Shabbat 21b (כא:) — the Talmud in English

Rav Ḥisda holds:

if it was extinguished,

the Hanukkah lamp,

one is not required

to relight it. Therefore, it is permitted to light with these oils on a weekday, and if it is extinguished, we are not concerned.

And it is permitted to use its light,

that of the Hanukkah lamp. Therefore, on Shabbat it is forbidden to light with them.

Rav Zeira said in the name of Rav Mattana, and some say:

Rav Zeira said in the name of Rav: The wicks and oils

about which the Sages said that one may not light with them on Shabbat—

one may light with them on Hanukkah, both on a weekday and on Shabbat.

Rav Yirmeya said: What is the reason of Rav

who says that one may light with them?

He holds

that a Hanukkah lamp which

was extinguished does not require

repair. Therefore, although these types of oil do not flow properly toward the wick, and the lamp may consequently be extinguished, we are not concerned.

It follows from Rav’s view that it is permitted to light with them even on Shabbat, and that we do not fear that one may adjust the wick, that he holds:

and it is forbidden to use its light,

that of the Hanukkah lamp.

The Sages said before Abaye, in the name of Rabbi Yirmeya,

that Rav holds that if it was extinguished one need not relight it, and that it is forbidden to use its light.

But he did not accept it;

Abaye did not rely on this teaching.

When Ravin arrived, the Sages said this halakha before Abaye

in

the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, and

then

he accepted it.

He said: If only I had merited it,

if only I had been worthy—

I would have mastered this teaching from the outset,

I would have learned it earlier.

We challenge this:

But he had learned it,

when it had been told to him in the name of Rabbi Yirmeya.

We answer:

There is a practical difference with regard to a version learned in one’s youth,

for had he learned it in his youth, it would have been better retained.

We challenge this:

And if it was extinguished,

the Hanukkah lamp—are you saying

that one need not relight it?

And we juxtapose the following teaching:

The time for

its mitzva

the Hanukkah lamp, is

from

the time

when the sun sets, until

the time

when a person’s foot ceases

to be present

in the marketplace The early authorities offer several opinions as to the precise time of sunset].

Does this not mean that if it was extinguished

during this period,

one returns and lights it,

which proves that if it was extinguished, one must relight it?

And we reject this:

No;

the teaching does not concern the duration of the burning, but rather the time of lighting:

if I did not light

at the time when the sun sets,

I may light

until the time when a person’s foot ceases to be present in the marketplace.

Alternatively,

I can say to you:

It was taught with regard to its measure;

one must place in the lamp enough oil to burn for the period from sunset until a person’s foot ceases to be present in the marketplace. However, if it is extinguished during that period, one need not relight it.

We learned in a beraita: The mitzva of the Hanukkah lamp is from the time when the sun sets

until the time when a person’s foot ceases to be present in the marketplace.

We inquire concerning this:

How much

is the measure of the period until a person’s foot ceases to be present in the marketplace?

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: Until the feet of the Tarmodeans have ceased

to be in the marketplace. They were a people whose trade was gathering wood, and they remained in the marketplace until a late hour, in case purchasers in need of wood happened to come.

The Sages taught:

This is

the mitzva

of lighting the

Hanukkah lamp:

a.

One lamp,

and through lighting it

a person and his household

fulfill the obligation, meaning all the members of the household.

b.

Those who beautify

the mitzvot light

one lamp

each night,

for each and every one

of the members of the household.

c.

Those who beautify the mitzva beyond the standard level:

each member of the household lights, and lights a number of lamps corresponding to the number of days.

And what is the manner of lighting according to those who beautify the mitzva beyond the standard level?

Beit Shammai say: On the first day

of Hanukkah,

he lights eight

lamps;

from this point onward,

each day,

he decreases and goes down

in the number of lamps [on the second day he lights seven, and so on].

And Beit Hillel say: On the first day

of Hanukkah,

he lights one; from this point onward, he increases progressively, [on the second day he lights two lamps, and so on].

Ulla said,

concerning the reason for the disagreement between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel:

two amoraim in the West disagreed about it,

and who are they?

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida.

One

of them

said: The reason of Beit Shammai

for lighting eight lamps on the first day is

corresponding to the days yet to come,

the days that will follow.

And the reason of Beit Hillel

for lighting one lamp on the first day is

corresponding to the days that have gone,

with the current day counted together with the days that have already passed.

And one

of them

said: The reason of Beit Shammai is corresponding to the bulls of the Festival,

for on the first day of Sukkot thirteen bulls were offered, and on each day of the intermediate days of the Festival the number of bulls was reduced, until on the seventh day seven bulls were offered. Likewise, in lighting the Hanukkah lamp, one decreases progressively, and on the final day one lights a single lamp.

