16,374
edits
Lighting Chanukah Candles: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
m
Text replace - "So holds" to "This is also the opinion of"
m (Text replace - "So holds" to "This is also the opinion of") |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* On the other hand, the Maharam (cited by Hagahot Maimoniyot 3:2), based on the Masechet Sofrim, said LeHadlik before lighting, leaving She’asa Nissim and [[Shehechiyanu]] for afterwards. Rav Soloveitchik (quoted in Nefesh HaRav p. 224 and Mesorah vol 4, p. 8) explained that the Masechet Sofrim holds that the Bracha of She’asa Nissim functions as a Birkat HaRoeh and should be made after seeing the candles lit. He notes that in order to satisfy both views, Rav Chaim’s practice was that on all nights besides the first, he would say LeHadlik, light the first candle, say She’asa Nissim, and then light the rest of the candles. On the first night, when this is impossible, he made all three [[Brachot]] before lighting. Rabbeinu Yerucham (9:1) quotes a similar idea in the name of Rabbeinu Yonah. </ref> | * On the other hand, the Maharam (cited by Hagahot Maimoniyot 3:2), based on the Masechet Sofrim, said LeHadlik before lighting, leaving She’asa Nissim and [[Shehechiyanu]] for afterwards. Rav Soloveitchik (quoted in Nefesh HaRav p. 224 and Mesorah vol 4, p. 8) explained that the Masechet Sofrim holds that the Bracha of She’asa Nissim functions as a Birkat HaRoeh and should be made after seeing the candles lit. He notes that in order to satisfy both views, Rav Chaim’s practice was that on all nights besides the first, he would say LeHadlik, light the first candle, say She’asa Nissim, and then light the rest of the candles. On the first night, when this is impossible, he made all three [[Brachot]] before lighting. Rabbeinu Yerucham (9:1) quotes a similar idea in the name of Rabbeinu Yonah. </ref> | ||
# If one forgot to say the [[Brachot]] and remembers after he finished lighting before a half hour passed, one should recite “SheAssa Nissim” and "[[Shehecheyanu]]", on the first night, but not “Lehadlik Ner”. If one remembers before one finishes lighting the candles (on the 2nd day and on) one can make all the [[Brachot]] then and finish the lighting. <ref> Sh”t Rabbenu Avraham Ben HaRambam 83 writes that it is forbidden to say the bracha of LeHadlik Neirot [[Chanukah]] after one finished lighting [[Chanukah]] candles. Shulchan Gavoha 676:3 writes that if one remembers any time the candles are lit one may still say “SheAssa Nissim” and "[[Shehecheyanu]]", on the first night because he should be no worse that a person who isn't lighting and just saw the candles so is allowed to say these [[brachot]] ([[Birchat HaRoeh]]). Sh”t Demeshk Eliezer Y”D 47 agrees. However, see also the Sefer Pardes (Rabbenu Asher Ben Chaim pg 66) who says one can say it as long as the candles are burning. Sh”t Halachot Ketanot 1:3 and Yad Aharon (Hagahot Tur 676) say that one can make all the [[Brachot]] as long as one didn’t finish lighting all the candles of Hidur. Sh”t Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Mehudra Tanina 13) writes that if one remembers before one finishes one can make all the [[Brachot]] but if one only remembers after he finishes lighting he can’t make Lehadlik Ner just like [[Brachot]] HaRoeh(S”A 676:3). Mishna Brurah 676:4, Ben Ish Chaim Vayeshev 10, and Sh”t Chatav Sofer O”C 135 agree.Torat HaMoadim 6:9 adds that since we learn the after lighting one can still make the bracha of SheAssa Nisim from [[Brachot]] HaRoeh it only applies to the first half hour after one sees the candles as by [[Brachot]] HaRoeh. </ref> | # If one forgot to say the [[Brachot]] and remembers after he finished lighting before a half hour passed, one should recite “SheAssa Nissim” and "[[Shehecheyanu]]", on the first night, but not “Lehadlik Ner”. If one remembers before one finishes lighting the candles (on the 2nd day and on) one can make all the [[Brachot]] then and finish the lighting. <ref> Sh”t Rabbenu Avraham Ben HaRambam 83 writes that it is forbidden to say the bracha of LeHadlik Neirot [[Chanukah]] after one finished lighting [[Chanukah]] candles. Shulchan Gavoha 676:3 writes that if one remembers any time the candles are lit one may still say “SheAssa Nissim” and "[[Shehecheyanu]]", on the first night because he should be no worse that a person who isn't lighting and just saw the candles so is allowed to say these [[brachot]] ([[Birchat HaRoeh]]). Sh”t Demeshk Eliezer Y”D 47 agrees. However, see also the Sefer Pardes (Rabbenu Asher Ben Chaim pg 66) who says one can say it as long as the candles are burning. Sh”t Halachot Ketanot 1:3 and Yad Aharon (Hagahot Tur 676) say that one can make all the [[Brachot]] as long as one didn’t finish lighting all the candles of Hidur. Sh”t Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Mehudra Tanina 13) writes that if one remembers before one finishes one can make all the [[Brachot]] but if one only remembers after he finishes lighting