חנוכה Parties: Halachic Fact or Popular Fiction?

Today it is commonplace that every family and institution makes some type of סעודה/party in honor of חנוכה. This article will explore the sources and reasoning behind this practice.

1

The first one to address this question is the מהרם of Rothenburg (quoted by the טור להלכה [1]) who says unequivocally that חנוכה parties are a סעודת הרשות, because חנוכה was not established for משתה ושמחה but rather for הלל והודאה.

The בח there asks גופא why this is so, unlike פורים. -?- The בח explains that the main decree by פורים was a punishment for benefitting from אחשורוש's party; to that end, it was decreed that the Jews be persecuted and have their bodies, which benefitted from food and drink of איסור, killed. Where they did תשובה, they then afflicted their bodies (אסתר ד:טו); which is why פורים was established for משתה ושמחה, namely to remember the עיקר הנס. By חנוכה, on the other hand, the main decree was a punishment for lack of enthusiasm and zeal for the עבודה in the בית המקדש, which is why part of the decree was to disrupt the עבודה. Where they did תשובה, they then did so by sacrificing their lives for the continuation of the עבודה; which is why חנוכה was established for הלל והודאה, which are an עבודה שבלב.

The טז [2] offers an entirely different reason for this disparity, namely that the נס פורים was מפורסם להצלת נפשות, for which there is שמחה in a physical sense, whereas by חנוכה - even though there was a ישועה from ה יתברך in battle, still - the military victory was not מפורסם על צד הנס; rather, only by the נרות was the נס מפורסם, which is why they were קובע להודות ולהלל, namely because from the נרות there was no particular שמחה in a physical sense (the הצלת נפשות that resulted from the military victory having been historically secondary in significance). To that end they made an עיקר from the נס המפורסם which demands gratitude more than celebration.

The לבוש [3] is מחלק between חנוכה and פורים in that by פורים there was הצלת נפשות whereas by חנוכה there wasn't; after all, the Greeks weren't looking to kill per se, but rather political/cultural submission which would have involved leaving our faith. The טז disagrees with this חילוק because one who causes someone to sin is worse than one who kills him [4]. The reason for this is because one who kills someone only makes that person lose their life in this world. One who causes someone else to sin, on the other hand, makes that person lose their life in the Next World as well. אליה רבה points out, however, [5] that the aforementioned principle is only true with regards to one who convinces someone to sin willfully, not one who forces someone to sin, because one who sins unwillingly does not lose their life in the Next World.

The בח himself, however, disagrees with the מהרם, based on the fact that גדולי הדור of the previous generations [6] made parties - the correctness of this practice being proven by means of an inference from the רמבם (חנוכה ג:ג) who says that חנוכה was established for שמחה והלל.

2

מגילת תענית says [7] that part of the reason for the establishment of חנוכה as a festival was the rededication of the מזבח.

דרכי משה suggests the rededication of the מזבח [8] as a possible reason why there is some מנהג of משתה ושמחה nevertheless. What is not entirely clear is which מזבח is referred to here. The מ"א [9] assumes this to mean the completion of the מלאכת המשכן. Now, even though the משכן was completed on כה כסלו, it still remained unused until ניסן, where it was formally inaugurated. To that end, כסלו (figuratively speaking) complained to הקב"ה of unfair treatment. 'ה reassured כסלו (again, figuratively speaking) that it would get its due by means of חנוכה. This is why the חנוכת המזבח of the משכן which took place in ניסן might be celebrated in כסלו.

אליה רבה and מלבושי יו"ט [5], on the other hand, disagree with the above resolution and say, by dint of this קשא, that the חנוכת המזבח referred to by the רמא is that of the חשמונאים.

ר אייזיק Tirnau adds [10] that they were נוהג to say מזמורים and many תשבחות at a חנוכה party so that it should be like a סעודת מצוה.

Conclusion

We have shown that numerous reasons for חנוכה parties are brought by the פוסקים, some even going so far as to say that they are obligatory. While there are those who complain about this practice as a recent innovation, we have seen that this phenomenon is actually quite an old one, as evidenced by the discussion among the פוסקים as to whether such parties are סעודות מצוה or סעודות רשות. -?-

ואחד המרבה ואחד הממעיט ובלבד שיכוון את לבו לשמים.