And the reason of Beit Hillel

for increasing progressively is because

one rises in matters of sanctity and does not descend [this principle is derived from a verse in tractate Menaḥot 99a].

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: There were two elders in Sidon; one acted

lit

according

to the words of

Beit Shammai, and one acted according to the words of Beit Hillel.

The one

who acted according to the words of Beit Shammai

gave a reason for his position,

that it was

corresponding to the bulls of the Festival.

And the one

who acted according to the words of Beit Hillel

gave a reason for his position

because

one rises in matters of sanctity and does not descend.

The Sages taught: The Hanukkah lamp—

it is a mitzva to place it at the entrance of one’s house on the outside.

Rashi’s view is that one places it at the entrance of the house that opens onto the courtyard, whereas Tosafot’s view [in their commentary beginning “It is a mitzva”] is that one places it at the entrance to the courtyard; the Shulḥan Arukh ruled accordingly, section 671, subsection 5.

If he lived in an upper story

and had no possibility of placing it at the entrance to his courtyard—

he places it

inside,

at a window adjacent to the public domain.

And in a time of danger,

when the Persians decreed that no lamp might be lit except in their house of idolatry—

he places it on his table, and that suffices.

By doing so, he fulfills his obligation with regard to the mitzva.

Rava said:

One who lights a Hanukkah lamp in his home

must

also light

another lamp in order to use its light.

Rashi wrote that he lights it in order to create a distinction in the matter. [In the Bi’ur Halakha, section 671, subsection 5, Rashi’s intent is explained as follows: even if he does not wish to use its light, he must provide another lamp so that he has the ability to use the light, and thereby it will be apparent that the first lamp is the lamp of the mitzva.]

And if there is a bonfire

of fire—

he need not

light an additional lamp.

And if

this man

is an important person,

who does not ordinarily use the light of a bonfire,

even though there is a bonfire

in his home, he

must

light

another lamp

so that it will be apparent that one of them is the lamp of the mitzva.

What is Hanukkah?

For what miracle were the days of Hanukkah established?

As the Sages taught: On the twenty-fifth of

the month of

Kislev, the days of Hanukkah—

there are eight of them [they are eight days],

on which it is forbidden to eulogize

the dead [

and on which it is forbidden to fast]. [

The Gaon of Vilna did not have these words in his text.]

And this was the miracle:

When the Greeks entered the Temple,

the Sanctuary,

they rendered impure all the oils that

were

in the Temple.

And when the Hasmonean kingdom prevailed and defeated them, they searched and found only one flask of oil that had been placed

in a concealed place, and it was sealed

with the seal of the High Priest.

It was evident that they had not touched this flask of oil.

And

in that flask

there was not

a sufficient quantity of oil

to light

the menorah for

one day. And a miracle occurred with it:

they lit from it for eight days,

until olives could be crushed and pure oil produced. [Maimonides, Laws of Hanukkah, chapter 3].

The following year,

they established them and made them

these days

festival days—

with

the recitation of

Hallel, and

with the recitation of “For the miracles” in the blessing of

thanksgiving [Modim].

We learned there,

in tractate Bava Kamma:

A spark—

a spark

that emerges from beneath a hammer,

the heavy hammer with which smiths strike—

and it went out

the spark

and caused damage—

he is liable.

A camel that

is

laden with flax, and it passes through the public domain, and its flax enters a shop and catches fire from the shopkeeper’s lamp,

which was inside the shop,

and sets the building on fire,

the house—

the owner of the camel is liable

for payment of the damage, since he should not have loaded so much flax that it would enter the shop.

But if

the shopkeeper placed his lamp outside

and it ignited the flax on the camel—

the shopkeeper is liable

for the damage.

Rabbi Yehuda says: In the case of a Hanukkah lamp,

the law is that if the shopkeeper placed it outside, he is

exempt,

since he had permission to place it outside in order to publicize the mitzva.

Ravina said:

From the fact that one is exempt in the case of a Hanukkah lamp,

that is to say—

it is a mitzva to place the Hanukkah lamp within ten

handbreadths.

And this is how the inference is made:

If it enters your mind

that the mitzva is to place it

above ten

handbreadths,

let him say

the owner of the camel—the injured party—to the shopkeeper:

You should have placed

the lamp

above the

height of

the camel and its rider.

And we reject this:

Perhaps

in fact, as a matter of law, he could place it above ten handbreadths, but the Sages were concerned that

if it entailed excessive exertion

and made lighting difficult for him,

he might come to refrain from the mitzva.