3,231
edits
Lighting Chanukah Candles: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
no edit summary
m (Text replace - "ibid" to "{{ibid}}") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== The Brachot of Chanukah Candles== | == The Brachot of Chanukah Candles== | ||
# On the first night of [[Chanukah]], before lighting the candles one should recite three [[blessings]]. On all other nights, only the first two are said (and not [[Shehecheyanu]]). <ref> Shulchan Aruch OC 676:1-2</ref> Here is the text in Hebrew and below it is the transliterated text: | # On the first night of [[Chanukah]], before lighting the candles one should recite three [[blessings]]. On all other nights, only the first two are said (and not [[Shehecheyanu]]). <ref> Shulchan Aruch OC 676:1-2</ref> Here is the text in Hebrew and below it is the transliterated text: | ||
## ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להדליק נר (של) חנוכה <ref> S”A 676:1 writes the first bracha without the word shel. So is the opinion of the Arizal (Shaar Kavanot pg 108d), Pri Chadash, and Gra (Maaseh Rav 231). However Ashkenazim add the word Shel based on our girsa of the Gemara, Rif and Rambam. Mishnah Berurah 676:1, based on early sources quoted in Shaar Hatziyun 1. Orchos Rabbeinu 3:17 says that the practice of the Chazon Ish was to say lehadlik ner shelachanukah (one word with a patach under the lamed). Clearly, if a Sephardi said it with the word Shel he fulfills his obligation (Chazon Ovadyah pg 125). Although the Shibolei HaLeket (Siman 185) argues that the text of first bracha should be Al Mitzvat Hadlakat Ner [[Chanukah]], the Rosh (Pesachim 1:10) cites Rabbeinu Tam and Riva, who justify the text of [[LeHadlik Ner Shel Chanuka]]. S”A 676:1 rules that the text is LeHadlik. </ref> | ## ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להדליק נר (של) חנוכה <ref> S”A 676:1 writes the first bracha without the word shel. So is the opinion of the Arizal (Shaar Kavanot pg 108d), Pri [[Chadash]], and Gra (Maaseh Rav 231). However Ashkenazim add the word Shel based on our girsa of the Gemara, Rif and Rambam. Mishnah Berurah 676:1, based on early sources quoted in Shaar Hatziyun 1. Orchos Rabbeinu 3:17 says that the practice of the Chazon Ish was to say lehadlik ner shelachanukah (one word with a patach under the lamed). Clearly, if a Sephardi said it with the word Shel he fulfills his obligation (Chazon Ovadyah pg 125). Although the Shibolei HaLeket (Siman 185) argues that the text of first bracha should be Al Mitzvat Hadlakat Ner [[Chanukah]], the Rosh (Pesachim 1:10) cites Rabbeinu Tam and Riva, who justify the text of [[LeHadlik Ner Shel Chanuka]]. S”A 676:1 rules that the text is LeHadlik. </ref> | ||
## ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, שעשה נסים לאבותינו בימים ההם בזמן הזה | ## ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, שעשה נסים לאבותינו בימים ההם בזמן הזה | ||
## ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, שהחינו וקימנו והגענו לזמן הזה | ## ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, שהחינו וקימנו והגענו לזמן הזה | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
# 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. 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> | # 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. This is also the opinion of 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. This is also the opinion of 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 27: | Line 27: | ||
* However, the Levush (676:5) and Taz (676:6), however, argue that the Gemara means in one’s first decision between right and left one should go right, but afterwards one may continue to follow that path even if that means going left. Therefore, they rule that on the first night, the candle is placed in the leftmost position, and on the subsequent nights, the candles are put to the right of the previous candles and are lit from right to left. This is also the opinion of the Sh”t Panim Meirot 1:98 and Sh”t Semach Tzedek O”C 67. | * However, the Levush (676:5) and Taz (676:6), however, argue that the Gemara means in one’s first decision between right and left one should go right, but afterwards one may continue to follow that path even if that means going left. Therefore, they rule that on the first night, the candle is placed in the leftmost position, and on the subsequent nights, the candles are put to the right of the previous candles and are lit from right to left. This is also the opinion of the Sh”t Panim Meirot 1:98 and Sh”t Semach Tzedek O”C 67. | ||
* A third approach is that of the Gr”a (Bei’ur HaGra 676:5 and Maaseh Rav 240). He writes that one always should light the candle closest to the door first, even if it is not the newest candle and even if it means lighting from right to left. This is also recorded in Maaseh Rav (Siman 240). | * A third approach is that of the Gr”a (Bei’ur HaGra 676:5 and Maaseh Rav 240). He writes that one always should light the candle closest to the door first, even if it is not the newest candle and even if it means lighting from right to left. This is also recorded in Maaseh Rav (Siman 240). | ||