[1] או"ח תרע:ב

[2] שו"ע או"ח שם ס"ק ג

[3] או"ח שם סעיף ב

[4] רשי דברים כג:ט

[5] לבוש או"ח שם אות יד

[6] This is in consistent with the בח's assumption that anything done by the previous generations (especially the גדולי הדור thereof) must be correct if only because it was indeed done by them. Whether or not we, mere mortals, can understand why what they did was correct is hardly relevant, as our understanding of the הלכה plays little role in determining what the הלכה should be; rather, we must simply copy what was done by the previous generation, on the assumption that whatever they did must have been correct. See או"ח סי' סח וקיב for a good example of where else this שיטה appears in the בח. This would not seem to be the consistent approach of many other פוסקים, who instead prefer to determine הלכה objectively, by means of שקלא וטריא.

ואכמ"ל.

[7] פרק ט. In truth, מגילת תענית does not say explicitly that חנוכת המזבח was a factor in the establishment of חנוכה as a festival. In fact, מגילת תענית only references the miracle of the oil lasting for eight days. However, מגילת תענית then asks why, if the חנוכת המזבח in the מדבר lasted only seven days, does חנוכה still last eight days? If we take מגילת תענית at face value, then the entire question seem irrelevant: what does the חנוכת המזבח in the מדבר have to do with anything? The מפרשים infer from here that, evidently, the חנוכת המזבח in the מדבר was part of the reason for establishing חנוכה as a יו"ט in the first place.

This connection is brought out further by פסיקתא רבתי in פרשה ו אות א.

[8] טור שם ס"ק א

[9] שו"ע שם ס"ק ג

[10] ספר המנהגים [חנוכה הגהה כט]. Note that the רמא, where bringing this הלכה in שו"ע, does not say that such a party is like a סעודת מצוה, but rather that such a party is a סעודת מצוה.

או"ח ו:ד - עניית אמן צ' פעמים בכל יום

There are those who are נוהג that after one person says ברכות השחר and everyone else answers אמן - that one of those who answered אמן then makes his own ברכות and everyone answers אמן to his ברכות, each person taking their turn one at a time [1]. This is done in order to answer אמן 90 times, because כלל ישראל is called a גוי צדיק because they answer אמן ninety times every day, in addition to saying 4 קדושות and 10 קדישים and making 100 ברכות every day [2].

Now, one might think that this is problematic on account of the fact that those who listen to the first person make their ברכות was already יוצא by answering אמן. However, this is not really true because whoever made their ברכות did not necessarily have in mind to be מוציא anyone else [3]. The מהרשדם [4], however, objects that any ברכה that one could be יוצא by means of having someone else who is already making the ברכה be מוציא them - is then considered a ברכה שאינה צריכה if one still makes it themselves. מלבושי יו"ט responds [5], on the other hand, that this arrangement only looks like a ברכה שאינה צריכה but in actuality it is no different than any other ברכה that we could theoretically be יוצא with someone else (like ברכות ק"ש or שמו"ע) which we nonetheless say ourselves because there actually is a halachic preference [6] to say ברכות yourself over answering אמן to someone else's ברכות. One could argue, however, that for ברכות השחר one does not specifically have to have in mind to be יוצא, because these ברכות are only about the way of the world (that there is a circadian rhythm which wakes us up, that the sea remains separate from the dry land, etc.) in which case one can simply answer אמן without having anything in mind and that would be enough [7]. (To that end, one who hears someone making ברכות השחר and wants to still make their own - should then say ברוך הוא וברוך שמו, thereby creating a הפסק that prevents one from being יוצא. Alternatively, an even better solution is to make ברכות השחר as soon as one can, thereby minimizing the interruption between ברכות השחר and waking up in the morning [7].)