he can’t make Lehadlik Ner just like [[Brachot]] HaRoeh(S”A 676:3). Mishna Brurah 676:4, Ben Ish Chaim Vayeshev 10, and Sh”t Chatav Sofer O”C 135 agree.Torat HaMoadim 6:9 adds that since we learn the after lighting one can still make the bracha of SheAssa Nisim from [[Brachot]] HaRoeh it only applies to the first half hour after one sees the candles as by [[Brachot]] HaRoeh. </ref> | ||
# If one forgot to say [[Shehecheyanu]] before lighting one can say it in the half hour after lighting. If one didn’t say it the first night one should say it the second night and so on. So too, if on the eighth night one forgot one can say it in the half hour after lighting. <ref> Shibolei HaLeket 186 and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 10) quote a Teshuvat Hagoanim to which Rabbenu Yishaya says that one can say [[Shehecheyanu]] any day after the first when he remembers; BI"H, [[Chanukah]], 3 concurs . Piskei Rid ([[Shabbat]] 23a) explains it means one can only make the bracha at the time of the lighting. However, Bach 676 in name of the Maharash says not to say [[Shehecheyanu]] the second night. Nonetheless, Meiri ([[Shabbat]] 23a) and Riaz (23a), also write that one lights [[Shehecheyanu]] the first night one lights. | # If one forgot to say [[Shehecheyanu]] before lighting one can say it in the half hour after lighting. If one didn’t say it the first night one should say it the second night and so on. So too, if on the eighth night one forgot one can say it in the half hour after lighting. <ref> Shibolei HaLeket 186 and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 10) quote a Teshuvat Hagoanim to which Rabbenu Yishaya says that one can say [[Shehecheyanu]] any day after the first when he remembers; BI"H, [[Chanukah]], 3 concurs . Piskei Rid ([[Shabbat]] 23a) explains it means one can only make the bracha at the time of the lighting. However, Bach 676 in name of the Maharash says not to say [[Shehecheyanu]] the second night. Nonetheless, Meiri ([[Shabbat]] 23a) and Riaz (23a), also write that one lights [[Shehecheyanu]] the first night one lights. This is also the opinion of Sh”t Maharam (Prague Edition 57), Tur 676 in name of the Rosh and S”A 676:1. </ref> | ||
# After the half hour of lighting one can’t say the [[Brachot]]. <ref> Levush 676, Pri Chadash 676:1, Sh”t Sadeh HaAretz O”C 38, Birkei Yosef 692:1, and Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:190 hold that one can only make the [[Shehecheyanu]] at the time of the lighting. However, Yavetz in Mor Ukesiah 692, Sh”T Mahari Molcho 78, Sh”t Zera Emet 1:96, and Taharat Mayim (Shiurei Tahara 8:3) hold it can be said any time during [[Chanukah]]. Nonetheless, Mishna Brurah (676:2 and Shar Tzion 676:3), and Torat HaMoadim 6:12 say that because of a Safek [[Brachot]] one doesn’t make [[Brachot]] past the time of lighting. Taharat Mayim implies that by SheAssa Nissim one can say it anytime against the Mor Ukesiah who says that SheAssa Nissim can only be said over the candles. Sh”t Yechave Daat 2:77 says because of Safek [[Brachot]] one doesn’t say SheAssa Nissim not over candles. </ref> | # After the half hour of lighting one can’t say the [[Brachot]]. <ref> Levush 676, Pri Chadash 676:1, Sh”t Sadeh HaAretz O”C 38, Birkei Yosef 692:1, and Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:190 hold that one can only make the [[Shehecheyanu]] at the time of the lighting. However, Yavetz in Mor Ukesiah 692, Sh”T Mahari Molcho 78, Sh”t Zera Emet 1:96, and Taharat Mayim (Shiurei Tahara 8:3) hold it can be said any time during [[Chanukah]]. Nonetheless, Mishna Brurah (676:2 and Shar Tzion 676:3), and Torat HaMoadim 6:12 say that because of a Safek [[Brachot]] one doesn’t make [[Brachot]] past the time of lighting. Taharat Mayim implies that by SheAssa Nissim one can say it anytime against the Mor Ukesiah who says that SheAssa Nissim can only be said over the candles. Sh”t Yechave Daat 2:77 says because of Safek [[Brachot]] one doesn’t say SheAssa Nissim not over candles. </ref> | ||
# If someone had his wife or anyone else light for him the first night he fulfill his obligation of saying [[Shehecheyanu]] and shouldn’t say it the next night. <ref> Bach 676 says that his wife’s lighting with [[Brachot]] doesn’t exempt him from [[Shehecheyanu]]. So says Eliyah Raba 676:5. Torat HaMoadim 6:13 explain that this is the Bach according to his opinion that one who has someone lighting for him at home makes [[Brachot]] HaRoah; however since we hold (S”A 676:3) that if one has someone lighting for home doesn’t make [[Brachot]] HaRoah here too, one fulfills [[Shehecheyanu]] with his wife’s lighting. So rules Sharei Knesset Hagedolah 676:2, Magan Avraham 676:2, Pri Megadim A”A 676:2, Mishna Brurah 676:7, and Kaf HaChaim 676:26. Sh”t Yabia Omer O”C 4:50 (4-5), 6:42(3-4) holds that even by [[Shehecheyanu]] we apply [[Safek Brachot LeHakel]]. </ref> | # If someone had his wife or anyone else light for him the first night he fulfill his obligation of saying [[Shehecheyanu]] and