Likkutei Sichos Vol. 30 – Chanukah 1
1. Regarding the timing of the victory in the war that is commemorated by the miracle of Chanukah, we find two opinions among the Rishonim: a) The view of the Rambam is that it took place on the 25th of Kislev. In his words: “And when the Jews prevailed over their enemies and destroyed them, it was on the twenty-fifth of the month of Kislev, and they entered the Sanctuary, etc.” b) The view of the Meiri is that “this triumph was in Kislev, on the 24th of the month.”
It is well known that there are two opinions regarding the nature of the days of Chanukah: whether they were established only for praise and thanksgiving, and not for feasting and rejoicing, or whether they were established also for feasting and rejoicing. In the words of the Rambam: “These eight days, which begin (on the night of) the twenty-fifth of Kislev, are days of rejoicing and praise.”
At first glance, it would seem that this is connected to the above-mentioned dispute (on which day the victory in the war occurred), in light of what has been explained elsewhere: that the disagreement over whether the days of Chanukah are days of rejoicing depends on the reason for establishing the days of Chanukah. According to those opinions that Chanukah is only for praise and thanksgiving, the festival was established (primarily) for the miracle of the oil. Since this is (primarily) a spiritual matter, the celebration of the festival is also through praise and thanksgiving to G‑d (a spiritual matter). However, according to the Rambam, the (primary) establishment of the days of Chanukah is because of the victory in the war, and therefore the Sages instituted that they should also be days of rejoicing—physical and bodily rejoicing—since the victory in the war was a physical salvation. And the fact that they were also established for praise and thanksgiving, which is a spiritual matter, can be explained as an additional aspect, for the miracle of the oil (a spiritual matter).
Accordingly, it can be said that the two points the Rambam writes—(a) that the days of Chanukah are days of rejoicing, and (b) that the victory in the war was also on the 25th—are related to each other. For according to his view, the establishment of the festival of Chanukah is in commemoration of the two events that occurred on that day. In contrast, the opinion that the main establishment of the festival of Chanukah (which begins on the night of the 25th) is because of the miracle of the oil and not because of the victory in the war, would hold that the victory in the war was on the previous day (the 24th of the month), and that on the 25th of Kislev (only) the miracle of the oil occurred.
Accordingly, the wording of the Meiri is precise: when he explains the content of the celebration of the first night (when, seemingly, there was no miracle with the oil), he writes, “We bless for the redemption and for the thanksgiving for finding the cruse.” That is, he does not suffice with saying that we bless “for the redemption” (the victory in the war), but adds also “for the thanksgiving for finding the cruse.” For if it were only for the redemption itself, the festival would have been established on the 24th (the day of the victory in the war). Therefore, he adds that the reason for the first day of Chanukah is also because of the finding of the cruse (which is connected with the lighting of the menorah on the night of the 25th).
2. However, upon closer examination, this is not conclusive. For regarding Purim, we find explicitly that the festival is because of the victory in the war—“that the Jews should rule over their enemies”—and yet the festival was established (not on the day of the victory, but) on the day of rest: “And they rested on the fourteenth… on the fifteenth of the month, and made it a day of feasting and rejoicing.” If so, the same could be said regarding Chanukah: even if the victory in the war was on the 24th of the month, nevertheless, the festival was established (for that victory) on the following day, the 25th of Kislev, which is the day of rest (and it is also well known that the name Chanukah hints at this—“they rested on the 25th”—meaning that the 25th is the day of rest).
This is also the view of the Alter Rebbe, who writes that “the festival of Pesach is on the day the miracle occurred, whereas Chanukah and Purim are on the day of rest” (as will be discussed below in section 4).
Accordingly, it emerges that according to the Rambam, who holds that the victory in the war was on the 25th, and that the establishment of the festival is in commemoration of the victory in the war, as mentioned above (and according to the Pri Chadash, in the Rambam’s view the first day of Chanukah is only on account of the victory in the war), the festival of Chanukah is (not on the day of rest that follows, as in Purim, but) on the day of the victory itself, as in Pesach. In contrast, according to the Meiri, who holds that the victory in the war was on the 24th, the establishment of the festival (which is also for the redemption) is on the day of rest (as in Purim).
It can be suggested that the debate—whether Chanukah is on the day of rest or on the day of the victory—depends on how we understand the connection between the victory in the war and the festival of Chanukah.
