Lighting Chanukah Candles

From Halachipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
A Chanukkiya lit on the eighth night


  1. In the time of the second Bet Hamikdash the Greek kings made decrees against the Jews in order to make them forget Torah and Judaism. They broke in the Bet Hamikdash and defiled it until Hashem had mercy on the Jews and saved them. The salvation came through the Chashmonaim who were victorious over the Greeks and served as Cohanim Gedolim. They returned to the Bet Hamikdash and could only find one pure flask of oil which was enough to light for only one day. A miracle occurred and it lasted 8 days. On the day that they found the flask, on the 25th of Kislev, the Rabbis established a holiday, 8 days of festivity and joy, called Chanuka. [1]

Mitzvah of Chanuka Candles

  1. The mitzvah to light candles is a very special and dear mitzvah. Even a poor person should rent or sell his clothing or hire himself out in order to get enough for at least one candle for every night. The Gabbai tzedaka (local charity distributor) needs to make sure that the poor have money for at least one candle every night. [2]
  2. The minimum requirement of candles is one candle per house every night. The practice is to do this mitzvah in the most beautified (Mehadrin) which means that one candle for every person in the house every night is lit. The best (Mehadrin Min HaMehadrin) way to fulfill this mitzvah is according to Sephardim, for one person per house to light one candle on the first night and to add another candle each night and according to Ashkenazim, for every person to light for themselves one candle on the first night and to add another candle each night. [3]

Getting benefit from the light of the candles

  1. It’s forbidden to get benefit from the light of the candles for the first half hour, even on minimal tasks like checking the value of a coin. [4]
  2. However a minimal task that’s for a mitzvah is permitted, but learning by the light of the candles isn’t considered a minimal task. [5]
  3. Therefore it’s the Minhag to light a Shamash so that if one does use the light of the candles it’ll be permitted because of the Shamash. [6]
  4. The Shamash should be placed slightly higher than the other candles or recognizable distant from the others. [7]
  5. Nowadays when we have electric lights if the lights are on some say one doesn’t need a Shamash and some say it’s still part of the Minhag. [8]

If done incorrectly

  1. If one missed lighting one day it can’t be made up and the next night one should light the number everyone else is lighting. [9]
  2. If one lit two candles on the first night, he fulfills his obligation and doesn’t have to relight the right number of candles. [10]

Placement of the Chanukia/Direction of Lighting

  1. [All left and right’s are for someone standing inside the house looking at the doorway.] The Chanukia should be placed within a tefach of the right side of the door, opposite the post with the mezuzah. The first night the candle should be placed on the right most side of the Chanukia, furthest from the door. The second night the two candles should be placed on the right most spots and be lit from left to right (the way English is written), moving your hand away from the door, always lighting the new candle first. [11]
  2. If there’s no Mezuzah on the door, the Chanukia should be put within a tefach of the left side of the door (where the mezuzah usually goes). The first night the candle should be placed on the right most side of the Chanukia, closest from the door. The second night the two candles should be placed on the right most spots and be lit from left to right (the way English is written), moving your hand towards the door, always lighting the new candle first. [12]
  3. If there’s a courtyard in front of a house it should be put by the doorway of the courtyard and not the doorway of house. But one who lives in an upper floor without a doorway to the public, should light by a window or porch facing the public. [13]
  4. In an apartment building some say that the stairwell is a courtyard and one should light at the entrance to the stairwell towards the public domain [14] while others say that nowadays we don’t use the stairwell like a courtyard thus light in the apartment itself. [15]
  5. Nowadays one doesn’t have to light a Chanukia for a door on a side of the house for which there is no Chanukia. [16]
  6. Nowadays many have the practice to light indoors even not when it’s dangerous to light outside. Still it should be put to the left of the door (opposite the mezuzah) within a tefach of door. However if there’s a window facing the public, one should light by the window. [Some are strict to light outside with a covering.] [17]
  7. Someone who lives in a yeshiva or college setting where one eats in a different building than he sleeps, some have the Minhag to light by the place he eats and some have Minhag to light where he sleeps. [18]
  8. One must light in the place where the Chanukia is going to stay. Thus, one shouldn’t light indoors and then move the Chanukia outside or light it in one’s hand and then put it down. If one did so, one should extinguish the candles and relight without a bracha. Consequently, a sick person should light while in bed and then have the Chanukia moved but rather should let another household member light. [19]

Windy place

  1. In a place where it’s windy (which would blow out the candle) one is allowed to light inside. Some are strict to light outside with a glass covering. However one should be careful to light with the glass covering on and not that after lighting one covers it with the glass. [20]
  2. One shouldn’t light in a place where it’s windy. If one did so and it gets blown out within a half hour one doesn’t fulfill one’s obligation, therefore one should relight without a Bracha. [21]
  3. If one lit in a windy area and the candles last a half hour so say that retroactively one fulfilled the mitzvah, while others say that one didn’t fulfill the mitzvah and should relight without a Bracha. [22]

Glass cases

  1. Some achronim say that one shouldn’t light with the glass case doors wide open when one lights and then close them after lighting if it’s a windy place, while most others argue that one may be lenient. [23]
  2. Having two Chanukiot in one case can be an issue of lacking recognition of the day of Chanuka and so one Chanukia should be raised so that the flames are seen separately. [24]

Heights of placement of Chanukia

  1. The Chanukia should be placed between 3 and 10 tefachim (between 24 and 80 centimeters) from the ground of the house. If it’s placed above 10 tefachim, one fulfilled the obligation. [25]
  2. If it’s above 20 amot (9.6 meters) one doesn’t fulfill the obligation and should extinguish the candle and relight it in the proper height without a bracha. [26]
  3. Similarly someone who lives an upper floor apartment, should light by the door of the apartment and if they want they can light at the window even if it’s above 20 amot. Some have the custom to light by the apartment building entrance. [27]
  4. The measurements are measured to the flame of the candle. [28]
  5. If one is lighting in a window, preferably the candles should be within 10 Tefachim from the floor, however, the there’s no issue of lighting in the window above 10 Tefachim. [29]
0 Rav Chaim Noeh Chazon Ish
3 Tefachim 24 cm 28.8 cm
10 Tefachim 80 cm 96 cm
20 Amot 9.6 meters 11.52 meters
  1. Some say that regarding this law one can follow the more lenient of the two measurements. [30]

Who’s Obligated?

  1. Women are obligated in Chanuka candles since they too were part of the miracle of Chanuka. Thus a man who is away traveling he should have his wife light at home for him to fulfill his obligation. Even if he will come that night later than tzet hakochavim (the night to light Chanuka candles), he should still have his wife light. Ashkenazim who have the Minhag that everyone in the household lights and they are able to light where they are should light without a bracha. [31]
  2. A deaf and mute, insane, or child not bar/bat-mitzvah isn’t obligated to light and so can’t fulfill the obligation of someone who is obligated. However a deaf who can speak is obligated and can fulfill the obligation of others. [32]
  3. A blind person is obligated in lighting. If he’s married, his wife should light for him, if he lives alone he should light. [33]
  4. Even though a child, who is the age of chinuch but not bar/bat mitzvah, can’t fulfill the obligation of others, the one making the bracha can light the first candle and then let the child light the other candles. However a child who isn’t at the age of chinuch, shouldn’t light any of the candles except for the Shamash. [34]
  5. A mourner in the first 7 days can light and make Brachot [however he shouldn’t light in shul on the first night because of the Shechianu, even in the 30 days of mourning or 12 months for a parent.] [35]
  6. A mourner on the first day is exempt as he is exempt from all mitzvoth and so he should have a household member who isn’t a mourner light with a bracha, if that’s not possible, he should have another person light without a bracha. [36]
  7. A convert can make all the Brachot and say “She’assa Nissim Le’avotenu” but if he wants can change it to say “She’assa Nissim LeYisrael”. [37]

Who should rely on the household’s lighting?

  1. A married woman should rely on her husband’s lighting. Unmarried girls who in still live at in their father’s home can rely on their father’s lighting even according to the Ashkenazic custom. If they want to light, Ashkenazim can light with a Bracha. [38]
  2. According to Sephardim, members of the household that are dependant on their parents fulfill their obligation with the one lighting of the household even if they aren’t home such as children in yeshiva or in the army that don’t sleep at home don’t light where they sleep. However, Ashkenazi Minhag is for single children to light themselves even at home and certainly when not sleeping at home. [39]
  3. A married man traveling should have his wife light for him at home and not make the Bracha of Sh’asa Nisim nor Sh’chianu even when he returns home. [40]

Should a guest light candles?

  1. A guest at a friend’s house, who doesn’t have anyone lighting for them at home, must chip in (a prutah’s worth) with the owner of the house for the Chanuka candles so that the owner will give him a portion of the candles, either with a kinyan or as a gift, [and the owner will add some oil for the guest] and will fulfill the obligation of the guest. According to Ashkenzim, if he has his own doorway (to outside) he should light by himself, and even if he doesn’t have his own doorway it’s preferable to light by himself. [41]
  2. A household member who is a guest in a friend’s house but have someone lighting for them at home, according to Sephardim may light but without a bracha, even if they have in mind not to fulfill their mitzvah with their house’s lighting. According to Ashkenazim, one should light by oneself and have what to rely on if they want make such as bracha. [42]
  3. A Sephardic household member who is exempt with the house’s lighting even if he is in Israel and his household is in America where they will only light many hours later. If one wants to light one can light at Tzet in Israel with a bracha. [43]
  4. A guest can intend not to join with the owner’s lighting and light for himself with a bracha. However if he is totally dependant on the house owner such as where one doesn’t pay for expenses or he only pays for some expenses but not for every need, according to Sephardim, he may not have intention to not to fulfill his obligation with the owner’s lighting, but he is allowed to light by himself without a bracha, but according to Ashkenazim he may intend not to be part of the owner’s lighting and light by himself with a bracha. [44]
  5. An older child who is independent of his parents or a son-in-law who come for Chanuka, according to Ashkenazim, should light for himself, but according to Sephardim should rely on the owner of the house and not by himself. [45]
  6. A Sephardic household member who is independent from his parents in that he doesn’t live at home, (or if he has no parents), should light on his own. However if he’s living in Yeshiva or college with other Jews he should intend to fulfill his obligation with the Yeshiva’s lighting or join with some friends and have them lighting for him. Thus they shouldn’t make a bracha on their own lighting. [46]
  7. A guest who is relying on the home owner and the home owner asks him to light, he can light for everyone with a bracha. [47]
  8. A guest of a motel or hotel which is just for guests and not a home owner, needs to light for himself (unless theirs is someone lighting for him at home). [48]
  9. Two people who live in a one apartment if they eat together and pay for the food together, they should light one set of candles (in which they both have a potion) and switch off with who should do the Bracha. If they pay for their own food separately even if they are family members they should light separately. [49]
  10. Someone who doesn’t have a house and isn’t a dependant of someone’s house, can’t light candles. If he eats at someone’s house, he can light without a bracha or join in the lighting of the owner (by paying for a portion of the candles). However he can make the Brachot HaRoeh for seeing the candles (She’assa Nisim and Shechianu on the first night). [50]
  11. If one is eating at someone’s house (even if it’s one’s parents) on Friday night Chanuka, and is going to sleep at home that night, should light at home after Plag HaMincha. [51]
  12. A guest on Chanuka according to Ashkenazim should light one’s own Chanukia. However there’s a dispute as to how long of a stay at someone’s house allows one to light there: some say one must be there for all 8 days, while some say that it’s enough to be there for 1 day. [52]
  13. Another option is to join with the owner of the house by giving a coin in order to acquire a portion in the candles. Some say one needs to mnake a קנין in order to acquire a partion of the candles, while others disagree. [53]The guest should hear the Brachot. [54]
  14. Otherwise, one can appoint a שליח to light for oneself at home. [55]

Brachot HaRoah (Seeing)

  1. Someone traveling all night in a car, train, plane, or boat and has no one lighting for him at home should preferably light there without a Bracha and make Brachot HaRoeh. [56]

Minimum Measurements

  1. The candles only need fuel to burn for a half hour. [57] If one doesn’t have enough for the each Hidur candle, the Hidur candles don’t need to burn for a half hour. [58]
  2. A person who is in doubt if his candles will last a half hour can nonetheless light with a bracha. [59]