* Halacha: Mishna Brurah 676:9 quotes the Bet Yosef and the Gra and concludes one can do like either one. The Pri HaChadash, Bear Sheva (Sotah 15b), Nezirut Shimshon (Sotah 15b), Sh”t Chatam Sofer O”C 187, Chazon Ovadiah ([[Chanukah]] pg 33) argue on the Levush and hold like S”A. Kovetz Hamoedim (Moriah pg 61), Evan Israel (9 pg 129a), Sadeh HaAretz O”C 3:33, and Nehar Mitzrayim [[Chanukah]] 7 argue on the Gra and hold like S”A. The Kitzur S”A 139:11, Kaf HaChaim 676:31, Aruch HaShulchan 676:11, Natai Gavriel ([[Chanukah]] 28:2, pg 177), and Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 229) write that the halacha and minhag follow Shulchan Aruch. Rav Mordechai Willig (Hilchos [[Chanukah]] and [[Purim]] #1, 37-8) observed that the minhag is like the S”A. | * Halacha: Mishna Brurah 676:9 quotes the Bet Yosef and the Gra and concludes one can do like either one. The Pri HaChadash, Bear Sheva (Sotah 15b), Nezirut Shimshon (Sotah 15b), Sh”t Chatam Sofer O”C 187, Chazon Ovadiah ([[Chanukah]] pg 33) argue on the Levush and hold like S”A. Kovetz Hamoedim (Moriah pg 61), Evan [[Israel]] (9 pg 129a), Sadeh HaAretz O”C 3:33, and Nehar Mitzrayim [[Chanukah]] 7 argue on the Gra and hold like S”A. The Kitzur S”A 139:11, Kaf HaChaim 676:31, Aruch HaShulchan 676:11, Natai Gavriel ([[Chanukah]] 28:2, pg 177), and Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 229) write that the halacha and minhag follow Shulchan Aruch. Rav Mordechai Willig (Hilchos [[Chanukah]] and [[Purim]] #1, 37-8) observed that the minhag is like the S”A. | ||
* Rav Hershel Schachter (Halachipedia Article 5773 #10) said that common practice is to put the candles in from right to left. He explained that the idea is to start the candles within a [[tefach]] of the doorway.</ref> | * Rav Hershel Schachter (Halachipedia Article 5773 #10) said that common practice is to put the candles in from right to left. He explained that the idea is to start the candles within a [[tefach]] of the doorway.</ref> | ||
# Ideally one should stand near the candles on the left side of the chanukia so that one need not pass over the candles on the right when lighting.<ref>Mishna Brurah 676:11</ref> | # Ideally one should stand near the candles on the left side of the chanukia so that one need not pass over the candles on the right when lighting.<ref>Mishna Brurah 676:11</ref> | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
* Interesting point: The Taz 671:1 writes that here is a case where Ashkenazim follow Rambam and Sephardim follow Tosfot. Chemed Moshe 671:4 argues that the Rambam concludes so is the Minhag not like the ruling, meaning it’s an old practice even before his time. The Torat HaMoadim ([[Chanukah]] pg 18) brings the Rama in Darkei Moshe 671:1 who says the Ashkenazi practice goes even according to Tosfot since the candles are indoors and separate. Tzeddai Chem ([[Chanukah]] 9:4) argues that the Ashkenazic practice for each member of the household to light isn’t like the Rambam who says that one person lights for everyone according to the number of people. For this reason many challenge the Rama who quotes his ruling in name of the Rambam including Maamar Mordechai 671:4, Bet Halevi on Torah ([[Chanukah]] pg 69). Yet, the Sh”t Maharil 145, Sh”t Trumat Hadeshen 101, and Sh”t Mahari Mebrona 50 hold like the explanation held by the Rama and could be sources for his opinion. Also, the Alfasi Zuta ([[Shabbat]] 2 beginning) says that the Rama is following the idea of the Rambam to light according to the number of household members but in order to satisfy Tosfot’s issue of being recognizable, every person lights instead of one person lighting.</ref> | * Interesting point: The Taz 671:1 writes that here is a case where Ashkenazim follow Rambam and Sephardim follow Tosfot. Chemed Moshe 671:4 argues that the Rambam concludes so is the Minhag not like the ruling, meaning it’s an old practice even before his time. The Torat HaMoadim ([[Chanukah]] pg 18) brings the Rama in Darkei Moshe 671:1 who says the Ashkenazi practice goes even according to Tosfot since the candles are indoors and separate. Tzeddai Chem ([[Chanukah]] 9:4) argues that the Ashkenazic practice for each member of the household to light isn’t like the Rambam who says that one person lights for everyone according to the number of people. For this reason many challenge the Rama who quotes his ruling in name of the Rambam including Maamar Mordechai 671:4, Bet Halevi on Torah ([[Chanukah]] pg 69). Yet, the Sh”t Maharil 145, Sh”t Trumat Hadeshen 101, and Sh”t Mahari Mebrona 50 hold like the explanation held by the Rama and could be sources for his opinion. Also, the Alfasi Zuta ([[Shabbat]] 2 beginning) says that the Rama is following the idea of the Rambam to light according to the number of household members but in order to satisfy Tosfot’s issue of being recognizable, every person lights instead of one person lighting.</ref> | ||
# If one missed lighting one day it can’t be made up and the next night one should light the number everyone else is lighting. <ref> S”A 672:2. Siddur Rashi 316 pg 151 quotes Rabbenu Yitzchak Bar Yehuda who says that there’s no make up for a missed day, otherwise those who see will think you’re violating the words of the Rabbis. So writes the Tur 672. There’s a dispute whether this means that since it can’t be made up one doesn’t light the next night or one lights like the rest of the world. The Sh”t Maaseh Geonim (55 pg 43) quoting Rabbenu Yitzchak Bar Yehuda that the next night one lights like everyone else. (Thus, Rabbenu Yitzchak means not to light the amount of the night he missed with the amount of that night because that would look like he’s going against the Rabbis); So hold Mordechai 2:268 explained by Sh”t Maharil 28, Agudah ([[Shabbat]] 31), Roke’ach 226 pg 128, Shibolei Leket 186, and Pardes Hagadol 199. However, Sefer Minhagim in name of Meharar MeMerizberg writes that the next night one should light the number of candles you missed last night. [He understood Rabbenu Yitzchak quoted by the Tur that one can’t add 8 candles on the 9th night.] Darkei Moshe 672:3 holds like the Agudah and Rokeach against the Maharam.