2. Question: Why are you allowed to
add permissible wood to muktzah wood into an oven on Yom Tov as a permissible
means of burning the wood and cooking with its heat but there is an opinion in
the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 677:4) that if oil already used for the
Chanukah menorah got mixed up less than 60 times its amount in regular oil you
cannot add more oil to nullify it?
The Shulchan Aruch In Orach Chaim 507:2 says that one may add wood on top of
muktza wood on Yom Tov to burn them in an oven because it is permissible to
purposefully nullify a rabbinic prohibition which can be fixed as long as one
does not get direct benefit from it when it is burning up.
B. The Chanukah oil is also rabbinic and some do permit purposefully adding more oil in order to nullify it and use it for whatever purpose you want like a light source. (See Mishna Berura 677:4:20.)
Answer: The Mishna Berura (507:2:8) says the reason why the other opinions don’t permit nullifying the oil is because in this circumstance you will be getting benefit from the light of the fire in the candle while the oil or wax is still in existence but by the wood the benefit of heating up the oven isn’t coming from the heat of the wood until after the fire burns it up.
Question: Why aren’t we strict by
Shabbos candles to not light from one candle to another just as we are
stringent to not light Chanukah candles from one candle to another?
The Rema in Orach Chaim 674:1 says we have a custom to be strict by Chanukah
candles to not light them from one candle to another since the main mitzvah is
with one candle and the rest aren’t totally for the mitzvah (rather only to
glorify the mitzvah.)
Halachically one only needs one candle for Shabbos candles we light at least
two as a reminder of Shamor vizachor, keeping and remembering the Shabbos which
refers to the negative and positive mitzvos associated with Shabbos.
Shabbos candles were enacted for Shalom Bayis so it would be easy to see in the
house and make Shabbos more enjoyable.
D. One can light from one candle to another if there is an equal level of mitzvah for example two roommates on the first night of Chanukah can each light from each other’s candle.
Answer: Each Shabbos candle makes it brighter in the room and is more directly adding to the mitzvah of delighting in Shabbos so they each have equal Mitzvah status and can light one from the other even though it is enough with one. But by Chanukah there is nothing integrally being enhanced to the mitzvah by each extra candle it is just a way to beautify the mitzvah more by lighting an additional candle each day therefore one shouldn’t light from one candle to the other (See Dirshu footnote 7.)
Question: Why was it considered accepting Shabbos by mistake in a case of
a congregation that didn’t get a shofar until a few minutes before sunset and
they had davened maariv early and they can blow the minimal amount of shofar
blasts but once one lit Shabbos candles before lighting Chanukah candles by
accident it is not considered a mistake and he cannot light candles anymore by
A. The scenario of the shofar
could be if Rosh HaShana was Thursday/Friday and the shul did not have a
shofar. They sent someone to retrieve a shofar from a few towns over and he got
delayed and was not showing up. Late Friday afternoon they essentially gave up
and davened Kabbalah Shabbos and maariv early sometime between plag hamincha
and sunset. Then the guy came with the shofar. The Mishna Berura (600:7) says
that if there is no expert shofar blower who has not taken on Shabbos to blow
then one who already accepted Shabbos can blow the minimal amount without a
blessing. The Taz there says this is because they accepted Shabbos by mistake.
B. Accepting Shabbos early is essentially making a vow.
Answer: The answer is found in the Responsa Beis Shearim 3:93 in the name of his Rebbe, Rav Pearls who said that the difference is that the obligation for the mitzvah by shofar already existed when they brought in Shabbos and therefore accepting Shabbos was like a vow said by mistake which does not need to be disavowed. But there is no obligation of Chanukah candles until the night time so when she lit Shabbos candles she was not obligated in Chanukah candles yet, if so then even accepting Shabbos was like making a vow by mistake nevertheless it was a mistake that just materialized after the vow was made so it needs a special annulment with an excuse and regret in front of 3 or a sage therefore Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach adds that at that point it is better just to ask someone else to light for you. (See Dirshu footnote 5 here.)