Doing an activity before lighting candles


  1. When the time to light comes, before one lights, one can’t eat a meal (with a Kebetza of bread) before lighting, but a snack, fruit, or drink are allowed. Some are strict not to eat a half hour before the time to light. [60] For this law, cake has the same law as bread. [61]


  1. Once the time comes to light one can’t learn Torah. [62]
  2. Some allow one to Hilchot Chanuka because one won’t forget to light. [63]
  3. A regular shiur of Torah learning between Mincha and Maariv or after Maariv should continue on Chanuka even if it continues an hour after Tzet. When they finish they should announce that they should light candles. [64]
  4. The practice in Israel is that the Avrechim (Semicha students) and Kollel members leave their studies early to pray Mincha, Arvit and then light with their family. [65] However some hold that it’s preferable to appoint one’s wife to light at the proper time so as not to take away from the regular learning. If that’s not possible one should light after he finishes his regular schedule of learning. Nonetheless if the Avrechim plan on returning to learn at candle lighting then one can interrupt to light at the proper time. [66]


  1. Similarly, one may not go to sleep a half hour before the time of candle lighting unless one appoints someone to wake oneself. [67]

Other activities

  1. One make not begin a significant activity which take time, however just writing a note is permissible. [68]

If one began

  1. Even if one began before the time to light candles, one should stop whatever one’s doing when the time to light comes. [69]

Those who aren't lighting

  1. Some say that if a man is coming home late (an hour or more) after the time for lighting and is careful to light when he gets home, his wife and children are permitted to eat. [70] However, others disagree and hold that someone who isn’t lighting and will fulfill the mitzvah with someone else should also refrain from eating, working, or learning as above unless there’s a need in which case one can be lenient. [71]

Lighting Chanuka Candles in Shul

  1. The congregation should light candles between Mincha and Mariv even at Shkiah because the congregation would leave right after Mariv and there wouldn’t be Pirsume Nisa for the candles. [72]

The oils that are Kosher

  1. All oils are kosher for lighting candles and it’s preferable to light with olive oil because that was the oil used in the Bet HaMikdash and with it the miracle occurred. If one doesn’t have oil, one can use wax. Some specifically use wax candles because it burns brightly. [Propane is judged like wax candles.] [73]
  2. If one can’t afford to get olive oil for all of them one should get olive oil for the one of mitzvah and light the rest with other oil. If that’s not affordable, one should light the one of mitzvah with olive oil and the rest with wax. If that’s not affordable one should light all them with wax. It’s preferable to light every night with the number of that night with wax candles than to light one every night with olive oil. [74]
  3. Someone involved in sticking wax candles to the Chanukia and then finds oil, should switch to use oil. If one started the bracha on the wax candles one can’t switch to oil. [75]
  4. One can’t use an electric light (because it lacks oil and wick) or a gas flame (because it lacks a wick) for Chanuka candles. If one has nothing else one should turn it on without a bracha (whether one can get benefit from it, see later on).If one later gets a candle he should light with a bracha. [76]
  5. Oils that spoiled that are inedible are unfit, unless it’s inedible because it’s bitter and it’s not spoiled is fit just like wax which is fit even though it’s inedible. [77]
  6. All wicks and oils are kosher for Chanuka candles even the wicks and oils that are unfit for Shabbat candles such as wicks of cotton, hair or silk, and oils of castor oil or pitch (See Hilchot Shabbat Candles), which the wicks don’t draw well from the oil. [78]
  7. On Friday afternoon if one puts in the exact measure required, enough oil for a half hour after Tzet, he can use the unfit wicks and oils (wicks and oils unfit for Shabbat candles). However if he puts in a lot of oil to last longer than the half hour after Tzet, he may not use the unfit wicks and oils (wicks and oils unfit for Shabbat candles).The Shamash on Friday afternoon can’t be lit with the unfit wicks and oils. [79]
  8. Some have the Minhag to add some water to the oil as long as the wick is immersed in the oil so that it’s able to light. [80]
  9. One is allowed to light with oil of the Shemittah year. [81]
  10. Chanuka oil that was left under a bed should preferably not be used for Chanuka candles but if there’s no other oil available one can use that oil. [82]
  11. Oil which is inedible, according to most opinions is totally fit and permissible to be used for Chanuka candles, however, some say that it’s preferable to use edible oil. [83]

The wicks that are Kosher

  1. All wicks are Kosher for lighting candles and it’s preferable to light with cotton or linen wicks. [84]
  2. One doesn’t need to replace the wicks until it’s used up. Some specifically don’t because wicks already lit catch faster, but some replace them as a reminder of the wicks in the Bet HaMikdash. [85]
  3. A candle with two wicks counts for two candles. Nowadays when everyone lights according to the number of the night someone seeing a candle with two wicks will think it’s the second night and so it can’t be used for two people. One can be lenient nowadays to light on two sides of a chanukia for two people. [86]

Which Chanukia is Kosher and which is preferable

  1. One should beautify the mitzvah by using a nice Chanukia. The types of materails in order of their importance are:1)gold 2) silver 3)polished copper 4)red copper 5)iron 6)tin 7)lead 8)glass 9)wood 10)animal bone 11)glazed earthenware 12)unglazed earthenware that’s new 13)shell of a pomegranate 14)coconut shell 15)oak tree bark. [87]
  2. Unglazed earthenware that was used for lighting candles once shouldn’t be used again because it becomes old looking. However if there’s nothing else it can be cleaned out and reused. Glazed earthenware, glass, and metal don’t need to be cleaned in order to be reused. [88]
  3. The floating wick even though the wick is floating on the oil with wax one can use it Lechatchila. [89]
  4. A Chanukia bought from a goy doesn’t need a tevilah. [90]
  5. A vessel used to sample urine (for medical purposes) isn’t allowed to be used as a Chanukia but rather as the vessel holding the Shamash. [91]

Possible Chanukia arrangements

  1. One can fill a bowl with oil and surround the edge with wicks as long as it’s covered by a vessel so that the wicks stay separate in order not to appear like a bonfire. If it the candles are lit while covered each wick counts as another candle, if it’s not covered then all the wicks don’t even count for one candle. [92]
  2. If one lit without covering the bowl (with wicks surrounding the edge) one should extinguish the candles and relight without a bracha. [93]
  3. Even if one separates the wicks an Etzbah (2 centimeters), one doesn’t need to cover the candles. However, some say that one should cover it even if it’s separated. [94]
  4. A chanukia with branches in a circle with an etzbah separation between each candle are Kosher for lighting. [95]
  5. One shouldn’t arrange Chanuka candles in a circle (not in any permanent holders) since it looks like a bonfire. If one light this way one should relight without a bracha. If one separated the candles by an etzbah one doesn’t need to relight at all. [96]
  6. One shouldn’t light with wax candles attached to each other because it looks like a bonfire, rather they should be separated an etzbah (2 centimeters). [97]
  7. The candles should be set up in a line and not a zigzag. [98]
  8. The candles should be set up all at the same height level. [99]

The Brachot of Chanuka Candles

On the first night all three blessings are said. On all other nights only the first two are said [100]

  • ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להדליק נר (של) חנוכה
  • ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, שעשה נסים לאבותינו בימים ההם בזמן הזה
  • ברוך אתה ה' אלוקינו מלך העולם, שהחינו וקימנו והגענו לזמן הזה
  1. There are there Brachot on the first night: 1)Asher Kidishanu BeMitzvotav VeTzivanu Lehadlik Ner (Ashkenazim add: Shel) Chanuka. 2) SheAssa Nissim LeAvotenu Bayamim Hahem Bazman Hazeh. 3)SheHechiyanu Vekiyemanu Vehiygianu Lazman Hazeh. [101]
  2. If one forgot to say the Brachot and remembers after he finished lighting and before a half hour passed one can say “SheAssa Nissim” (and Shechiyanu on the first night) but not “Lehadlik Ner”. If one remembers before one finishes lighting the candles (on the 2nd day and on) one can make all the Brachot then and finish the lighting. [102]
  3. If one forgot to say Shechiyanu before lighting one can say it in the half hour after lighting. If one didn’t say it the first night one should say it the second night and so on. So too, if on the eighth night one forgot one can say it in the half hour after lighting. [103]
  4. After the half hour of lighting one can’t say the Brachot. [104]
  5. If someone had his wife or anyone else light for him the first night he fulfill his obligation of saying Shechiyanu and shouldn’t say it the next night. [105]

The extra oil and wicks

  1. One can add oil to the leftover oil and wick from the previous day and reuse it. If there’s leftover from the eighth day, it’s forbidden from benefit and should be burned in a separate bonfire. That only applies if the oil and wicks were leftover before the mitzvah was fulfilled, meaning that the candle went out within the half hour of mitzvah. However if the candles burnt for the half hour of mitzvah, the oil and wicks are permitted. Some hold that anything that put in the Chanukia is assumed to be set aside for the mitzvah and is forbidden. To satisfy all opinions one should stipulate when putting in the oil that only the oil for the half hour of mitzvah should set be aside for the mitzvah. [106]
  2. Extra oil in the container that wasn’t poured into the Chanukia or oil poured into the Chanukia that was never lit is permitted. [107]
  3. One who has forbidden oil should burn it and not keep it around until next Chanuka. Some have the Minhag to keep it until the burning of Chametz. [108]
  4. Even though one isn’t allowed to nullify a forbidden object Lechatchila, after the fact if forbidden oil was mixed with 60 times that amount of permitted oil, the forbidden oil is nullified. If some oil was already added, then one is permitted to add more permitted oil to nullify it. Some say that even in that case one can’t nullify a forbidden object Lechatchila. [109]
  5. Oil that was leftover after the 8th day of Chanuka can’t be used and must be burnt in a separate fire [110] or can be thrown out. [111] Some have the minhag to or together with one’s Biyur Chametz. [112]
  6. This only applies if the amount of oil was placed in the cup and it turned out that there was extra, however, if one originally filled the cups with extra oil it’s permissible. However, some are strict unless one made a stipulation that the extra oil is permissible. [113]
  7. Oil left in the container is totally permissible. [114]
  8. The wicks have the same halacha as the oil. [115]
  9. Oil leftover from one day and only the precise amount of oil was put in one may use it the next day even for only the additional candles. [116]

Lighting Chanuka candles in a non-Jewish city

  1. Someone in a city that’s totally not Jewish even if he has family lighting for him at home he should light with a bracha. [117]