</ref> | # If one missed lighting one day it can’t be made up and the next night one should light the number everyone else is lighting. <ref> S”A 672:2. Siddur Rashi 316 pg 151 quotes Rabbenu Yitzchak Bar Yehuda who says that there’s no make up for a missed day, otherwise those who see will think you’re violating the words of the Rabbis. So writes the Tur 672. There’s a dispute whether this means that since it can’t be made up one doesn’t light the next night or one lights like the rest of the world. The Sh”t Maaseh Geonim (55 pg 43) quoting Rabbenu Yitzchak Bar Yehuda that the next night one lights like everyone else. (Thus, Rabbenu Yitzchak means not to light the amount of the night he missed with the amount of that night because that would look like he’s going against the Rabbis); So hold Mordechai 2:268 explained by Sh”t Maharil 28, Agudah ([[Shabbat]] 31), Roke’ach 226 pg 128, Shibolei Leket 186, and Pardes Hagadol 199. However, Sefer Minhagim in name of Meharar MeMerizberg writes that the next night one should light the number of candles you missed last night. [He understood Rabbenu Yitzchak quoted by the Tur that one can’t add 8 candles on the 9th night.] Darkei Moshe 672:3 holds like the Agudah and Rokeach against the Maharam.</ref> | ||
# If one lit two candles on the first night, he fulfills his obligation and doesn’t have to relight the right number of candles. <ref> Sh”t HaElef Lecha Shlomo O”C 380 says adding to the number doesn’t ruin the mitzvah as the Rama 263 says by [[Shabbat]] candles. However, Sh”t Ohel Moshe 69 and Sh”t Mishna Sachir O”C 199 argue since he lit the wrong number someone seeing this will think he didn’t lit it for [[Chanukah]] candles just for light. Yet, the Pri Chadash 675 says one who extinguishes the candles fulfills the mitzvah since the candles are in a Chanukiya that’s only used for [[Chanukah]] it’s recognizable that he lit for [[Chanukah]]. Also, Eliya Raba 671:7 says the first night doesn’t need to illustrate the number of the nights. Sh”t Lehorot Natan 2:51, Sh”t Shraga HaMeir 4:73, 5:75(1), Sh”t Shevet Hakehati 1:202 hold like Sh”t HaElef Lecha Shlomo. Chazon Ovadiah (Mitzvah Hadlaka 6, pg 29) agrees and adds that one who repeats and makes a bracha is making a bracha levatala.</ref> | # If one lit two candles on the first night, he fulfills his obligation and doesn’t have to relight the right number of candles. <ref> Sh”t HaElef Lecha Shlomo O”C 380 says adding to the number doesn’t ruin the mitzvah as the Rama 263 says by [[Shabbat]] candles. However, Sh”t Ohel Moshe 69 and Sh”t Mishna Sachir O”C 199 argue since he lit the wrong number someone seeing this will think he didn’t lit it for [[Chanukah]] candles just for light. Yet, the Pri [[Chadash]] 675 says one who extinguishes the candles fulfills the mitzvah since the candles are in a Chanukiya that’s only used for [[Chanukah]] it’s recognizable that he lit for [[Chanukah]]. Also, Eliya Raba 671:7 says the first night doesn’t need to illustrate the number of the nights. Sh”t Lehorot Natan 2:51, Sh”t Shraga HaMeir 4:73, 5:75(1), Sh”t Shevet Hakehati 1:202 hold like Sh”t HaElef Lecha Shlomo. Chazon Ovadiah (Mitzvah Hadlaka 6, pg 29) agrees and adds that one who repeats and makes a bracha is making a bracha levatala.</ref> | ||
==How long should the candles last?== | ==How long should the candles last?== | ||
For background, see the [[How Long Do Chanukah Candles Have To Be Lit?]] page. | For background, see the [[How Long Do Chanukah Candles Have To Be Lit?]] page. | ||
| 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. 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> | * 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. 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 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> | ||
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
* (4) Piskei Teshuvot 677:5 (pg 499) rules that if it’s difficult to leave the wedding the groom may light at the wedding hall because they’re renting the place. ([http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2248 Rabbi Mansour] applies this Piskei Teshuvot even if the wedding takes place during the night but the parents didn’t have a chance to light beforehand. Additionally, Rabbi Mansour seems to say that Yalkut Yosef also agrees with this leniency but was unable to find any proof to this from the words of the Yalkut Yosef.) </ref> | * (4) Piskei Teshuvot 677:5 (pg 499) rules that if it’s difficult to leave the wedding the groom may light at the wedding hall because they’re renting the place. ([http://www.dailyhalacha.com/displayRead.asp?readID=2248 Rabbi Mansour] applies this Piskei Teshuvot even if the wedding takes place during the night but the parents didn’t have a chance to light beforehand. Additionally, Rabbi Mansour seems to say that Yalkut Yosef also agrees with this leniency but was unable to find any proof to this from the words of the Yalkut Yosef.) </ref> | ||
===Traveler=== | ===Traveler=== | ||
