The Chanukah Candles: Rabbinic Obligation or Torah Obligation?
BY RABBI AZARYA BERZON
Rava in the Gemara (Shabbat 23b) raises a question about Chanukah candles and kiddush on the Shabbat of Chanukah. What should someone do if they cannot afford both wine for kiddush and oil for the ner Chanukah? Rava concludes that one should buy oil for the ner Chanukah, prioritizing pirsumei nisa – the publicizing of the miracle.
The Rashba and the Ran raise a difficulty: Kiddush is a Torah obligation, so how can a Rabbinic commandment like lighting the Chanukah candles override it? They resolve the issue by noting that if one has bread, the obligation of kiddush, on a Biblical level, can be fulfilled over the bread, freeing the money that would have been spent on wine to purchase oil for the ner Chanukah. Although wine is preferable to bread, that requirement is only Rabbinic, hence Rava establishes that he should fulfill his Biblical kiddush on bread and forfeit the preference for wine for the sake of pirsumei nisa.
However, the Tosafot Rid (Nazir 4a) questions this solution. He notes that wine for kiddush is a Biblical requirement derived from halacha leMoshe miSinai, and even though one can fulfill his obligation with bread, nevertheless, Rava in formulating his question regarding the individual with limited funds does not indicate at all that the person possesses bread. Hence, the question remains: how did Rava conclude that a Rabbinic mitzvah, lighting the Chanukah candles, could override kiddush, a Biblical mitzvah? Even though the Chanukah candles have the added merit of pirsumei nisa, nonetheless the fact remains that the mitzvah is a Rabbinic commandment. The issue is left unresolved.
We would like to suggest that the sugya of Rava be understood in light of a much broader principle. The Torah includes several general commandments whose specific details are not spelled out in the Torah itself. Let’s mention just three examples amongst many: ve’ahavta l’reacha, the commandment to love one’s fellow; ve’initem et nafshoteichem, the obligation to afflict oneself on Yom Kippur; and mikraei kodesh, the mitzvah to sanctify the days of Chol HaMoed. In all these cases, the Torah endows the Chachmei Yisrael (the Sages of Israel) the authority to determine the specifics of the mitzvah, when and how the mitzvah is to be fulfilled. Yet fulfilling the Rabbinic enactments in these cases constitutes fulfillment (kiyum) of a Torah commandment.
Similarly, the Torah commands, “v’nikdashti, I shall be sanctified among the Children of Israel” (Vayikra 22:32) – a general obligation to sanctify G-d’s name and to publicize our faith in Him. The Torah does not specify how or when this commandment should be fulfilled. The Sages established that during the eight days of Chanukah, one lights the candles to publicize the miracle and demonstrate faith in G-d. By doing so, one sanctifies His name. For this reason, the mitzvah of lighting the ner Chanukah carries the weight of a Torah-level obligation (see Harerei Kedem, Vol I, page 275).
Using this approach, Rava’s question can be understood as follows. On the one hand, a person faces a Torah obligation of kiddush and has neither wine nor bread to fulfill his mitzvah. At the same time, there is the Torah-level obligation to publicize the miracle by lighting the Chanukah candles. Which mitzvah takes preference? Rava concludes that lighting the candle takes precedence, since it fulfills the commandment to sanctify G-d’s Name – that fulfillment is sufficient to override the obligation of kiddush.
The Sefer Revavot Ephraim (Orach Chaim 2:115) rules: One who is uncertain whether he lit Chanukah candles is obligated to light again. This despite the rule that when one is in doubt regarding a Rabbinic commandment he may be lenient. It would seem that this ruling – to light the candles in a case of doubt – is based on the premise that one fulfills a Biblical mitzvah by lighting the ner Chanukah. Therefore, the appropriate principle is “be stringent in a case of doubt.”
This ruling should be understood in light of the broader discussion outlined above, namely, that a Rabbinic enactment that fulfills a Torah obligation is treated as a mitzvah shel Torah. The mitzvah of Chanukah candles is an example of this principle since by lighting the candles one publicizes the miracle and sanctifies His Name, fulfilling a great Torah obligation.
Rabbi Azarya Berzon is the Rav of Kehilla Oz Lamelech in Ramat Beit Shemesh and the author of Hagigei Oz.