  1. Shabbat 21b, Rambam Chanuka 3:1-3
  2. Rambam Chanuka 4:12, S”A 671:1. The Mishna (Pesachim 99b) which says a poor person can take from the Tamchui (the charity fund) for 4 cups of wine on pesach, the gemara explains is because of Pirsumeh Nisa, publicizing the miracle. Maggid Mishna (Chanuka 4:12) says from here Rambam learns all the more so is there publiczing the miracle by candles of Chanuka. The Lechem Mishna ibid argues the law of publicizing the miracle by Chanuka is just equal to the 4 cups of wine. Sh”t Kanaf Ranana O”C 84 explains the Miggid Mishna that Chanuka candles are more important since it’s the only way to publicize compared to pesach where there’s an entire seder.
  3. Shabbat 21b as understood by Sephardim and Ashkenazim. Rambam (Chanuka 4:1-2) rules that each night one adds one candle for each member of the household. [He adds that the Minhag of Spain is to only light add one candle every night per household.] So holds Rabbenu Yehonatan in name of Ran (Shabbat 21b), Piskei Riaz (Shabbat 2, Chanuka 5), Rif explained by Buir HaGra 671:4. However, Tosfot (Shabbat 21b D”H VeHaMehadrin) in name of the Ri writes that one should only have one increasing per household so that it’s recognizable what night of the Chanuka it is. So writes Mordechai (Shabbat 270) in name of the Ri, Meiri (Shabbat 21b) that such is the Minhag, Ran (ibid.) in name of Raah, Tur(671). Ritva (Shabbat 21b) brings both explanations of the Gemara. S”A 671:2 holds like Tosfot and Rama ibid. holds like Rambam. Interesting Points: The Taz 671:1 writes that here is a case where Ashkenazim follow Rambam and Sephardim follow Tosfot. Chemed Moshe 671:4 argues that the Rambam concludes so is the Minhag not like the ruling, meaning it’s an old practice even before his time. The Torat HaMoadim (Chanuka pg 18) brings the Rama in Darkei Moshe 671:1 who says the Ashkenazi practice goes even according to Tosfot since the candles are indoors and separate. Tzeddai Chem (Chanuka 9:4) argues that the Ashkenazic practice for each member of the household to light isn’t like the Rambam who says that one person lights for everyone according to the number of people. For this reason many challenge the Rama who quotes his ruling in name of the Rambam including Maamar Mordechai 671:4, Bet Halevi on Torah (Chanuka pg 69). Yet, the Sh”t Maharil 145, Sh”t Trumat Hadeshen 101, and Sh”t Mahari Mebrona 50 hold like the explanation held by the Rama and could be sources for his opinion. Also, the Alfasi Zuta (Shabbat 2 beginning) says that the Rama is following the idea of the Rambam to light according to the number of household members but in order to satisfy Tosfot’s issue of being recognizable, every person lights instead of one person lighting.
  4. Shabbat 22a brought by S”A 673:1 writes that it’s a disgrace to mitzvah to benefit from the candles. Sh”t Ginat Veradim (Began HaMelech 42) writes that the prohibition applies equally to the new candle of mitzvah and extra candles of Hidur. So rules Bear Hetiev 673:2, Sh”T Ketav Sofer O”C 133, and Simchat Yehuda (Masechet Soferim 20:6).
  5. Biur Halacha 673:1, quoted by Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 673).
  6. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 673)
  7. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 673)
  8. Rav Kanievsky (Sefer Yamei Hallel VeHodah 25 note 11) says that the Minhag applies even if there’s electric candles. Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach (Berchat Moshe; quoted by Halichot Yosef pg 319) says if there are electric lights one doesn’t need a Shamash.
  9. S”A 672:2. Siddur Rashi 316 pg 151 quotes Rabbenu Yitzchak Bar Yehuda who says that there’s no make up for a missed day, otherwise those who see will think you’re violating the words of the Rabbis. So writes the Tur 672. There’s a dispute whether this means that since it can’t be made up one doesn’t light the next night or one lights like the rest of the world. The Sh”t Maaseh Geonim (55 pg 43) quoting Rabbenu Yitzchak Bar Yehuda that the next night one lights like everyone else. (Thus, Rabbenu Yitzchak means not to light the amount of the night he missed with the amount of that night because that would look like he’s going against the Rabbis); So hold Mordechai 2:268 explained by Sh”t Maharil 28, Agudah (Shabbat 31), Roke’ach 226 pg 128, Shibolei Leket 186, and Pardes Hagadol 199. However, Sefer Minhagim in name of Meharar MeMerizberg writes that the next night one should light the number of candles you missed last night. [He understood Rabbenu Yitzchak quoted by the Tur that one can’t add 8 candles on the 9th night.] Darkei Moshe 672:3 holds like the Agudah and Rokeach against the Maharam.
  10. Sh”t HaElef Lecha Shlomo O”C 380 says adding to the number doesn’t ruin the mitzvah as the Rama 263 says by Shabbat candles. However, Sh”t Ohel Moshe 69 and Sh”t Mishna Sachir O”C 199 argue since he lit the wrong number someone seeing this will think he didn’t lit it for Chanuka candles just for light. Yet, the Pri Chadash 675 says one who extinguishes the candles fulfills the mitzvah since the candles are in a Chanukiya that’s only used for Chanuka it’s recognizable that he lit for Chanuka. Also, Eliya Raba 671:7 says the first night doesn’t need to illustrate the number of the nights. Sh”t Lehorot Natan 2:51, Sh”t Shraga HaMeir 4:73, 5:75(1), Sh”t Shevet Hakehati 1:202 hold like Sh”t HaElef Lecha Shlomo. Chazon Ovadiah (Mitzvah Hadlaka 6, pg 29) agrees and adds that one who repeats and makes a bracha is making a bracha levatala.
  11. S”A 676:5, Arizal (Shaar Kavanot pg 108c), Nagid VeMitzvah (26:72), Mahari Kolon 183, Mordechai (Shabbat 2:268), Maharil (quoted by the Magan Avraham 676:5), Trumat Hadeshen 106, and Bet Yosef 676 hold that one lights from left to right so that “all your turns are to the right”. However Levush and Taz (676:6) say if there’s a mezuzah one sets the first night’s candle on the left most side, closest to the door. The second night the candles are put in the left most spots and are always lit from right to left. So hold Maaseh Rav 232, Sh”t Panim Meirot 1:98, Sh”t Semach Tzedek O”C 67. However Pri HaChadash, Bear Sheva (Sotah 15b), Nezirut Shimshon (Sotah 15b), Sh”t Chatam Sofer O”C 187, Chazon Ovadiah (Chanuka pg 33) argue on the Levush and hold like S”A. A third approach is that of the Gra who says that instead of lighting the newest candle first one must light the same candle first every night. Thus if there’s a mezuzah one set up the candles closer to the door on the left side of the Chanukia and lit from left to right. Mishna Brurah 676:5 quotes the Bet Yosef and the Gra and concludes one can do like either one. However the follow hold like S”A against the Gra: Kovetz Hamoedim (Moriah pg 61), Evan Israel (9 pg 129a), Sadeh HaAretz O”C 3:33, Nehar Mitzrayim Chanuka 7, and Kaf HaChaim 676:31.
  12. S”A 671:7 rules if there’s no mezuzah the candles should be put on the left side where the mezuzah usually goes, so says Sefer HaManhig, Ravyah 843, Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:8) in name of Rabbenu Simcha, Mordechai (Shabbat 2:266) in name of Rabbenu Yakar, Or Zaruh (2:323) in name of Rabbenu Efraim, Sh”t Maharam MeRotenberg (defus prag 66), Likutim Mehilchot Amarchal 24b, Hagot Rabbenu Peretz to Smak 280, Ran (Shabbat 22a), Tur 671, and Sh”t Maharil 40 against the Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 3), Kol Bo 44, and Sefer HaMeorot (Shabbat 22a) who say even without a mezuzah it’s still put on the right. [Note to reader: the right and left used in this footnote is the reverse of the language found in the sources brought in this footnote because the sources are looking from the perspective of someone walking into the house with the mezuzah on his right, however the sources by the directions of lighting discuss it from the perspective of someone standing inside or outside (by the entrance) facing the public domain [for example: the newest candle is the one closer to the door and it’s lit first so that one’s hand is moving left to right so that “all your turns are to the right” (Bet Yosef)]. For conformity, the directions here are all set to the directions of lighting (which are more easily confused).]
  13. Rashi (Shabbat 21a D”H Mibachutz) says the chanukia isn’t put in the reshut harabim but in the courtyard. The Rashba and Ran explain this to mean that it should be put at the doorway to the house and not the doorway to the courtyard. So holds the Smag (Chanuka) in name of the Ri (not the same one as tosfot, see Bach 671:5), Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:30) in name of Ri, Riaz(Shabbat 21a), and Shiltei Giborim(Shabbat 21a). However Tosfot (Shabbat 21a D”H Mitzvah) writes it should be put outside the entrance to the courtyard. So holds Piskei Rid, Rashba, Tur, and S”A 671:5. Rashi (Shabbat 21b D”H im haya dar ba’aliya) writes that one living in an upper floor only puts it by the window if he has no place to put it in the courtyard (this fits with his opinion of putting it in the courtyard not on the entrance). Similarly, the Tur says one puts it by the window only if one doesn’t have a doorway to the public. Implying that if one has a courtyard or door facing the public, that’s preferable to a window. [However Bet Yosef 671:5 comments on the Tur that only if the door to the public or a entrance of a courtyard but if the doorway to the apartment goes into the house itself, putting it by the doorway to the public or courtyard won’t be recognizable that it belongs to the apartment and so it must be put in the window. Nonetheless, Torat HaMoadim 3:2 based on Ritva (Shabbat 21b) says that the Bet Yosef’s concern doesn’t apply to the stairwell because it’s known that all the tenants have rights to the stairwell an upper floor apartment can still put a chanukia there.]
  14. Maadei Shlomo pg 110, Halichot Shlomo 14:1, Shevut Yitzchak vol 5 pg 7 in name of Rav Elyashiv, Kol Bo Chanuka (pg 98) in name of the Griz and Rabbi Yosef Kahenmen
  15. Orchot Rabbenu (vol 3 pg 3) in name of the Chazon Ish (similar to Chazon Ish OC Eiruvin 65:52) and Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 198; Rav Ovadyah in Kol Torah 5725)
  16. Shabbat 23a Rav Huna says because of suspicion if a house has two doors (to the outside) he should light by both, and Rava explains that’s only if the doors are on separate sides. So holds Rambam (Chanuka 4:10), Tur and S”A 671:8. However nowadays one doesn’t have to light because of suspicion. So holds Sefer HaTruma 228, Smak 280, Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 13) in name of Rabbi Yehuda MeKorvin, Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:30) in name of Rabbenu Simcha, Sh”t HaRashba 1:541, Ritva (Shabbat 23a), Meiri, Mordechai (Shabbat 2:266), Sefer HaMeorot (Shabbat 23a), Shibolei HaLeket 185, Ohel Moed (Chanuka 5, Rama 671, Sh”t Maharshal, Hagot Maharikash, Pri Chadash, Sh”t Bet David O”C 472, Torat HaMoadim 3:8.