[1] שו"ע או"ח ו:ד

[2] תיקוני זוהר תיקון יח לג, הביאו השואל בתשובת הרמע מפאנו סימן קט

[3] ב"י או"ח שם בשם המהריל

[4] שו"ת סימן א

[5] שם ס"ק א

[6] ברכות נג: "ממהרין לברך יותר מהעונה" כלומר גדול שכר המברך יותר משכר העונה אמן

[7] ערוה"ש סעיף יג

סוף דבר: הנה במ"ב על סוגיתנו הובאו דברי תשובה מאהבה (חלק ב סימן ריב) שכ"ז לפי מנהגם שהיו יוצאים את ידי חובתן בברכות (בכלל) מהש"ץ אבל לפי מנהגנו שכ"א מברך כל ברכה לעצמו - הרי אין שום חשש. ולפי המהרשדם - הרי אין דבריו מובנים כלל שהרי אין זה תלוי במנהגם או במנהגנו אלא בעצם דין ברכה שאינה צריכה וצ"ע. ולדאבוני כעת אין התשובה תחת ידי לעיין בו בפנים. אכן ראיתי הובא בשם מקור חיים החדש (הובא בשערי אהרן על סוגיתנו) שמה שיוצאים את ידי חובת הברכה ע"י שמיעה בעלמא מבלי לכוון לצאת - הוא תלוי ב'סתם דעת' בני אדם שדעתם לצאת או שלא לצאת. ואפשר שזה כוונת התשובה מאהבה אבל עדיין צ"ע

.עוד יש לציין שבמ"ב כתוב להלכה שכל אחד ינהוג כפי מנהגו כי לכל אחד יש לו על מי לסמוך

ולפי מה שהעלנו למסקנא בפנים - הנה העצה הכי פשוטה להלכה היא לברך את כל ברכות השחר מיד אחר נטילת הידים

או"ח ד:יז - רחיצת הפה בבוקר

There are those who are נוהג to wash their mouth in the morning because of the רירים (mucus or other such unpleasant debris) inside it, in order to have a clean mouth for davening, especially where one mentions the Name of Hashem. If the only water available, however, is not clean, and one is sensitive to that, then washing the mouth is not מעכב with regards to saying ברכות and the like.

Even one who normally washes their mouth every morning to have a clean mouth for davening still may not do so on a תענית ציבור.

References: שו"ע או"ח ד:יז, לבוש שם, כף החיים שם

It would seem that all of the above is not on the assumption that one anyway brushes their teeth with toothpaste every morning, in which case one would already be washing their mouth regardless. However, even one who does brush their teeth with toothpaste every morning, has, until reading this article, presumably only done so for hygiene. Hereon they can also invest one piece of their daily routine with halachic significance.

הושענא רבה @ Breuer's

This past הושענא רבה I decided to visit Breuer's (Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights), having heard that הושענא רבה davening there is a significant attraction, meaning that outsiders who may have little connection to the Kehilloh otherwise nevertheless attend הושענא רבה services there. As I was not at all disappointed, I therefore decided to write about all the unique things I saw there that are difficult to find elsewhere. I will list them in chronological order, i.e. in the order that they occur in the davening.

Shacharis began promptly at 6:55am with Adon Olam. The official מנהג המקום is to wear tefillin on Chol Hamoed, to which end those who do not wear tefillin on Chol Hamoed daven in the Sulzbach Shiur Room next to the main sanctuary until Hallel, where many of those that do wear tefillin take theirs off. The official מנהג המקום is also that everyone wears a talis (even those who are not married), hat (even those who are married), jacket and tie (some wore specifically white ties), in keeping with a proper festive environment. Despite rumors to the contrary, nearly everyone followed this dress code, although it was not specifically enforced as it has been in the past (where, for example, one who did not wear one already was offered a hat and talis, with the clear expectation that they accept the offer).

At this point I will skip to Hallel, as the regular weekday minhogim of Breuer's are beyond the scope of this article, and everything done until that point is more or less the same as a regular weekday (aside from these two pieces in ברכות ק"ש).