shouldn’t say it the next night. <ref> Bach 676 says that his wife’s lighting with [[Brachot]] doesn’t exempt him from [[Shehecheyanu]]. So says Eliyah Raba 676:5. Torat HaMoadim 6:13 explain that this is the Bach according to his opinion that one who has someone lighting for him at home makes [[Brachot]] HaRoah; however since we hold (S”A 676:3) that if one has someone lighting for home doesn’t make [[Brachot]] HaRoah here too, one fulfills [[Shehecheyanu]] with his wife’s lighting. So rules Sharei Knesset Hagedolah 676:2, Magan Avraham 676:2, Pri Megadim A”A 676:2, Mishna Brurah 676:7, and Kaf HaChaim 676:26. Sh”t Yabia Omer O”C 4:50 (4-5), 6:42(3-4) holds that even by [[Shehecheyanu]] we apply [[Safek Brachot LeHakel]]. </ref> | ||
| Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
== Who’s Obligated?== | == Who’s Obligated?== | ||
# Women are obligated in [[Chanukah]] candles since they too were part of the miracle of [[Chanukah]]. Thus, a man who is away traveling he should have his wife light at home for him to fulfill his obligation. Even if he will come that night later than [[Tzet HaKochavim]] (the night to light [[Chanukah]] candles), he should still have his wife light. Ashkenazim who have the Minhag that everyone in the household lights and they are able to light where they are should light without a bracha. <ref> The Gemara [[Shabbat]] (23a) says that woman are obligated in lighting [[chanuka]] candles because they too were part of the miracle of [[chanuka]]. Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:9), Tur 665, and S”A 665:5 codify this as halacha. Kitzur S"A 139:16 concurs. | # Women are obligated in [[Chanukah]] candles since they too were part of the miracle of [[Chanukah]]. Thus, a man who is away traveling he should have his wife light at home for him to fulfill his obligation. Even if he will come that night later than [[Tzet HaKochavim]] (the night to light [[Chanukah]] candles), he should still have his wife light. Ashkenazim who have the Minhag that everyone in the household lights and they are able to light where they are should light without a bracha. <ref> The Gemara [[Shabbat]] (23a) says that woman are obligated in lighting [[chanuka]] candles because they too were part of the miracle of [[chanuka]]. Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:9), Tur 665, and S”A 665:5 codify this as halacha. Kitzur S"A 139:16 concurs. | ||
* Piskei Maharam Riketani (154) holds women can fulfill a man’s obligation on his behalf. | * Piskei Maharam Riketani (154) holds women can fulfill a man’s obligation on his behalf. This is also the opinion of Rabbenu Yerucham 9:1, Rokeach [[Chanukah]] 226:3, Ritva and Meiri ([[Shabbat]] 23a, Megilah 4a), Maharil ([[Chanukah]] pg 407). Levush (675), Bach (675), Taz(675:4), Magan Avraham 675:4, Olot [[Shabbat]] 675:1, Pri Chadash 675:4, Eliyah Raba 675:6, Sh”t Shar Efraim 42, Shulchan Gavoha 675:6, Mor Ukesia 675:6, Machzik Bracha 675:4, Mishna Brurah 675:9. Sh”t Yechave Daat 3:51 writes that since some rishonim and achronim hold one can only light at [[Tzet HaKochavim]] one should let his wife light at the right time and fulfill his obligation according to all opinions. The Yechave Daat holds like the Chaye Adam 154:33. Kaf Hachiam 676:25. Chaye Adam adds that Ashkenazim can light without a bracha. Interesting point: S”A 689:2 says a women can read the [[megillah]] to fulfill for a man his obligation of [[megillah]], and some hold otherwise. [Bahag (quoted by Tosfot Megilah 4a, Erchin 3a) and Morchedai 4a in name of Ravyah (Megilah 569,843) hold women can’t fulfill the obligation of a man, but Rashi Erchin 3a, Or Zaruh 2:324, Rambam(Megilah 1), Rif (quoted by Sefer Eshkol 2:30) hold a women can fulfill obligation of a man]. However Smag (brought by Magan Avraham 589:5), Itur (Megilah 113d), Eshkol 2 pg 30 differentiate between Megilah which is like Torah reading but by [[Chanukah]] women can fulfill the man’s obligation according to everyone. Also Torat Moadim [[Chanukah]] pg 40 says the Behag only held a women can fulfill megilah for a man since a women’s obligation is derebanan and a man’s is from divrei kabalah (Ketuvim). Similarly, Sh”t Maharash Halevi O”C 24 says [[Chanukah]] isn’t an obligation on each person but on the household and so a women can fulfill it for a man. Thus even those who say by Megilah a woman can’t fulfill a man’s obligation agree by [[Chanukah]]. </ref> | ||