  17. Seemingly the only exemption to lighting outside is a time of danger as in Shabbat 21b. Rashi and Tosfot (D”H Ubeshat Sakanah) explain that it was outlawed by the king to light. Thus Or Zaruh 2:323 asks, now, when there isn’t danger, why don’t we light outside. However Itur 2 pg 114d, Shibolei Leket 185, and HaOhel Moed (Chanuka 5) say that once there was a Minhag not to light outside because of danger, the Minhag stayed in place. Another reason to be lenient is the Ritva (Shabbat 21b), and Rabbenu Perachya who say a prevention to light outside such as wind is also called “time of danger”. Similarly, Rabbenu Yerucham 9:1, Siddur Rav Amram Goan, Hilchot Kesuvot Min HaGoenim, Darkei Moshe 671:9, Bach 671e hold that since thieves come (which is also called “danger”), they would light inside. [Sh”t Imrei Noam 2:29, Sh”t Minchat Yitzchak 6:66 quotes Megilat Taanit 1 says because of fear of scoffers the practice is to light inside.] Nonetheless Meiri (Shabbat 21b), Tosfot (Shabbat 45a D”H Makmi) in name of Ri, Rid, Riaz, Ran, Pri Chadash implies from S”A 671:5 that a “danger” is when it’s forbidden to light (and not just a fear of thievery). Still Raavad, Rashba, Sefer Trumah, and Ritva (against the Rambam) hold that if one lights inside not at the time of danger one fulfills his obligation after the fact. Others who defend the practice to light inside include: Tzafnat Pane’ach (Chanuka 3:3), Yaskil Avdi O”C 7:46, and Torat HaMoadim 3:4. Mishna Brurah 671:35 writes [Sh”t Dvar Yehoshua 1:40 says nowadays one can only light indoors and it doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah to light outside. However Yalkut Yosef (Moadim 231-2) quotes Rav Ovadyah’s response to this that it’s better to light outside but one is allowed to light inside.]
  18. Torat HaMoadim 2:5. If there’s a cafeteria(place to eat) and dorms(place to sleep) in one building one can light wherever in the building there’s more Pirsume Nisa (Publicizing the miracle) such as the entrance to the cafeteria, in the cafeteria, entrance to the dorms, or in the dorms. If the cafeteria and dorm are separate building is a dispute of the Achronim sourced in the Sh”t 1:542 who says that if one eats daily at someone’s house he must join in the lighting at that house. So the Rama 677:1 rules the main place for the Chanuka candles is where he eats. So holds the Taz 677:2 and Leket Yoshar. However Sh”t Maharshal 85 says the place where one sleeps is primary. So holds Sefer Yosef Ometz Yuzfa 1071, Sh”t Rivivot Efarim in name of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe (Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe O”C 3:70(3), Y”D 3:14(5)), and Sh”t Minchat Yitzchak 7:48; Chazon Ish holds that the primary place is the place of eating but says as a stringency one should also light without a bracha by the place of sleeping.
  19. Shabbat 22b Rava’s statement, so rules Rambam (Chanuka 4:9), Tur and S”A (675:1). Pri Chadash says one shouldn’t make a bracha if one needs to light again, against Hagot Rabbi Akiva Eiger 675 who says to make a bracha. Because of Safek Brachot one shouldn’t make a bracha (in addition to the idea that perhaps one fulfills the mitzvah not it’s place if it’s recognizable that it’s lit for Chanuka- Sh”t Lev Chaim 3:146), so holds Torat HaMoadim 3:9 and Sh”t Hitorerut Teshuva 2:110. [Also, a sefek sefeka isn’t sufficient to allow a bracha- see Yechava Daat 5:21] Torat HaMoadim 3:9 quotes the ruling of a sick person from Sh”t Lev Chaim 3:146.
  20. Aruch HaShulchan 671:24 says our practice isn’t to light outside since in our areas it commonly rains, snows and there’s strong wind. Also the Rabbis didn’t impose such a burden of setting up a glass case for the Chanukia. Sh”t Shelit Yaavetz 149 writes that one should light outside with a glass covering, implying if there’s wind me’ikar hadin one doesn’t need to light outside. Torat HaMoadim Chanuka 3:3 requires with the glass covering on is because otherwise it’s like lighting a candle that can’t last a half hour which S”A 675:2 renders the lighting unfit even if more fuel is added later. So too Shiltei Giborim (Shabbat 21b), Piskei Riaz, Rivta, Rabbenu Perachya, Back 673, Magan Avraham 673:12, Taz 673e, Pri Chadash, and Eliyah Rabba 673:14 write that one can’t light in a place where the wind would blow it out. Mikrei Kodesh (Chanuka 17) writes that the Mahril Disken would light with the covering on so that at the time he lit he could leave it and it’d stay lit without closing the covering, however he defends the Minhag to light and then put on the cover.
  21. Mishna Brurah 673:25 writes that just like one shouldn’t light without sufficient amount of oil, one shouldn’t light in a place that’s windy. If one did so and the wind blows it out one should relight it without a Bracha.
  22. Sh”t Har Tzvi Siman 114 writes that if the wind doesn’t blow it out certainly one fulfills the obligation retroactively. Rav Shlomo Zalman in Halichot Shlomo (16:6 pg 301) agrees. However, Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Nassim Karlitz quoted in Kovetz Shemuot (Chanuka pg 123) who argue that since it wasn’t light properly even if it doesn’t get blown out one doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah and one should relight without a Bracha.
  23. The Maharal Diskin (quoted by Mikrei Kodesh siman 17 and Moadim UZmanim vol 2 siman 142) holds that one shouldn’t light with the glass case doors open because at the time of the lighting the candles have to able to burn for a half hour and in this case at the time of lighting they were in a windy place. So held the Griz (quoted by Piskei Teshuvot 673:5). However, Rav Chaim Zonenfeld in Sh”t Shelmat Chaim Siman 261 disagrees with the Maharal Diskin. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank in Sh”t Har Tzvi Siman 114 agrees with Rav Chaim Zonenfeld because one’s intention and completion of lighting was to close the doors. Rav Shternbach in Moadim UZmanim 2:142, Rav Shlomo Zalman in Minchat Shlomo 58:1 (and Halichot Shlomo 16:6), Rav Chaim Kanievsky in Taama DeKra Parshat Vayeshev, and Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 675:2) concur with the lenient position.
  24. Or Yisrael (Dardak pg 86), Kol MeHeichal (pg 520) in name of Rav Ovadyah Auerbach, and Or Yisrael (Blinsky pg 105)
  25. Shabbat 21b the statement of Ravina that it’s a mitzvah (preferable) to place it below ten; Ran (9b D”H Garsi) in name of Rabbenu Chananel and Rabbenu Yonah, Rashba (Shabbat 21b Amar Ravina), Rosh (Shabbat 2:5), Smag (Chanuka 250d), Smak (280,277), Tur and S”A 671:6 hold like Ravina even though the gemara questions him. Bet Yosef 671:6 says since the Rif and Rambam don’t mention this it means you can place it anywhere, but to fulfill everyone’s opinion one should put it below 10. Also Orchot Chaim pg 117d:3 and Kol Bo hold explicitly like Rambam and Rif that only after the fact can light under 10. [Moreover Seder Hayom and Gefen Poriah (Bava Kama 62b) that one doesn’t fulfill his obligation if less than 10.] The Bet Yosef brings the dispute of the Mordechai (Shabbat 266) who writes that since everyone lights indoors, one can light even above 10 and the Tur (671:6) who writes to place it within 10 not differentiating between indoors and outside. Tur 671:6 in name of Maharam MeRotenberg holds that one should place it above 3 tefachim. So holds Mordechai Shabbat 266, S”A 671:6. Birkat Yosef Yedid 3 pg 207, Sh”t Kinyan Torah 1:131(2) imply from Orchot Chaim that under three tefachim doesn’t fulfill the mitzvah. However most argue than if it’s lit less than 3, one still fulfills the obligation including. Yet, Pri Chadash 671, Pri Megadim A”A 671:6, Mishna Brurah 671:26, Kaf HaChaim 671:50, Torat HaMoadim 3:5, and Shaar Shlomo (51, pg 33d) who says someone on the road can even light on the ground.
  26. Shabbat 22a Rav says it can’t be above 20 amot. Tosfot (D”H Ner) says it can’t just be lowered since the mitzvah was already done incorrectly. Tur(671:6), Bach, Taz, Pri Chadash, Mishna Brurah (Shaar Tzion 671:33) says indoors it can be above 20 amot against the Rabbenu Yoel (Ravyah 843) and Rabbi Yitzchak Avuhav (quoted by the Bet Yosef). If one put it above 20 amot, Pri Chadash, Mishna Brurah 671:29 say to relight with a Bracha. Kaf Hachaim (671:53) limits the ruling of the Pri Chadash to only where one finished lighting and stopped thinking about it. However Chazon Ovadiah (Chanuka pg 35) and Torat HaMoadim 3:6 say to relight without a bracha because of the opinion of Rabbenu Yoel (Pri Megadim A”A 671:7), [and Hareri Kodesh who says that perhaps according to Meiri and Shiltot one should repeat Sh’assa Nissim].
  27. Ritva (Shabbat 21b D”H VeIm Dar) says someone living in an upper floor should light by the window that’s above 20 amot. Pri Chadash 671:6, Pri Megadim A”A 671:8, Machsit HaShekel 671:6 say to light it by the door of the apartment. Chazon Ovadiah (Chanuka pg 36) says that one living in an apartment on the fifth floor (just an example) should light inside his house by the door and if he wants he can light by the window that’s above 20 amot as it’s Pirsume Nisa for the household members and to those on the street according Rabbenu Yoel and for others in a building across the street at the same height (similar to Kol Bo Chanuka pg 99). The custom of lighting by the apartment entrance is sourced in halacha 17.
  28. Mishna Brurah (Shaar Tzion 671:33), Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 36b) say to measure from the flame of the candle like the Pri Megadim (M”Z 671:5) [However Leket Yosher (Chanuka pg 150) writes in name of a student of the Trumat HaDeshen that just the bottom has to be within 10 tefachim.]
  29. Mishna Brurah 671:27, Piskei Teshuvot 671:8
  30. Piskei Teshuvot 671:7
  31. S”A 565:5 says that women are obligated in Chanuka candles based on Shabbat 23a, Rambam (Chanuka 4:9), and Tur 565. Piskei Maharam Riketani (154) holds women can fulfill a man’s obligation on his behalf. So holds Rabbenu Yerucham 9:1, Rokeach Chanuka 226:3, Ritva and Meiri (Shabbat 23a, Megilah 4a), Maharil (Chanuka pg 407). Levush (675), Bach (675), Taz(675:4), Magan Avraham 675:4, Olot Shabbat 675:1, Pri Chadash 675:4, Eliyah Raba 675:6, Sh”t Shar Efraim 42, Shulchan Gavoha 675:6, Mor Ukesia 675:6, machzik Bracha 675:4, Mishna Brurah 675:9. Sh”t Yechava Daat 3:51 writes that since some rishonim and achronim hold one can only light at tzet hakochavim one should let his wife light at the right time and fulfill his obligation according to all opinions. The Yechava Daat holds like the Chaye Adam 154:33. Kaf Hachiam 676:25. Chaye Adam adds that Ashkenazim can light without a bracha. Interesting point: S”A 689:2 says a women can read the megillah to fulfill for a man his obligation of megillah, and some hold otherwise. [Bahag (quoted by Tosfot Megilah 4a, Erchin 3a) and Morchedai 4a in name of Ravyah (Megilah 569,843) hold women can’t fulfill the obligation of a man, but Rashi Erchin 3a, Or Zaruh 2:324, Rambam(Megilah 1), Rif (quoted by Sefer Eshkol 2:30) hold a women can fulfill obligation of a man]. However Smag (brought by Magan Avraham 589:5), Itur (Megilah 113d), Eshkol 2 pg 30 differentiate between Megilah which is like Torah reading but by Chanuka women can fulfill the man’s obligation according to everyone. Also Torat Moadim Chanuka pg 40 says the Behag only held a women can fulfill megilah for a man since a women’s obligation is derebanan and a man’s is from divrei kabalah (Ketuvim). Similarly, Sh”t Maharash Halevi O”C 24 says Chanuka isn’t an obligation on each person but on the household and so a women can fulfill it for a man. Thus even those who say by Megilah a woman can’t fulfill a man’s obligation agree by Chanuka.