# A married man traveling should have his wife light for him at home and not make the Bracha of Sh’asa Nisim nor Sh’chianu even when he returns home. <ref> S”A 676:3. There’s a dispute in the Rishonim whether one makes a bracha for seeing [[Chanukah]] candles if someone is lighting for him at home and he is thereby fulfilling his obligation with the lighting. The Rashba ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Sefer HaHashlamah ([[Shabbat]] 23a) in name of Rabbi Asher MeLunil, Smag ([[Chanukah]] 250d), Ran (10b s.v. Amar Rav Chiya), Tur 676:3, Magid Mishna ([[Chanukah]] 3:4) in name of Itur (2 pg 117c), and Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 8) hold that one doesn’t make a bracha if someone is lighting for him at home and he is thereby fulfilling his obligation. However, the Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 3:4), Magid Mishna in name of some Geonim, Ravyah 3:843, Riaz ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Meiri, Sefer HaMeorot ([[Shabbat]] 23a), and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 9) hold that one can make a Bracha even if someone is lighting for him at home. S”A rules 676:3 that one doesn’t make Bracha HaRoeh if is fulfilling his obligation at home. Pri Chadash 676:3, however, argues that the halacha should follow those Rishonim who say that one should make the [[Brachot]] HaRoeh if one is personally not going to light that night even if someone is lighting for him at home. Sh”t Maharshal 85, Bach 676:3 (in name of Rif, Rambam, Smak, Rosh, and Aguda), Eliyah Raba, Biur HaGra, and Chaye Adam 154:33 agree. However, Shirei Knesset HaGedola 677:3, Taz 676:4, Magan Avraham 676:1, Shulchan Gavoha 676:5, Birkei Yosef 676:3, Mishna Brurah 676:6, and Torat HaMoadim 2:15 rule that one doesn’t make a bracha because of Safek Bracha. </ref> | # A married man traveling should have his wife light for him at home and not make the Bracha of Sh’asa Nisim nor Sh’chianu even when he returns home. <ref> S”A 676:3. There’s a dispute in the Rishonim whether one makes a bracha for seeing [[Chanukah]] candles if someone is lighting for him at home and he is thereby fulfilling his obligation with the lighting. The Rashba ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Sefer HaHashlamah ([[Shabbat]] 23a) in name of Rabbi Asher MeLunil, Smag ([[Chanukah]] 250d), Ran (10b s.v. Amar Rav Chiya), Tur 676:3, Magid Mishna ([[Chanukah]] 3:4) in name of Itur (2 pg 117c), and Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 8) hold that one doesn’t make a bracha if someone is lighting for him at home and he is thereby fulfilling his obligation. However, the Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 3:4), Magid Mishna in name of some Geonim, Ravyah 3:843, Riaz ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Meiri, Sefer HaMeorot ([[Shabbat]] 23a), and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 9) hold that one can make a Bracha even if someone is lighting for him at home. S”A rules 676:3 that one doesn’t make Bracha HaRoeh if is fulfilling his obligation at home. Pri [[Chadash]] 676:3, however, argues that the halacha should follow those Rishonim who say that one should make the [[Brachot]] HaRoeh if one is personally not going to light that night even if someone is lighting for him at home. Sh”t Maharshal 85, Bach 676:3 (in name of Rif, Rambam, Smak, Rosh, and Aguda), Eliyah Raba, Biur HaGra, and Chaye Adam 154:33 agree. However, Shirei Knesset HaGedola 677:3, Taz 676:4, Magan Avraham 676:1, Shulchan Gavoha 676:5, Birkei Yosef 676:3, Mishna Brurah 676:6, and Torat HaMoadim 2:15 rule that one doesn’t make a bracha because of Safek Bracha. </ref> | ||
===A Yeshiva Student=== | ===A Yeshiva Student=== | ||
# There is a dispute whether a Yeshiva student who eats and sleeps at the Yeshiva but is financially supported by his parents is considered dependent on the table of the household or not. Most Sephardic authorities rule that he is considered dependent and fulfills his obligation with the lighting of his household, however, many Ashkenazic authorities rule that he is considered independent and doesn’t fulfill his obligation. <Ref> | # There is a dispute whether a Yeshiva student who eats and sleeps at the Yeshiva but is financially supported by his parents is considered dependent on the table of the household or not. Most Sephardic authorities rule that he is considered dependent and fulfills his obligation with the lighting of his household, however, many Ashkenazic authorities rule that he is considered independent and doesn’t fulfill his obligation. <Ref> | ||
| Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
* 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. 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> | * 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. | ||
* Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo, chapter 14, note 22) says that a Sephardic Yeshiva whose parents live outside Israel in a different time zone can fulfill his obligation with the lighting of his parents. Torat HaMoadim 2:7 and Sh”t Mishna Halachot 6:119 agree. </ref> | * Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo, chapter 14, note 22) says that a Sephardic Yeshiva whose parents live outside [[Israel]] in a different time zone can fulfill his obligation with the lighting of his parents. Torat HaMoadim 2:7 and Sh”t Mishna Halachot 6:119 agree. </ref> | ||
==A Guest on Chanuka== | ==A Guest on Chanuka== | ||
===According to Ashkenazim=== | ===According to Ashkenazim=== | ||
# Someone who is a guest at another person’s house on [[Chanukah]], according to Ashkenazim, should light one’s own Chanukia (see footnote for background). <ref> | # Someone who is a guest at another person’s house on [[Chanukah]], according to Ashkenazim, should light one’s own Chanukia (see footnote for background). <ref> | ||
# Rav Sheshet in Gemara [[Shabbat]] 23a states that a guest is obligated to light [[Chanukah]] candles. The Gemara then quotes Rabbi Zeira, who states that when he was a guest he used to contribute a prutah. After he got married, he no longer contributed a prutah because his wife lit the [[Chanukah]] lights at home. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch 677:1 rules that a guest must contribute a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] to the host’s lighting. | # Rav Sheshet in Gemara [[Shabbat]] 23a states that a guest is obligated to light [[Chanukah]] candles. The Gemara then quotes Rabbi Zeira, who states that when he was a guest he used to contribute a [[prutah]]. After he got married, he no longer contributed a [[prutah]] because his wife lit the [[Chanukah]] lights at home. Accordingly, Shulchan Aruch 677:1 rules that a guest must contribute a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] to the host’s lighting. | ||
* Tur and Shulchan Aruch 677:1 rule that a guest must contribute a prutah to the host’s lighting. The Darkei Moshe 677:1 quotes the Sefer HaMinhagim (Rabbi Yitzchak Tirna, [[Chanuka]], pg 143, cited by Darkei Moshe 677:1) who says that even nowadays, a guest may fulfill his obligation by giving a prutah to the host. | * Tur and Shulchan Aruch 677:1 rule that a guest must contribute a [[prutah]] to the host’s lighting. The Darkei Moshe 677:1 quotes the Sefer HaMinhagim (Rabbi Yitzchak Tirna, [[Chanuka]], pg 143, cited by Darkei Moshe 677:1) who says that even nowadays, a guest may fulfill his obligation by giving a [[prutah]] to the host. | ||
* On the other hand, the Mahari Veil 31, also quoted by the Darkei Moshe, argues that since the minhag is that everyone in the house lights his own candles, if the guest doesn’t light on his own, there will be a suspicion that he didn’t light. Sh”t Maharil 145 agrees with the Mahariv. Mishna Brurah 677:3 rules that in order to satisfy the opinion of the Mahariv it is better for a guest to light on his own rather than contribute a prutah to the host. He adds (677:7) that this would be true even if he has someone lighting for him at home. According to Rav Soloveitchik (cited in Bi’Ikvei Hatzon 20:2) one cannot light as a guest unless one has been there for 8 days because the obligation is to light in one’s own house. | * On the other hand, the Mahari Veil 31, also quoted by the Darkei Moshe, argues that since the minhag is that everyone in the house lights his own candles, if the guest doesn’t light on his own, there will be a suspicion that he didn’t light. Sh”t Maharil 145 agrees with the Mahariv. Mishna Brurah 677:3 rules that in order to satisfy the opinion of the Mahariv it is better for a guest to light on his own rather than contribute a [[prutah]] to the host. He adds (677:7) that this would be true even if he has someone lighting for him at home. According to Rav Soloveitchik (cited in Bi’Ikvei Hatzon 20:2) one cannot light as a guest unless one has been there for 8 days because the obligation is to light in one’s own house. | ||
* The Rif ([[Shabbat]] 10a), ([[Chanukah]] 4:11), and Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 2:8) add that if the guest is staying in his own house with a separate doorway he must light by himself and can’t join with the host’s lighting because people seeing his doorway without [[Chanukah]] candles will suspect that he didn’t light. The S”A 677:1 rules that a guest must contribute a pruta to the host’s lighting and if he sleeps in separate house and eats with the host he should light by the doorway of the separate house. The Rama 677:1 comments that since nowadays we light inside one should light where one eats (meaning, if he eats with the host, he doesn’t have to light by the separate house where he is sleeping). | * The Rif ([[Shabbat]] 10a), ([[Chanukah]] 4:11), and Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 2:8) add that if the guest is staying in his own house with a separate doorway he must light by himself and can’t join with the host’s lighting because people seeing his doorway without [[Chanukah]] candles will suspect that he didn’t light. The S”A 677:1 rules that a guest must contribute a [[pruta]] to the host’s lighting and if he sleeps in separate house and eats with the host he should light by the doorway of the separate house. The Rama 677:1 comments that since nowadays we light inside one should light where one eats (meaning, if he eats with the host, he doesn’t have to light by the separate house where he is sleeping). | ||
* The idea of suspicion is based on a later statement of Rav Huna in [[Shabbat]] 23a who says that if one has a house with doorways on two sides of the house one must light in both of them so that people don’t suspect that he didn’t light [[Chanukah]] candles. Rama 671:8 writes that since nowadays we light inside there’s no concern of suspicion and one does not have to light by both doorways. The Rama is accepted by many achronim including Mishna Brurah 671:54 and Yalkut Yosef 671:24. | * The idea of suspicion is based on a later statement of Rav Huna in [[Shabbat]] 23a who says that if one has a house with doorways on two sides of the house one must light in both of them so that people don’t suspect that he didn’t light [[Chanukah]] candles. Rama 671:8 writes that since nowadays we light inside there’s no concern of suspicion and one does not have to light by both doorways. The Rama is accepted by many achronim including Mishna Brurah 671:54 and Yalkut Yosef 671:24. | ||
* The Magan Avraham 677:3 (as explained by the Beiur Halacha s.v. LeAsmo) says that we only strict for the opinion of the Mahariv when the guest eats and sleeps in a separate house. | * The Magan Avraham 677:3 (as explained by the Beiur Halacha s.v. LeAsmo) says that we only strict for the opinion of the Mahariv when the guest eats and sleeps in a separate house. | ||