In Hallel, Chazzon Ezra Lasdun sang a Modzhitzer B'Tzeis Yisroel (of which I could not find a recording) for לך אזבח and הללו together, followed the official Naanuim Nigun (of which I also could not find a recording), which the Chazzon used for all 4 lines of הודו (indeed, there were naanuim for all 4 lines). After the Chazzon chanted each line, the congregation responded with הודו לה' וכו for all 4 lines, with naanuim (using the same nigun) for each line.

Following Hallel, the Chazzon put down his lulov in a canister next to the omud which was designated to be a lulov holder.

Above: the official lulov holder of Khal Adath Jeshurun

Following Musaf were Hoshaanos. The Aron was opened, three sifrei Torah were taken out by young bochurim who then put down the sifrei Torah on the bimoh and stayed with them for the duration of the Hoshaanos. In many congregations, the Chazzon says each line of Hoshaanos aloud preceded and followed by הושע נא (for example הושע נא למען אמתך הושע נא). Here, however, after the first 4 lines which introduce Hoshaanos any day of Succos, the Chazzon, followed by the Rav, then led the congregation around the shul, all the while singing the Hoshaana paragraphs to tastefully selected popular melodies (meaning, the Chazzon sang למען אמתך למען בריתך etc. together with the congregation without interspersing the lines with הושע נא, besides for the last two lines which were followed by a resounding הושע נא on the part of the congregation). Towards the end of each paragraph the melody would inevitably conclude, at which point the Chazzon would finish the paragraph in Nusach.

Now, while singing the lines of Hoshaanos without interspersing them with הושע נא before and after each line may seem strange at first glance, it should nonetheless be pointed out that in no siddur (of the many that I have encountered) is such an interspersion printed. To that end, while interspersing the lines of Hoshaanos with הושע נא before and after each line is certainly appropriate, it is nevertheless reasonable to assume that these were not part of the original piyyut-form and, as such, Breuer's does not say them. (I was later informed that similar customs are followed in certain Chassidic communities.)

After the initial 7 encirclements, everyone then returned to their seats for the remainder of the Hoshaanos service, which, on הושענא רבה, is lengthened by extra piyutim. The Chazzon finished each of these aloud in a Nusach, followed by the introductory line for the next piyut. Each introductory line was chanted aloud the Chazzon, with a resounding response by the congregation in the same Nusach.

After the very last piyut, the Chazzon chanted קול מבשר מבשר ואומר aloud in Nusach, followed by a resounding response from the congregation of the same in the same. This was done three times, each louder and with more emphasis than the previous. At this point the sifrei Torah were returned to the Aron, and everyone beat their arovoh on the floor two or three times. The concluding Kaddisch was chanted/sung in a festive melody, after which the congregation offered a resounding "Shko'ach!!", thanking the Chazzon for a [not so easy] job well done.

The service concluded with Oleinu, Tehillim, and a Dvar Halochoh from the Rav about מוקצה מחמת מצוה, each of which was followed by Kaddisch [said by one person at a time only, hence the need for multiple קדישים in the first place].

Above: the shtender from where the Rav delivers a Dvar Halochoh, covered with a festive cloth (changed immediately following davening from a white High Holiday cloth)

Overall, I found the davening very inspiring and uplifting. I hope to go back again in the future.

הושענות - Part 2

In a previous post, we offered a basic background for הושענות. Here we will discuss what to do if, for whatever reason, one does not have their own ארבע מינים with which to encircle the בימה for הושענות.

1

ספרדים are נוהג to encircle the בימה for הושענות - even someone who doesn't have their own ארבע מינים [1]. 

The earliest discussion of this point is based on a תשובה of רשי [2] who initially posits that encircling the מזבח (on which our הושענות are based) is dependent on the presence of an ערבה, which is what the מזבח used to be encircled with. We, however, encircle the בימה with all 4 מינים, so evidently we do not consider our encircling to be a חובה (in the sense that we are doing עבודה as was done in the בית המקדש) but rather only a מנהג בעלמא. To that end, apparently we do not consider our encircling to be dependent on the presence of ארבע מינים (as they are not the causative factor for the encircling to begin with), in which case even one who does not have ארבע מינים should still encircle the בימה. Then, however, רשי retracts his position based on the counterargument of his brother (identified in the footnotes of the Elfenbein edition as ר שמעיה, his תלמיד) to the effect that once we are doing זכר למקדש - we should then do exactly what was done in the בית המקדש as closely as possible, in which case, since the encircling in the בית המקדש was dependent on the presence of an ערבה - so too our encircling is dependent on the presence of ארבע מינים.

