3,231
edits
Lighting Chanukah Candles: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
m
Text replacement - "Magan" to "Magen"
m (Text replacement - "the the" to "the") |
m (Text replacement - "Magan" to "Magen") |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
# 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, | # 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, Magen 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> | ||
==Order of lighting== | ==Order of lighting== | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
[[Image:Levush's lighting.png| thumb|Levush's order of lighting|250px]] | [[Image:Levush's lighting.png| thumb|Levush's order of lighting|250px]] | ||
[[Image:Gra's lighting.png| thumb| Gra's order of lighting |250px]] | [[Image:Gra's lighting.png| thumb| Gra's order of lighting |250px]] | ||
* Maharik (Responsa 183, cited by Beit Yosef 676:5 s.v. Aval) writes that on the first night, one should light the rightmost candle and on subsequent nights should add a candle to the left and light the new one first such that one lights from left to right (the way English is written). He bases his argument on the Gemara (Sotah 15b) that a person always should turn to the right, which the Mordechai ([[Shabbat]] 2:268) applied to lighting [[chanuka]] candles. The Shulchan Aruch 676:5 codifies this as halacha. This is also the opinion of the Arizal (Shaar Kavanot pg 108c), Nagid VeMitzvah (26:72), Maharil (quoted by the | * Maharik (Responsa 183, cited by Beit Yosef 676:5 s.v. Aval) writes that on the first night, one should light the rightmost candle and on subsequent nights should add a candle to the left and light the new one first such that one lights from left to right (the way English is written). He bases his argument on the Gemara (Sotah 15b) that a person always should turn to the right, which the Mordechai ([[Shabbat]] 2:268) applied to lighting [[chanuka]] candles. The Shulchan Aruch 676:5 codifies this as halacha. This is also the opinion of the Arizal (Shaar Kavanot pg 108c), Nagid VeMitzvah (26:72), Maharil (quoted by the Magen Avraham 676:5). | ||
* [The Trumat Hadeshen 106 agrees that if one is lighting opposite the [[Mezuzah]] then one should light from left to right with the new candle is always the leftmost candle which is within a [[Tefach]] of the door. However, if there’s no [[mezuzah]] and one is lighting on the right side of the door as one enters then one should light right to left so that the new candle is always the rightmost candle and is within a [[Tefach]] of the door. The Sh”t Maharshal 85 agrees with the Trumat HaDeshen. However, the Bet Yosef 676:5 quotes the Trumat HaDeshen and argues that there shouldn’t be any difference whether one is lighting on the left or right of the door one should always light the new candle first and light from left to right.] | * [The Trumat Hadeshen 106 agrees that if one is lighting opposite the [[Mezuzah]] then one should light from left to right with the new candle is always the leftmost candle which is within a [[Tefach]] of the door. However, if there’s no [[mezuzah]] and one is lighting on the right side of the door as one enters then one should light right to left so that the new candle is always the rightmost candle and is within a [[Tefach]] of the door. The Sh”t Maharshal 85 agrees with the Trumat HaDeshen. However, the Bet Yosef 676:5 quotes the Trumat HaDeshen and argues that there shouldn’t be any difference whether one is lighting on the left or right of the door one should always light the new candle first and light from left to right.] | ||
* 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. | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
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. | ||
# The candles only need fuel to burn for a half hour. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 672:2. [[Shabbat]] 21b says the time of Tichle Regel is when the Tarmodeans (merchants) leave, which the Rif says is about a half hour. The Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:5) and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 15) write it’s a half hour or (a little) more. The Rosh (2:3), Rabben Yerucham 9:1, Meiri, S”A 672:2, Mishna Brurah 672:1 (who is strict to satisfy all opinions to light by [[Shekiah]] and have it last a half hour past Tzet), and Torat HaMoadim 4:5 agree that the candles need enough oil to be lit for a half hour. Some say that the practice of the Griz was that since the Gemara sets the ending time for candles as when people leave the marketplace, nowadays when many people stay at the marketplace late into the night one should have to light longer than a half hour. However, Chazon Ovadiah pg 66, Sh”t Mishna Halachot 4 pg 79, and Sh”t Or Letzion 44 argue that the measure set by Chazal (a half hour) hasn’t changed because of the practice of our time. However, Avodot VeHanagot LeBet Brisk says that the Griz himself challenged that idea when he heard it from another Rabbi in Brisk, yet he lit candles that lasted for very long only as a hiddur mitzvah. Also, Yomin DeChanukah and Leket Yoshar say there’s a hiddur mitzvah to light for longer than a half hour. </ref> | # The