- Question: Why can a woman ask someone to light Chanukah candles for her if
she forgot and lit Shabbos candles first but she can’t ask someone to make an
eruv tavshilin for her if she forgot and already lit Yom Tov candles?
A. The Mishna Berura
(679:1:1) says, if a woman is lighting Chanukah candles, since the custom is
that we assume she accepts Shabbos as soon as she lights Shabbos candles, then
she won’t be able to light Chanukah candles herself, rather she should ask
someone else to light for her and he will say the first blessing for her but
she can say the second blessing herself.
B. One can’t light fires
C. There was a decree made that one makes an eruv tavshilin as a means to start cooking for the needs of Shabbos before Yom Tov which permits one to prepare food on Yom Tov for the next day of Shabbos as if preparations is being done for everything and you would not transgress the prohibition of preparing on Yom Tov for the next day.
Answer: Once she accepts upon herself Yom Tov by lighting candles then the whole concept of an eruv tavshilin doesn’t apply to her anymore because it only is applicable before Yom Tov starts but by lighting Chanukah candles the only issue is doing a melacha on Shabbos, transgressing Shabbos so someone who has not accepted Shabbos yet can light candles for her. (See Dirshu footnote 4 here.) [/edit]
- Question: According
to the Pri Megadim what is the difference between a half slave half free person
who can’t blow shofar or read megilla himself but could have someone do it for
him and he fulfills those mitzvahs through the messenger but the Pri Megadim
does not understand why a person can light Chanukah candles for another person
who took on Shabbos early and forgot to light Chanukah candles?
A. The Pri Megadim did not understand how you can have someone else light Chanukah candles for you if you accidentally first lit Shabbos candles because there is a rule that whatever you can’t do your messenger can’t do for you. This is because the messenger of a person is like himself so if you can’t do it he can’t do it either.
B. The Mahara”m Shick (chelek 1, Even HaEzer, teshuva 129) answers the Pri Megadim’s difficulty by saying this rule that a messenger can’t do something the sender can’t do only applies if the job and the problem is the same, (for example someone asking a messenger to marry him to a relative like his own daughter or mother.) But in this case there are two different factors, Chanukah and Shabbos. The fact that it is Shabbos for this person now is a technicality so the messenger can act on his behalf.
C. This technicality concept is exactly why a half slave half free person can fulfill the mitzvah through others according to the Mahara”m Shick, meaning the only reason why he can’t do the mitzvos himself is because he is a half slave otherwise there is nothing wrong with him doing the mitzvah therefore someone else can do it for him.
The Pri Megadim obviously does not hold of this technical logic so why could others be a messenger for the half slave half free person but it does not make sense in his eyes why a messenger can light Chanukah candles after the sender took on Shabbos?
Answer: By the Chanukah candles case, granted it is a technicality which doesn’t allow him to light but he still can’t light because it is Shabbos and a technicality is no excuse according to the Pri Megadim. But the half free person side really can fulfill any mitzvah it is just that the half slave side is stopping him so a messenger can do the mitzvah for the half free side.
- Questions: The Beis
HaLevi on the Torah in his section on Chanukah says one has to light a
menorah at each of his entrances if he has more than one, so that people won’t
suspect him of not lighting. According to the opinion that one does not have to
relight his menorah if it blew out within a half an hour, why wouldn’t the same
concern apply that people will think he did not light Chanukah candles?
A. There is an argument between Rav Huna and Rav Chisda in the gemara whether one has to relight the candles if they blew out within the half hour required time limit or since they potentially had the ability to stay lit for that long the mitzvah is fulfilled.
B. The concern of why one has to light in two entrances is a מראית עין issue.
Answer: By the case of two entrances there is really an obligation on the home owner to light in two places from the start because of this concern. But in the case where the light blew out he technically fulfilled his mitzvah already so we won’t force him to be obligated again just because of a concern that just popped up.