branches (arava, also called hoshanot),[31] and perform the ritual known as chibut arava with them:

Sukka 44b

Ayebo and Chizkiya sons of the daughter of Rav brought an arava before Rav, he performed chibut and did not recite a beracha. He thought, it is a custom derived from the prophets.

Rashi explains that this chibut entails taking up and shaking the arava:

Rashi Sukka 43b

Since it is taught chibut arava - the inference is that one takes it in one's hand and shakes

Chibut arava is typically understood, however, as beating the arava on the ground. Rema recommends that we do both:

Shulchan Aruch OC 664:4

The [minimum] measure of this arava is even one leaf on one branch. Rema: nevertheless, it is ugly for it to be one leaf on one branch (Tur). Therefore, they had the practice to make the hoshanot nice, on account of "This is my God and I will beautify Him" (Shemot 15:2). [Shulchan Aruch:] And the [minimum] measure of its length is like the measure of length of the arava that is in the lulav….And he beats [chovet] it on the ground or on a vessel two or three times. Rema: And there are those who say that he must shake it (Tur in the name of Rashi) and they had the practice to do both of them, shaking it and afterwards beating it.

Beating the arava on the ground symbolizes our having been judged favorably, because Hoshana Rabba represents the final day of the judgment period of the Yamim Nora'im, when, as it were, the utterings of the Heavenly fall powerless to the ground:

Teshuvot Ha-ge'onim, Sha'arei Teshuva 340, Rav Tzemach

Why chibut? Because "Every weapon formed against you will not succeed and every tongue that rises against you in judgment will be condemned" (Yeshayahu 54:17) etc. Since until now in these days the Satan accuses and Israel in these days when there are many mitzvot nullify him, from here onward any mouth that rises against them won't be able to prevail and will fall to the ground.

Women and Hoshanot

Women in synagogue traditionally do participate in chibut arava on Hoshana Rabba. We have records from medieval Worms that male heads of household were particular to acquire aravot for Hoshana Rabba for all household members:

Rav Yosef Ha-Levi the beadle, Customs of the Sacred Congregation of Worms, Mechon Yerushalayim p. 318

He makes a hoshana from willow for all members of his household, for male and female on their own.

To this day, it is taken as a given that women may recite Hoshanot as well:
 

Rav Ya'akov Ariel , Internet Q&A, 17 Tishrei 5770 (2020)

Question: Do girls need to say Hoshanot on Sukkot or is it just boys? Thank you very much, chag same'ach! Response: Girls are also permitted to say Hoshanot. My mother had the practice of participating in the Hoshanot of Hoshana Rabba and my father would ensure she had designated aravot. I assume that this was a received tradition for generations.

Given the requirements of gender separation in the synagogue, circling the bima is usually not feasible even for women with their own sets of arba'at ha-minim. In this case, women in synagogue generally stand in place to recite the Hoshanot. As with Hoshanot on Shabbat, the words retain their power and meaning in this case.

An argument can be made that a woman in this situation should hold her arba'at ha-minim while reciting Hoshanot, as part of rejoicing before God with them. In synagogues in which the bima cannot be circled, it is common for men to circle a sefer Torah (usually held by someone lacking arba'at ha-minim) for Hoshanot. Inspired by this, Rabbanit Toni Mittelman has suggested another possibility, that in some synagogues women could circle a sefer Torah in the women's section during Hoshanot:[32]

Rabbanit Tonya Mittelman, "Women in the Torah World in the Thought of Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein, "Tradition 52:3 (Summer 2020): 77-78.

It seems to me [Rabbanit Mittelman] that increased opportunities for women’s Torah learning have impacted upon two realms: they have created a stronger connection to mesora, and they have driven a stronger desire for involvement and innovation. A woman who has her own lulav will come to the synagogue on Hol ha-Mo’ed, and she might seek out a way to be a participant (in circling a Torah scroll) during the recitation of Hoshanot, which I presume my father would have opposed. I think that a community needs to give thought to how women can take an active part in Hoshanot, even if, in the Temple, they did not circle the altar. Ten years ago, I never felt that this was lacking, as there were few other women in the synagogue with a lulav. However, as, from year to year, the number of women outfitted with lulav and etrog has increased, the deficiency becomes more apparent.

We have not heard of communities taking up this suggestion. If it were to be adopted, it would likely be in synagogues in which women dance with a sefer Torah on Simchat Torah. Indeed, since the hakafot are modeled on the Hoshanot, a synagogue's practice for women on Simchat Torah can serve as a model for Hoshanot.

Yet another possibility may build on a ruling of Ben Ish Chai, who maintains that a man praying alone without a sefer Torah may circle a chair with a Tanach on it, while he holds arba'at ha-minim and recites Hoshanot:

Ben Ish Chai, First Year, Ha'azinu 15

Someone who is sick and is unable to circle the aron kodesh in the synagogue should set down a chair in his home and place a Tanach upon it and circle [that], in order not to nullify the mitzva of circling…

Following this idea, a woman praying alone or a group of women with arba'at ha-minim in the women's section might circle a Tanach during Hoshanot. It should be noted, though, that Ben Ish Chai himself did not think it relevant for women to participate in the circling on Hoshana Rabba for kabbalistic reasons, though he does support women's learning on Leil Hoshana Rabba:

