Chanukah (dedication) is an obligation, a mitzvah midevrei soferim (a rabbinic commandment). Why not, shekach? Well, what do you expect it to be? Of course, it is a mitzvah midevrei soferim.
There is a very interesting Chatam Sofer on this. When you call it a mitzvah midevrei soferim, what is midevrei soferim? Is the lighting of the nerot (candles) the part that could be midevrei soferim? But what about the holiday itself—making a holiday for a miracle?
He says, “Yesh omerim she’ikar mah shekov’im yom mo’ed beyom shena’asah bo nes hu min haTorah” (some say that establishing a festival on the day a miracle occurred is from the Torah). That idea is from the Torah: we make a chag (holiday) when a miracle happens. “But pirtei hadinim mah la’asot bahem hu miderabbanan” (but the details of what to do on those days are rabbinic): the details, such as lighting the menorah and reading the Megillah, are rabbinic. “Ve’over ve’eino oseh shum zecher lanes, over al mitzvat aseh de’oraita” (one who does not make any commemoration of the miracle transgresses a Torah commandment).
That is quite a chidush (novel interpretation). If somebody does not celebrate Chanukah—“I didn’t light the menorah; I didn’t do anything”—you might say, “Okay, on Yom Kippur, I transgressed a rabbinic commandment; I didn’t light the menorah.” He says, “No. You transgressed a Torah prohibition.” You did not commemorate, in any way, a holiday that you were supposed to commemorate.
It is the Chatam Sofer in Yoreh De’ah, at the end of siman resh-lamed-gimel. He writes: “Kevia’at yom mo’ed beyom asiyat nes hu kal vachomer (a fortiori inference) de’oraita hu” (establishing a festival on the day a miracle occurred is a fortiori from the Torah). It is a kal vachomer. We say in Megillah, daf yud-dalet: “Amar Rebbi Chiya bar Avin amar Rebbi Yehoshua ben Korchah, umah me’avdut lecherut amrinan shirah, mimitah lechayim lo kol sheken?” (Rabbi Chiya bar Avin said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korchah: If, when we came out of slavery into freedom, we sing, then when we went from death to life, all the more so.)
If, when we came out of avdut lecherut, you have to make a holiday, then Purim—when we went from death to life—all the more so. So he says, “Ulefi zeh, yom Purim vimei Chanukah de’oraita hem” (according to this, Purim and the days of Chanukah are from the Torah). Yesterday we said that Chanukah was about the neshamah (soul). If the neshamah was in trouble and was saved, then certainly we have to make a chag.
But what do we do on those days? “Im lishloach manot o lehadlakat nerot”—what do you have to do? Either send mishlo’ach manot (portions of food) or light candles. Those details are rabbinic. “Ve’over ve’eino oseh shum zecher limei Chanukah uFurim, over al mitzvat aseh de’oraita” (one who makes no commemoration of Chanukah or Purim transgresses a Torah commandment).
But if he made some kind of commemoration, whatever it was—the fellow eats latkes, perhaps in honor of the miracles—at least on one day, even if he does it for only one day, he did something. He commemorated the miracle once, pa’am achat (once), and said al hanissim (for the miracles). Even if he did not light candles and did not send portions of food, he has transgressed only a rabbinic prohibition.
So the fellow said, “Happy Chanukah,” or whatever he did; he made some kind of commemoration of the miracle, spun a dreidel. “Ve’efshar keri’at Hallel (praise psalms) uMegillah hu kal vachomer de’oraita, lomar shirah” (perhaps reading Hallel and the Megillah is a fortiori from the Torah, to sing praise). That is it.
Wow. So if he did something, it is a kal vachomer, and we know that a kal vachomer is from the Torah. That is a big thing. I do not know if he counted it among the 613, but it is interesting that in the azharot (liturgical admonitions) of Shavuot, we sing about Chanukah. There is a part that mentions Chanukah, which is interesting because we would say it is rabbinic. According to this, it is like a—
That is very good. He says, look at the wording of the Zohar Hakadosh: “Kigavna da, chova ihu al bar nash le’ishtayei tadir kamei Kudsha Berich Hu, ulparsumei nisa bechol inun nissin de’avad” (it is incumbent upon a person to stand constantly before the Holy One, Blessed is He, and publicize all the miracles He performed). There is an idea in the Zohar Hakadosh about publicizing the miracles.
If you look at our book here, it brings this down: “Vehu midevrei soferim” (and it is rabbinic). What is the practical difference if it is rabbinic? If someone is unsure whether he lit the candles, it is a case of uncertainty about a rabbinic law, so we are lenient. So you have that idea there.
Now we have another idea. We said in the Mishnah Berurah that the poor have a custom of going around on Chanukah. If you look at Mishnah Berurah alef again, it says that the poor have a custom of going around to the doorways on Chanukah to collect money. The Ner LeTziyon, halachah lamed-tet, says: “Nahagu aniyim lesabev al hapetachim beChanukah, veyesh ta’am lazeh” (the poor have the custom of going around to the doorways on Chanukah, and there is a reason for this).
He says that the reason is written in Mo’ed Lechol Chai: “Dedami lePurim shena’asah bo nes bo bayom” (it is similar to Purim, when a miracle happened on that very day). And there is another reason: “Ayein desheloshah amudei olam hem: Torah, avodah, gemilut chasadim, veYevanim bikshu la’akor Torah va’avodah” (see, the three pillars of the world are Torah, service, and acts of kindness, and the Greeks sought to uproot Torah and service).
They tried to get rid of Torah and service, so we bring back acts of kindness as well. We bring back all three. They did not try to do away with acts of kindness, but since they did away with two, we do all three. “Veyesh ta’am al pi sod” (there is also a reason according to the mystical tradition). There is an amazing idea: “Hanotnim le’amalei Torah bayamim elu hu tikun me’ulah lechamah avonot chamurim” (giving to those who labor in Torah on these days is an excellent rectification for severe sins). There is an idea, according to the mystical tradition, to give tzedakah (charity) to teachers of Torah, and it is a rectification for severe sins.
He says, “Ayein beChemdat Yamim mah shehe’erich bazeh, vehevi leshon Maharam di Lonzano, vera’ui sheteda ki cheshehayinu al admatenu, hayah be’umanutenu shevet meyuchad lazeh, vehu Shevet Levi” (see what Chemdat Yamim elaborates on this, and it quotes the wording of Maharam di Lonzano: You should know that when we were in our land, there was a tribe specifically devoted to this, the tribe of Levi). It is like a tribe whose members study Torah.