candles only need fuel to burn for a half hour. <ref>Shulchan Aruch 672:2. [[Shabbat]] 21b says the time of Tichle Regel is when the Tarmodeans (merchants) leave, which the Rif says is about a half hour. The Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:5) and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 15) write it’s a half hour or (a little) more. The Rosh (2:3), Rabben Yerucham 9:1, Meiri, S”A 672:2, Mishna Brurah 672:1 (who is strict to satisfy all opinions to light by [[Shekiah]] and have it last a half hour past Tzet), and Torat HaMoadim 4:5 agree that the candles need enough oil to be lit for a half hour. Some say that the practice of the Griz was that since the Gemara sets the ending time for candles as when people leave the marketplace, nowadays when many people stay at the marketplace late into the night one should have to light longer than a half hour. However, Chazon Ovadiah pg 66, Sh”t Mishna Halachot 4 pg 79, and Sh”t Or Letzion 44 argue that the measure set by Chazal (a half hour) hasn’t changed because of the practice of our time. However, Avodot VeHanagot LeBet Brisk says that the Griz himself challenged that idea when he heard it from another Rabbi in Brisk, yet he lit candles that lasted for very long only as a hiddur mitzvah. Also, Yomin DeChanukah and Leket Yoshar say there’s a hiddur mitzvah to light for longer than a half hour. </ref> | ||
# If one doesn’t have enough for the each Hidur candle, the Hidur candles don’t need to burn for a half hour. <ref> | # If one doesn’t have enough for the each Hidur candle, the Hidur candles don’t need to burn for a half hour. <ref> Magen Avraham 671:1 </ref> | ||
# A person who is in doubt if his candles will last a half hour can nonetheless light with a bracha. <ref> Smag in name of the Ri, Hagahot Maimon ([[Chanukah]] 4:2), Ravyah (843 pg 579) in name of Rabbenu Tam hold that no minimum measure is needed (the gemara’s two explanation of ‘Tichleh Regel Min HaShuk’ argue and we hold the first explanation). Similarly, Hilchot and Minhagei Maharash in name of Rimzei HaRosh (quoted by Darkei Moshe 672:1), Piskei Tosfot ([[Shabbat]] 89), Leket Yoshar pg 151, Shiltei Giborim([[Shabbat]] 9a:5), Taharat Mayim Shuirei Tahara 8:9, Sh”t Chochavei Yitzchak 1:5(3), Sh”t Bear Tzvi 31 that nowadays when we don’t light for Parsumei Nisa of the public, we don’t need a minimum measure. Thus we have a Safek Safeka(double doubt) perhaps no minimum measure is needed and perhaps even if the measure is necessary, the candle will last the minimum measure. Chazon Ovadiah ([[Chanukah]] pg 67) says if one wants to make a bracha, he can make a bracha with this Safek Sefaka. For more about Safek Safaka BeBrachot see Sh”t Yachave Daat 5:21 (the footnote), Otzrot Yosef 4:3, and Sh”t Chazon Ovadiah 48 pg 866. </ref> | # A person who is in doubt if his candles will last a half hour can nonetheless light with a bracha. <ref> Smag in name of the Ri, Hagahot Maimon ([[Chanukah]] 4:2), Ravyah (843 pg 579) in name of Rabbenu Tam hold that no minimum measure is needed (the gemara’s two explanation of ‘Tichleh Regel Min HaShuk’ argue and we hold the first explanation). Similarly, Hilchot and Minhagei Maharash in name of Rimzei HaRosh (quoted by Darkei Moshe 672:1), Piskei Tosfot ([[Shabbat]] 89), Leket Yoshar pg 151, Shiltei Giborim([[Shabbat]] 9a:5), Taharat Mayim Shuirei Tahara 8:9, Sh”t Chochavei Yitzchak 1:5(3), Sh”t Bear Tzvi 31 that nowadays when we don’t light for Parsumei Nisa of the public, we don’t need a minimum measure. Thus we have a Safek Safeka(double doubt) perhaps no minimum measure is needed and perhaps even if the measure is necessary, the candle will last the minimum measure. Chazon Ovadiah ([[Chanukah]] pg 67) says if one wants to make a bracha, he can make a bracha with this Safek Sefaka. For more about Safek Safaka BeBrachot see Sh”t Yachave Daat 5:21 (the footnote), Otzrot Yosef 4:3, and Sh”t Chazon Ovadiah 48 pg 866. </ref> | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
== 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 Shulchan Aruch 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 Shulchan Aruch 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), | * 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), Magen 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 Magen 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. | # 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. Magen 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, | # 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, Magen 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, | # 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, Magen 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]]. 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 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> | ||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