# A deaf and mute, insane, or child not bar/bat-mitzvah isn’t obligated to light and so can’t fulfill the obligation of someone who is obligated. However a deaf who can speak is obligated and can fulfill the obligation of others. <ref> [[Shabbat]] 23a says a deaf, insane person, and child isn’t obligated. | # A deaf and mute, insane, or child not bar/bat-mitzvah isn’t obligated to light and so can’t fulfill the obligation of someone who is obligated. However a deaf who can speak is obligated and can fulfill the obligation of others. <ref> [[Shabbat]] 23a says a deaf, insane person, and child isn’t obligated. This is also the opinion of Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:9), Tur and S”A 675:3. The Mishna Trumot 1:2 defines deaf in Talmud as deaf and mute, but someone just deaf is obligated like anyone else. So quotes Pri Megadim M”Z 670:5, Mishna Brurah 675:12, and Torat HaMoadim 2:19. There’s a dispute whether a child who is at the age of [[Chinuch]] can fulfill the obligation of an adult. Bet Yosef 675e quotes the Ran ([[Shabbat]] 23a) in name of the Itur ([[Chanukah]] pg 116a) that a child can fulfill the obligation of an adult. So writes the Shibolei HaLeket 185, Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 12). However Meiri writes that he disagrees with the Rabbis of Provincia who say a child at age of [[chinuch]] can fulfill the obligation of an adult. [Seemingly, this is the opinion of Tosfot (Megilah 19b concerning megilah) that a double derabanan (child only obligated on a [[chinuch]] level and it’s only a derabanan mitzvah) can’t fulfill the mitzvah of one obligated on level of rabanan (adult for a mitzvah derabanan). The Tur 689 writes that so is the opinion of the Bahag and Rosh. However Bet Yosef 53 in name of Sh”t HaRashba 1:239, and Raavad disagree with Tosfot.] S”A 675:3 says a child isn’t obligated to light but some permit “a child at age of [[chinuch]] to fulfill the obligation of others” Yet, it’s a dispute in the Achronim whether S”A meant it as “Setam and then Yesh Omerim” (anonymous and then a disagreeing opinion) in which case we hold like the anonymous opinion or that it’s not a dispute but the “some say” was just explaining the first line. Magan Avraham 689:4 (as understood by Pri Megadim A”A 689:4), Sh”t Zivchei Tzedek 3:41 say that S”A meant the “some say” is just explanatory. However, Yaavetz in Mor U’Kesia 689 understands S”A that we hold like the anonymous opinion. This is also the opinion of Sh”t Kol Gadol 100, Chelko Shel Yedid pg 58b, Sh”t Olat Shmuel 105e, Pri Chadash 675:3, Ben Ish Chai Veyeshev 19, Mishna Brurah 675:13, and Torat HaMoadim 2:19. </ref> | ||
# A blind person is obligated in lighting. If he’s married, his wife should light for him, if he lives alone he should light. <ref> Sh”t Maharshal 76, Magan Avraham 675:4, Eliyah Raba 675:7 write that a blind is obligated and preferably should fulfill it through joining with other house members or his wife, otherwise they can light own their own. </ref> | # A blind person is obligated in lighting. If he’s married, his wife should light for him, if he lives alone he should light. <ref> Sh”t Maharshal 76, Magan Avraham 675:4, Eliyah Raba 675:7 write that a blind is obligated and preferably should fulfill it through joining with other house members or his wife, otherwise they can light own their own. </ref> | ||
# A child, even if he is the age of [[chinuch]] but not bar/bat mitzvah, may not fulfill the obligation of others. However, the one making the bracha can light the first candle and then let the child light the other candles. However a child who isn’t at the age of [[chinuch]], shouldn’t light any of the candles except for the Shamash. <ref> Levush 671, Yaavetz in Mor U’Kesia 671, and Ben Ish Chai Vayeshev 18 hold the making the bracha should light all the candles. However, Sh”t Maharshal 85, Magan Avraham 671:11, Mishna Brurah 671:49, Ruach Chaim 671:3, and Torat HaMoadim 2:20 (he writes that his father Rav Ovadyah Yosef would hold his hands while lighting in order to satisfy all opinions). </ref> | # A child, even if he is the age of [[chinuch]] but not bar/bat mitzvah, may not fulfill the obligation of others. However, the one making the bracha can light the first candle and then let the child light the other candles. However a child who isn’t at the age of [[chinuch]], shouldn’t light any of the candles except for the Shamash. <ref> Levush 671, Yaavetz in Mor U’Kesia 671, and Ben Ish Chai Vayeshev 18 hold the making the bracha should light all the candles. However, Sh”t Maharshal 85, Magan Avraham 671:11, Mishna Brurah 671:49, Ruach Chaim 671:3, and Torat HaMoadim 2:20 (he writes that his father Rav Ovadyah Yosef would hold his hands while lighting in order to satisfy all opinions). </ref> | ||
# A mourner in the first 7 days can light and make [[Brachot]] [however he shouldn’t light in shul on the first night because of the Shechianu, even in the 30 days of [[mourning]] or 12 months for a parent.] <ref> Sh”t Maharam Mintz 43, Sefer Mnhagim of Rav Yitzchak Tirna ([[Yom Kippur]] 155), Taz 671:8 write that a mourner shouldn’t light in shul the first night because of [[Shehecheyanu]]. The Nodea Benyehuda Tanina O”C 141 writes that at home one can light even the first night with [[shechiyanu]]. | # A mourner in the first 7 days can light and make [[Brachot]] [however he shouldn’t light in shul on the first night because of the Shechianu, even in the 30 days of [[mourning]] or 12 months for a parent.] <ref> Sh”t Maharam Mintz 43, Sefer Mnhagim of Rav Yitzchak Tirna ([[Yom