“Uvifrat minivcheret hakohanim” (and especially the chosen among the priests). In the tribe of Levi there were the priests who served in the Beit HaMikdash (Temple). “Ki lefi shehayah esek baTorah gadol venechmad be’einei Hashem Yitbarach, tzivah et shivtei Yah latet lahem kol tzorkam” (because engaging in Torah was great and beloved in the eyes of God, He commanded the tribes of God to provide them with all their needs).
Learning Torah is so great in God’s eyes that He commanded the tribes to provide for the tribe of Levi. “Ki yadua me’esrim ve’arba matanot”: the 24 priestly gifts. All 24 entitlements, and all their needs, are on us, just so they can be constantly engaged in Torah. “Velo ye’asu” (and not do other work).
“Ve’al tit’akesh vetomar ki chol mah shetzivanu Hashem latet leShevet Levi hayah chelef avodatam” (do not insist and say that everything Hashem commanded us to give the tribe of Levi was in exchange for their service). You might argue, as Maharam di Lonzano says: “No, perhaps the only reason we have to give them the 24 priestly gifts is that they serve in the Beit HaMikdash. A little learning—and I have to pay the 24 gifts because they serve in the Beit HaMikdash.” Then people will argue that today there is no service in the Beit HaMikdash, so there is no obligation to support the tribe of Levi.
He says, “Ki be’emet ein hadavar ken, ela tzivanu Hashem latet lahem terumah uma’aser kedei shelo yifneh levavam le’iskei ha’olam klal, veya’avdu vaMikdash be’et ha’avodah” (in truth, that is not so; Hashem commanded us to give them terumah and tithes so their minds would not turn at all to the affairs of the world, and they would serve in the Temple when it was time for the service). When they are free from their work, they can study Torah.
He further writes that now that we know this, we have to fulfill the mitzvah as though we were dealing with those who accepted upon themselves to serve Hashem. It is not only the tribe of Levi; it is anybody who accepted upon himself to sit and study Torah all day. We have to accept upon ourselves to support them. “Ve’ein yotzim yedei chovateinu ki sheyish’alunu” (we do not fulfill our obligation merely by giving when they ask us, “Oh, I need help”). Rather, we should designate people who will study all their lives, with all their needs provided for by us.
We have to designate someone and say, “I am supporting this person for my whole life.” He learns like Yissachar-Zevulun: he learns, and I take care of the expenses. “Velo nigra mimah shenahagu haMitzrim” (we are no worse than what the Egyptians did). Did the Egyptians not provide for all the needs of their priests?
He further elaborates there and brings the words of the Zohar Hakadosh: through this, a person attaches himself to the Shechinah, “besod hachayim hanitzchiyim, venitzal mimisim ve’arnoniyot” (through the secret of eternal life, and he is saved from taxes and property taxes). It is a segulah to be saved from the taxman, from the IRS.
He writes, “Al ken yesh le’ashirei am” (therefore, the wealthy people), the leaders of the congregations, and the synagogue treasurers, should keep their eyes open and have compassion for students who have begun to succeed in their learning. When you see a young student doing well in his studies, you have to invest in him. Especially those who have reached a good level, who have been tried and tested and have good learning, in study and in-depth learning, so that everyone who sees them will recognize that they are blessed offspring of Hashem.
If they continue learning, they will undoubtedly become great Torah scholars. You should also look at those who, besides appearing likely to succeed in Torah, display signs of purity and holiness. They are not studying in order to argue, but for its own sake; they are careful with the recitation of the Shema and with prayer, and they are meticulous in the mitzvot. They are careful to avoid flattery and frivolity. For these people and others like them, you should make a great effort to support them.
He says that this failure lies at the hands of the wealthy leaders of the community; today, they do not do that anymore. He is very upset about this. Then Chacham Ben Tzion says, “This is a beautiful passage about supporting Torah.” He says, “Ume’achar shebimei Chanukah yesh tikun yoter betzedakah” (since on the days of Chanukah there is greater rectification through charity), especially for someone who sinned in this incarnation or in other incarnations through the sin of nashgaz. If, God forbid, someone was involved with non-Jewish women and did things like that, collecting money for Torah students on this day is a rectification.
That is what we do. Baruch Hashem, we give out tzedakah. Harav Chaim Palachi has a whole system involving a hundred coins. He explains exactly how to do that. See Mo’ed Lechol Chai. We have never done the hundred coins on Chanukah. We do it on Shavuot: 102 coins, 104 coins—but that is another matter.
But, my friends, it is a big idea to give the teachers money on Chanukah—meaning schoolteachers. The custom is to send them money. That is what it is. It is not a small thing.
Let us continue. Open the Ben Ish Chai, parashat Vayeishev, se’if katan chaf-chet. We are trying to learn this carefully, so that we do not skip a detail. We are going slowly to cover every item and every custom. It is se’if katan chaf-zayin—chaf-chet; start, please. Look at the end, where he talks about lighting candles for Rabbi Meir on Rosh Chodesh (new month) Tevet.
“Vechen yiheyeh beRosh Chodesh Tevet shebetoch yemei Chanukah, shemishum pirsumei nisa, minhagenu lehadlik shemen lama’or lichvod nishmat Rabbi Meir Ba’al HaNes (master of the miracle)” (and so it is on Rosh Chodesh Tevet, which falls during Chanukah: because of publicizing the miracle, our custom is to light oil for illumination in honor of the soul of Rabbi Meir, the master of the miracle).
That is a big point. On Rosh Chodesh Tevet, the Ben Ish Chai says to light extra oil, a candle, shemen lama’or (oil for illumination), for Rabbi Meir. I think it would be a nice thing to have a large bowl filled with oil in some synagogues, with wicks in it, so people could light there in memory of someone. That is shemen lama’or: oil in the synagogue. That would be a good thing for somebody to take upon himself. We can put it somewhere on the side of the synagogue. It is a big bowl; you get wicks, and there is oil in it. A person can donate: there is a little tray, you put a few dollars in, and you pour some oil into it. You are actually donating the oil. A fellow comes, buys oil, puts it in, and then lights a candle.