  32. Shabbat 23a says a deaf, insane person, and child isn’t obligated. So holds Rambam (Chanuka 4:9), Tur and S”A 675:3. The Mishna Trumot 1:2 defines deaf in Talmud as deaf and mute, but someone just deaf is obligated like anyone else. So quotes Pri Megadim M”Z 670:5, Mishna Brurah 675:12, and Torat HaMoadim 2:19. There’s a dispute whether a child who is at the age of Chinuch can fulfill the obligation of an adult. Bet Yosef 675e quotes the Ran (Shabbat 23a) in name of the Itur (Chanuka pg 116a) that a child can fulfill the obligation of an adult. So writes the Shibolei HaLeket 185, Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 12). However Meiri writes that he disagrees with the Rabbis of Provincia who say a child at age of chinuch can fulfill the obligation of an adult. [Seemingly, this is the opinion of Tosfot (Megilah 19b concerning megilah) that a double derabanan (child only obligated on a chinuch level and it’s only a derabanan mitzvah) can’t fulfill the mitzvah of one obligated on level of rabanan (adult for a mitzvah derabanan). The Tur 689 writes that so is the opinion of the Bahag and Rosh. However Bet Yosef 53 in name of Sh”t HaRashba 1:239, and Raavad disagree with Tosfot.] S”A 675:3 says a child isn’t obligated to light but some permit “a child at age of chinuch to fulfill the obligation of others” Yet, it’s a dispute in the Achronim whether S”A meant it as “Setam and then Yesh Omerim” (anonymous and then a disagreeing opinion) in which case we hold like the anonymous opinion or that it’s not a dispute but the “some say” was just explaining the first line. Magan Avraham 689:4 (as understood by Pri Megadim A”A 689:4), Sh”t Zivchei Tzedek 3:41 say that S”A meant the “some say” is just explanatory. However, Yaavetz in Mor U’Kesia 689 understands S”A that we hold like the anonymous opinion. So holds Sh”t Kol Gadol 100, Chelko Shel Yedid pg 58b, Sh”t Olat Shmuel 105e, Pri Chadash 675:3, Ben Ish Chai Veyeshev 19, Mishna Brurah 675:13, and Torat HaMoadim 2:19.
  33. Sh”t Maharshal 76, Magan Avraham 675:4, Eliyah Raba 675:7 write that a blind is obligated and preferably should fulfill it through joining with other house members or his wife, otherwise they can light own their own.
  34. Levush 671, Yaavetz in Mor U’Kesia 671, and Ben Ish Chai Vayeshev 18 hold the making the bracha should light all the candles. However Sh”t Maharshal 85, Magan Avraham 671:11, Mishna Brurah 671:49, Ruach Chaim 671:3, and Torat HaMoadim 2:20 (he writes that his father Rav Ovadyah Yosef would hold his hands while lighting in order to satisfy all opinions).
  35. Sh”t Maharam Mintz 43, Sefer Mnhagim of Rav Yitzchak Tirna (Yom Kippur 155), Taz 671:8 write that a mourner shouldn’t light in shul the first night because of Shechiyanu. The Nodea Benyehuda Tanina O”C 141 writes that at home one can light even the first night with shechiyanu. So holds Machzik Bracha 671:10, Birkei Yosef Y”D 205:14m,Bet HaRoeh pg 59, Chatom Sofer on S”A 671, Chaye Adam 154:17, Sh”t Binyan Olan O”C 35, Sh”t Olat Shmuel 106, Sh”t Machane Chaim Y”D 2:61, Sh”t Rav Poalim O”C 4:36, Siddur Bet Ovad pf 160b:2, Kemach Solet 137d, Shulchan Lechem HaPanim 676e, Mishna Brurah 671:44, and Kaf HaChaim 671:73.
  36. Eliyah Raba 670:19 writes one should have someone else light and answer amen. However, Erech HaShulchan 670:3 writes one should light without a bracha. Kaf Hachaim 670:20 explains that this is only a dispute if the first-day mourner is alone, otherwise his wife or a household member can fulfill for him his obligation. Pri Megadim M”Z 670:5 agrees with Eliyah Raba but argues that one can’t answer amen as in S”A Y”D 341 where we follow the anonymous opinion that a first-day mourner doesn’t answer amen. Torat HaMoadim 2:24 agrees with Erech HaShulchan.
  37. Sh”t Rambam (Pasya edition 158, Kisei Nirdamim Mehuderet Fredman 42, Mehuderet Belav 293) writes that a convert can say all of the Brachot like every Jew because he converted he becomes a descendant of Avraham and part of the Jewish people for all their history, however if he wants to change the brachot that relate to the Jewish history such as Yetsiat Mitzrayim, and Chanuka. So quotes Sh”t Rashba 7:54, Hagot Mordechai Megilah 1:786, Sh”t Ridvaz 5:520; Torat HaMoadim 2:25 says this is also the opinion of S”A based on S”A O”C 53:19, 199:9.
  38. A married women is exempt by her husband because “Ishto Kegufo Dami”(a husband and wife are like one person). So writes the Maharshal 88, Knesset Hagedolah 671, Mateh Moshe 982, Eliya Raba 671:3, Machasit Hashekel 675:4. Mishna Brurah 675:9 quotes this in name of Sh”t Olot Shmeul 105 and says if women want they can light with a Bracha like any mitzvah for which one’s exempt according to the Ashkenazi Minhag. Mishmeret Shalom 48 says since a married woman doesn’t light and relies on her husband, her daughters also don’t light as derech eretz. Similarly, Chiddushei Chatom Sofer (Shabbat 21b D”H Vehamehadrin) writes since the practice used to be to light outside it wasn’t Derech Eretz for women to light if her husband is already lighting and since then the Minhag hasn’t changed. Ashel Avraham Mebustatesh 675:3 says according to kabbalah women don’t light (unless they have to). However it seems as the minhag is that Ashkenzic unmarried girls also light.
  39. S”A and Tur 677:1, based on Shabbat 23a, and Rambam (Chanuka 4:11) rule that a dependant is exempt with his household’s lighting. However, Rambam, Tur, and S”A add that if he has his own household, he should light so people don’t suspect him of not observing Chanuka. However Sh”t Rashba 1:541, Orchot Chaim Chanuka 13, Smak 280, Sefer Trumah 228, Hagot Maimon Chanuka 4:30, Ritva (Shabbat 23a), Mordechai (Shabbat 2:226), Ohel Moed (Chanuka) Shibolei HaLeket 185 say that there’s no suspicion of not lighting by a extra doorway nowadays when we light indoors. Sefer HaTrumah (229 Introduction) says clearly students that learn outside their home don’t light if they have someone lighting for them at home. So write Magan Avraham 677:1, Sh”t Yechava Daat 6:43, and Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 144-151). Meiri Shabbat 23a and Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 14) say an older and married child should light for themselves.
  40. S”A 676:3. There’s a dispute in the Rishonim whether one makes a bracha for seeing Chanuka candles if he is fulfilling his obligation with that which they light for him at home. Rashba (Shabbat 23a), Sefer HaHashlamah (Shabbat 23a) in name of Rabbi Asher MeLunil, Smag(Chanuka 250d), Ran(10b D”H Amar Rav Chiya), Tur 676:3, Magid Mishna (Chanuka 3:4) in name of Itur (2 pg 117c), Rosh (Shabbat 8) imply that one doesn’t make a bracha if one is fulfilling his obligation through his household. However Rambam (Chanuka 3:4), Magid Mishna in name of some Geonim, Ravyah 3:843, Riaz (Shabbat 23a), Meiri, Sefer HaMeorot (Shabbat 23a), Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 9) hold that one can make a Bracha even if one is fulfilling his obligation with his house’s lighting. S”A rules 676:3 that one doesn’t make Bracha HaRoeh if is fulfilling his obligation at home. Against the S”A the following rule that one should make the Brachot HaRoeh: Sh”t Maharshal 85, Bach 676:3 (in name of Rif, Rambam, Smak, Rosh, and Aguda), Eliyah Raba Pri Chadash, Biur HaGra, Chaye Adam 154:33. However Shirei Knesset HaGedola 677:3, Taz 676:4, Magan Avraham 676:1, Shulchan Gavoha 676:5, Birkei Yosef 676:3, Mishna Brurah 676:6, and Torat HaMoadim 2:15 rule that one doesn’t make a bracha because of Safek Bracha.
  41. S”A 677:1 says that a guest fulfills his obligation with a portion of the oil, based on Shabbat 23a, Rambam Chanuka 4:11, Tur 677. S”A 677:1 based on Rif 23a rules because of suspicion one should light in a second doorway. However Rama says that nowadays we don’t have this suspicion because we light indoors. So agrees many achronim including Sh”t Maharshal 85, see Sh”t Yechava Daat 6:43. Thus a guest shouldn’t need to light for himself. However Sh”t Mahariv (Likutim 31), (quoted by Magan Avraham 677:3, Mishna Brurah 677:7) says since there’s no suspicion everyone lights indoors and even the guest. Kaf Hachaim adds that the Sh”t HaRashba 1:542 one needs a portion of the oil and the wicks. Yad Aharon 677, Sh”t Ginat Veradim (Gan HaMelech 40), Pri Megadim (A”A 677:1), Mishna Brurah 677:3 rule that any amount is sufficient against Eliyah Rabba(677:1,2) who says that one must chip in the amount of oil to burn for a half hour. Sh”t HaRashba 1:542, Magan Avraham 677:1, Pri Chadash 677:1, Eliyah Raba 677:2, Derech HaChaim 677:2, Mishna Brurah 677:3 say that the owner can give him the portion even as a gift. Agudah (Shabbat 2:32), Bach 677, Magan Avraham 677:1, say that the owner should add some oil because of the guest. Pri Megadim and Derech Hachaim rule it’s enough the owner add a little bit against the Eliyah Raba who says the owner should add the amount the guest gave and Machasit HaShekel who says the owner should add an half hour’s worth.
  42. There’s a dispute whether one can have in mind not to fulfill his obligation with his house’s lighting. Sh”t Trumat HaDeshen 101, Sh”t Sh”t Maharil 145, Agur 1036, Rama 677 hold one can have intent not to be exempt and since there’s a doubt whether his house will light with him in mind he can make a bracha for himself. So agree the Levush (677:1), Olat Shabbat 677:1, Taz 677:1, Magan Avraham 677:9, Eliyah Rabba 677:4, Sh”t Tevuot Shemesh O”C 7. However Bet Yosef 677 says one can’t rely on the Trumat HaDeshen to make an unnecessary Bracha. So hold Sh”t Maharshal 85, Pri Chadash 677:1, Mateh Moshe 983, Sh”t Zera Emet 1:97, Chaye Adam 154:33, Mishna Brurah 677:16 say that it’s better one doesn’t make a bracha. That applies for Ashkenazim. However for Sephardim who always rely on the house’s lighting can’t have in mind not to fulfill your obligation. Knesset Hagedolah understands Bet Yosef as it’s not forbidden as Bracha Levatala but just an issue of Bracha Sh’eina Tzaricha; however the Birkei Yosef 677, Maamer Mordechai 677:5 argue that shouldn’t make such a bracha; so hold Sh”t Sadeh Eretz O”C 42, Sh”t Chesed LeAvraham Alkelai O”C 24, Sh”t Zivchei Tzedek 2:37, Sh”t Yechava Daat 6:43 (who says that he personally asked Rav Ezra Attiah this question), and Torat HaMoadim 2:6.
  43. Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 231), Torat HaMoadim 2:7, and Sh”t Mishna Halachot 6:119 explain that according to many that hold the obligation is only on the household, he fulfill his obligation, but the Bach who holds there’s an obligation on each individual, may also hold that one should light in his timezone, but concludes that he fulfill his obligation with his household even according to the Bach. However Sh”t Minchat Yitzchak 7:46 says because of the doubt one should have in mind not to fulfill his obligation with his house’s lighting. However because of the dispute between posikim about whether that will enable one to make a bracha (see previous footnote), one shouldn’t have in mind not to fulfill his obligation with his house’s lighting. Chazon Ovadyah pg 150 and Pri HaAretz 1:9 pg 6d say if one wants, one can light with a bracha at Tzet in Israel because his family didn’t light for him in America yet.
  44. Rabbenu Chananel (Shabbat 23b), Tur 677, Meiri (Shabbat 23a), Itur (2 Chanuka pg 116c), Ran (Pesachim 6b) imply that one is allowed to intend not to be part of the owner’s lighting and light by oneself. However Darkei Moshe 677:2 quotes the Mahari (Yalkutim 31), Sh”t Maharil (145e), Mishna Brurah 677:3 who say it’s preferable for a guest to light for himself. However for Sephardim since some hold that he is included in the household members who are exempt with the owner’s lighting, one shouldn’t light independently because of Safek Brachot. So holds Torat Moadim 2:12.
  45. See previous footnote.