* Rav Sheshet (Gemara [[Shabbat]] 23a) stated that a guest is obligated to light [[Chanukah]] candles. Rabbi Zeiri commented that his wife lit [[Chanukah]] candles for him at home, he fulfilled his mitzvah. This is codified by Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:11), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 677:1 that someone who has someone else lighting for him at home doesn't have to light [[Chanukah]] candles. | * Rav Sheshet (Gemara [[Shabbat]] 23a) stated that a guest is obligated to light [[Chanukah]] candles. Rabbi Zeiri commented that his wife lit [[Chanukah]] candles for him at home, he fulfilled his mitzvah. This is codified by Rambam ([[Chanukah]] 4:11), Tur and Shulchan Aruch 677:1 that someone who has someone else lighting for him at home doesn't have to light [[Chanukah]] candles. | ||
* While the Rambam, Tur, and S”A state that if one has his own room that leads to the outside one would have to light so people don’t suspect him of not observing [[Chanukah]], many Rishonim including the Sh”t Rashba 1:541, Orchot Chaim [[Chanukah]] 13, Smak 280, Sefer Trumah 228, Hagahot Maimon [[Chanukah]] 4:30, Ritva ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Mordechai ([[Shabbat]] 2:226), Ohel Moed ([[Chanukah]]), and Shibolei HaLeket 185 say that there’s no suspicion of not lighting by a extra doorway nowadays when we light indoors. | * While the Rambam, Tur, and S”A state that if one has his own room that leads to the outside one would have to light so people don’t suspect him of not observing [[Chanukah]], many Rishonim including the Sh”t Rashba 1:541, Orchot Chaim [[Chanukah]] 13, Smak 280, Sefer Trumah 228, Hagahot Maimon [[Chanukah]] 4:30, Ritva ([[Shabbat]] 23a), Mordechai ([[Shabbat]] 2:226), Ohel Moed ([[Chanukah]]), and Shibolei HaLeket 185 say that there’s no suspicion of not lighting by a extra doorway nowadays when we light indoors. | ||
* Sefer HaTrumah (229 Introduction) says clearly students that learn outside their home don’t light if they have someone lighting for them at home. | * Sefer HaTrumah (229 Introduction) says clearly students that learn outside their home don’t light if they have someone lighting for them at home. Magen Avraham (Introduction to 677) quotes the Maharshal who says that a yeshiva student who is dependent on the owner of the house is considered like a family member and doesn't have to light. Rav Ovadyah Yosef (Sh”t Yechave Daat 6:43, Chazon Ovadyah [[Chanukah]] pg 144-151) writes clearly that a family member who is dependent on his parents fulfills his obligation with the lighting of his parents at home. Meiri [[Shabbat]] 23a and Orchot Chaim ([[Chanukah]] 14) say an older and married child should light for themselves. | ||
* Similarly, Rav Mordechai Willig (Am Mordechai Moadim p. 104-5) writes that a man fulfills his primary obligation with his wife’s lighting at home even if he is a guest somewhere else. Similarly, a student can fulfill his primary obligation with his parent’s lighting at home. However, according to the minhag of the Rama, Ashkenazim still may light with a bracha even if someone is lighting for them at home. | * Similarly, Rav Mordechai Willig (Am Mordechai Moadim p. 104-5) writes that a man fulfills his primary obligation with his wife’s lighting at home even if he is a guest somewhere else. Similarly, a student can fulfill his primary obligation with his parent’s lighting at home. However, according to the minhag of the Rama, Ashkenazim still may light with a bracha even if someone is lighting for them at home. | ||
* However, Rav Hershel Schachter (B’ikvei HaTzon p. 123-4) writes that a man does not fulfill his obligation with the lighting of his wife in another city unless he actually goes home later that night. Similarly, he stated in a shiur ([http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/784742/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Where_to_light_Neiros_Chanukah_in_the_dorm-_A_full_discussion|YUTorah.org, “Where to light Neiros Chanukah in the dorm,” min 24)] that a yeshiva student does not fulfill his obligation with his father’s lighting in another city unless he is at home that night.</ref> | * However, Rav Hershel Schachter (B’ikvei HaTzon p. 123-4) writes that a man does not fulfill his obligation with the lighting of his wife in another city unless he actually goes home later that night. Similarly, he stated in a shiur ([http://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/784742/Rabbi_Hershel_Schachter/Where_to_light_Neiros_Chanukah_in_the_dorm-_A_full_discussion|YUTorah.org, “Where to light Neiros Chanukah in the dorm,” min 24)] that a yeshiva student does not fulfill his obligation with his father’s lighting in another city unless he is at home that night.</ref> | ||
| Line 86: | Line 86: | ||
* (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, | # 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, Magen 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 107: | Line 107: | ||
* 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 | * The Magen 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> | ||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
## 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, | # 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, Magen 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 | * 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 Magen 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> | ||