There are many days when there is an idea to light, like Motza’ei Shabbat and other days. It cannot hurt. There is clearly an idea here. He says, “Ve’ayein mah shekatav bazeh beMo’ed Lechol Chai shenitpashet bedorot ha’acharonim la’asot hilula deRabbi Meir beyom yud-dalet be-Iyar” (see what he wrote about this in Mo’ed Lechol Chai: in later generations, it became widespread to make Rabbi Meir’s hilula on the fourteenth of Iyar).
That is Pesach Sheni (Second Passover), the hilula of Rabbi Meir, the master of the miracle. He writes in Ta’amei HaMinhagim that “shebadu milibam la’asot yom Pesach Sheni lehilula dehatana Rabbi Meir.” He says it is made up; that is not the day.
The Gaon Rabbi Meir Mazuz also writes that it is a new custom that began in Tveryah. It is to raise money for the yeshivot, he says. It is funny: he says Rosh Chodesh Tevet is the day, but in Tveryah—who is going to Israel, to Tveryah? People come when the weather is terrible: it is raining and freezing, and it is the middle of Chanukah. They cannot raise any money. So they moved his yahrtzeit (death anniversary) to prime time, the fourteenth of Iyar, when there are lots of tourists. Okay, so now that is the yahrtzeit. He died at that time. Tzaddikim do not die, anyway. That is an incredible point.
Now look at this. Go to halachah bet. We remember that on Rosh Chodesh Tevet we light candles for Rabbi Meir, the master of the miracle. “Ribui hase’udot shemarbim bahem hem se’udot hareshut” (the numerous meals that people have on these days are optional meals). We learned yesterday that these meals we have on Chanukah are called optional meals. “Shelo keva’um lemishte vesimchah” (they did not establish them for feasting and celebration).
Michael, Eli, do you want to read Mishnah Berurah vav? “Shelo keva’um lemishte vesimchah, ela lehallel ulehodot. De’zeh hata’am lo kave’u kan lesimchah kemo bePurim, ki bePurim hayah hagezerah al hashmidah degufot, shehu bitul mishte vesimchah, ve’et hanefashot, she’afilu datam, chas veshalom, lo hayah mekabel.”
On Purim, even if we had converted, they still would have killed us. It was not religious persecution on Purim; it was all physical. Therefore, the celebration is physical. “Lefi sheHakadosh Baruch Hu kave’u lehallel mishte vesimchah” (therefore the Holy One, Blessed is He, established it for praise, feasting, and celebration). That is different from what happened with Antiochus, “shehu gazar aleihem rak letzarot nishmatot, kedei lehamir datam” (who decreed against them only to trouble their souls, in order to make them change their religion).
As we say, “Lehashkicham Toratecha”—they wanted to make us forget the Torah. “Ule’aviram meichukei retzonecha” (to remove them from Your ordinances). That was the decree. If we had paid that tax and then just given up and become Hellenists, there would have been no decree; that is it. The decree was only on the soul, not on the physical body.
Rather, the Jews were in the hands of the Holy One, Blessed is He; He delivered Israel, and they defeated the Greeks. Therefore, they established the days only for praise and thanksgiving. “Kelomar, keivan she’ein haguf nig’al mizeh mibor umimavet, chas veshalom, uveguf arachot, velachach anu... velachach anu modim umeshabchim lo al shehayah lanu le’Elohim velo azavanu me’avodato.” That is the fragment from the Mishnah Berurah passage.
Open the Rambam, Hilchot Chanukah. I think we have it here. Open Hilchot Chanukah, perek gimmel. The Rambam’s wording is always golden, the way he writes. Read from the beginning. Who will have the merit of reading the golden wording? Solly, do you want to read the Rambam? Beveit sheni, gimmel alef, start from alef, all the way at the end of the book.
“Beveit sheni keshemolchu Yavan gazru gezerot al Yisrael ubitlu datam velo hinichu otam la’asok baTorah uvemitzvot ufashatu yadam bemamonam uvivenoteihem. Venichnasu laheichal ufaratzu vo peratzot. Vetim’u hatahorot vetzar lahem leYisrael me’od mipneihem velachatzum lachatz gadol, ad shericham aleihem Elohei avoteinu vehoshi’am miyadam vehitzilam vegavru bnei Chashmona’i hakohanim hagedolim, veharagum vehoshi’u Yisrael miyadam vehe’emidu melech min hakohanim. Vechazrah malchut leYisrael yoter al matayim shanah ad hachurban hasheni.”
It says that in the Second Temple period, when the Greeks ruled, they decreed against Israel, canceled their religion, and did not allow them to engage in Torah and mitzvot. They laid their hands on their property and their daughters. They entered the sanctuary and made breaches in it. They made the pure things impure, caused great distress to Israel, and oppressed them severely, until the God of their ancestors had mercy on them, saved them from the Greeks, and rescued them. The sons of the Hasmonean high priests overcame them, killed them, and saved Israel from their hands. They appointed a king from among the priests, and the kingdom returned to Israel for more than 200 years, until the destruction of the Second Temple.
Clearly, they laid their hands on the people’s property and daughters. They made breaches in the walls. “Vetim’u hatahorot” (they made the pure things impure). They oppressed Israel greatly until God had mercy on them and saved them. The Hasmonean priests defeated the Greeks, killed them, and saved Israel. They appointed a king from among the priests, which was a problem; they should not have done that. But okay. The kingdom lasted more than 200 years, until the destruction.
“Bet, ucheshagavru Yisrael al oyveihem ve’ibdum bachamishah ve’esrim bechodesh Kislev hayah.” When Israel overcame their enemies and destroyed them, it was the twenty-fifth of Kislev. “Venichnasu laheichal velo matz’u shemen tahor bamikdash ela pach echad, velo hayah vo lehadlik ela yom echad bilvad, vehidliku mimenu nerot hama’arachah shemonah yamim ad shekatshu zeitim vehotzi’u shemen tahor.” They entered the sanctuary and found only one jar of pure oil. It was enough to light for only one day, but they lit from it for eight days, until olives were pressed and they produced pure oil.
They lit for eight days, until they got oil. That is it, like the Ran. Four days, four days.
Now look at gimmel: “Umipnei zeh hitkinu chachamim shebe’oto hador sheyihyu shemonat hayamim ha’elu shetechilatan mileil chamishah ve’esrim beChislev yemei simchah vehallel” (for this reason, the sages of that generation established that these eight days, beginning on the night of the twenty-fifth of Kislev, should be days of celebration and Hallel). Oh! “Days of celebration.” The Rambam does not say only days of Hallel; he adds the words “days of celebration.” Stop right there. Precisely. Well, he did not say feasting, so perhaps wine is not required, but celebration is celebration—celebration is food.