2

ב"י adds [3] that this argument manifests itself on שבת, where we do not use ארבע מינים (out of concern that people might carry them to shul where there is no ערוב) and, as such, we therefore don't encircle the בימה on שבת at all, rather many communities say הושענות stationary, without encircling the בימה.

Based on the above, there are those who say that someone who does not have ארבע מינים does not encircle the בימה, and so are אשכנזים נוהג [4]. (The ספרדים, presumably, rely on רשי's original position, which, upon critical examination, was not entirely disproven.)

3

Now, on הושענא רבה - even someone who doesn't have ארבע מינים should still encircle the בימה with an ערבה (assuming they have one), only that it looks like יוהרא [5]. This is because the מצות היום of הושענא רבה is the ערבה, so one can, theoretically, encircle the בימה with it if not that it looks holier-than-thou [6]. על דרך האמת, however, there is absolutely no ענין to encircle the בימה with an ערבה (even on הושענא רבה) at all. Rather, after קדיש תתקבל one smacks the ערבה on the ground, ideally with the proper כוונות [7].

4

In practice, a sensitive גבאי will pick out someone who, for whatever reason, does not have their own ארבע מינים to hold the ספר תורה at the בימה while everyone else encircles him, so as not to embarrass someone who does not have their own ארבע מינים.

וכך ראוי ונכון לנהוג בכל מקום.

[1] שו"ע או"ח תרס:ב ע"פ ב"י שם

[2] סי' קכא

[3] שם

[4] רמא שם ע"פ פסק רשי שהובא בטור להלכה

[5] מ"א שם ס"ק ג

What specifically constitutes יוהרא is not specified, but seemingly one who encircles the בימה with only an ערבה looks like they are being מהדר to do more similar to what was done in the בית המקדש than the rest of the ציבור.

[6] בח שם

[7] באר היטב שם ס"ק ד, כה"ח שם ס"ק יג-יד

ובזה מבואר מה שאין אנו נוהגין כהמשך דברי הרמא שמקיפים עם הלולב והערבה ביחד, שהרי ע"פ קבלת האריזל - הנה אין לחברם יחד כלל וכדאי' בערוה"ש שם סעיף ד "כי אין ראוי לעורר את הגבורות ואת הדינים במקום כניסת החסדים" (ועיי' כה"ח שם ס"ק טו). וצע"ק על אותם הטוענים ש'כל ישראל יוצאים ביד רמא' (בלי שום יוצא מן הכלל) שהרי כמה מאותם שטוענים כך - הרי מעולם לא ינהגו כדברי הרמא כשדברי האריזל סותרים לדבריו. 

?או"ח תרד:ב - סליחות בערב יום כפור: קצרות או ארוכות

Unlike the rest of אלול and עשרת ימי תשובה, where we say many סליחות before עלות השחר - on ערב יו"כ, on the other hand, we don't say many סליחות (though there are places that are נוהג to be מרבה in סליחות, everything depending on the מנהג [1]).

The explanation for those who don't say many סליחות is that, since it is אסור to fast on ערב יו"כ - therefore it is like a יו"ט, which is why we also don't say תחנון [2].

Those who, on the other hand, do say many סליחות - assume that the festive aspect of ערב יו"כ only begins from עלות השחר, whereas סליחות are meant to be said at night [3].