* Mishna Brurah 677:3 rules that in order to satisfy the opinion of the Mahariv it’s better for a guest to light by himself than to contribute a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] to the host. This is also the opinion of the Nitei Gavriel ([[Chanukah]] 12:6). However, the Kaf HaChaim 677:11 comments that the suspicion introduced by the Mahariv doesn’t apply to Sephardim who don’t have the minhag that everyone in the house lights. | * Mishna Brurah 677:3 rules that in order to satisfy the opinion of the Mahariv it’s better for a guest to light by himself than to contribute a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] to the host. This is also the opinion of the Nitei Gavriel ([[Chanukah]] 12:6). However, the Kaf HaChaim 677:11 comments that the suspicion introduced by the Mahariv doesn’t apply to Sephardim who don’t have the minhag that everyone in the house lights. | ||
* Mishna Brurah 677:16 presents a minority opinion in the achronim that if one's wife already lit at home, he shouldn’t recite a bracha. Therefore, he says one should listen to someone else recite the [[brachot]] and then light. </ref> | * Mishna Brurah 677:16 presents a minority opinion in the achronim that if one's wife already lit at home, he shouldn’t recite a bracha. Therefore, he says one should listen to someone else recite the [[brachot]] and then light. </ref> | ||
# Some say that one may not light at a person’s house unless he stays there for all eight days of [[Chanukah]]. If one stays there for less time, he should give the host a prutah to fulfill his obligation (see #3 below). However, some say that as long as one stays there one ‘day’ one may light there. <Ref> Beiur Halacha 677:1 s.v. BeMakom quotes the Pri Chadash 677:1 who says a guest and his whole family who stay at someone else’s home for all eight days of [[Chanukah]] should light at the place they are staying. Rabbi Hershel Schachter (oral communication, Halachipedia Article 5772 #4, B'ikvei Hatzon chapter 20 footnote 2) holds one must remain there all eight days in order to have some connection to that house to allow him to light there. When one stays for a shorter period, one should fulfill his obligation by giving a prutah to the host. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo 14:18, 19) rules that if a guest stays at a person’s house for one day, he may light at that house. For example, if a person sleeps and eats at a house for [[Shabbat]] he can light there Friday afternoon. Chazon Ish (Shevut Yitzchak pg 110), Rav Vosner (Kovetz MeBet Levi Kislev 5757) and Rav Shternbuch (Teshuvot V’Hanhagot 1:391) agree. Rav Shternbuch ({{ibid}} 1:394) adds that if on Motzaei [[Shabbat]] one will not arrive home before “tichle regel” one can even light in that house but should try to stay there for a half hour.</ref> | # Some say that one may not light at a person’s house unless he stays there for all eight days of [[Chanukah]]. If one stays there for less time, he should give the host a [[prutah]] to fulfill his obligation (see #3 below). However, some say that as long as one stays there one ‘day’ one may light there. <Ref> Beiur Halacha 677:1 s.v. BeMakom quotes the Pri [[Chadash]] 677:1 who says a guest and his whole family who stay at someone else’s home for all eight days of [[Chanukah]] should light at the place they are staying. Rabbi Hershel Schachter (oral communication, Halachipedia Article 5772 #4, B'ikvei Hatzon chapter 20 footnote 2) holds one must remain there all eight days in order to have some connection to that house to allow him to light there. When one stays for a shorter period, one should fulfill his obligation by giving a [[prutah]] to the host. However, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichot Shlomo 14:18, 19) rules that if a guest stays at a person’s house for one day, he may light at that house. For example, if a person sleeps and eats at a house for [[Shabbat]] he can light there Friday afternoon. Chazon Ish (Shevut Yitzchak pg 110), Rav Vosner (Kovetz MeBet Levi Kislev 5757) and Rav Shternbuch (Teshuvot V’Hanhagot 1:391) agree. Rav Shternbuch ({{ibid}} 1:394) adds that if on Motzaei [[Shabbat]] one will not arrive home before “tichle regel” one can even light in that house but should try to stay there for a half hour.</ref> | ||
===According to Sephardim=== | ===According to Sephardim=== | ||
# According to Sephardim, one who has someone lighting for him such as his wife or parent is exempt from lighting. Therefore, a Sephardic yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with his parents’ lighting. Similarly, a orphaned Yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva. A guest, who has no one lighting for him, should give his host a prutah to join. <Ref> Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daat 6:43, and Chazon Ovadia [[Chanukah]] pg 144). Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Sh”t Yachave Daat 6:43, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Chanukah]] pg 144) rules a Sephardic yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with his parent’s lighting. He adds that even if one wants to light, he would not be allowed to say the bracha. Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shalmei Moed pg 204) adds that this is true for Sephardim even if there is a time difference. Rav Ovadia (Chazon Ovadia pg 150, see also Yalkut Yosef [[Chanukah]] pg. 161) says that in a case where the son will light before his parents, such as if he is in Israel while his parents are in the United States, the son can light with a bracha if he so desires. The Torat HaMoadim 2:8 adds that an orphan Yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva, but a guest for whom no one is lighting should give his host a prutah to join with his lighting. For more background see [[#A Yeshiva Student]]. </ref> | # According to Sephardim, one who has someone lighting for him such as his wife or parent is exempt from lighting. Therefore, a Sephardic yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with his parents’ lighting. Similarly, a orphaned Yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva. A guest, who has no one lighting for him, should give his host a [[prutah]] to join. <Ref> Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yechave Daat 6:43, and Chazon Ovadia [[Chanukah]] pg 144). Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Sh”t Yachave Daat 6:43, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Chanukah]] pg 144) rules a Sephardic yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with his parent’s lighting. He adds that even if one wants to light, he would not be allowed to say the bracha. Rav Shlomo Zalman (Shalmei Moed pg 204) adds that this is true for Sephardim even if there is a time difference. Rav Ovadia (Chazon Ovadia pg 150, see also Yalkut Yosef [[Chanukah]] pg. 161) says that in a case where the son will light before his parents, such as if he is in [[Israel]] while his parents are in the United States, the son can light with a bracha if he so desires. The Torat HaMoadim 2:8 adds that an orphan Yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva, but a guest for whom no one is lighting should give his host a [[prutah]] to join with his lighting. For more background see [[#A Yeshiva Student]]. </ref> | ||
# According to Sephardim, a guest who is not independent of the homeowner (such as where one doesn’t pay for expenses or he only pays for some expenses but not for every need) should give his host a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] to join with his lighting. He may not have intention not to fulfill his obligation with the owner’s lighting and then light himself with a Bracha, however, he is allowed to light by himself without a Bracha. <ref> Torat Moadim 2:12 writes that for Sephardim since some authorities hold that he is included in the household members even without giving a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] and so he is exempt with the owner’s lighting, one shouldn’t light independently because of Safek [[Brachot]]. However, Torat HaMoadim 2:8 points out that this is only for a regular guest but an orphan Yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva. </ref> | # According to Sephardim, a guest who is not independent of the homeowner (such as where one doesn’t pay for expenses or he only pays for some expenses but not for every need) should give his host a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] to join with his lighting. He may not have intention not to fulfill his obligation with the owner’s lighting and then light himself with a Bracha, however, he is allowed to light by himself without a Bracha. <ref> Torat Moadim 2:12 writes that for Sephardim since some authorities hold that he is included in the household members even without giving a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]] and so he is exempt with the owner’s lighting, one shouldn’t light independently because of Safek [[Brachot]]. However, Torat HaMoadim 2:8 points out that this is only for a regular guest but an orphan Yeshiva student fulfills his obligation with the lighting of the Yeshiva. </ref> | ||
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
## listen to the host make the [[Brachot]] <ref> Mishna Brurah 677:4, Nitei Gavriel 12:5 </ref>, and | ## listen to the host make the [[Brachot]] <ref> Mishna Brurah 677:4, Nitei Gavriel 12:5 </ref>, and | ||
# Some say that the host should add a little oil because of the guest. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 677:3, Torat HaMoadim 2:1, Yad Aharon 677, Sh”t Ginat Veradim (Gan HaMelech 40), and Pri Megadim (A”A 677:1) rule that any amount is sufficient against Eliyah Rabba(677:1,2) who says that one must chip in the amount of oil to burn for a half hour. </ref> | # Some say that the host should add a little oil because of the guest. <Ref>Mishna Brurah 677:3, Torat HaMoadim 2:1, Yad Aharon 677, Sh”t Ginat Veradim (Gan HaMelech 40), and Pri Megadim (A”A 677:1) rule that any amount is sufficient against Eliyah Rabba(677:1,2) who says that one must chip in the amount of oil to burn for a half hour. </ref> | ||
# The host can give the guest the oils and wicks as a gift (and the guest doesn’t have to give the host a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]]). <ref> Sh”t HaRashba 1:542, Magan Avraham 677:1, Pri Chadash 677:1, Eliyah Raba 677:2, Derech HaChaim 677:2, Mishna Brurah 677:3 say that the host can give the guest the portion even as a gift. </ref> | # The host can give the guest the oils and wicks as a gift (and the guest doesn’t have to give the host a [[Measurements#Prutah|prutah]]). <ref> Sh”t HaRashba 1:542, Magan Avraham 677:1, Pri [[Chadash]] 677:1, Eliyah Raba 677:2, Derech HaChaim 677:2, Mishna Brurah 677:3 say that the host can give the guest the portion even as a gift. </ref> | ||
===If someone is lighting at home=== | ===If someone is lighting at home=== | ||