Maran said clearly, if you look at his wording: “Ribui hase’udot shemarbim bahem hem se’udot hareshut, shelo keva’um lemishte velesimchah” (the many meals people have are optional meals; they were not established for feasting and celebration). No celebration. But the Rambam’s wording is “celebration,” so it is not so simple. Come on, you want to add wine? You could add wine too. I have no problem with that.
Read halachah vav. Are you reading vav? “Velo zeh sheChanukah bilvad hu shemidevrei soferim, ela keri’at ha-Hallel le’olam midevrei soferim bechol hayamim shegomerim bahem et ha-Hallel. Ushmonah asar yom bashanah mitzvah ligmor bahem et ha-Hallel, ve’elu hen: shemonat yemei ha-Chag, ushmonat yemei Chanukah, verishon shel Pesach, veyom Atzeret. Aval Rosh Hashanah veYom Hakippurim ein bahem Hallel, lefi shehen yemei teshuvah veyir’ah vafachad, lo yemei simchah yeteirah. Velo tiknu oto hayamim.”
You see that, according to the Rambam, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur do not have Hallel because they are days of repentance, awe, and fear, not days of extraordinary celebration. It seems that Hallel and celebration go together. On Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, because they are not days of celebration, there is no Hallel. So infer the opposite: where there is Hallel, as on Chanukah and the other holidays, there is an idea of celebration. He groups all the holidays together. It seems from the Rambam, at least, that there is an idea of having a meal on the holiday.
What are we going to do now? He quotes Rabbi Ben Tzion in Ner LeTziyon, halachah lamed-dalet: “Ve’od ayein beMegillat Antiyochus shemevo’ar shetiknum gam liyemei simchah” (also see Megillat Antiochus, where it is explained that they established them as days of celebration as well). That is it. We have Megillat Antiochus; that is probably where the Rambam got it.
Also see the wording of the Kolbo, another of the Rishonim: “Ulefnei zeh hitkinu chachamim shebe’oto hador sheyihyu osim eleh ha-yamim bechol shanah veshanah yemei mishteh vesimchah” (for this reason, the sages of that generation established that every year these days should be days of feasting and celebration). There you have “days of feasting.” The Kolbo holds that feasting is included too.
He says, “Da’at Maran shese’udot Chanukah hen se’udat reshut lefi shelo haytah gezerah, aval leshon ha-Rambam mashma shekave’u ha-yamim gam lesimchah, veyesh omerim shehu bevasar veyayin” (Maran’s view is that Chanukah meals are optional because there was no decree against the body, but the Rambam’s wording implies that the days were also established for celebration, and some say that means meat and wine). Bingo. That is the Ma’aseh Roke’ach on the Rambam.
Now he says, “Veda’at ha-Rema” (and the view of the Rema). What does the Rema say? Read it. “Veyesh omerim sheyesh ketzat mitzvah beribui hase’udot” (some say there is somewhat of a mitzvah in having many meals). I like “somewhat of a mitzvah,” whatever that means. “Mishum deba’otan hayamim hayah chanukat hamizbe’ach” (because on those days there was the dedication of the altar). A different point: the meal is for the dedication of the altar.
“Venohegim lomar zemirot vetishbachot base’udot shemarbim bahem, ve’az havei se’udat mitzvah (commandment meal)” (the custom is to sing songs and praises at the meals, and then they are a mitzvah meal). Bingo. That makes the meal a se’udat mitzvah. So we have to get some pizmonim (liturgical songs). Look at the famous Bi’ur Halachah on “Venohegim lomar zemirot vetishbachot.” It brings the responsum of the Maharshal, siman peh, who writes that it is fitting for the celebration to be mixed and combined with joy in Torah and new teachings, “ve’al tevatel mikvi’utcha” (and do not neglect your regular Torah study).
Unfortunately, many people turn the songs and praises into something else. Instead of praising Hashem, they sit privately and play cards. There you go: card playing. Instead of saying words of Torah at the meal, they turn it into a tournament. The holy books have warned greatly about this. A person who guards his soul should distance himself from it.
What does Chazon Ovadia say? He writes, “Umah tov umah na’im lenatzel mesibot ka’eleh liderashot uledivrei Torah veyir’at Hashem, ve’az bevaddai nechshavot se’udat halailah lemitzvah” (how good and pleasant it is to use such gatherings for a sermon, words of Torah, and fear of Hashem; then the meal is certainly considered a mitzvah meal). That is the idea.
So Maran holds that there is no idea of celebration, but the Rambam’s wording sounds as though there is. Chazon Ovadia writes: “Yesh omerim sheribui hase’udot shemarbim bahem besimchah beChanukah einam ela se’udat hareshut, veyesh cholkim ve’omerim sheyesh mitzvah beribui hase’udot” (some say the many meals eaten joyfully on Chanukah are only optional meals, while others disagree and say there is a mitzvah in having many meals).
He quotes the Rambam: “Hinei leshon ha-Rambam: shekeva’um liymei simchah” (the Rambam’s wording is that they established them as days of celebration). He writes that the Rambam’s wording implies that the meals eaten on these days are not optional meals but mitzvah meals, since we hold that there is no celebration except through eating and drinking, that is, through a meal.
He also writes that the Gaon Maharash Kluger, in his book Binyan Shlomo on the Rambam, says that the Rambam’s words show that he holds that the days of Chanukah are days of celebration, and that there is a mitzvah in their meals. What the Shulchan Aruch wrote—that they did not establish them for feasting—means that the Rambam explicitly says they were established that way. Maran says no, but the Rambam says yes. Wow.
He further writes that Nimukei Mahara’i concludes that one should make a feast for them, because they were actually established for celebration, and that Chanukah meals are mitzvah meals. The Maharshal also says that the meals people make on Chanukah are mitzvah meals, as the Rambam wrote. It is a big point; it is not so simple just to say they have nothing to do with anything.
He did not rule that way; he ruled like other rabbis. He does not always rule like the Rambam. But I already have Rishonim here. No, the truth is, the Rema did not rule that way either. He says it is because of the altar dedication. That is right. They are all quoting this Rambam.