[1] רמא או"ח תרד:ב

[2] לבוש שם סעיף א

[3] שו"ע הרב שם סעיף ד

והנה מנהג קהל עדת ישרון הוא להרבות בסליחות בערב יו"כ כמו ה'יש-מקומות' שהזכיר הרמא, אבל לפמ"ש נתקשיתי בהבנת מנהגם שהרי הם לא אומרים סליחות כלל בלילה (אפילו סליחות ראשונות) - וא"כ הרי אין להם שום טעם עוד להרבות בסליחות, וצ"ע

ואפשר שמעיקרא היו אומרים סליחות באשמורת הבוקר - וכפי המנהג שהביאו כל הפוסקים לומר סליחות באשמורת הבוקר דוקא - וא"כ הרי חל הטעם שעדיין אין דין יו"ט קודם עלות השחר - ושנשתנה המנהג לומר סליחות בבוקר אבל לא נשתנה המנהג להרבות בסליחות - אבל אין כל זה מסתבר, אלא דוחק ועדיין צ"ע

ועל אף שהובא טעם בשו"ע הרב להרבות בסליחות - אבל מ"מ הרי מנהג חבד הוא שלא לומר סליחות בערב יו"כ כלל, והדברים מפתיעים 

At what point to start saying סליחות

1

We are נוהג to get up באשמורת to say סליחות and תחנונים from ראש חודש אלול and on until יום כפור [1]. This is because these days are ימי רצון during which משה רבינו ascended הר סיני to receive the second לוחות [2]. So is the מנהג of the ספרדים. The מנהג of אשכנזים, however, is that where ראש השנה is on Thursday or שבת then we start saying סליחות on the Sunday immediately prior. (Some also fast and daven a תפלת תענית, including עננו and ויחל, etc.)  [3]. The חשבון of these 4 days before ראש השנה on which סליחות are said is to compensate for the 4 days between ראש השנה and יו"כ on which we eat סעודות מצוה such that we cannot fast as some used to [4]. Where ראש השנה falls on Monday or Tuesday, however, then we start on Sunday of the week before ראש השנה, rather than the Sunday of the week of ראש השנה [3]. The reason for this difference is because even though, strictly speaking, 4 days would be enough, nevertheless they instituted that סליחות should consistently begin on Sunday, so that no one should get confused what day סליחות start [5]. אשכנזים do, however, blow שופר every morning (and in some places every evening) from ראש חודש and on, which is a subject for its own article.

The reason for the specification of אשמורת is because הקב"ה floats, as it were, in 18,000 metaphysical worlds, and at the end of the night (which is, evidently, what אשמורת refers to) - He floats, as it were, in this world, such that the end of the night - i.e. before dawn - is an עת רצון [6]. The source of this concept (as pointed out by ביהגר"א [7]) is איכה ב:יט where the idea is expressed that ראש אשמרות (lit. the head of watches) is an appropriate point at which to pour one's heart out to Hashem.

2

There are those who are נוהג that whoever leads סליחות also leads the davening throughout the rest of the day [8].

3

On a practical level, ערוה"ש [9] offers an advisory that those who are not fasting should replace words referencing fasting in a given סליחה with words referencing תפלה. Additionally, there are words in סליחות referencing night or אשמורת הבוקר as the time where the particular סליחה is being said. One who says סליחות in the morning (i.e. before שחרית) should skip those words so as not to be saying falsehood.

Postscript:

There are various other technical דינים relating to who should lead סליחות, in what specific order they need to be said with what liturgical framework (such as אשרי, קדיש and the like), what do if one is wants to say סליחות individually, etc. These are purely halachic (rather than מנהג) in nature and, as such, are far beyond the scope of this article.

[1] שו"ע או"ח תקפא:א

The טז (ס"ק ב) points out that on ר"ח itself, however, we do not say סליחות and תחנונים.

[2] ביהגר"א אות א שם ע"פ פרקי דרבי אליעזר פרק מו

[3] טור שם

[4] פרישה שם ס"ק ו

[5] שם ס"ק ז

[6] מ"א שם ס"ק א

A vague reference to this point is made in :עבודה זרה ג.

[7] שם אות ב ובפסוק "קומי רוני בלילה לראש אשמרות שפכי כמים לבך נכח פני ה" ופי' הריד שהוא לשון תפלה, כמו אל הרנה ואל התפלה

[8] רמא שם

[9] שם סעיף ד