1) MUST ALL OF THE "ARBA'AS HA'MINIM" BE HELD AT ONE TIME?
OPINIONS: The Mishnah lists Mitzvos which one fulfills only when multiple objects are present at one time. One of these Mitzvos is the Mitzvah of the Arba'as ha'Minim on Sukos. This Mitzvah requires that one hold a Lulav, Esrog, Hadasim, and Aravos together. If one does not hold all of these objects, he does not fulfill the Mitzvah of Arba'as ha'Minim.
The Gemara derives this from the verse, "And you shall take" (Vayikra 23:40), which implies that there must be a complete "taking." This means that all of the Arba'as ha'Minim must be held in order to fulfill the Mitzvah.
Rav Chanan bar Rava adds that "this was taught only when he does not have them, but when he has them, they do not prevent him from fulfillment of the Mitzvah." What is the meaning of this statement?
(a) TOSFOS (DH u'Lekachtem) quotes the BEHAG who explains that if one does not have all of the Arba'as ha'Minim, he does not fulfill the Mitzvah. However, if he has them and picks them up separately, he fulfills the Mitzvah.
(b) Tosfos quotes RABEINU TAM who has a different text in the Gemara. According to his text, if any one of the Arba'as ha'Minim is missing, one does not fulfill the Mitzvah. However, if one picks up all of the Arba'as ha'Minim but they are merely not tied together, he fulfills the Mitzvah.
The SHULCHAN ARUCH (OC 651:12) rules like the opinion of the Behag. However, the REMA adds that all of the Arba'as ha'Minim must be in front of him when he picks up each one separately. Is the Rema arguing with the Shulchan Aruch?
1. The SHA'AR HA'TZIYUN (OC 651:67) quotes the MAGEN AVRAHAM who says that the Rema is not arguing with the Shulchan Aruch, but is merely adding explanation to the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch. The Rema agrees that one fulfills the Mitzvah even if all of the Arba'as ha'Minim are not in front of him at the same time. However, it is preferable that all of the Arba'as ha'Minim be in front of him in order that his blessing on the Lulav cover his act of picking up the other three Minim. If all of the Arba'as ha'Minim are not present when he recites the blessing, there will be an interruption between his blessing and the Mitzvah, and he will need to recite another blessing when he picks up the next Min. Indeed, the Rema rules that if one interrupts between the blessing and the taking of the other species, he must make new blessings. The MISHNAH BERURAH explains that one would have to say the blessing of "Al Netilas Etz Avos" for the Hadasim, "Al Netilas Aravah" for the Aravos, and "Al Netilas Esrog" for the Esrog. In order to avoid these extra blessings, the Rema recommends that all of the Arba'as ha'Minim be present when he recites the blessing of "Al Netilas Lulav."
2. The Sha'ar ha'Tziyun quotes the BI'UR HA'GRA who implies that the Rema is expressing the view of the ROSH who argues that one does not fulfill the Mitzvah at all unless all of the Arba'as ha'Minim are present at one time. (Y. MONTROSE)
2) "DERECH MESHUPASH"
OPINIONS: The Gemara explains that the Rabanan derive from the verse, "El Pnei ha'Kapores" -- literally, "towards the face of the Kapores" (Vayikra 16:2), that a person is liable for entering the Kodesh ha'Kodashim only when he enters in a normal way, excluding one who enters in a "Derech Meshupash." What is a "Derech Meshupash"?
(a) RASHI (DH li'Me'utei) explains that "Derech Meshupash" refers to a person who breaks down part of the wall of the Kodesh ha'Kodashim and makes an entrance in the south or north side of the Kodesh ha'Kodashim. This differs from the normal way of entering, which is done through the opening on the eastern side of the Kodesh ha'Kodashim, in a way in which the faces west as he enters.
(b) In his second explanation, Rashi suggests that "Derech Meshupash" refers to a person who enters through the entrance on the eastern side of the Kodesh ha'Kodashim, but he enters sideways or diagonally, without facing west.
In reference to both explanations, Rashi says that the word "Meshupash" is related to the word "Meshubash," meaning abnormal or irregular.
(c) TOSFOS (DH li'Me'utei) offers a third explanation. "Derech Meshupash" refers to a person who enters the Kodesh ha'Kodashim by being lowered down in a box, similar to the way in which workers are lowered into the Kodesh ha'Kodashim in order to conduct maintenance work in the Kodesh ha'Kodashim.
Tosfos explains that all of these explanations answer an obvious question on the Gemara. Why is a special teaching from the verse needed to teach that one is not liable for entering the Kodesh ha'Kodashim in an irregular way? This should be obvious from the simple meaning of the words in the same verse, "v'Al Yavo" -- "and he shall not come" (Vayikra 16:2), which imply that entering in an unusual way does not constitute "coming" into the Beis ha'Mikdash, as the Gemara in Shevuos indeed derives with regard to one who enters the Beis ha'Mikdash in an irregular way.
Tosfos answers that the Gemara in Shevuos refers to one who enters by breaking the ceiling of the Beis ha'Mikdash. Since it is the normal practice to lower workers into the Kodesh ha'Kodashim in this manner, the verse of "v'Al Yavo" does not exclude this manner of entry. Similarly, the verse of "v'Al Yavo" does not exclude one who enters by walking in the normal manner through a breach in the wall. One who enters the Kodesh ha'Kodashim in these ways should be liable. Accordingly, the Gemara needs the verse of "El Pnei ha'Kapores" to teach that one is not liable for these forms of entry into the Kodesh ha'Kodashim, since he does not face towards the west when he enters in these ways. (Y. MONTROSE)