The Rema, in Darkei Moshe, notes what they said in the Midrash on parashat Beha’alotecha: the work on the Mishkan was completed on the twenty-fifth of Kislev. The same is stated in Tanchuma, parashat Pekudei: the work on the Mishkan was completed on the twenty-fifth of Kislev, but Hashem waited until Rosh Chodesh Nisan and repaid Kislev, as we learned yesterday.
The Rema writes in his gloss: “Veyesh omerim sheyesh ketzat mitzvah beribui se’udah mishum shebe’otam yamim haytah chanukat hamizbe’ach” (some say there is somewhat of a mitzvah in having many meals because the altar was dedicated on those days). The Ya’avetz also says that Chanukah comes from the word chinuch hamizbe’ach (dedication of the altar). That is a different reason.
Chazon Ovadia then says that the custom is to sing songs and praises, the same as the Rema. He is not going against Maran. But we have now upgraded this whole idea of the meal. If somebody wants to have a meal to fulfill the words of the Rambam, he should do it every day of Chanukah. That is what follows from this.
There is another point the Rema brings: some say one should eat gevinah (cheese) on Chanukah, because the miracle happened through milk that Yehudit fed to the enemy. We cannot dismiss any of these customs. What does the Ben Ish Chai say about the milk? “Nahagu le’echol ma’achalei chalav (milk) beChanukah zecher lanes shena’asah bechalav, shehe’echilah Yehudit et ha’oyev, shehayah mimalkei Yavan. Ma’aseh huva besefer Chemdat Hayamim. Omnam zeh ma’aseh kodem nes Chanukah, kamah shanim. Ach ho’il ve’oto oyev hayah mimalkei Yavan, vegam hu hayah rotzeh leha’aviram al dat, vechach hoshia Hashem, zeh gam ken zecher bimei Chanukah.”
The custom is to eat dairy foods on Chanukah in memory of the miracle involving milk, which Yehudit fed to the enemy, who was one of the Greek kings. The story is brought in Chemdat Hayamim. However, that event happened some years before the Chanukah miracle. But since that enemy was one of the Greek kings and also wanted to make them abandon their religion, and Hashem saved them, this too is commemorated on Chanukah.
As they say, eat seeds on Purim. It seems to me, with Heaven’s help, that there is also a moral reason for the dairy foods: the three mitzvot the Greeks decreed against and Israel upheld were month, Shabbat, and circumcision. The letter chet in chalav is the first letter of chodesh (month); the letter bet is the second letter of Shabbat; and the letter lamed is the third letter of milah (circumcision). Beautiful. One, two, three: month, Shabbat, circumcision; the first, second, and third letters of chalav. That is another reason we eat dairy.
That is the minhag (custom), my friends. The Ben Ish Chai brings it down, so it is not only the Rema. That is no proof that you have to eat cheese—cheese and eggs. You do not have the eggs; I do not know where you got the eggs from. But if you want to have them—
Chacham Ben Tzion writes that people eat dairy foods on Chanukah because the miracle was performed through Yehudit. See also the Rema. Although this miracle preceded the Chanukah miracle, the Ben Ish Chai quotes those who say that the beginning of the victory that led to the Chanukah miracle came through the daughter of Yochanan the High Priest. Some say she was taken by the enemy, gave him cheese to make him thirsty, and it got him hungry, and then killed him. So that was the beginning of the miracle.
He says it is fitting to try to eat these foods every day of Chanukah, or to eat a special cheese dish, so it will be clear that it is because of the custom. People say, “I have milk in my coffee.” You have milk in your coffee every day. You have to have something specific; do not tell me that is not a dairy food. You should have cheesecake or something like that, to show it.
Chacham Ben Tzion, mem-alef, bet. Michael, read this for us. “Hala se’udot she’osim bimei Chanukah, ha’im nechshavot hen se’udat mitzvah?” (Are the meals made on Chanukah considered mitzvah meals?) That is the first question: mitzvah meals or not? Maran says no; the Rambam says yes.
He says: “Stam se’udot she’osim bimei Chanukah einan se’udat mitzvah. Aval im osim se’udah lichvod yemei Chanukah umezamrim shirot vetishbachot, omerim sham divrei Torah umessaprim nissei Hashem, vechen im osim se’udah shemataratam le’oded ne’urim uvachurim letalmud Torah, harei hen se’udot mitzvah” (ordinary meals made on Chanukah are not mitzvah meals. But if one makes a meal in honor of Chanukah and sings songs and praises, says words of Torah, and tells of Hashem’s miracles, or makes a meal to encourage young people and students to study Torah, then they are mitzvah meals).
That is the custom: to have many meals on Chanukah and sing songs and praises to publicize the miracle. It says one should try to eat a cheese dish every day of Chanukah. It says that at the bottom of page 49: “Veyesh lehishtadel le’echol bechol yom miyemei Chanukah ma’achal gevinah, kegon tavshil shel gevinah, mishum haminhag le’echol gevinah beChanukah, kemovi bedivrei haRan beperek mem-heh beMadlikin” (one should try to eat a cheese dish every day of Chanukah, such as a cheese casserole, because of the custom of eating cheese on Chanukah, as brought in the Ran’s words in chapter mem-heh of Bameh Madlikin).
They do not dismiss minhagim. It is a minhag; we have to eat it every day! We have to have pizza every day. Exactly. We have to bring the—We have to have pizza every—sufganiyot (doughnuts); we will see. But are we already discussing the food? Since we are, let us finish with all the food items now.
The Ner LeTziyon says that from ancient times there has been a custom to eat foods cooked in oil on Chanukah. In the booklet Sarid Ufalit, he brings a passage he found in the book Kaf Ezer by Rabbi Yehudah berabi Me’ir. It quotes a manuscript by Rabbi David Chasba’oni of Sale, Morocco, and a passage by Rabbeinu Maimon ben Yosef, which he wrote in Arabic in his work on the prayers.
In his explanation of Chanukah, Rabbeinu Maimon writes that one should not be lenient with any custom, even a minor custom. Every proper person is obligated to make a feast and celebration and a food that publicizes the miracle Hashem performed for us in those days. The widespread custom is to make doughnuts, called al-sfandj in Arabic, and they are hasepichot bidvash. The translation of the term is iskaritin. It is an ancient custom, because they are cooked in oil, in memory of the blessing of the oil.
