A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
If Chanukah (חנוכה) candles extinguish early, must one relight them? The shiur resolves this machlokes by distinguishing two separate mitzvos: hadlakah (replicating the Temple menorah) and pirsumei nisa (publicizing the miracle). The kindling obligation is fulfilled immediately upon lighting, while the publicity requirement governs duration and placement.
This comprehensive Gemara (גמרא) analysis examines the fundamental question in Masechta Shabbos (שבת) 21a regarding Chanukah (חנוכה) candle lighting obligations, specifically whether one must relight candles if they extinguish prematurely. Rabbi Zweig begins by analyzing Rashi (רש"י)'s difficult interpretation that introduces the concept of 'shema yifsha' (lest one become negligent), questioning why Rashi assumes negligence when someone who carefully lit Chanukah candles would naturally want to relight them if they went out. The shiur delves into the core dispute between those who hold 'kaf zeh ain zakuk la' (if it goes out, one need not relight) versus 'kaf zeh zakuk la' (if it goes out, one must relight). Rabbi Zweig examines Tosafot's fundamental question about Rav Huna's position regarding Shabbos - how do we know that the prohibition on certain oils for Shabbos is due to 'mutar lishtamish lo yarud' (forbidden to use for personal benefit) rather than simply the basic principle that unreliable oils shouldn't be used? The analysis proceeds to explore the Gemara's discussion of the half-hour oil requirement, questioning the logical progression of the Talmudic argument. If the sages hadn't yet established the half-hour minimum, why would they debate relighting obligations rather than first determining the basic duration requirement? Rabbi Zweig presents an innovative reading through the lens of the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s historical introduction to Chanukah laws, suggesting that there are actually two distinct mitzvos: the act of kindling (hadlakah) which replicates the Temple menorah lighting, and the obligation to publicize the miracle (pirsumei nisa). The Rambam's unusual inclusion of historical background serves to distinguish these two components - the military victory that culminated in rededicating the Temple, and the miracle of the oil. This framework resolves many textual difficulties by explaining that the kindling obligation is fulfilled immediately upon lighting, while the publicity requirement mandates lighting at night and outdoors for the prescribed duration. The shiur examines how this understanding affects the Erev Shabbos scenario, where one lights before Shabbos begins. According to this analysis, the kindling mitzvah (מצוה) is fulfilled even if the candles extinguish after Shabbos begins, since one cannot relight on Shabbos. This explains why Erev Shabbos follows the lenient position of not requiring relighting. Rabbi Zweig addresses the practical implications, including the recitation of 'Hanerot Halalu' which explicitly connects the lighting to publicizing the military victories and miracles. The analysis concludes by examining how different Rishonim understand the relationship between these two mitzvos, whether the half-hour requirement belongs to the kindling obligation itself or to the publicity requirement, and how this affects various practical applications including indoor lighting and situations where optimal publicity isn't possible.
Shabbat 21a
Looking for the full transcript?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Dedicate a Shiur in Gemara
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
Up Next in this Series
How can Shabbos observance atone for the idolatry of Enosh's generation? The Rambam's reading shows that generation sought God through physical intermediaries rather than direct connection. Proper Shabbos observance creates authentic divine experience that naturally displaces attraction to spiritual substitutes - like tasting real coffee exposes ersatz as meaningless.
Why does the Gemara say one Shabbos protects from Amalek while two Shabboses bring redemption? The shiur applies a principle from Kiddushin about repetition changing psychology: the first time doing anything is experimental, but the second demonstrates genuine desire. True Shabbos connection with Hashem requires moving beyond spiritual curiosity to authentic internalization.
Why does the Gemara pray to be 'among those who eat three meals on Shabbos' rather than simply to fulfill the mitzvah? The shiur develops that Shabbos eating means 'tasting the day itself' - mindful appreciation that connects us to Shabbos's spiritual quality. This requires discipline and community support, with three meals corresponding to distinct phases of Shabbos time.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