Kippur]] 155), Taz 671:8 write that a mourner shouldn’t light in shul the first night because of [[Shehecheyanu]]. The Nodea Benyehuda Tanina O”C 141 writes that at home one can light even the first night with [[shechiyanu]]. This is also the opinion of Machzik Bracha 671:10, Birkei Yosef Y”D 205:14m,Bet HaRoeh pg 59, Chatom Sofer on S”A 671, Chaye Adam 154:17, Sh”t Binyan Olan O”C 35, Sh”t Olat Shmuel 106, Sh”t Machane Chaim Y”D 2:61, Sh”t Rav Poalim O”C 4:36, Siddur Bet Ovad pf 160b:2, Kemach Solet 137d, Shulchan Lechem HaPanim 676e, Mishna Brurah 671:44, and Kaf HaChaim 671:73. </ref> | ||
# A mourner on the first day is exempt as he is exempt from all mitzvoth and so he should have a household member who isn’t a mourner light with a bracha, if that’s not possible, he should have another person light without a bracha. <ref> Eliyah Raba 670:19 writes one should have someone else light and answer [[amen]]. However, Erech HaShulchan 670:3 writes one should light without a bracha. Kaf Hachaim 670:20 explains that this is only a dispute if the first-day mourner is alone, otherwise his wife or a household member can fulfill for him his obligation. Pri Megadim M”Z 670:5 agrees with Eliyah Raba but argues that one can’t answer [[amen]] as in S”A Y”D 341 where we follow the anonymous opinion that a first-day mourner doesn’t answer [[amen]]. Torat HaMoadim 2:24 agrees with Erech HaShulchan. </ref> | # A mourner on the first day is exempt as he is exempt from all mitzvoth and so he should have a household member who isn’t a mourner light with a bracha, if that’s not possible, he should have another person light without a bracha. <ref> Eliyah Raba 670:19 writes one should have someone else light and answer [[amen]]. However, Erech HaShulchan 670:3 writes one should light without a bracha. Kaf Hachaim 670:20 explains that this is only a dispute if the first-day mourner is alone, otherwise his wife or a household member can fulfill for him his obligation. Pri Megadim M”Z 670:5 agrees with Eliyah Raba but argues that one can’t answer [[amen]] as in S”A Y”D 341 where we follow the anonymous opinion that a first-day mourner doesn’t answer [[amen]]. Torat HaMoadim 2:24 agrees with Erech HaShulchan. </ref> | ||
# A convert can make all the [[Brachot]] and say “She’assa Nissim Le’avotenu” but if he wants can change it to say “She’assa Nissim LeYisrael”. <ref> Sh”t Rambam (Pasya edition 158, Kisei Nirdamim Mehuderet Fredman 42, Mehuderet Belav 293) writes that a convert can say all of the [[Brachot]] like every Jew because he converted he becomes a descendant of Avraham and part of the Jewish people for all their history, however if he wants to change the [[brachot]] that relate to the Jewish history such as Yetsiat Mitzrayim, and [[Chanukah]]. The Sh”t Rashba 7:54, Hagahot Mordechai Megilah 1:786, and Sh”t Ridvaz 5:520 agree. Torat HaMoadim 2:25 finds support for this opinion in the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (See S”A 53:19 and S"A 199:9). </ref> | # A convert can make all the [[Brachot]] and say “She’assa Nissim Le’avotenu” but if he wants can change it to say “She’assa Nissim LeYisrael”. <ref> Sh”t Rambam (Pasya edition 158, Kisei Nirdamim Mehuderet Fredman 42, Mehuderet Belav 293) writes that a convert can say all of the [[Brachot]] like every Jew because he converted he becomes a descendant of Avraham and part of the Jewish people for all their history, however if he wants to change the [[brachot]] that relate to the Jewish history such as Yetsiat Mitzrayim, and [[Chanukah]]. The Sh”t Rashba 7:54, Hagahot Mordechai Megilah 1:786, and Sh”t Ridvaz 5:520 agree. Torat HaMoadim 2:25 finds support for this opinion in the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (See S”A 53:19 and S"A 199:9). </ref> | ||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
* Torat HaMoadim (2:4 pg 45) explains that since the Yeshiva students return home during break and are still connected to their parent’s home they are considered dependant on their parent’s house. Torat HaMoadim (2:4 pg 48) continues that even if they don’t fulfill their obligation with the lighting at home they fulfill their obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva. He explains that certainly the administration of the Yeshiva gives a portion of the oil and wicks to the students. He adds that the lighting of the Yeshiva isn’t similar to the lighting in a Shul where some say that one can’t fulfill one’s obligation because the students are in the Beit Midrash all the time and so it’s considered their house. | * Torat HaMoadim (2:4 pg 45) explains that since the Yeshiva students return home during break and are still connected to their parent’s home they are considered dependant on their parent’s house. Torat HaMoadim (2:4 pg 48) continues that even if they don’t fulfill their obligation with the lighting at home they fulfill their obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva. He explains that certainly the administration of the Yeshiva gives a portion of the oil and wicks to the students. He adds that the lighting of the Yeshiva isn’t similar to the lighting in a Shul where some say that one can’t fulfill one’s obligation because the students are in the Beit Midrash all the time and so it’s considered their house. | ||
