NOTE: BEGINNING DECEMBER 2013, ALL NEW POSTS OF SERIOUS DIVREI TORAH WILL BE POSTED ONLY AT Beis Vaad L'Chachamim, beisvaad.blogspot.com


For private communication, write to eliezer(no space)e at aol

Monday, December 22, 2008

Tumah Hutrah be'Tzibur and Chanuka: Never-Ending Dvar Torah on the Never-Ending Oil

This piece has been moved to Beis Vaad LeChachamim, where updates and additions were made.

http://beisvaad.blogspot.com/2008/12/tumah-hutrah-be-and-chanuka-never.html

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

But essentialy he "Blaibs Shver" on the Kashe.

Barzilai said...

I'll tell you the truth: for all the teirutzim I've heard on this question, (who needs shemen tahor if tuma hutra betzibur), I'm still not satisfied either. I'd like a simple straightforward answer that makes the question into a not-question.

Anonymous said...

Rav Avrhoom Schorr has a Sefer on Chanukah; as a Brisker I think he has an Arichus on the Inyan.

Anonymous said...

I think The Shlal Rav on chanukah also has some answers.

Barzilai said...

I think I can get the Shalal Rav: I don't think I can get Rav Shor's sefer. But I haven't run out of teirutzim yet!

Remember, if you have a teretz you like, feel free to post it here. I'll take anything-- good, bad or indifferent.

Anonymous said...

The pshat in the Da'as Zkeinim may be that the korbonos miluim were a one-time affair, and did not establish the beginning of anything in and of themselves: i.e., kodoshei sha'a. The korbon ledoros, on the other hand, was the beginning of a permanent sequence of se'irei rosh chodesh, and the l'doros had to be rooted in l'chatchila.

Chaim B. said...

Your last 2 answers (so far) sound like R' Yosef Engel in Gilyonei HaShas Shabbos 23. Normally hadlakah is OK b'zar, but when a mitzvah is done the first time it must be done in the a perfect manner. For the same reason you can't say tumah hutra/dechuya.

Re: whether burning the oil is a ma'aseh mitzvah, you can fit this debate into the R' Chaim al haRambam in bi'as mikdash that discusses the miztvah of hadlakah.

Anonymous said...

It does not Matter that tumah Hutra Btzibur Since the Job of the Menorah is to bring light into the world in a spiritual sense, Halachicly it would not be a Problem ,but Spiritually it would be lacking.

Barzilai said...

Anonymous 5:45-- I was thinking along those lines, and although I was bothered by the idea of elevating the beginning of a daily avoda over the milu'im, it probably is tolui in Todir Umedudash; again, only assuming that the avodas hamilu'im is me'kudash.

Chaim-- I hadn't seen the Gilyonei Hashas.
And, (crimson faced) I admit I didn't see Reb Chaim on Hadlakah. BUT I did see Reb Dovid Rapaport's torah in the Mikdash Dovid 21 towards the end, where he brings from Temura 14b and Menachos 89 a machlokes Rashi+Rabbeinu Gershon and Tosfos there as to whether the Shemen has a din Korban at all, or it's just a machshir to create light.

You know, it used to be that any decent knowledge of kodshim put you on a safe pedestal, safe from contradiction. Not anymore....

Anonymous 2:33-- I agree. That is pretty much what the Pnei Yehoshua and the Chacham Tzvi say.

PoemParts-- Ahh, I see you didn't know that Reb Yosef Engel actually published THREE volumes of Shivim Panim Latorah. Very rare. The other was on proofs that monogamy is merely a bourgeoisie invention to ensure that one's property is inherited by his own children.

Chaim B. said...

BTW, in the sefer Tiferes Yosef, which has a bio of R' Yosef Engel, they quote a gadol (sorry, I forget who) as saying that R"Y Engel came up with 70 answers because he wanted to title the book "Ayin Panim". Had he titled the book something else (e.g. Gevuros Shmonim) he would have been able to come up with more teirutzim.

Anonymous said...

An interesting point for tonight, in the Emes Layackov on Shulchan Aruach
on Siman Tuf Reish Ayin Reb Yackov says that Giving gifts on Chanukah is not Chukas Hagoyim it is a jewish Minhag and they took it from us,The reason is they sent with the children a gift to the Rebbeim and the children got to because they were the shluchim.

