What is [the reason of] Hanukkah? For our Rabbis taught: On the twenty-fifth of Kislew<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The ninth month of the Jewish year, corresponding to about December.
');"><sup>22</sup></span> [commence] the days of Hanukkah, which are eight on which a lamentation for the dead and fasting are forbidden.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is an extract of the Megillath Ta'anith, lit., 'the scroll of fasting'.
');"><sup>23</sup></span> For when the Greeks entered the Temple, they defiled all the oils therein, and when the Hasmonean dynasty prevailed against and defeated them, they made search and found only one cruse of oil which lay with the seal of the High Priest,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence untouched and undefiled.
');"><sup>24</sup></span> but which contained sufficient for one day's lighting only; yet a miracle was wrought therein and they lit [the lamp] therewith for eight days. The following year these [days] were appointed a Festival with [the recital of] Hallel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Praise', Ps. CXIII-CXVIII, recited on all Festivals; v. Weiss, Dor, I, p. 108, n. 1.
');"><sup>25</sup></span> and thanksgiving.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This lighting took place in 165 B.C.E. Exactly three years before, on the same day, Antiochus Epiphanes had a pagan altar erected in the Temple, upon which sacrifices were offered (I Macc. I, 41-64). Apart from the Talmudic reason stated here, Judas Maccabeus chose 25th of Kislew as the anniversary of the Temple's defilement, and the dedication of the new altar was celebrated with lights for eight days, similarly to the Feast of Tabernacles, which lasted eight days and was celebrated by illuminations (I Macc. IV, 36; II Macc. X, 6; supra a, p. 90, n. 3). Actually the revolt was against the Syrians, of whom Antiochus Epiphanes was king, but the term 'Greeks' is used loosely, because the Seleucid Empire was part of the older Empire founded by Alexander the Great of Macedon, and because it was a reaction against the attempted Hellenization of Judea. The historic data are contained in the First Book of the Maccabees.
');"><sup>26</sup></span> We learnt elsewhere: If a spark which flies from the anvil goes forth and causes damage, he [the smith] is liable. If a camel laden with flax passes through a street, and the flax overflows into a shop, catches fire at the shopkeeper's lamp, and sets the building alight, the camel owner is liable; but if the shopkeeper placed the light outside, the shopkeeper is liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the loss of the flax.
');"><sup>27</sup></span> R. Judah said: In the case of a Hanukkah lamp he is exempt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because, as stated above, it should be placed outside; the onus then lies upon the camel driver.
');"><sup>28</sup></span> Rabina said in Rab's name: This proves that the Hanukkah lamp should [in the first instance] be placed within ten.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Handbreadths from the ground.
');"><sup>29</sup></span> For should you think, above ten, let him say to him, 'You ought to have placed it higher than a camel and his rider.' 'Yet perhaps if he is put to too much trouble, he may refrain from the [observance of the] precept'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Possibly the lamp may be placed at the outset higher, yet the Rabbis did not wish to make the precept too burdensome. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> R. Kahana said, R. Nathan b. Minyomi expounded in R. Tanhum's name:
Maamar Mezake HaRabim
As for those with no desire to accept the responsibility on themselves, reasoning that the responsibility is more weight than the worker can handle, this is a mistake. We can bring a proof against this, in what we find in the Torah, that Moshe our master requested helpers from The Holy One Blessed is He, saying "I am not able to carry this burden alone etc." And The Holy One Blessed is He responded to him "Gather for me seventy men… and I will draw from the spirit which is on you etc." This is perplexing. Was it not his intention in his request that The Holy One Blessed is He give him helpers, as if to say, give additional strength from what he already has, and [in Hashem's response] what did he give him!? It is possible to answer that he supplied him seventy men, but he did not supply him with seventy additional units of power on top of his own strengths, because he drew from his Moshe's spirit and gave it to them!? What is this situation comparable to? To a vessel, compartmentalized by placing a second tube inside. The vessel is not widened by doing this. Similarly with this 'addition', it did not bring any more qualities, rather it is the measurement and weight that Moshe had on his own, just now it is made amongst seventy men as well, without increase. And we find that the power afforded them comes about through retraction from Moshe, as it writes "and I will draw…", even though there are those who say it is similar to one candle lighting another (Sifri), in any event, this is in the sense of a commandment like we find by the Chanukah lights, and he is puzzled, what was the intention of his question to add in strength?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Some mystical elements pertaining to the Chanukah lights: We shall now proceed to explain part of the deeper meaning of the חנוכה lights which issue forth from the ירך המנורה, the stem of the candelabra (the equivalent of ירך, thigh, in a human body). The expression רגל, foot, is also found in connection with נר, light, when the Psalmist describes הר לרגלי דברך, "Your word is a lamp to my feet" (Psalms 119,105). According to Halachah, the period during which the Chanukah lights have to burn concludes when תכלה רגל מן השוק, when the foot (pedestrian) leaves the market-place, when the streets empty out. Let us get back to the meaning of the word ירך. The Torah reported that Samael succeeded in dislocating Jacob's כף ירך, thigh joint. The immediate cause for this had been Jacob's having remained alone while he had gone to retrieve some trinkets of minor value (Rashi on 32,25). No doubt these פכים קטנים, "insignificant trinkets," are of great symbolical significance. We are reminded of the פך קטן, "small cruse" of oil which the Hasmoneans found when they entered the Temple precincts after their victory over the Greeks.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
We find a similar discussion in Bava Kamma (62b), in conjunction with rules about where to place the Chanukah lights. First we are told that any damage due to sparks emitted from the anvil is the smith's responsibility. We are also taught there that if a camel laden with flax walks in the public domain near which Chanukah lights are burning, the owner of those lights is not responsible for damage sustained by the flax (at least according to Rabbi Yehudah). If the lights causing the damage did not serve a מצוה purpose, everybody agrees that the owner is responsible. The discussion about possible damage caused by the Chanukah lights is also mentioned in Shabbat 21b, where most of the details about Chanukah observances may be found.