Rabbeinu Nissim writes in Megillat Setarim that all the nation’s customs like these are similar to the custom of eating a head on Rosh Hashanah, dairy on Purim, or this food on Pesach. We should not scorn these customs. Whoever established them and makes an effort to observe them is praiseworthy. Do not scorn the nation’s custom; “Al titosh Torat imecha” (do not forsake your mother’s teaching). The traditions of the Geonim, the heads of the yeshivot, also mention customs like these.
They bring it down, my friends. They say, “Doughnuts? Nonsense.” But Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach gives another reason why we eat doughnuts: their blessing is me’ein shalosh (the abbreviated three-part blessing). What do we say in the blessing? “Ve’al mizbachecha” (and upon Your altar). Wow. That is the case—it is not about the doughnut; it is about al hamichyah (after-blessing for grain).
“We do not say that in Birkat Hamazon (grace after meals)?” “It is the doughnut.” “Yes, exactly. If a person does not say al hamichyah, he missed the whole point. He is eating 30 doughnuts, but it is ‘upon the altar.’” “Not so with Birkat Hamazon; it does not say it explicitly.” “Right, ‘upon Your altar.’ And however many doughnuts you eat, it is still mezonot (food with the grain blessing), because it is fried.” “Unbelievable. So it is ‘upon Your altar.’” He brings it in the...
That is Hilchot Berachot. Cheese, doughnuts, all these things are brought down.
Now let us go to the next halachah. We have to finish this halachah. Is there anything else from Chacham Ben Tzion on this, besides the blessings for the doughnut and all that? “Four pages.” Four pages on what? On the blessings? “No, a question.” This is the question we did yesterday. “The meal that people make…” Okay, we have that. That is what we need here.
Maran says, “Ein maspidin bahem ela lechacham befanav” (one may not deliver eulogies on these days, except for a sage in his presence). What is written? No eulogies, except for a sage in his presence. What is a chacham (sage), by the way? What is a sage? Does it go according to the Haggadah—“We are all wise”? “Who is wise? One who sees what is coming”? “Who is wise? One who learns from everyone”? Or perhaps it is like the Pesach Haggadah: “We are all wise.”
Open your books, my friends. Taf-kuf-mem-zayin. You have it in your books; I do not have it in mine. Do you have the large Mishnah Berurah at the back? Oh, these are all Gary’s books. Beautiful. Good work. Do we have a regular Mishnah Berurah? David, bring us a large one. Right there.
The famous Mishnah Berurah, taf-kuf-mem-zayin, yod-bet. It brings this down. In se’if katan yod-bet, on the word “sage,” the Mishnah Berurah says: “Shesho’alim oto devar halachah bechol makom ve’omer” (one who is asked a matter of halachah in any area and answers). You ask him a halachic question and he knows how to answer. “Ve’afillu eino yode’a lisa veliten bah” (even if he does not know how to explain and discuss it). He knows the answer: permitted or forbidden, that is it. “Ve’ein bizmanenu talmid chacham kazeh” (in our time, there is no such Torah scholar). That is the Magen Avraham. We do not have a rabbi like that anymore, whom you can ask anything, anywhere. He does not exist. Well, perhaps Chacham Ovadia, peace be upon him; I do not know.
“Ulefi zeh katav shebizmanenu ein dorshin al chacham bamo’ed” (accordingly, he wrote that in our time one does not deliver a eulogy for a sage on a festival). What are we going to do now? They want to say there is no sage today. Chacham Ovadia Yosef, in Yabi’a Omer, wants to say—well, we have Chacham zeh, Chacham Ben Tzion. Let us read Chacham Ben Tzion.
That is a big question. God forbid, we hope it will not apply to us; but let us see what he says. “Yemei Chanukah assurim behesped, milevad lechacham befanav, vehainu lifnei hakevurah” (eulogies are forbidden on Chanukah, except for a sage in his presence, meaning before the burial). Ohr LeTzion, volume dalet. “Veyom shemu’ah kivfanav damei” (the day one hears of the death is considered as though the sage is present).
What about the wife of a sage after her husband has died? That is another question. “Ha’im maspidin lechacham o le’eshet chacham beChanukah? Maspidin beChanukah lechacham befanav, dehainu lifnei hakevurah, aval le’achar hakevurah lo yaspid ad achar Chanukah. Ule’eshet chacham, yesh lehistapek im maspidim befaneha, veshev ve’al ta’aseh adif” (may one eulogize a sage or a sage’s wife on Chanukah? One may eulogize a sage in his presence, meaning before burial, but after burial one should not eulogize him until after Chanukah. As for a sage’s wife, it is uncertain whether one may eulogize her in her presence, and refraining from action is preferable).
Look at Chacham Ben Tzion. “Ein maspidin bahem ela lechacham, vehainu lifnei hakevurah” (one does not deliver eulogies on these days except for a sage, meaning before burial). After burial, one does not eulogize. But there is aveilut (mourning) on Chanukah, meaning they sit on Chanukah. Chanukah does not break the aveilut, and it does not push it off either. All the laws of aveilut apply on Chanukah.
Regarding the wife of a sage, he further asks whether eshet chaver kechaver, the wife of the talmid chacham is like the talmid chacham, applies. “Ishto kegufo, eshet chaver kechaver” (his wife is like his body). Is the wife of a sage, after her husband’s death, also included? Because now you can’t say eshet chaver, ein chaver. She’s not an eshet chaver anymore.
He proves that there is a law of eshet chaver kechaver even after her husband’s death from the Gemara in Shevuot. The wife of Rav Huna had a case before Rav Nachman. Rav Nachman said, “What should I do? If I stand up for her, the other litigant’s argument will be weakened. If I do not stand up for her, a scholar’s wife is like a scholar.” He told his attendant, “Go out, bring me a young goose, put it on me, and I will stand up.” He would arrange to get up for another reason, but would still stand up for her.
That is Chacham Ben Tzion’s proof: even after Rav Huna had died, the law of eshet chaver kechaver still applied. That is a nice proof. But he says the proof is not conclusive. Perhaps, in this matter, we require the sage himself to be alive. Maybe this case is different. When it comes to standing, perhaps it is different; but for eulogizing on Chanukah, where the law says “a sage in his presence,” perhaps more is required than eshet chaver kechaver. Perhaps the rabbi himself has to be there. So the matter remains uncertain, and refraining from action is preferable.