Barzilai said...

Very good. But I would point out that our minhag is, consonant with Reb Yakov's he'arah, to give Chanuka Gelt, not gifts.

Anonymous said...

Much like the Chayah Adam on Shavous who says we don't decorate the Shul on Shavous because of what the Goyim do in this season.

Anonymous said...

Even thought the Jews where doing it first.

Anonymous said...

Chanukas Hatorah a sefer the Magen Avrahom Quotes in Hilchos Chanukah speaks of giving Chanukah GIFTS.

Barzilai said...

Thank you all for your valuable comments, corrections, and Mar'ei Makom. I have corrected, added to, and expanded the post, and, I hope, made it clearer.

Anonymous said...

A simple explanation is that tamei doesn't mean in the usual sense but rather that it was used or designated for avodah zara which would pasul it for use in the menorah
gjs

Barzilai said...

Thank you, GJS. I put your teretz into the post, and attributed it to you, even though it's very good.

mS said...

I'm only 2 years late to the party.

On Chanukah we learn, "We don't need to win wars. We need to fight them." (R. Matis Weinberg)

In other words, we learn: don't try to control outcomes, don't resort to rama'ut, don't put Dina in a box, and don't sweep issues under the rug with neat denials punctuated by chas veshalom. Rather, attend to the means more than the ends, be tam, invest in life and people even if you don't know where it'll go, deal with issues even if the skeletons in the closet are terrifying, even if you think they might drag you down into death.

I began checking out the issue of "tuma hutra betzibur" on the hunch that somehow it would confirm the insight. I was thinking something like this:
We had to choose. Either we’d wait till we could do everything in Beit HaMikdash perfectly, according to our expectations and plans with no loose ends or interruptions, or we’d throw ourselves into the avodah, even if we couldn’t see how we’d keep it up after just one day (after that one day, we’d light with impure oil if we held "tuma hutra betzibur", or we’d have to wait for pure oil).
We chose to throw ourselves into the avodah. The nes comes as a response to this choice. H’ shows us: You got it! Don’t imagine you can plan for perfection because you never know what’ll be, you don’t know how big and wild creation is, you don’t control where things go. (Just see how long the Chashmonean revival lasts…) When you work with emunah (= the pach hashemen, according to the Sfat Emet), when you stand for the eternal and infinite, for more than whatever your limited conception allows, – that’s everything.

Thus the comment in Avot on the 10 maamarim of creation. Rashaim fail to engage in the process because they try to impose their ends and take the part for the whole. Tzadikim are completely engaged in the process. And so they’re zochim to the or haganuz, the light of Chanukah.

This is also the difference between Torah and all that’s “tachat hashemesh” in Kohelet (according to Rashi). “Tachat hashemesh” creation is not integrated and nothing has significance. Torah doesn’t have different facts from a “tachat hashemesh” perspective. What’s different is that in Torah all the havelim of creation find meaning in the context of our relationship with H’.

When we threw ourselves into the mitzvah, we were all about relationship with H’. That’s Torah. Tuma needs an absence of Torah, a breakdown in relationship. So Torah and tuma are mutually exclusive. And here "tuma hutra betzibur" is rendered irrelevant.

mS said...

I'm only 2 years late to the party.

On Chanukah we learn, "We don't need to win wars. We need to fight them." (R. Matis Weinberg)

In other words, we learn: don't try to control outcomes, don't resort to rama'ut, don't put Dina in a box, and don't sweep issues under the rug with neat denials punctuated by chas veshalom. Rather, attend to the means more than the ends, be tam, invest in life and people even if you don't know where it'll go, deal with issues even if the skeletons in the closet are terrifying, even if you think they might drag you down into death.

mS said...

(cont.)
I began checking out the issue of "tuma hutra betzibur" on the hunch that somehow it would confirm the insight. I was thinking something like this:
We had to choose. Either we’d wait till we could do everything in Beit HaMikdash perfectly, according to our expectations and plans with no loose ends or interruptions, or we’d throw ourselves into the avodah, even if we couldn’t see how we’d keep it up after just one day (after that one day, we’d light with impure oil if we held "tuma hutra betzibur", or we’d have to wait for pure oil).
We chose to throw ourselves into the avodah. The nes comes as a response to this choice. H’ shows us: You got it! Don’t imagine you can plan for perfection because you never know what’ll be, you don’t know how big and wild creation is, you don’t control where things go. (Just see how long the Chashmonean revival lasts…) When you work with emunah (= the pach hashemen, according to the Sfat Emet), when you stand for the eternal and infinite, for more than whatever your limited conception allows, – that’s everything.

mS said...