Responsa Rav Pe'alim I Sod Yesharim 9

…On the night of Hoshana Rabba they [the women] are awake and learn Devarim and Tehillim and the prayers of "Kortei Berit."...For [Hoshana Rabba] is efficacious for man and woman who repent in teshuva, for therefore they enacted Selichot and tefillot on it, and it is called a miniature Yom Kippur, and therefore it is fitting that a woman should also be involved in the study, and as men need life, so women need life…It is the honor of the lady [the bride, the metaphysical essence of the Jewish people awaiting her conjunction with God]…that a male chase after a female…For the learning of Hoshana Rabba is done from the [kabbalistic] aspect of sealing judgment, and the conjugal unification [of the Bride, following accompaniment by male attendants] is not done on the morrow [Hoshana Rabba] until after the completion of the circuits of Hoshana Rabba and chibut arava, which only men do, and not women.

Concluding Note

According to one midrashic tradition, each of the four species corresponds to one of the matriarchs:

Vayikra Rabba Emor 30:10

"Peri etz hadar"-This is Sara, for God glorified her [hidrah] with a long life, as it is said "And Avraham and Sara grew old" (Bereishit 18). "Kapot temarim"-This is Rivka. Just as a date palm has food and has spikes, so Rivka gave rise to a righteous man and a wicked man. "Ve-anaf etz avot"-This is Leah. Just as this myrtle is rustled with leaves, so was Leah rustled with sons. "Ve-arvei nachal"-This is Rachel. Just as this willow withers before the [other] three species, so did Rachel die before her sister.

The connection between women and the mitzva of taking arba'at ha-minim has a long and rich history, conceptually and in practice.

Is it meaningful for a woman to have her own set of arba'at ha-minim?

For hundreds and hundreds of years, women have taken on the mitzva of arba'at ha-minim, in many communities also reciting the beracha and shaking them, even though this is a positive time bound mitzva from which women are exempt.  And for hundreds of years, many women have performed chibut arava with their own aravot on Hashana Rabba. Why, then, is it less common for women to own a set of arba'at ha-minim?

This, too, can be understood largely as a function of history: For many years, arba'at ha-minim were in short supply or prohibitively expensive, so that a community would share a set or two (and members would then formally transfer ownership as necessary for mitzva fulfillment). As sets became more readily available and more reasonably priced in the last few decades, it became increasingly common for men of age to have their own sets, in accordance with their obligation. Young boys who were not yet bar mitzvah were often next in line to get their own sets, to fulfill the obligation of the mitzva of chinuch (education for mitzvot). A woman would typically use her husband's or father's set, and a girl might "share" a set with her brothers.

Even now, when women are more likely to be financially independent and it is relatively easier and more affordable to buy a set in most main centers of Jewish life, a woman who lives with family members who own arba'at ha-minim might still decide to share a set with them, especially if the minim are very expensive or when sharing them is convenient, as when she will in any case use them only a home, or at a different minyan from the owner of the minim.

Still, more and more women are choosing to buy their own sets of arba'at ha-minim. These might be single women, who otherwise might lack easy access to fulfilling the mitzva, or married women who, even if attending synagogue only on the first day, appreciate taking arba'at ha-minim during Hallel and Hoshanot with the congregation—and relish the opportunity to help other women fulfill the mitzva there. (Though a woman who has made the effort to acquire her own set of arba'at ha-minim is not obligated and should not be pressured to give them to a man for use during tefillot that she attends.)

A woman's arranging to have her own arba'at ha-minim can also symbolize her investment in her personal avodat Hashem.

For generations, women's voluntary mitzva performance has been a largely private affair which has had its own intimate beauty and spiritual power. That should be valued and respected. As more women bring arba'at ha-minim into synagogue, women's voluntary mitzva performance also becomes more tangible and finds its place in the communal sphere. In a piece on women and arba'at ha-minim, Ayelet Libson describes this changing dynamic:

Ayelet Libson, Daughters of Israel who Pursue the Mitzva of Lulav (Formerly published on the website of Kehillat Ramban, Jerusalem)

The holiday of Sukkot is a celebration of senses, a holiday of smells and of colors…Taking the lulav alone in the sukka is an act that has the intimacy of a person being surrounded by mitzvot, a sensory experience unique to the holiday of Sukkot. Transferring the intimate encounter to the beit kenesset makes it more powerful and connects it to the communal prayers of Hallel and Hoshanot. As the lulavim within it become more numerous, so too the ezrat nashim dresses itself for the festival, and is filled with new and special smells and colors. In many places, the special dance of women pursuing mitzvot also has a unique flavor and scent of excitement and renewal. And, above all, the colors and smells echo the call that ends the recitation of Hoshanot: "Save your people and bless Your portion, and You shall tend to them and bear them forever…in order that all peoples of the earth know that the Lord is God, there is no other."

In some synagogues, it is very common to see many women davening Hallel and Hoshanot with arba’at haminim in hand. In others, this is less common and a woman may find herself the only one with a set. As a Torah community, we should be open to and encouraging of women performing mitzvot of a voluntary nature. Seeing a woman with arba’at haminim in the women’s section of the synagogue should be seen as added prayer-power and rejoicing for the community, and not cause suspicion or discomfort. While the practice may be relatively new in the synagogue, it is a natural extension of generations of well-founded halachic practice. 

Further Reading

Rav David Auerbach, Halichot Beitah, ch. 22.