Chanukah Burglar. Ohr Fellowships חנוכה. Sources

Transcription

1 Ohr Fellowships Chanukah Burglar חנוכה The first two nights of Chanukah did not go over well on 3rd Street. There were already five houses burglarized the first two nights, and people were very nervous. Officer Bergman, who happened to live on 3rd Street, noticed that each house that was robbed did not have any Chanukah lights lit the first two nights. He figured out that the burglars saw which houses were without lights, realized no one was there, and ransacked the house. That night, Officer Bergman noticed two suspicious characters at the end of the block. They were eyeing around and did not look familiar. He realized that they were probably the burglars. He wanted to catch them in the act, but wasn t sure how. I got it! thought Mr. Bergman. He had already lit his Chanukah lights, and wanted to blow them out in order to look as if no one was home. That way, his house might be the one robbed. once inside, he would arrest them. One problem though the Chanukah lights were already lit. He wasn t sure if he was allowed to blow them out in order to catch the suspected thieves. Right away, he go on the phone with his Rav and asked him what to do. Sources [1] Gemara Pesachim 99b [2] Rambam Hilchos Chanukah 4:12 [3] Shulchan Aruch: Orach Chaim 671:1 [4] Mishna Brurah, ibid. 1-3 [5] Gemara Pesachim 9a [6] Veh aarev Na Find more sugyas at OhrOnCampus.com CHANUKAH BURGLAR Questions? Comments? OhrOnCampus@gmail.com1

2 CHANUKAH BURGLAR 2

3 Gemara Pesachim 99b [1] From the time of Mincha in the afternoon to nightfall of the day when the Passover Offering is brought, one cannot eat. Even the poor cannot eat at this time. Furthermore, even the poorest person must have at least four cups of wine to drink that night (the night of the Seder). Rashi, ibid. [2] The poor person mentioned here is even one who has insufficient funds for two meals, and is thus allowed to take from the public charity fund (called Tamchui). Even if the Gabbai Tzedaka (the one in charge of distributing these funds) does not give this poor person anything, the poor man is nevertheless obligated to borrow, hire himself out, or even sell his clothing, in order to pay for these four cups of wine. CHANUKAH BURGLAR 3

4 Rambam: Hilchos Chanukah 4:12 [3] The mitzva of the Chanukah lights is exceptionally precious. One should be meticulous in performing this mitzvah in order to publicize the great miracles from G-d that these lights represent. This mitzva is so precious that even one who has so little that he receives money from the public charity, must borrow or even sell his clothes in order to purchase the Chanukah lights. Maggid Mishna, ibid. [4] Here, the Rambam is connecting the Halacha that even a poor man must go to extremes measures to obtain Chanukah lights to the Halacha about acquisition of four cups of wine on the Seder night. If a poor man must purchase four cups of wine on the Seder night in order to publicize the miracle of the exodus from Egypt, surely he must do so in order to purchase the Chanukah lights. CHANUKAH BURGLAR 4

5 Shulchon Aruch: Orach Chaim 671:1 [5] One must be exceptionally careful in one s performance of the mitzvah to light Chanukah lights. This care is demanded for this mitzva due to its great value, as is evidenced by the fact that even a poor man must borrow money, or even sell his clothing, in order to acquire the Chanukah lights. Mishna Brurah, ibid. 1-3 [6] The Gemara states that one who diligently performs the commandments to light Shabbos candles and Chanukah lights will merit sons who are Torah scholars, deriving it from the pasuk which juxtaposes the phrase mitzvos of candles to the phrase light of Torah. In addition, the obligation of a poor man to purchase Chanukah lights requires that if necessary, he even go from house to house asking for money, in order to publicize the Chanukah miracle. However, he only need collect money for a single candle per night. CHANUK AH BURGL AR 5