These are all very important questions, my friends. They should be practical, with God’s help, when we have long lives. In any case, he says that when the law is uncertain, refraining from action is preferable. The eulogies can always be delivered later.
It sounds as if refraining from action is preferable when the sage is not present. But if the sage is still alive, then it seems simple that it is permitted, because eshet chaver kechaver. There is no uncertainty about that when the rabbi is alive.
He then discusses another interesting case. Since we have established that mourning practices apply on Chanukah, what if someone’s seven days of mourning end during Chanukah? Should he go to the cemetery on Chanukah or after Chanukah? Perhaps, just as they say that souls are not at the grave on Shabbat and Yom Tov, the same applies on Chanukah.
Who has the Ben Ish Chai? David, kaf-bet in the Ben Ish Chai. “BeChanukah ein holchim lebeit kevarot beyom yahrtzeit. Umi sheyesh lo yahrtzeit betoch yemei Chanukah, yelech kodem Chanukah, aval holchim lehishtate’ach al kivrei hatzaddikim” (on Chanukah, one does not go to the cemetery on a yahrtzeit. Anyone whose yahrtzeit falls during Chanukah should go before Chanukah, but people do go to visit the graves of the righteous).
So anyone with a yahrtzeit during Chanukah should go before. We discussed yesterday the question of fasting and other matters; now we are discussing visiting the cemetery. He says to go only to the graves of the righteous. Are you going to Israel? Graves of the righteous, yes. But as for simply visiting the deceased, that is not the time. “Vechen haminhag po irenu sheholchim al matzevat adonenu Yehoshua Kohen Gadol betoch yemei Chanukah be’erev Rosh Chodesh” (and this is the custom in our city: people go to the grave of our master Yehoshua Kohen Gadol during Chanukah, on the eve of Rosh Chodesh).
That is what he says. It is his practice to go there, and there is always an idea of going on the eve of Rosh Chodesh. These are righteous people. He says, “Anyone who has a yahrtzeit during Chanukah should go beforehand.” It seems also that Mo’ed Lechol Chai and Gesher Hachayim say that the custom nowadays is to go to graves during Chanukah. It seems that those who want to go during Chanukah are permitted, and those who want to postpone it until after Chanukah are also permitted.
What does Chacham zeh say? Clearly, he says that while the husband is alive, it seems that the wife may be eulogized in his presence. He explicitly says that if the husband is alive, they may eulogize the wife in his presence; that is clearly implied by Chacham Ben Tzion.
But mourning, God forbid, applies on Chanukah, and one also provides the mourner with the meal of consolation on Chanukah. The regular rules apply. Someone who has accepted fasts for a few days—we will get to that in a moment.
The Ben Ish Chai says that the custom is not to go to the graves during Chanukah, even for someone with a yahrtzeit. Why? The main reason is that one is forbidden to eulogize or arouse weeping. If people go to the cemetery only to say a few chapters of Tehillim (Psalms), as is the community’s custom, they read the alef-bet for five minutes, say a Kaddish (sanctification prayer), and go home; nobody cries or delivers eulogies. As people do nowadays, there is no prohibition in that.
That is very interesting. I suppose Chacham Ben Tzion brought that down. A regular person with a yahrtzeit who goes to read the alef-bet for five minutes and then goes home would not have a problem on Chanukah, he says. The Ben Ish Chai was talking about a case where people were crying and doing those things. The ruling of Maran, Rabbi Abba Shaul, is also that those who want to go during Chanukah are permitted.
We just saw that. It is very interesting. The question was asked to Rav Chaim Palachi about the custom in his city: people would visit the graves of their relatives three times a year, men separately from women, and they would cry and eulogize. Was it permitted to do that on Chanukah? In that case, he said they should not do it. That is what the discussion is about, because they were crying and bringing eulogizers. You cannot go and cry then. But simply going to say a few chapters of Tehillim is what people do today.
That is why it is so important to learn this carefully. If we just learned the Ben Ish Chai, we might say, “Forbidden.” Someone asks you, “Can I read the alef-bet at his grave?” You say, “Forbidden.” Is that so? You have to know the reasons. Based on the reasons, it could be permitted.
Going to the graves of the righteous is a custom, as they did in Baghdad when they went to the grave of Yehoshua on the eve of Rosh Chodesh, in Shoftim dalet, in the Ben Ish Chai. Ohr LeTziyon discusses whether the souls are even there on Chanukah. The question is whether the souls of the righteous are there, because on Shabbat and Yom Tov they go up to Heaven. So there is a whole question of whether they are even there.
Why? First, Maharchu’s view that the souls go up is not explained as applying to anything except Shabbat and Yom Tov. Chanukah is not mentioned. It is only said in Rav Chaim Vital that they go up on Shabbat, Rosh Chodesh, and Yom Tov. It would be interesting to consider people in Israel going on Rosh Chodesh. But the eve of Rosh Chodesh is also an important time. On Rosh Chodesh, do not give Satan an opening. What about the month of Nisan? Is there something about not going during the month of Nisan? The souls hover over the—They do not say tziduk hadin (the declaration of divine judgment).
Another question: if the souls are not at the graves, why does the Ben Ish Chai write that people have the custom of going to the graves of the righteous? They went anyway. Of course, he says they went. Why? “Veyesh lomar shehatefilot mekudalot bimkom kevurat hatzaddikim shehu makom kadosh” (one can say that the prayers are accepted at the burial place of the righteous, which is a holy place). It is not because the righteous are there; the place itself has become holy. Even when the soul is not there, prayers can be accepted there. But specifically lying down and doing particular practices with special intentions is not applicable.
He says that when the seven days of mourning end during Chanukah, Chacham Ben Tzion is uncertain whether it is permitted to go to the grave on Chanukah. In any case, it is certainly forbidden to go there crying.
He asks what the reason is for going to the grave at the end of seven days, thirty days, and a year. It is brought from the Rishonim, such as the Ramban, and the Shulchan Aruch brings it down. Do they go because the soul reaches different levels on those days? Perhaps that is the uncertainty.
In truth, if the Ben Ish Chai wrote that people do not go on the yahrtzeit, perhaps the same should apply on the seventh day. That leaves us uncertain: do you follow the custom the Ben Ish Chai wrote, or the custom in Gesher Hachayim? Perhaps, according to what Chacham Ben Tzion explained, the souls are not found at the graves on Chanukah. One could say that specifically after the body has decayed, the soul is no longer there. Before the body has decayed, everyone holds that the soul is there, even on Chanukah. So after seven days, certainly the body has not decayed yet.