  46. Since he isn’t exempt from his house’s lighting he must light on his own. However, Sh”t Ginat Veradim says the rule that a guest must chip in for the Chanuka candle expenses to fulfill his obligation (S”A 677:1) only applies to a guest who pays for all his expenses like food and board, but a student in Yeshiva or College who can rely on them for all his needs and doesn’t account for every expense, doesn’t need to chip in for the Chanuka candles since they definitely allow him a portion of the candles. So holds Yad Aharon, Shulchan Gavoha, Kiseh Eliayahu, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 263:9, Kaf Hachaim 677:3, Sh”t Yechava Daat 6:43, and Torat HaMoadim 2:8 (who says he personally asked his father, Rav Ovadyah Yosef). On the other hand, Pri Megadim A”A 677:3 and Mishna Brurah 677:4 disagree with the Ginat Veradim and hold any guest needs to chip in for the Chanuka candles. See Sh”t Bet David O”C 472, Sh”t Chesed LeAlafim Alkelai O”C 24, Sh”t Zivchai Tzedek 2:27, Sh”t Rav Poalim 2:50, Sh”t Mishnat Halachot 7:87.
  47. Torat HaMoadim 2:13 quoting his father, Rav Ovadiah, based on the fact that one can appoint a Shaliach to light for him and all the more so if the Shaliah is a household member. So holds Rav Elyashiv (Kuntres Halichot VeHanhagot, quoted in Halichot Yosef pg 244), Sefer Chanuka of Rav Kenievsky 13:14b.
  48. Torat HaMoadim 2:14 says a hotel guest doesn’t have the laws of a guest at his friend’s house because he’s not living with the owner of the house and he’s renting his own room. So holds the Chovat Hadar 39. Implied from Piskei Riaz (Shabbat 23a), Piskei Rid (Shabbat 23a), and Shebolei HaLeket 185 that there’s an obligation on a renter even if it’s a just a room in a house.
  49. Sefer Pardes Gadol 199e, Sh”t Maaseh Geonim 44, and Shiboeli HaLeket 185 bring a dispute between Rabbenu David who hold that two people living in one house should light separately and Rabbotenu who said that they can light together. Torat Hamoadim 2:17 explains that this dispute concerns two people who have separate funds for food because otherwise it’s untenable why Rabbenu David requires separate lighting, however if they didn’t separate the cost of food everyone agrees that they can light together. Magid Mishna (Chanuka 4:4), Pri Chadash 677:1, Sh”t Shaarei Yehoshua O”C 7:4 agree with Rabbenu David. However, Sefer HaTrumah 229, Eliyahu Zuta 671:6 in name of Tosfot, Levush 677:3, Pri Megamdim A”A 678:3, and Ben Ish Chai Vayeshev 17 agree with Rabbotenu. Mishna Brurah in Biur Halacha (677:1 D”H Imo) quotes this dispute and doesn’t rule on it. Torat HaMoadim 2:17 advises that since everyone agrees that one can light separately and it’s dispute whether one can light together one should light separately to satisfy all opinions.
  50. Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe Y”D 3:14(5) based on Rashi (23a D”H HaRoeh) and Torat HaMoadim 2:18 based on Tosfot (Sukkah 46a D”H HaRoeh) rule that someone who doesn’t have a house doesn’t light and can only make Brachot HaRoah. [It seems, Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 15:29 holds one should light even if he doesn’t have a house.] Bach 677 D”H “U’Mah Shekatav HaRosh” implies if not for suspicion one can light in the place he ate. However Taz 677:2 argues that one can not light in the place he ate. Thus one can only light without a Bracha (Safek Brachot Lehakel).
  51. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 672:11)
  52. Biur Halacha quotes the Pri Chadash who gives the example of a guest who stays in a home for all 8 days of chanuka. Rav Elyashiv (Shevut Yitzchak Chanuka pg 110) holds that one needs to be there 8 days in order to have some connection to that house in order to light there. [See Rav Shachter at who also holds this.] Rav Wosner (Piksei Shemuot pg 136), Rav Shternbuch (Sh”t Teshuvot VeHanhagot 1:391), and Rav Shlomo Zalman (Halichot Shlomo 14:18, 19) hold that one only needs to be there for one day in order to light there.
  53. Shaar HaTzion 677:9, Piskei Teshuvot 677, Peninei Halacha pg 18
  54. Mishna Brurah 677:4
  55. Shevut Yitchak pg 110, Mishna Brurah 677:14
  56. Rashi 23a D”H HaRoah says one only makes Brachot Haroah when on a boat. So quotes in name of Rashi, Machsor Vitri pg 201, Itur (Chanuka 2 pg 117c), Smag (Chanuka), Smak (280), Ravyah 3:843, Or Zaruah 2:325, Tosfot Rid(Shabbat 23a), and Rosh (Shabbat 2:8). So rules Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe in Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe Y”D 3:14(5). However Sh”t Maharsham 5:144 writes only in an unroofed boat one can’t light but in a train one should light. So rules Rav Tzvi Peasch Frank in Mikra’eh Kodesh (Chanuka 18e), Rav Ovadyah Yosef (Kol Sinai Kislev 5725), Aruch HaShulchan 677:5, Sh”t Mishna Halachot 7:86, and Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 15:29 (he says one should light even if he’s in an unroofed boat); Torat Hamoadim 2:18 says since there’s a safek for Rashi’s opinion one shouldn’t make the Bracha but can make Brachot HaRoeh.
  57. Shabbat 21b says the time of Tichle Regel is when the Tarmodeans (merchants) leave, which the Rif says is about a half hour. Rambam (Chanuka 4:5) and Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 15) writes it’s a half hour or (a little) more. The accepted opinion is a half hour. So writes Rosh (2:3, Rabben Yerucham 9:1, Meiri, S”A 672:2, Mishna Brurah 672:1 (who is strict to satisfy all opinions to light by Shekiah and have it last a half hour past Tzet), and Torat HaMoadim 4:5. Some say in name of the Griz that since the Gemara sets the ending time for candles as when people leave the marketplace, nowadays when many people stay at the marketplace late into the night one should have to light longer than a half hour. However, Chazon Ovadiah pg 66, Sh”t Mishna Halachot 4 pg 79, and Sh”t Or Letzion 44 argue that the measure set by Chazal (a half hour) hasn’t changed because of the practice of our time. However, Avodot VeHanagot LeBet Brisk says that the Griz himself challenged that idea when he heard it from another Rabbi in Brisk, yet he lit candles that lasted for very long only as a hiddur mitzvah. Also Yomin DeChanuka and Leket Yoshar say there’s a hiddur mitzvah to light for longer than a half hour.
  58. Magan Avraham 671:1
  59. Smag in name of the Ri, Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:2), Ravyah (843 pg 579) in name of Rabbenu Tam hold that no minimum measure is needed (the gemara’s two explanation of ‘Tichleh Regel Min HaShuk’ argue and we hold the first explanation). Similarly, Hilchot and Minhagei Maharash in name of Rimzei HaRosh (quoted by Darkei Moshe 672:1), Piskei Tosfot (Shabbat 89), Leket Yoshar pg 151, Shiltei Giborim(Shabbat 9a:5), Taharat Mayim Shuirei Tahara 8:9, Sh”t Chochavei Yitzchak 1:5(3), Sh”t Bear Tzvi 31 that nowadays when we don’t light for Parsumei Nisa of the public, we don’t need a minimum measure. Thus we have a Safek Safeka(double doubt) perhaps no minimum measure is needed and perhaps even if the measure is nessecary, the candle will last the minimum measure. Chazon Ovadiah (Chanuka pg 67) says if one wants to make a bracha, he can make a bracha with this Safek Sefaka. For more about Safek Safaka BeBrachot see Sh”t Yachave Daat 5:21 (the footnote), Otzrot Yosef 4:3, and Sh”t Chazon Ovadiah 48 pg 866.
  60. Sh”t Maharshal 85, Yosef Ometz Yuzfa 1066, magan Avraham 672:5, Eliyah Raba and Pri Chadash write that one can’t eat before one lights. Machasit HaShekel and Mishna Brurah (Shaar Tzion 672:14) say one should be strict not to eat a half hour before. Maharshal quotes Bach 672 who says that even Rabbenu Yonah who says concerning Bedikat Chametz that one doesn’t have to stop a meal that began when it was permitted would agree by lighting Chanuka candles that are a passing mitzvah, one should stop a meal when the time to light arrives. So Ben Ish Chai (Vayeshev 7) and Sh”t Seridei Esh 2:43 hold that one should interrupt the meal against Sh”t Bet Efraim O”C 63 pg 110:2 who permits continuing. Chazon Ovadiah pg 68 writes that a snack not a Kebetsah just like eating before megilah (Sh”t Yabea Omer O”C 9:67).
  61. Ashel Avraham 431 quoted by Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 672:3)
  62. Sh”t Marharshal 85, Bach 672 D”H Upasak, Bear Heteiv 672:10, Knesset Hagedolah (Hagot HaTur), Taz (672:1, Magan Avraham 672:5, Chaye Adam 154:20, and Emek Bracha 71 write that learning is also forbidden when the time for lighting comes against the Erech HaShulchan 672:2. Chazon Ovadiah pg 68, and Sh”t Elef HaMagen 15 write one shouldn’t be strict to stop a half hour early because of Bitul Torah as the Achronim say by Bitul Chametz (Mishna Brurah 431:7). Halichot Yosef pg 254 says this is implied from the Maharshal, Bach, and Chaye Adam but not the Machasit HaShekel. However Doleh UMashkeh of Rav Kenievsky, and Kuntres Piskei Shmuot pg 86 say not to learn even a half hour before the time.
  63. Orchot Rabbenu Chanuka 3:51 brings proof from S”A 275:7 that one can learn Bameh Madlikin by the light of the fire, but is unsure whether one needs to appoint a person to remind you to light. Similarly, Sh”t Mekadesh Yisrael (Chanuka 23) who brings a proof from Pesachim 11a that someone involved in Bedika won’t eat the Chametz.
  64. Torat HaMoadim 4:7, Yalkut Yosef (Moadim pg 211), Mekor Chaim 672, Pekudat Elazar 672 pg 62d, Ner Mitzvah pg 28, Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 73), and Machzik Bracha 672 hold one should delay lighting for Torah of the many against Noheg KeSoan Yosef (Chanuka 5 pg 185). Since one can light with a bracha even after ‘Tichle Regel’ (S”A 672:2) even though it sounds like it’s Bedieved, because of Bitul Torah of a congregation it’s Lechatchila to light later. The issue of not learning when the time comes for lighting is only so that one doesn’t forget to light but a congregation won’t forget and will remind each other. Chazon Ovadyah brings proof from Meiri and Sefer Meorot on Shabbat 21b who write that the Yeshivot in France would continue learning and only light when they finished learning half-way into the night. [Similar idea by Bedikat Chametz that permits it after the time comes is found in Sh”t Maharanach 2:79, Knesset Hagedolah 431, Olat Shabbat 431:2, Shulchan Gavoha 431:6, and Shulchan Aruch HaRav 431. Even though Kesef Mishna says in name of Rambam that a shiur shouldn’t take place after the time for Bedika, Chatam Sofer (Pesachim 431:6) says Kesef Mishna was referring to learning at home but if it was a shiur in shul it’s permitted.]
  65. Chazon Ovadyah pg 75 testifies to this practice. So writes Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach in Halichot Shlomo pg 296 and it’s written about him that he would get angry at Avrechim who continued learning and have their wives light at the appropriate time.
  66. Some hold (Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 672:8), Rav Hershel Schachter in YU) based on the Meiri and Sefer Meorot on Shabbat 21b who write that the Yeshivot in France would continue learning and only light when they finished learning half-way into the night. Thus since S”A 671:1 says that lechatchila one should light at Tzet and bedieved one can light all night, because of the issue of Bitul Torah of Rabim one shouldn’t interrupt learning to light at the proper time. Nonethless, Chazon Ovadyah defends the practice (to interrupt to light with their family) because the Avrechim are concerned with Bitul Torah and will learn also at home, and can tell their family about Chanuka when they light.
  67. Piskei Shemuot pg 99
  68. Mishna Brurah 672:10, Piskei Shemuot pg 97
  69. Mishna Brurah 672:10
  70. Chazon Ovadiah pg 68, (quotes Sh”t Nachlat Tzvi Y”D 262 concerning Brit Milah) allows the children and wife to eat.
  71. Piskei Teshuvot 672:7. However Sh”t Besel HaChochma 4:58, Halichot Shlomo, and Rav Kanievsky (quoted by Halichot Yosef pg 260) say if it’s the Minhag for women not to eat a meal before the lighting. In response, Chazon Ovadiah rules that if there’s not a known Minhag, then one doesn’t have to wait. Similarly, Rav Yacov Kamenetsky in Emet LeYacov 676 says according to the Ashkenaz Minhag, if the children want to eat they can light for themselves.
