[Avodah] Women Lighting Menorahs

[kennethgmiller at juno.com]

I quoted
> Mishne Brura 671:9, that because of "ishto k'gufo" (that
> husband and wife are two halves of a whole), one of them
> can light and still be following the "each person" rule.

R' Steven J Scher commented:
> I saw this MB too, but don't really understand it. Is there
> any other case where the halacha or minhag is for everyone
> to do something, but we rely on ishto k'gufo to fulfill it?

Excellent question. I suspect that we will NOT find any other such cases, and that this is because of the unique nature of the case at hand.

We have many mitzvos which apply to the entire home as a unit. Examples include Shabbos candles and Eruv tavshilin. These mitzvos are usually done by a senior member of the household; the others are automatically covered, simply by being a member of that household. They are *not* covered via the usual procedures of "shomea k'oneh" or by making the other person a shaliach. The other people don't even need to be present when the mitzvah is performed. It is automatic.

Other mitzvos very clearly apply to each individual. Kiddush and Lechem Mishneh are examples of this. These too are usually done by a senior member of the household, but the others are very specifically covered by virtue of being present, and having in mind to be covered, etc etc. There's nothing automatic about it.

Ner Chanukah is a very different case. Is it a mitzvah which applies to the entire home collectively, or is it a mitzvah which applies to each resident individually? The answer is that it truly does fall in both categories. Many have commented on the uniqueness of Ner Chanuka, in that - from the very beginning - Chazal legislated several optional levels in which it could be performed. For other halachos, chumras and kulas result from different views among the authorities, and similar methods, but for Ner Chanukah, one has the unquestionable right to choose whichever version he wants, and is unquestionably yotzay regardless which he chooses. One can choose to be automatically yotzay via the baal habayis's lighting, or one could choose to do it himself.

Now, suppose one chooses the "Mehadrin" version of this mitzvah, in which each resident lights his own single candle, or the Ashkenaz version of "Mehadrin Min Hamehadrin", in which each resident lights his own whole menorah. Why would the husband and wife share, rather than following the "each resident lights his own" rule?

My wild guess is that the answer is in deference to the particular language which the Gemara (Shabbos 21b, middle of page) uses to describe the basic, non-mehadrin, version of this mitzvah: "Mitzvas Chanukah - ner ish ubeiso" - "The Mitzvah of Chanukah is a ner for a man and his home." Why use the words "a man AND his home"? Why not just say "ner l'bayis" - "one ner for the home"?

My guess is that there is someone somewhere who focused on this particular phrasing, and connected it to R' Yosi's saying (Shabbos 118b) that "I call my wife 'my home'". Thus, even when following the Mehadrin versions of this mitzvah, "ner ish ubeiso", there is but one ner (or menorah) for both the husband and wife.

Again, all the above is only my wild guess.

Akiva Miller
_____________________________________________________________
Bolster your sales numbers with professional sales training. Click here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2121/fc/Ioyw6i3m6SEgfThEKc2JbLy2XmSRoUfh18UkaH2JkwurbPy7W64E4K/