Anonymous

Lighting Chanukah Candles: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
Line 58: Line 58:


== 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]].<ref>The Gemara [[Shabbat]] (23a) says that women 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 and Chazon Ovadia pg. 25 concur </ref> Thus, a man who is away should have his wife light at home for him to fulfill his obligation. Even if he will come that night, but later than [[Tzet HaKochavim]], 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>  
* 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>
* 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), Baal Hamaor Megilla 19b in the name of the Itur, 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, Chazon Ovadia pg. 25.
# 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>
* 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 Hachaim 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]] for a man to fulfill 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 woman can fulfill the 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 woman’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]] that she can. </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 a child aren’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, 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 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, 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 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>