  72. Rashba (Shabbat 21b) says that if one wants he can light at Shkiah because there’s also Pirsume Nisa then. Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 15), Ritva and Ran on Shabbat 21b. Bach 672 says in Shul the Shaliach Tzibbur can light at Shkiah. Sh”t Shev Yacov 22 pg 28a says it’s established to light between Mincha and Mariv (and so says Avudraham 54d) and the reason is that if they light after Mariv the whole congregation would leave. Sh”t Zivchai Tzedek (O”C 2:29,3:112 pg 213) writes that that was the Minhag of Bagdad based on the Yesh Omerim of S”A 672:2. So rules Chazon Ovadyah pg 69 and records that such is the Minhag Yerushalayim. Sh”t Shraga HaMeir 7:44 says that if the congregation forgot to light in between Mincha and Mariv they should light before Alenu so there’s a minyan still there. See also Yeraim 102e.
  73. Shabbat 21b brings a dispute whether the not kosher wicks and fuels of Shabbat candles are Kosher or not for Chanuka candles. Rambam (Chanuka 4:6), Tur, and S”A 673:1 rule that they are Kosher for Chanuka. Tosfot (Shabbat 23a), Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 7), Roke’ach 226, Kol Bo 44, Manhig, Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:5), Meiri (Shabbat 21a,23a), and Mordechai 268 in name of Maharam hold that all oils are Kosher for Chanuka and olive oil is the best. Rama 673:1 rules based on the practice of the Maharil that olive oil is the best. There’s 4 opinions about using wax candles: 1) Sefer Minhagim of Rav Yitzchak Tirna 144, Darkei Moshe 673:1 in name of Rabbi Avraham of Prag, Levush 673:2 and Mateh Moshe 990 writes the wax is equal to olive oil. 2)Chaye Adam 154:8 and Pri Megadim A”A 676:5 seem to equate wax with other oils. 3) Meiri 21a, Mahari MeBruna 39, Maharshal 85, Sh”t Chacham Tzvi 45, Mishna Brurah 673:4 say any oil is preferable to wax. 4) Mor Ukesiah 673 and Ner Mitzvah of the Maharal disqualify wax altogether. Concerning propane see Torat HaMoadim 5:1
  74. Sh”t Shevut Yacov 2:31, Bear Hetev 673:1, Moed Kol Chai 27:55 allow one to light one candle of olive oil and the rest of other oils. Sh”t Shaar Efraim 39, Eliyah Raba 673:2, Yad Aharon (Hagot bet Yosef), and Yeshuot Yacov 673:2 say not to light with one candle olive oil and the rest wax. However this implies that one can light with one candle of olive oil and the rest other oils (so says the Mishna Brurah (Shaar Tzion 673:1, Kol Sinai (kislev 5725)). However Bear Hetev, Shaarei Teshuva (673:1), Siddur Bet Ovad 27, and Moed Kol Chai understand the Shaar Efraim that even that’s forbidden. Birkei Yosef 673:2, Mateh Yehuda (Shevet Yehuda 35d) and Pri Megadim A”A 676e rule leniently allowing oil with wax. Thus Torat HaMoadim 5:2 rules to use oil with wax only if oil with oil is not possible. Chaye Adam 154:24, Sh”t Binyan Olam O”C 34, Mishna Brurah 671:7, and Torat HaMoadim 5:2 rule that it’s better to light according to the number of the night than to use olive oil.
  75. Sh”t Shevut Yacov 1:37 says once one sticks the wax candles to the Chanukia one began the mitzvah and shouldn’t change to oil. Sh”t Chacham Tzvi 45 argues that that isn’t called starting the mitzvah. Sh”t Shevut Yacov defends himself in teshuva 2:30 and agrees even though one started the mitzvah one doesn’t have to change to oil but can if he wants to be strict. Most of the Achronim hold like the Chacham Tzvi including:Sh”t Shaar Yosef 8, Birkei Yosef 673:3, Sh”t Yad Eliyahu Melublin 42, Sh”t Tiferet Yosef O”C 36, Sh”t Nachalat Binyamin O”C 132, Sh”t Shelat Shalom (Kama 113), and Kol Sinai (Kislev 5725). Shaarei Teshuva 673:1 and Aruch HaShulchan 673:6 say that once one begins the bracha one can’t change to oil at all.
  76. Rav Ovadyah Yosef in Sh”t Yacheve Daat 4:38, Yabea Omer O”C 2:17(12),3:35, 10:54(19), Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 93), Sh”t Bet Yitzchak Y”D 120, doesn’t allow electric or gas lights. Rav Shlomo Zalman Aurbach in Halichot Shlomo (Moadim 283), and Rav Elyashiv in Kovetz Teshuvot 3:103 say if there’s nothing else available if the lights are set up so it’s recognizable that it’s Chanuka candles one can light (and seemingly make a bracha). Gas: Pitchei Sharim (Shabbat 21a) and Sh”t Yad HaLevi O”C 116 forbid the use of gas bulbs. Sh”t Yam Hagadol 32 allows gas but not electric lights.[Atret Zekenim 673 quotes Maharal of Prague who forbids even wax because the miracle happened with oil.] Electric: Ashel Avrham Nemark (Shabbat 22a), Sh”t Mayim Chaim Mashash 279, Or Chadash 5665 pg 36, Sh”t Ohel Yitzchak Posek in name of Rabbi Yachanon Fershel, and Sh”t Kochavei Yitzchak 5-8 allow electric lights. However, Sh”t Levushei Mordechai Winkler (Talita O”C 59, Mehudra Batra 19), Sh”t Har Tzvi O”C 2:114, Sh”t Bear Moshe 6:59, Sh”t Ohel Yitzchak Posek 3, Sh”t Darkei Shalom Leiter 63(5), Pedukat Elazar 23, Sh”t Eliyahu Kalsakin 63, Sh”t Dvar Eliyahu 63, Sh”t Mishpatei Uziel O”C 1:7(2), Sh”t Mahargash 2:107, Kaf HaChaim 673:19, Sh”t Mishnat Sachir 2:203, Even Yisrael 9 pg 127b, Sh”t Yashkil Avdi O”C 2:9(8), 3:17,Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 1:20(12), and Sh”t Shevet Hakehati 3:199 forbid the use of electric lights.
  77. S”A 154:12 if a mouse is found in the oil and it makes it spoiled it can’t be used to light in the Shul. Knesset Hagedolah extends this halacha to all candles of mitzvah. Pri Megadim A”A 154:19, M”Z 154:10, Erech Hashulchan Y”D 104:10, Mishna Brurah 673:3 say this law explicitly by Chanuka. By lighting in a shul, Magan Avraham 154:15, Olot Tamid 154:15, Ben Ish Chai (Vayeshev 12) say that spoiling that makes it inedible is unfit but if it’s just bitter it’s fit.
  78. Shabbat 21a brings a dispute in the Amoraim. We hold that these wicks and oils are permitted for Chanuka. It’s only a potential issue on Friday afternoon and even then it’s permitted since we are not afraid that on Shabbat you’ll fix the wick (to draw better) because the Chanuka candles are forbidden to benefit from their light and if they go out one donesn’t have to relight them. Rambam (Chanuka 4:6), Tur and S”A 673:1.
  79. Meiri(Shabbat 21b), Sh”t Rashba 1:170, Bet Yosef 673, Rama 673:1 say this difference by Friday afternoon. S”A 672:2 rules that if the oil lasts longer than the required half hour it’s permitted for benfit. Thus there’s an issue that one will fix the wick to draw better and violate Shabbat. So writes Bach 673, Pri Chadash 673, Eliyah Raba 673:5, Pri Megadim M”Z 673:2, and Mishna Brurah 673:6. So too, say the Bach 673, Shaarei Knesset Hagedolah 673:5, Magan Avraham 673:1, Eliyah Raba 673:3, and Pri Chadash 673, the Shamash can’t be lit with unfit wicks and oils because it’s permitted for benefit and there’s an issue of fixing it to improve it.
  80. Yafeh Lelev 2, 671:2.
  81. Rav Mordechai Eliyahu in Techumin (Vol 21 pg 11-15)
  82. Piskei Teshuvot 663:5
  83. Piskei Teshuvot 673:5, Shevut Yitzchak (vol 5) in name of Rav Elyashiv
  84. S”A 673:1 says all wicks are kosher based on Shabbat 21b, Rambam (Chanuka 4:6), and Tur 673. Chaye Adam 154:8, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 139:4, Mishna Brurah 673:2 and Kaf HaChaim 673:3 say that it’s preferable to use cotton or linen wicks.
  85. Masechet Soferim 20:4, Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 6), Shibolei HaLeket 185, Rabbi David Avudraham in name of Rashi (Seder Tefilat Chanuka), Tur 677 and S”A 673:4 say that wicks can be reused until they’re used up. Orchot Chaim 5, Kol Bo 44, Ohel Moed (Chanuka 2), Meiri (Shabbat 21a says that it’s just a Hidur), Leket Yosher (Chanuka pg 152), Darkei Moshe 673:6 says that it’s the practice to use new wicks. Levush 673 and Mishna Brurah 673:31 say that reusing the wicks is better because it lights faster.
  86. Shabbat 23b says that a candle with two wicks can count for two people. Magan Avraham 673:2 says it’s not used nowadays for 2 people because everyone lights according to the number of the night. Chaye Adam 154:11 and Mishna Brurah 673:12 are lenient by two sides of a Chanukia. [The cases to which it applies: Rashi explains that it applies to those who do the Mehadrin and light per person in the house. So explains the Rabbenu Chananel, Ritva, Ravyah 3:843, Itur 2 Chanuka pg 116d, Or Zaruh 2:326, and Shibolei HaLeket 185.However Tosfot (Shabbat 21b D“H Mitzvah) explains that it refers to 2 people with a common front courtyard. So explains Rabbenu Yerucham 9:1, and Ran. Magid Mishna (Chanuka 4:4) quotes the case of Rashi, Tosfot and adds also the cases of 2 people who live in one house who split their funds for food, and 2 houses with doorways within a Tefach. Tur 673:3 writes that it can count for 2 candles on the second night and on. Bet Yosef explains that the Tur was excluding the case of Rashi because he holds that Mahadrin Min Mahadrin is done with one per house independent on the number of people in the house. Eliyah Raba 673:2 implies from the Tur that lighting for two people with one candle won’t work.]
  87. Chesed LeAvraham (2:58 pg 25b), Sh”t Sadeh HaAretz O”C 41, Ikrei HaDaat 35:11, Sadei Chemed (Chanuka 7), Kaf HaChaim 673:60 and Torat HaMoadim 5:16 record this list of importance.
  88. Masechet Soferim 20:3 says one can’t use an old vessel, if there’s nothing else one can clean it out and reuse it. Mordechai 2:268 in name of Maharam, Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:1), Tur 673, Likutim MeHilchot Amarchal 24b, Shibolei Leket 185, Kol Bo44, and S”A 673:3 say that a metal vessel doesn’t get the status of an old vessel. Torat HaMoadim 5:17 adds glass and glazed earthenware to the list of vessels that don’t get the status of an old vessel.
  89. Yalkut Yosef (kitzur Shulchan Aruch 673:3), Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 8:157, Sh”t Lehorot Natan 6:45, Halichot Shlomo pg 285.
  90. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 671:16)
  91. Sh”t Kol Gadol 92 and brought down by Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 671:17)
  92. Shabbat 23b explains that a bowl with wicks needs to be covered to look like candles and not a bonfire. Rambam (Chanuka 4:4), Tur, S”A 671:4, Sh”t Ginat Veradim (Gan Hamelech 151), Yad Aharon (671 Hagot Tur), Pri Megadim (A”A 671:3), and Mishna Brurah 671 bring down this Halacha.
  93. Pri Chadash 671 and Piskei Moshe (Chanuka 3:4) quotes the above halacha (S”A 671:4) and says if one did light without a cover one should relight with a bracha. However, Kaf Hachaim 671:26, Sh”t Yabea Omer 4:52(5,6) and Torat HaMoadim 5:21 say since at the time the first candle was lit the mitzvah was fulfilled even though later on it became a bonfire it’s like lighting in an area where there’s a lot of wind (in which case according to some opinions one fulfills the mitzvah) and thus one should just relight without a bracha (Safek Brachot LeHakel). Perhaps that’s why the rest of the achronim (besides the Pri Chadash) don’t say that law that one should relight with a bracha implying that one should just relight without a bracha. Against Yabea Omer
  94. Sefer HaItur (Chanuka 2:116d) (quoted by Shibolei Haleket 185, Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 18), Kol Bo 44, Meiri and Ran (Shabbat 23b)) holds if they are separated and not covered the wicks don’t appear to be a bonfire. However the Tur 671 and Ritva (Shabbat 23b) argue that one still needs to cover the wicks. Bet Yosef answers the tur’s question on the Sefer HaItur. Nonetheless, Meiri and Sh”t Maharshal 85 say according to the Sefer HaItur if it’s not covered it can only count as one candle against the Pri Chadash who says it can count for as many candles as there are wicks. Torat Hamoadim 5:22 rules to be strict because it’s a dispute in the rishonim. Pri Megadim (M”Z 671:2), Mekor Chaim (671:4) and Piskei Moshe (Chanuka pg 74) say that the opinion of S”A is like the Tur. However Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 124) says that we hold like the Itur because that’s the majority of the rishonim.