# A married man who is away from home during [[Chanukah]] and his wife is lighting at home, according to Ashkenazim, there is what to rely on light with a Bracha as long as one has in mind not to fulfill one’s obligation with one’s wife’s lighting. However, it’s preferable to either hear the Bracha from someone else and then light or make sure to light before one’s wife. According to Sephardim, one is exempt with one’s wife’s lighting and if one wants to be strict and light one may only light without a Bracha, even if they have in mind not to fulfill their mitzvah with one’s wife’s lighting. <ref> | # A married man who is away from home during [[Chanukah]] and his wife is lighting at home, according to Ashkenazim, there is what to rely on light with a Bracha as long as one has in mind not to fulfill one’s obligation with one’s wife’s lighting. However, it’s preferable to either hear the Bracha from someone else and then light or make sure to light before one’s wife. According to Sephardim, one is exempt with one’s wife’s lighting and if one wants to be strict and light one may only light without a Bracha, even if they have in mind not to fulfill their mitzvah with one’s wife’s lighting. <ref> | ||
* Sh”t Trumat HaDeshen 101 writes that a married man who is away from home during [[Chanukah]] and his wife is lighting at home and his wife is lighting at home, he is still allowed to light with a Bracha to fulfill the mitzvah of Mehardin (performing the mitzvah in the best possible way). Rama 677:3 rules like the Trumat HaDeshen and writes that such is the minhag. See Agur 1036. However, the Bet Yosef 677:3 writes that not to rely on the Trumat HaDeshen because it is an unnecessary Bracha (Bracha Sheina Tzaricha). | * Sh”t Trumat HaDeshen 101 writes that a married man who is away from home during [[Chanukah]] and his wife is lighting at home and his wife is lighting at home, he is still allowed to light with a Bracha to fulfill the mitzvah of Mehardin (performing the mitzvah in the best possible way). Rama 677:3 rules like the Trumat HaDeshen and writes that such is the minhag. See Agur 1036. However, the Bet Yosef 677:3 writes that not to rely on the Trumat HaDeshen because it is an unnecessary Bracha (Bracha Sheina Tzaricha). | ||
* The Sh”t Maharil 145 agrees that one may light at the place one is staying even if one’s wife is lighting at home but adds that this is only where one has in mind not to fulfill one’s obligation with one’s wife’s lighting. This is also the ruling of the Levush 677:1, and Magan Avraham 677:9. See also Olat [[Shabbat]] 677:1, and Rav Shalom Mashash in Sh”t Tevuot Shemesh O”C 7 who agree with this approach. | * The Sh”t Maharil 145 agrees that one may light at the place one is staying even if one’s wife is lighting at home but adds that this is only where one has in mind not to fulfill one’s obligation with one’s wife’s lighting. This is also the ruling of the Levush 677:1, and Magan Avraham 677:9. See also Olat [[Shabbat]] 677:1, and Rav Shalom Mashash in Sh”t Tevuot Shemesh O”C 7 who agree with this approach. | ||
* However, Sh”t Maharshal 85 argues on the Maharil saying that one fulfills one’s obligation with one’s wife’s lighting at home even if one has intent not to fulfill one’s obligation. The Taz 677:9 who doesn’t understand the Maharshal and defends the Maharil explaining why it’s not considered an unnecessary Bracha. The Chida in Birkei Yosef 677:2 explains the approach of the Bet Yosef saying that by other [[Brachot]] where there is a personal obligation one may have intent not to fulfill one’s obligation, however, by [[Chanukah]] the obligation is for the house to have lit candles and so one’s intent not to fulfill one’s obligation is useless. [See Pri Chadash 677:1, Mateh Moshe (Siman 983), Sh”t Zera Emet 1:97, Kaf HaChaim 677:25, Chaye Adam 154:33, Maamer Mordechai 677:5, Sh”t Sadeh Eretz O”C 42, Sh”t Chesed LeAvraham Alkelai O”C 24, and Sh”t Zivchei Tzedek 2:37 who agree with this approach of the Chida.] Sh”t Yechave Daat 6:43 quoting Rav Ezra Attiah, and Torat HaMoadim 2:6 rule like the Bet Yosef that one should not have in mind not to fulfill one’s obligation. Yalkut Yosef 677:8 rules that a married man fulfills his obligation with the lighting of his wife and if he wants to be strict to light where he is staying he should light without a Bracha. | * However, Sh”t Maharshal 85 argues on the Maharil saying that one fulfills one’s obligation with one’s wife’s lighting at home even if one has intent not to fulfill one’s obligation. The Taz 677:9 who doesn’t understand the Maharshal and defends the Maharil explaining why it’s not considered an unnecessary Bracha. The Chida in Birkei Yosef 677:2 explains the approach of the Bet Yosef saying that by other [[Brachot]] where there is a personal obligation one may have intent not to fulfill one’s obligation, however, by [[Chanukah]] the obligation is for the house to have lit candles and so one’s intent not to fulfill one’s obligation is useless. [See Pri [[Chadash]] 677:1, Mateh Moshe (Siman 983), Sh”t Zera Emet 1:97, Kaf HaChaim 677:25, Chaye Adam 154:33, Maamer Mordechai 677:5, Sh”t Sadeh Eretz O”C 42, Sh”t Chesed LeAvraham Alkelai O”C 24, and Sh”t Zivchei Tzedek 2:37 who agree with this approach of the Chida.] Sh”t Yechave Daat 6:43 quoting Rav Ezra Attiah, and Torat HaMoadim 2:6 rule like the Bet Yosef that one should not have in mind not to fulfill one’s obligation. Yalkut Yosef 677:8 rules that a married man fulfills his obligation with the lighting of his wife and if he wants to be strict to light where he is staying he should light without a Bracha. | ||
* Mishna Brurah 677:15-6 writes that many achronim agree with the Maharil and there is what to rely on but because of those who argue it’s preferable that either one hear the Bracha from someone else and then light or make sure to light before one’s wife. </ref> | * Mishna Brurah 677:15-6 writes that many achronim agree with the Maharil and there is what to rely on but because of those who argue it’s preferable that either one hear the Bracha from someone else and then light or make sure to light before one’s wife. </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> | # 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. 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 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> | ||
| Line 153: | Line 153: | ||
[[Category:Chanukah]] | [[Category:Chanukah]] | ||
[[Category:Holidays]] | |||