That is: according to all opinions, the festival of Chanukah is connected both to the victory in the war and to the miracle of the oil. However, they differ as to whether the miracle of the victory in the war is merely a prelude and preparation for the miracle of the oil—which is the completion and perfection, and this is the reason for establishing the festival—or whether the victory in the war is not considered only a preparation, but is equally as significant as the miracle of the oil in its relevance to the establishment of the days of Chanukah.
[Therefore, according to the opinion that the victory in the war is only a prelude and preparation, and the festival of Chanukah is for the purification of the Temple and the lighting of the Menorah—the miracle of the oil—then the days of Chanukah are not days of rejoicing. In contrast, according to the Rambam, who holds that the victory in the war is equally significant as the reason for establishing the days of Chanukah, Chanukah contains two aspects, including also “days of rejoicing.”]
3. The explanation of this is as follows:
Festivals that were established as a remembrance for a miracle that occurred to the Jewish people at a certain time can be of two types and details: (a) The festival is established for the salvation and redemption of Israel, and not for the manner in which the salvation and redemption occurred; (b) The establishment of the festival is not only for the salvation and redemption of Israel itself, but also for the particular manner in which the redemption occurred, that it was in a unique way.
It can be said that, according to the Rambam, this is one of the differences between Purim and Chanukah. For although in both there was salvation and redemption of Israel from the hands of their enemies and those who hate them [and indeed, the main salvation and redemption of Israel in a revealed way was on Purim, when they were saved from the decree of Haman, “who sought to destroy, kill, and annihilate all the Jews, young and old, infants and women, in a single day”], nevertheless, on Purim the main establishment of the festival is for the result—the salvation and redemption of Israel. The reason for this is that the salvation and victory in the war itself did not occur through an open miracle, but through a miracle clothed in the ways of nature. In contrast, on Chanukah, the establishment of the festival is not only for the result—the salvation and deliverance of Israel—but also for the manner of the miracle: “And for the miracles… You delivered the mighty into the hands of the weak, and the many into the hands of the few.”
Therefore, on Purim, the victory in the war is considered only as a sort of preparation and prelude to the main thing—the salvation of Israel. Thus, the festival was established not on the day when the victory in the war occurred, but on the day of rest, when the salvation of Israel is emphasized. In contrast, on Chanukah, since the victory itself is part of the miracle and is connected to the festival, the establishment of the festival is on the very day that the victory occurred.
4. Now, it was mentioned above that the Alter Rebbe follows the view of the Meiri, and explains that Chanukah is not like Pesach, for Chanukah was established on the day of rest (and the victory was on the preceding day), whereas Pesach was established on the day the miracle occurred. [As he explains there, based on the inner dimension of the matter, that when the victory and the festival are on two different days, this indicates that the defeat of the enemy is a matter separate from the festival itself (and only a preparation for it). In contrast, on Pesach, when the miracle occurred through the revelation of the King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself—transcending all levels—therefore, both things happened together, without any separation between the plague upon the Egyptians and the healing for Israel.]
However, it can be said that the essence of the Alter Rebbe’s explanation is also fitting according to the view of the Rambam (that the victory in the war was on the 25th), for Chanukah is not comparable to Pesach. On Pesach, both aspects—the plague upon the Egyptians (the slaying of the firstborn) and the healing (redemption) for Israel—were united in a single event, as the Alter Rebbe writes (and he adds, “what is written in the seforim that this was before midnight and this after midnight is only that both occurred at the same time”). In contrast, on Chanukah, although the victory in battle is also included in the miracle for which the festival was established, nevertheless, the primary miracle of Chanukah was the miracle of the oil and the lights, in which there was a truly open miracle: “there was only enough oil to light for one day, and a miracle occurred and they lit from it for eight days.” Furthermore, the miracle of the lights signifies the salvation of the Jewish faith (the opposite of the decree to abolish their religion, etc.). Thus, there were two distinct miracles here, which occurred at two different times: the victory in battle, and the miracle of the cruse of oil (which represents the completion of the salvation and redemption of Israel).
[The essence of the dispute between the Rambam and the Meiri regarding whether the victory in battle on Chanukah was on the 24th or the 25th can be explained as follows: According to the Meiri, although with regard to Purim the victory in battle on Chanukah is considered part of the miracle, nevertheless, the main victory of Chanukah is the victory of the faith (especially since the victory in battle was not an open miracle like the miracle of the cruse of oil, for this victory had a foothold in nature), and the miracle of the military victory is considered only a preparation for the main event. Therefore, he holds that even on Chanukah, the festival is established not on the day of the victory in battle, but on the day of rest, as on Purim. [Accordingly, it is understood why the Meiri is precise that on the first night “we bless for the redemption and for the gratitude of finding the cruse,” as mentioned above.] In contrast, the Rambam holds that even the victory in battle (and the physical salvation) is a principal aspect of Chanukah (although the Rambam too holds that one of the principal aspects of the victory of Chanukah is the salvation of the faith)].