  95. Sh”t Trumat HaDeshen 105 allowed circular Chanukia’s with permanent holders if there’s a separation between candles. So rules Rama 671:4. Mishna Brurah 673:18 explains in name of the Buir HaGra that they need to be separated by an eztbah and have a separate holder. See at length Torat Hamoadim 15:24 and Chazon Ovadyah pg 124.
  96. Rabbenu Peretz (Hagot Smak 280) and Rama 671:4 says that one shouldn’t arrange the candles in a circle. Piskei Moshe (Chanuka 3:6) says one relights without a bracha because of the Pri Chadash 671:4 who say one fulfills his obligation even if it’s in a circle [see similar idea in Torat HaMoadim 5:21]. Piskei Moshe 3:6 rules if one separated the candles an etzbah one doesn’t need to relight because of a Sefek Sefeka.
  97. Or Zaruh 326 says not to light attached wax candles. Darkei Moshe 671:2, Marahi Vil (Dinin VeHalachot 65), and Rama 671:4 bring down this law. Magan Avraham 671:4, Eliyah Raba 671:8, Chaye Adam 154:10 and Mishna Brurah 671:19 say it even applies to attaching 2 candles. Pri Chadash 671:4 argues that it’s okay that the candles are attached because it looks light a torch and not a bonfire. [However, Sefer Eshkol 21 and Maharal in Ner mitzvah say not to use a torch (of wax).] Pri Medagim A”A 671:4 says the candles can be separated just a little bit against the Mishna Brurah 671:18 in the name of Eliyah Raba that they should be separated by an eztbah.
  98. Maharil(Chanuka pg 405), Darkei Moshe 671:2, Rama 671:4, and Mateh Moshe 988 hold one should align them in a line. However Pri Megadim A”A 671:3 says since the Rama left out part of this halacha he meant to arrange it in a line rather than a circle but a zigzag is okay.
  99. Chaye Adam 154:10 and Torat HaMoadim 5:23 says to set them up at the same height. However, Mahari MeBruna 39, Sharei Knesset Hagedolah (Hagot Bet Yosef 673:1) and Eliyah Raba that the candle should specifically be set up so that each new candle is higher than the next.
  100. Shulkhan Arukh Orach Chayim 676:1-2
  101. S”A 676:1 writes the first bracha without the word shel. So is the opinion of the Arizal (Shaar Kavanot pg 108d), Pri Chadash, and Gra (Maaseh Rav 231). However Ashkenazim add the word Shel based on our girsa of the Gemara, Rif and Rambam. Clearly, if a Sephardi said it with the word Shel he fulfills his obligation (Chazon Ovadyah pg 125).
  102. Sh”t Rabbenu Avraham Ben HaRambam 83 pg 122, Shulchan Gavoha 676:3, and Sh”t Demeshk Eliezer Y”D 47 write that after one lights one can’t make the bracha of Lehadlik Ner against Sefer Pardes (Rabbenu Asher Ben Chaim pg 66) who says one can say it as long as the candles are burning. Sh”t Halachot Ketanot 1:3 and Yad Aharon (Hagot Tur 676) say that one can make all the Brachot as long as one didn’t finish lighting all the candles of Hidur. Sh”t Rabbi Akiva Eiger (Mehudra Tanina 13) writes that if one remembers before one finishes one can make all the Brachot but if one only remembers after he finishes lighting he can’t make Lehadlik Ner just like Brachot HaRoeh(S”A676:3). So rules Mishna Brurah 676:4, Ben Ish Chaim Vayeshev 10, and Sh”t Chatav Sofer O”C 135.Torat HaMoadim 6:9 adds that since we learn the after lighting one can still make the bracha of SheAssa Nisim from Brachot HaRoeh it only applies to the first half hour after one sees the candles as by Brachot HaRoeh.
  103. Shibolei HaLeket 186 and Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 10) quote a Teshuvat Hagoanim to which Rabbenu Yishaya says that one can say Shechiyanu any day after the first when he remembers. Piskei Rid (Shabbat 23a) explains it means one can only make the bracha at the time of the lighting. However, Bach 676 in name of the Maharash says not to say Shechiyanu the second night. Nonetheless, Meiri (Shabbat 23a) and Riaz (23a), also write that one lights Shechiyanu the first night one lights. So holds Sh”t Maharam (Prague Edition 57), Tur 676 in name of the Rosh and S”A 676:1.
  104. Levush 676, Pri Chadash 676:1, Sh”t Sadeh HaAretz O”C 38, Birkei Yosef 692:1, and Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:190 hold that one can only make the Shechiyanu at the time of the lighting. However, Yavetz in Mor Ukesiah 692, Sh”T Mahari Molcho 78, Sh”t Zera Emet 1:96, and Taharat Mayim (Shuirei Tahara 8:3) hold it can be said any time during Chanuka. Nonetheless, Mishna Brurah (676:2 and Shar Tzion 676:3), and Torat HaMoadim 6:12 say that because of a Safek Brachot one doesn’t make Brachot past the time of lighting. Taharat Mayim implies that by SheAssa Nissim one can say it anytime against the Mor Ukesiah who says that SheAssa Nissim can only be said over the candles. Sh”t Yechave Daat 2:77 says because of Safek Brachot one doesn’t say SheAssa Nissim not over candles.
  105. Bach 676 says that his wife’s lighting with Brachot doesn’t exempt him from Shechiyanu. So says Eliyah Raba 676:5. Torat HaMoadim 6:13 explain that this is the Bach according to his opinion that one who has someone lighting for him at home makes Brachot HaRoah; however since we hold (S”A 676:3) that if one has someone lighting for home doesn’t make Brachot HaRoah here too, one fulfills Shechiyanu with his wife’s lighting. So rules Sharei Knesset Hagedolah 676:2, Magan Avraham 676:2, Pri Megadim A”A 676:2, Mishna Brurah 676:7, and Kaf HaChaim 676:26. Sh”t Yabea Omer O”C 4:50 (4-5), 6:42(3-4) holds that even by Shechiyanu we apply Safek Brachot LeHakel.
  106. Midrash Tanchuma (Naso 29) says one can use oil from one day to the next but after the eighth day one has to burn the extra oil. Shiltot (Siman 27 Shielta 2), Pesikta Rabati 3 pg 22b, Tosfot (Shabbat 44a D”H Shebaner), Smag, Smak 280, Mordechai (Shabbat 265-6), Roke’ach 226, Sefer Eshkol (2 Chanuka pg 20), Rabbenu Yerucham 9:1, Rabbi David Avudraham (Tefilat Chanuka) and Ohel Moad (Chaunka 2) quote this midrash as halacha. Bet Yosef asks on the Tur 677:4 and Rosh(Shabbat 2:9) who quote this as halacha but also hold the opinion (Tur 672:1-2 and Rosh Shabbat 3) that if the candle lasts more than the required half hour it’s permitted to extinguish it or benefit from it. The Ran (9a D”H Iy Nami) clearly saw these two opinions as contradictory as he comments that the Rif 9a says one can benefits from the candle after the half hour argues on the Geonim who say that the oil is forbidden for benefit after the 8th day. [So it seems from Ramban, Rashba and Ritva (Shabbat 21a).] However Bet Yosef says it can’t be contradictory because the Tur rules like both and that the Tur and Rosh put these topics in very different simanim. Rather Bet Yosef explains that in Tur 672 the case was when more than the required oil was added and so it’s permitted after the required time but 677 is a case where only the required oil was added and so the extra oil is set aside for the mitzvah and is forbidden. The same difference is clear in the Hagot Maimon (Chanuka 4:4), Mordechai 266, and Sefer Eshkol (2 Chanuka pg 20). S”A 677:4 rules like Tur and Rosh (and the Rif, Rambam and Shiltot according to his answer) that the required amount of oil would become forbidden but the oil more than that is permitted. Sh”t Maharshal 85, Darkei Moshe 676:5, and Taz 672:1 agree to the S”A. Bet Yosef quoted the Mahari Ahuvhav as a second answer that the oil is only permitted if one specifically set aside the required amount for the mitzvah but Stam(without any declaration) the extra oil is forbidden. Bach, Pri Chadash 677, Knesset Hagedolah agree with this second answer. Magan Avraham 677:6, Eliyah Raba 677:2, Chaye Adam 154:31, Mishna Brurah 672:7, 677:18 and Torat HaMoadim 5:25 say that one can hold like S”A but it’s preferable to stipulate clearly that it’s permitted to satisfy the opinion of the Bach. [Piskei Rid and Riaz(Shabbat 22a) and Rabbenu Yishaya Harishon (Shababt 45a) give a third answer that only on Chanuka it’s permitted and afterwards it’s forbidden.]
  107. According to the opinions in the last halacha that extra oil that was lit is permitted certainly permit in our case. And even the opinions that forbid extra oil that lit in our case may permit because it was only set aside for the mitzvah and never used. The Kaf HaChaim 677:28 in name of Berot Mayim 27 that extra oil in the container is permitted. So says Ikrei HaDaat 35:32, Biur Halacha 677 (D”H HaTzarich), and Torat HaMoadim 5:26. [Sh”t Bet Av P”C 98 says that originally Peni Yehuda forbad it and then retracted.] Olot Shabbat 672 based on the Rama says one shouldn’t use oil that was put in the Chanukia and not lit. However Sh”t Mahari MeBruna 51, Sharei Knesset HaGedolah 673:8, Magan Avraham 673:8, Eliyah Raba 673:11, Erech Hashulchan 672:5, Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 160) hold it’s not forbidden because it’s just designated but not set aside specifically for that purpose. Seemingly a stipulation should permit it according to all opinions as in the case where the extra oil after it was lit for a half hour is permitted with a stipulation (See Mishna Brurah 677:28). Torat HaMoadim points out that for Sephardim it’s certainly permitted because S”A disagrees with Rama that was the basis for the Olot Shabbat.
  108. Tur 677 in name of Maharam MeRotenburg says not to keep it until next Chanuka because someone may come to use the forbidden oil. Brought down by the Achronim including Mishna Brurah 677:19, and Torat HaMoadim 5:27. Halichot Yosef pg 499 writes that the Minhag Balza is to use it for burning chametz.
  109. See Chazon Ovadyah (Chanuka pg 160-6) and Torat HaMoadim 5:28 at length.
  110. S”A 677:4
  111. Piskei Shemuot pg 135 in name of Rav Chaim Kanievsky
  112. Piskei Teshuvot 677:9
  113. Mishna Brurah 677:18
  114. Biur Halacha D”H HaTzarich
  115. Piskei Teshuvot 677:9
  116. Piskei Shemuot pg 134 in name of Rav Nassim Karlitz
  117. S”A 677:3 writes “some say to light with a bracha when in a city that totally not Jewish” based on Orchot Chaim (Chanuka 13,18) and Mordechai 267. So writes Sh”t She’erit Yosef 73e. Pri Chadash 677:3 argue that one shouldn’t rely on this to make a bracha since it’s not an obligation [just like the Bet Yosef 677:1 argued against the Trumat Hadeshen 101 who says that a guest who was married was allowed to light on his own for Hiddur Mitzvah because, says the Bet Yosef, one shouldn’t rely on this to make an unnecessary bracha.] Buir HaGra 677:3 argues similarly. So rules the Mishna Brurah 677:14. On the other hand, Chazon Ovadyah pg 158-60 says that the Bet Yosef 677:3 only quotes the Orchot Chaim and Mordechai without anyone who argues and then rules that way in S”A implying that no one disagrees. The difference between the a guest and this traveler is as the Mamer Mordechai 677:4 explains that the guest can’t light if there’s already a Pirsume Nisa and he’s fulfilled his obligation with his wife’s lighting, but a traveler has an obligation of Pirsume Nisa (just like in lighting in Shul) even if his wife is lighting because no one around is lighting. So holds the Shulchan Gavoha 677:5 (and that so was the Minhag of Selanica), Chasidei David Chasan pg 61b, Chelko Shel Yedid pg 48b, Sh”t Besamim Rosh 343, Chazon Ovadyah, and Moed Kol Chai 27:49. Why did S”A begin the halacha with words “some say”? Mamer Mordechai says it’s because S”A was unsure about this. Yet, Chazon Ovadyah responds that the S”A was intending to the opinion of the Meiri (who argues on the Orchot Chaim and Mordechai).