* However, Shevut Yitzchak (vol 5, pg 113-4) quotes Rav Elyashiv as saying that a Sephardic Yeshiva student doesn’t fulfill one’s obligation with the lighting of one’s parents. The Shevut Yitzchak explains that a married man fulfills his obligation with his wife’s lighting at home because that’s his primary house, however, a Yeshiva student doesn’t live at home and so his parents can’t fulfill his obligation. Peninei [[Chanukah]] (pg 81-2) quotes Rav Elyashiva as saying that this is true even if the parents pay for tuition at the Yeshiva. Sh”t Az Nidbaru 3:53, Shulchan Yosef (vol 2, pg 139-140), Yemeh [[Chanukah]] (pg 155) quoting Rav Nissim Karlitz agree. See Teshuvot VeHanhagot 3:215(17) who seems to agree. Listen to shiur by [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/751512/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Chanukah Rav Hershel Schachter] (min 14-16) who seems to hold that a person in the Israeli army does not fulfill his obligation with the lighting in his home. | * However, Shevut Yitzchak (vol 5, pg 113-4) quotes Rav Elyashiv as saying that a Sephardic Yeshiva student doesn’t fulfill one’s obligation with the lighting of one’s parents. The Shevut Yitzchak explains that a married man fulfills his obligation with his wife’s lighting at home because that’s his primary house, however, a Yeshiva student doesn’t live at home and so his parents can’t fulfill his obligation. Peninei [[Chanukah]] (pg 81-2) quotes Rav Elyashiva as saying that this is true even if the parents pay for tuition at the Yeshiva. Sh”t Az Nidbaru 3:53, Shulchan Yosef (vol 2, pg 139-140), Yemeh [[Chanukah]] (pg 155) quoting Rav Nissim Karlitz agree. See Teshuvot VeHanhagot 3:215(17) who seems to agree. Listen to shiur by [http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/751512/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Chanukah Rav Hershel Schachter] (min 14-16) who seems to hold that a person in the Israeli army does not fulfill his obligation with the lighting in his home. | ||
* Background: Sh”t Ginat Veradim says the rule that a guest must chip in for the [[Chanukah]] candle expenses to fulfill his obligation (S”A 677:1) only applies to a guest who pays for all his expenses like food and board, but a student in Yeshiva or College who can rely on them for all his needs and doesn’t account for every expense, doesn’t need to chip in for the [[Chanukah]] candles since they definitely allow him a portion of the candles. | * Background: Sh”t Ginat Veradim says the rule that a guest must chip in for the [[Chanukah]] candle expenses to fulfill his obligation (S”A 677:1) only applies to a guest who pays for all his expenses like food and board, but a student in Yeshiva or College who can rely on them for all his needs and doesn’t account for every expense, doesn’t need to chip in for the [[Chanukah]] candles since they definitely allow him a portion of the candles. This is also the opinion of Yad Aharon, Shulchan Gavoha, Kiseh Eliayahu, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 263:9, Kaf Hachaim 677:3, Sh”t Yechave Daat 6:43, and Torat HaMoadim 2:8 (who says he personally asked his father, Rav Ovadyah Yosef). On the other hand, Pri Megadim A”A 677:3 and Mishna Brurah 677:4 disagree with the Ginat Veradim and hold any guest needs to chip in for the [[Chanukah]] candles. See Sh”t Bet David O”C 472, Sh”t Chesed LeAlafim Alkelai O”C 24, Sh”t Zivchai Tzedek 2:27, Sh”t Rav Poalim 2:50, Sh”t Mishnat Halachot 7:87. </ref> | ||
# A Sephardic Yeshiva whose parents live outside Israel in a different time zone some say that he may light with a Bracha at Yeshiva, while others say that he can fulfill his obligation with the lighting of his parents. <Ref> | # A Sephardic Yeshiva whose parents live outside Israel in a different time zone some say that he may light with a Bracha at Yeshiva, while others say that he can fulfill his obligation with the lighting of his parents. <Ref> | ||
* Chacham Ben Tzion Abba Shaul (Kovetz Zichron Yehuda, Sefer Zikaron, vol 1, pg 106-7) rules that a Yeshiva student whose parents live outside Israel in a different time zone can light with a Bracha at the Yeshiva. Chazon Ovadyah pg 150 and Pri HaAretz 1:9 pg 6d agree. See Sh”t Minchat Yitzchak 7:46 who agrees. | * Chacham Ben Tzion Abba Shaul (Kovetz Zichron Yehuda, Sefer Zikaron, vol 1, pg 106-7) rules that a Yeshiva student whose parents live outside Israel in a different time zone can light with a Bracha at the Yeshiva. Chazon Ovadyah pg 150 and Pri HaAretz 1:9 pg 6d agree. See Sh”t Minchat Yitzchak 7:46 who agrees. | ||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