According to that, one should distinguish between the day the seven days end and the yahrtzeit. On the seventh day, when the body has not yet decayed, certainly one can go, because the soul is still there. But on the yahrtzeit, perhaps there is no purpose. You have to know about the thirtieth day.
He does not accept that view. He says we do not find anywhere that the souls are not at the graves on Chanukah. He believes that the souls are there on Chanukah, and therefore says there should not be a problem. If the concern is that the person will not cry and all that, then what is the problem? In any case, he says, one should certainly not go there to cry or eulogize. But even on the seventh day, the person can go, as long as he is careful not to cry. The seventh day is close, so he has to be careful. Each person should act according to his circumstances.
That is that, my friends. Now we have tziduk hadin. There is one more thing to discuss: this tikkun—what does Chacham Ben Tzion, Chacham Ovadia Yosef, say about Tikkun Chatzot and all that? What do we do with that? Is there Tikkun Chatzot (midnight lament prayers) on Chanukah? Why would there not be? I have no idea, to be honest.
The Ben Ish Chai says: “Ein omrim Tikkun Rachel (Tikkun Rachel prayers) bachatzot laylah, ela yomru rak Tikkun Leah (Tikkun Leah prayers), velo yomru perek ya’ancha Hashem, veyedalgu pasuk ad anah” (one does not say Tikkun Rachel at midnight; one says only Tikkun Leah, omitting the chapter “May Hashem answer you” and skipping the verse “How long?”). So according to the Ben Ish Chai, there is no Tikkun Rachel, only Tikkun Leah, and in Tikkun Leah you skip those sections.
Regarding going to the grave at the end of the seven days, he quotes the Ben Ish Chai. On a yahrtzeit they do not go. But Ovadia brings the words of Rav Chaim Palachi again: all the more so, they should not go on the seventh day, because the mourner will be aroused to cry and eulogize. Therefore, the visit should be postponed.
In the responsum Shemesh Umagen, he writes that the custom in Morocco is to go to the cemetery even on the seventh and thirtieth days, and that this is also the custom in Jerusalem. So they do not go? Chacham Ovadia and—Regarding the twelfth month, Rav Chaim Palachi and the Ben Ish Chai write that one should not go during Chanukah, but should go before Chanukah.
Rabbi Pinchasi, in Chaim Vachesed, writes that since the prohibition is not a matter of law but is only to avoid causing distress, Maran, the Rishon LeTzion, told him that one could say that even according to their view, the annual visit is a decree so that the deceased will be forgotten, and if the family is confident that they will not come to cry, it is permitted. Chacham Ovadia Yosef and Chacham Ben Tzion say that if the person is sure he will not cry on the yahrtzeit, he may go. He added that he heard that Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul ruled this way as well. But for the seventh and thirtieth days, they are concerned that it will cause crying. That is a difficult thing to tell someone who does not know.
Regarding putting up a tombstone, the later authorities disagree. According to the Kabbalists, one should refrain from putting up a tombstone during Chanukah. Wow, do not put up the tombstone.
Regarding visiting the graves of the righteous, Mo’ed Lechol Chai writes that one should not go during Chanukah to visit their graves, while the Ben Ish Chai says they did go. The Gaon Rabbi Meir Mazuz writes that they mention Yehoshua Kohen Gadol there because he is mentioned in the Chanukah haftarah. That is why they visited Yehoshua Kohen Gadol. I thought it was just because he was in their area. They visited specifically on that day. There are many righteous people there. What did they visit? Last but not least, participating in a Chanukah gathering.
What did they say they visited? That is a big question. Someone who is in our city—our city of Chacham Matzliach—it must be there, David. For sure they did not go to China. There are many righteous people there; they had others to choose from as well, but they went to Yehoshua.
Anyway, may a mourner within twelve months of his mother’s or father’s death attend a Chanukah party? “Hishtatfut bimesibat Chanukah mutar le’avel betoch yud-bet chodesh, she’ein isur ela beveit hamishteh” (a mourner within twelve months may attend a Chanukah gathering, because the prohibition applies only in a house of feasting). He is saying that because the gathering is in the yeshiva, he can attend the yeshiva’s gathering. But can music be played at someone’s house? No. “Uvilvad shelo yiheyeh sham kelei neginah” (provided there are no musical instruments there). What is music? “Excuse me, can have it.” What is music? “Singing.” Okay, we will stop here. Baruch Hashem.
But I remember once, when the Rabbi’s grandfather passed away, it was a day when they did not eulogize. Yes, it was Rosh Chodesh. The Rabbi went to Israel, and Rabbi Betzalel said, no, to eulogize him. What did he say? He called my grandfather a sage in his presence.
But we are saying that many of these things do not apply now. Are they eulogized? Chacham Ben Tzion and these rabbis held that they were. No, so do we have a definition? We do not have a definition. That is what we are trying to figure out. The Mishnah Berurah says that if someone knows halachah—and we do not have a person like that—what is our definition now? We need a definition, right? There is no definition. The person calls himself a rabbi, and they will eulogize him anyway. They are not going to stop.
Today, a person knows the alef-bet. What are you going to say? You are going to slight him? No, I do not want to—But there are people they do not eulogize, right? I have been to funerals where they simply have the funeral procession, that is all. Of course, an am ha’aretz (an unlearned person)—that is all.
But at my grandfather’s funeral, we came, and the Sephardi rabbi stood up at Har HaMenuchot and said, “It is Rosh Chodesh; we do not eulogize,” and he said a few chapters of Tehillim. We went to the next place, and Rabbi Betzalel Toledano went crazy: “What do you mean? Joseph is a sage. He learned every day…” Compared to the generation, he was one of the great ones. He said, “A sage in his presence.” He said, “I don’t—” He was an exception. He started screaming and yelling.
Compared to everybody else in his day, he was a great scholar. The Chachmei Toledano are not exaggerators; they follow the matter. What is the definition? It is relative to the generation. Nobody is even learning. This man got up in the morning and did it; he was a sage in his presence. I do not think everybody gets that status. All right, you know what it takes to determine the halachah.
That is a difficult thing to tell somebody, especially guys. No, the seven days—you have to explain it to them. If you explain it properly, tell them that it is detrimental, and that waiting until afterward is better for the soul. Explain to them the way...