6 CHANUKAH BURGLAR 6

7 Gemara Pesachim 9a [7] MISHNA: One need not assume that a rat brought Chometz (leavened grain products) from one house, or one place, to another, for such an assumption would lead us to assume there might be Chometz in even more distant locations, like another city, and we would always remain concerned that Chometz might be present. GEMARA: The implication of this Mishna is that one need not assume Chometz was moved by a rat from place to place without any evidence of such an occurrence. If there is evidence of such an occurrence (ie. one saw a rat bringing Chometz into one s home), one should assume that Chometz is indeed present. This implication is strange, for in other contexts, we assume a rat would eat the food it is carrying and that nothing remains behind. For example, there is a Mishna that prohibits a Jew from dwelling in a home previously owned by non-jews (assuming the non-jews resided there for a minimum of 40 days) due to a concern that the previous residents may have buried unviable children there, thus making the dwelling Tamei (ritually impure), unless the Jews checks the home and finds there is nothing Tamei present. This prohibition exists even if the non-jew was not married because he may have produced children through an illicit relationship. However, one need not check the home if the home is accessible to either swine or rats, as either of those animals will have completely consumed the child s body. Why here do we assume the rat consumed everything when regarding Chometz, we assume food was left behind? Rebbe Zeira suggests that there is a difference between these two cases. In the case of the buried child, we are dealing with meat, and can thus assume the rat ate everything. In our case however, the food in question is bread, and we cannot assume the rat ate all of it. Rava suggests that there is a more basic distinction between these two scenarios. In the case of the buried child, we don t know for sure that there is even a child buried there at all; there is but a possibility that the non-jewish residents buried a child there. Therefore, once it is likely enough that a rat came to eat the theoretical body, we can assume the entire body was eaten, because the actual presence of the body is itself unclear. However, in the case implied by our Mishna, were one sees a rat in their home with Chometz in its mouth, there isn t simply a possibility that Chometz is present, we actually know it s there. Therefore, the possibility that the rat ate the entire piece of food is insufficient to remove the concern that there is Chometz in one s home. CHANUKAH BURGLAR 7

8 Veha arev Na [8] QUESTION: Here is a story I was told by a G-d fearing Jewish police officer, which brought about the following question: On the first two nights of Chanukah that year, many robberies were reported in the adjacent neighborhood to my own. The robbers were going from house to house, checking to see if Chanukah lights were lit inside. If they saw none lit, they assumed it was because no one was home to light them, and proceeded to rob that home. On the third night of Chanukah, after lighting my own candles, I was told that the robbers might have made their way into my own neighborhood. After hearing this message, I went outside and saw two suspicious individuals standing at the end of my block. I thought that perhaps I should put out my Chanukah candles in order to lure these robbers into my house and catch them red handed! However, I wasn t sure if I was allowed to do so, because the minimum duration the candles must remain lit for (30 min) had not yet arrived. Can I put out the candles? In addition to saving the neighborhood from these robbers, I will also keep the robbers from continuing to sin through their theft. ANSWER: It is forbidden for the police officer to put out his Chanukah candles for the following reasons. Firstly, putting out the candles does not mean the robbers will certainly enter your his home; there is a chance they will do so. This possibility does not outway the certain removal of the mitzva of Chanukah lights. Furthermore, even were this not to be the case, we know that a poor man is obligated to sell his own clothing in order to purchase candles, thus spending all of his money! Therefore, in this case as well, a person should leave his money to possible theft in order to perform the mitzva of the Chanukah lights. In addition, saving the thieves from sin is not grounds to permit putting out the candles either. There is no reason to permit someone to sin (in our case, putting out the Chanukah candles) in order to catch thieves. Would it be permissible to omit the recital of Kerias Shemah just to catch thieves? Of course not! Even if one were involved in Torah study (which isn t subject to the principle that once already involved in one mitzva, one is exempt from a concurrent mitzva) one is not obligated to interrupt in order to catch a thief. CHANUK AH BURGL AR 8

9 CONCLUSION DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions presented in this sourcesheet should not be taken as halachah l maaseh. Before applying these halachos to real-life situations, one must consult with a competent halachic authority. CHANUKAH BURGLAR 9