Thus the comment in Avot on the 10 maamarim of creation. Rashaim fail to engage in the process because they try to impose their ends and take the part for the whole. Tzadikim are completely engaged in the process. And so they’re zochim to the or haganuz, the light of Chanukah.

This is also the difference between Torah and all that’s “tachat hashemesh” in Kohelet (according to Rashi). “Tachat hashemesh” creation is not integrated and nothing has significance. Torah doesn’t have different facts from a “tachat hashemesh” perspective. What’s different is that in Torah all the havelim of creation find meaning in the context of our relationship with H’.

When we threw ourselves into the mitzvah, we were all about relationship with H’. That’s Torah. Tuma needs an absence of Torah, a breakdown in relationship. So Torah and tuma are mutually exclusive. And here "tuma hutra betzibur" is rendered irrelevant.

Barzilai said...

Hello, mS. So you're a talmid of Reb Matis? He's a few years older than me, though my stay in Ner Israel overlapped his.

Your insight is very moving. Thank you for sharing it.

mS said...

I try to hear as many of his shiurim as I can. :-)

I still don't quite understand what I'm talking about here, but reading your blog and commenting certainly helped... Yashar koach!

lesser unknown said...

A number of these tirutzim rely on the concept of the menora needing a chanukas of 8 days...

I've heard of the mizbayach needing such a chanukas, but (prob in my ignorance) I have not heard of other keilim (of which the menora would be included) needing more than an initial or 1-time inauguration.

I'll assume that I'm wrong until proven right, but if a source could be found I'd appreciate it.

b said...

A freilachen Chanuka, lesser unknown. The idea of connecting the miluim of the Mishkan to Chanuka is interesting. In Yoma 2a and 3b the Gemara says that a leap in Kedusha requires seven days of meditative preparation and isolation from worldly things. Reb Yochanan learns this from the Mishkan and Reish Lakish learns it from Moshe Rabbeinu's preparation for Matan Torah. Is there any such requirement for the Beis Hamikdash? This is a machlokes Rambam and Bahag/Ramban, found in Sefer Hamitzvos Shoresh III and the Ramban there. But even according the Rambam that there is no such mitzva after the Mishkan, we know that Shlomo Hamelech voluntarily brought similar korbanos.

So yes, I agree that there is certainly an Inyan of Chanukas Hamizbei'ach for the Bayis as a whole, but, as you say, not for the menora specifically. But the Terituzim here that mention it are not talking about eight days worth of chinuch, they're talking about the one time event of Avodasan mechanchasan.

lesser unknown said...

A freilachen Chanuka to you as well, and thank you for the quick reply.

However, I feel that perhaps I was not clear in the point I was trying to make.

If the menora just needed a one time event of Avodasan Mechanchasan, then the single cruse of oil would have sufficed without the oil lasting for 8 days.

Then, once properly inaugurated with the shemen tahor, let tumah hutra b'tzibur kick in and allow tamei oil...

Therefore, I conclude that those tirutzim held that the menora needed 8 days of chinuch (and exactly 8, otherwise why did the oil have to burn for exactly 8 days)

Which is what motivated my question in the first place of where is the source that the menora would need such an inauguration.

b said...

It's only the Daas Zkeinim that says that there's no din of hutra or even dechuya when you're being mechaneich. And I have seen people that ask your question, that who needs the nes if they had enough for day one to be mechaneich, because afterwards for sure dechuya/hutra applies. But I never saw anyone that said that you need seven days of chinuch for the menorah. But maybe it's a mehalach according to the Ramban, because it wasn't just the menora that was new, they also had to build a new Mizbei'ach (which we know because the Gemara in the end of Shvuos says the stones from the old mizbei'ach were in a chamber on the side.) So maybe they were mechaneich the entire structure and therefore were subject to the Ramban's din, and so the Daas Zkeinim would apply to the entire week. Still don't know why they needed eight days, though.