# Someone in a city that’s totally not Jewish, some say that even if his family is lighting for him at home he should light with a bracha, while others disagree. <ref> S”A 677:3 writes “some say to light with a bracha when in a city that totally not Jewish” based on Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 13,18) and Mordechai 267. So writes Sh”t She’erit Yosef 73e. The Pri Chadash 677:3 argues that one shouldn’t rely on this to make a bracha since it’s not an obligation. [This is similar to the Bet Yosef 677:1 who argued against the Trumat Hadeshen 101 who says that a guest who was married was allowed to light on his own for Hiddur Mitzvah because, says the Bet Yosef, one shouldn’t rely on this to make an unnecessary bracha.] Buir HaGra 677:3 argues similarly. Mishna Brurah 677:14 agrees. On the other hand, Chazon Ovadyah pg 158-60 says that the Bet Yosef 677:3 only quotes the Orchot Chaim and Mordechai without anyone who argues and then rules that way in S”A implying that no one disagrees. The difference between the a guest and this traveler is as the Mamer Mordechai 677:4 explains that the guest can’t light if there’s already a Pirsume Nisa and he’s fulfilled his obligation with his wife’s lighting, but a traveler has an obligation of Pirsume Nisa even if his wife is lighting because no one around is lighting. The Shulchan Gavoha 677:5, Chasidei David Chasan pg 61b, Chelko Shel Yedid pg 48b, Sh”t [[Besamim]] Rosh 343, Chazon Ovadyah, and Moed Kol Chai 27:49 agree. Why did S”A begin the halacha with words “some say”? Mamer Mordechai says it’s because S”A was unsure about this. Yet, Chazon Ovadyah responds that the S”A was concerned for those rishonim who disagreed with the Orchot Chaim and Mordechai and are quoted by the Meiri. </ref> | # Someone in a city that’s totally not Jewish, some say that even if his family is lighting for him at home he should light with a bracha, while others disagree. <ref> S”A 677:3 writes “some say to light with a bracha when in a city that totally not Jewish” based on Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 13,18) and Mordechai 267. So writes Sh”t She’erit Yosef 73e. The Pri Chadash 677:3 argues that one shouldn’t rely on this to make a bracha since it’s not an obligation. [This is similar to the Bet Yosef 677:1 who argued against the Trumat Hadeshen 101 who says that a guest who was married was allowed to light on his own for Hiddur Mitzvah because, says the Bet Yosef, one shouldn’t rely on this to make an unnecessary bracha.] Buir HaGra 677:3 argues similarly. Mishna Brurah 677:14 agrees. On the other hand, Chazon Ovadyah pg 158-60 says that the Bet Yosef 677:3 only quotes the Orchot Chaim and Mordechai without anyone who argues and then rules that way in S”A implying that no one disagrees. The difference between the a guest and this traveler is as the Mamer Mordechai 677:4 explains that the guest can’t light if there’s already a Pirsume Nisa and he’s fulfilled his obligation with his wife’s lighting, but a traveler has an obligation of Pirsume Nisa even if his wife is lighting because no one around is lighting. The Shulchan Gavoha 677:5, Chasidei David Chasan pg 61b, Chelko Shel Yedid pg 48b, Sh”t [[Besamim]] Rosh 343, Chazon Ovadyah, and Moed Kol Chai 27:49 agree. Why did S”A begin the halacha with words “some say”? Mamer Mordechai says it’s because S”A was unsure about this. Yet, Chazon Ovadyah responds that the S”A was concerned for those rishonim who disagreed with the Orchot Chaim and Mordechai and are quoted by the Meiri. </ref> | ||
===Other laws of a guest=== | ===Other laws of a guest=== | ||
# A guest who is relying on the home owner and the home owner asks him to light, he can light for everyone with a bracha. <ref> Torat HaMoadim 2:13 quoting his father, Rav Ovadiah, based on the fact that one can appoint a Shaliach to light for him and all the more so if the Shaliah is a household member. | # A guest who is relying on the home owner and the home owner asks him to light, he can light for everyone with a bracha. <ref> Torat HaMoadim 2:13 quoting his father, Rav Ovadiah, based on the fact that one can appoint a Shaliach to light for him and all the more so if the Shaliah is a household member. This is also the opinion of Rav Elyashiv (Kuntres Halichot VeHanhagot, quoted in Halichot Yosef pg 244), Sefer [[Chanukah]] of Rav Kenievsky 13:14b. </ref> | ||
# A guest of a motel or hotel which is just for guests and not a home owner, needs to light for himself (unless there is someone lighting for him at home). <ref> Torat HaMoadim 2:14 says a hotel guest doesn’t have the laws of a guest at his friend’s house because he’s not living with the owner of the house and he’s renting his own room. | # A guest of a motel or hotel which is just for guests and not a home owner, needs to light for himself (unless there is someone lighting for him at home). <ref> Torat HaMoadim 2:14 says a hotel guest doesn’t have the laws of a guest at his friend’s house because he’s not living with the owner of the house and he’s renting his own room. This is also