According to this, it emerges that according to the Rambam, there are three categories in this matter: On Purim, the establishment of the festival is not on the day of victory, but on the day of rest; on Chanukah, the establishment of the festival is on the day when both things occurred—the victory in battle and the miracle of the cruse of oil, which are two distinct matters that happened at two different times; and on Pesach, both aspects (the plague upon the Egyptians and the healing for Israel) were united in a single event.
And according to what is explained elsewhere (in the inner dimension of Torah) that the definition of a festival is that it is a special day on which there was (and is) a revelation and drawing down of additional holiness into the world, it can be said that these three forms indicate three ways in which the holiness of the Holy One, blessed be He, is revealed in the world:
On Purim, the revelation of holiness was primarily in the salvation and deliverance of Israel, and the destruction of Haman and the victory in battle are like a preparation for this revelation; on Chanukah, even in the victory in battle there was a revelation of holiness, but the level of holiness is not equal to the revelation of holiness in the miracle of the cruse of oil; and on Pesach, there was such a lofty Divine revelation that it was manifest equally in both aspects—even in “the plague upon the Egyptians,” the slaying of the firstborn, there was a revelation of holiness equal to the holiness revealed through the redemption of Israel.
5. All of these matters are also present in the service of man, whose order of service is “turn away from evil and do good.” In this service of “turn away from evil” (the victory in battle) that exists within every Jew, there are three forms:
a) “Turn away from evil” whose purpose is the removal of evil from within oneself, so that one becomes a clean and fitting vessel for the indwelling of the Shechinah. In this manner, the “turning away from evil” is only a preparation and prerequisite for the main service, which is the fulfillment of G‑d’s mitzvos—“do good.” “By way of analogy: when a king wishes to have a dwelling in a new house, first it must be cleaned of all filth and dirt.” So too in a person’s service: first, one must “remove the evil, and you shall remove the evil from your midst, so that there is no filth or dirt, G‑d forbid”—this is the concept of “turn away from evil.” Afterwards, it is possible to fulfill the positive commandments, which is “by way of analogy, the repair and arrangement of beautiful vessels, through which the dwelling in the lower realms will be”—by drawing down His holiness into the world.
b) On a higher level is when a person does not require cleansing from filth and dirt, because he is careful in the observance of the prohibitive commandments, and therefore he is already a clean vessel. Nevertheless, he still needs to engage in the service of “turn away from evil,” which is the concept of subjugation (iskafya) and acceptance of the yoke, where he compels himself and nullifies himself in order to fulfill the will of the Creator. For, since a person is a being and an entity unto himself, this itself is, so to speak, an opposition to the indwelling of the Shechinah, for the Holy One, blessed be He, only rests upon something that is nullified to Him. It is specifically when a person compels and nullifies himself—that is, the movement of “turn away from evil”—that the indwelling of holiness can be upon him. In this manner, the service of “turn away from evil” is not merely a preparation and prerequisite, but is itself a part of the indwelling of His holiness.
c) On a still higher level is the manner in which both are equal:
Even when a person is clean of all filth, and his “turn away from evil” is in the manner of subjugation and nullification, so that he is not a being and an entity unto himself, nevertheless, there still remains a distinction for him between the service of “turn away from evil” and the service of “do good.” In “do good,” he senses that he is fulfilling the supernal will, and thereby draws down holiness upon himself; whereas in “turn away from evil,” he feels the negation of an obstacle, that he is compelling and nullifying himself, for if not, it would be an opposition to the indwelling of the Shechinah.
But there is an even higher level in service, where his nullification to the supernal will is so absolute that he does not feel any difference between the ways through which the indwelling of the Shechinah is brought about—whether it is through preventing a negative (removal of evil) or through drawing down holiness (doing good). He is simply nullified to the supernal will and fulfills it without any calculations or considerations. (This is similar to the statement of Rabbi Akiva, that at the time of the giving of the Torah, the Jewish people responded “yes” to both the positive and the negative commandments, meaning that whether it was a positive commandment or a prohibition, what was felt by them was the general command of the Holy One, blessed be He.) And it is specifically through this absolute nullification, which is beyond calculation, that the drawing down of holiness is achieved in the ultimate perfection.
(From talks of Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev, Erev Chanukah, 5726, 5746)