the opinion of the Chovat Hadar 39. Implied from Piskei Riaz ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Piskei Rid ([[Shabbat]] 23a), and Shebolei HaLeket 185 that there’s an obligation on a renter even if it’s a just a room in a house. </ref> | ||
# Two people who live in a one apartment if they eat together and pay for the food together, they should light one set of candles (in which they both have a potion) and switch off with who should do the Bracha. If they pay for their own food separately even if they are family members they should light separately. <ref> Sefer Pardes Gadol 199e, Sh”t Maaseh Geonim 44, and Shiboeli HaLeket 185 bring a dispute between Rabbenu David who hold that two people living in one house should light separately and Rabbotenu who said that they can light together. Torat Hamoadim 2:17 explains that this dispute concerns two people who have separate funds for food because otherwise it’s untenable why Rabbenu David requires separate lighting, however if they didn’t separate the cost of food everyone agrees that they can light together. Magid Mishna ([[Chanukah]] 4:4), Pri Chadash 677:1, Sh”t Shaarei Yehoshua O”C 7:4 agree with Rabbenu David. However, Sefer HaTrumah 229, Eliyahu Zuta 671:6 in name of Tosfot, Levush 677:3, Pri Megamdim A”A 678:3, and Ben Ish Chai Vayeshev 17 agree with Rabbotenu. Mishna Brurah in Biur Halacha (677:1 D”H Imo) quotes this dispute and doesn’t rule on it. Torat HaMoadim 2:17 advises that since everyone agrees that one can light separately and it’s dispute whether one can light together one should light separately to satisfy all opinions. </ref> | # Two people who live in a one apartment if they eat together and pay for the food together, they should light one set of candles (in which they both have a potion) and switch off with who should do the Bracha. If they pay for their own food separately even if they are family members they should light separately. <ref> Sefer Pardes Gadol 199e, Sh”t Maaseh Geonim 44, and Shiboeli HaLeket 185 bring a dispute between Rabbenu David who hold that two people living in one house should light separately and Rabbotenu who said that they can light together. Torat Hamoadim 2:17 explains that this dispute concerns two people who have separate funds for food because otherwise it’s untenable why Rabbenu David requires separate lighting, however if they didn’t separate the cost of food everyone agrees that they can light together. Magid Mishna ([[Chanukah]] 4:4), Pri Chadash 677:1, Sh”t Shaarei Yehoshua O”C 7:4 agree with Rabbenu David. However, Sefer HaTrumah 229, Eliyahu Zuta 671:6 in name of Tosfot, Levush 677:3, Pri Megamdim A”A 678:3, and Ben Ish Chai Vayeshev 17 agree with Rabbotenu. Mishna Brurah in Biur Halacha (677:1 D”H Imo) quotes this dispute and doesn’t rule on it. Torat HaMoadim 2:17 advises that since everyone agrees that one can light separately and it’s dispute whether one can light together one should light separately to satisfy all opinions. </ref> | ||
# Someone who doesn’t have a house and isn’t a dependant of someone’s house, can’t light candles. If he eats at someone’s house, he can light without a bracha or join in the lighting of the owner (by paying for a portion of the candles). However, he can make the [[Brachot]] HaRoeh for seeing the candles (She’assa Nisim and Shechianu on the first night). <ref> Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe Y”D 3:14(5) based on Rashi (23a D”H HaRoeh) and Torat HaMoadim 2:18 based on Tosfot ([[Sukkah]] 46a D”H HaRoeh) rule that someone who doesn’t have a house doesn’t light and can only make [[Brachot]] HaRoah. [It seems, Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 15:29 holds one should light even if he doesn’t have a house.] Bach 677 D”H “U’Mah Shekatav HaRosh” implies if not for suspicion one can light in the place he ate. However, Taz 677:2 argues that one can not light in the place he ate. Thus one can only light without a Bracha (Safek [[Brachot]] Lehakel). </ref> | # Someone who doesn’t have a house and isn’t a dependant of someone’s house, can’t light candles. If he eats at someone’s house, he can light without a bracha or join in the lighting of the owner (by paying for a portion of the candles). However, he can make the [[Brachot]] HaRoeh for seeing the candles (She’assa Nisim and Shechianu on the first night). <ref> Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe Y”D 3:14(5) based on Rashi (23a D”H HaRoeh) and Torat HaMoadim 2:18 based on Tosfot ([[Sukkah]] 46a D”H HaRoeh) rule that someone who doesn’t have a house doesn’t light and can only make [[Brachot]] HaRoah. [It seems, Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 15:29 holds one should light even if he doesn’t have a house.] Bach 677 D”H “U’Mah Shekatav HaRosh” implies if not for suspicion one can light in the place he ate. However, Taz 677:2 argues that one can not light in the place he ate. Thus one can only light without a Bracha (Safek [[Brachot]] Lehakel). </ref> | ||
