The Little Menorah That Didn't

Here we are, soon to light the second candle on this 2169th Hanukka. For 2169 years, our ancestors have lit candles, most often in menorah's, to celebrate the "miracle of the oil." Or have they?

We all know the story. The Maccabee's capture Jerusalem, free the Temple and find it defiled. Worse yet, there is only one sealed, undefiled cruse of oil left in the Temple – enough to keep the menorah burning for only one day. It will take days – eight days, to be exact – to send for more pure oil.

The Maccabees, God-fearing priests that they were, lit the menorah with that one cruse of oil and, lo and behold, the menorah burned for eight days. New oil arrived as the menorah was still burning on day eight, and thus the miracle of Hanukka is sealed in the memory of our nation forever – maybe.

Why maybe? Because it did not happen that way. Let's see why:

1. The oldest telling of the story of Hanukka is found in 2 Maccabees. It does not mention the "miracle of oil."

2. The text of the Al HaNisim prayer inserted in the Amida prayer for Hanukka does not mention the "miracle of oil."

3. Josephus, who was a priest and served in the Temple, recounts the battles that led to the liberation of Jerusalem and the Temple but does not mention the "miracle of oil." This is even more significant because Josephus was a member of the Perushim (Pharisees).

4. No other ancient records mention the "miracle of oil."

Why would this be? Let's try to answer that question by exploring the first known mention of the "miracle of oil," found in the Talmud, which began to be codified in about 400 C.E. – almost 600 years after the Maccabees triumph – and was not completed for many years after that.

The Talmud's version of the Story of Hanukka can be found in Shabbat 21b:

What is Hanukkah? Our Rabbis taught: On the twenty-fifth of Kislev [begin] the days of Hanukkah, which are eight, and on which mourning and fasting are forbidden.  For when the Greeks entered the Temple, they defiled all the oils therein, and when the Hasmoneans [Maccabees] defeated them, they searched and found only one cruse of oil with the seal of the High Priest,  but which contained enough [oil] for one day's lighting only; yet a miracle happened and they lit [the menorah from that single cruse of oil and it lasted for] for eight days. The following year these [days] were made a Festival including [the saying of] Hallel and thanksgiving.

So, 600 years after the event, the Talmud claims the miracle of Hanukka was the "miracle of oil" and the holiday of Hanukka was established for the following year, in part because of it.

Here is the story of Hanukka as told in 2 Maccabees, written by a Jew within a few years of the actual events:

10:1 Now Maccabeus and his company, the Lord guiding them, recovered the temple and the city:

10:2 But the altars which the heathen had built in the open street, and also the chapels, they pulled down.

10:3 And having cleansed the temple they made another altar, and striking stones they took fire out of them, and offered a sacrifice after two years, and set forth incense, and lights, and shewbread.

10:4 When that was done, they fell flat down, and besought the Lord that they might come no more into such troubles; but if they sinned any more against him, that he himself would chasten them with mercy, and that they might not be delivered unto the blasphemous and barbarous nations.

10:5 Now upon the same day that the strangers profaned the temple, on the very same day it was cleansed again, even the five and twentieth day of the same month, which is Casleu [Kislev].

10:6 And they kept the eight days with gladness, as in the feast of the tabernacles, remembering that not long afore they had held the feast of the tabernacles, when as they wandered in the mountains and dens like beasts.

10:7 Therefore they bare branches, and fair boughs, and palms also, and sang psalms unto him that had given them good success in cleansing his place.

10:8 They ordained also by a common statute and decree, That every year those days should be kept of the whole nation of the Jews.

10:9 And this was the end of Antiochus, called Epiphanes.

No "miracle of oil."  Eight days because of the Succot sacrifices (that went on for eight days) that were not able to be offered due to the Greeks.

Now, Josephus:

[36] Accordingly Matthias, the son of Asamoneus, one of the priests who lived in a village called Modin, armed himself, together with his own family, which had five sons of his in it, and slew Bacchides with daggers; and thereupon, out of the fear of the many garrisons [of the enemy], he fled to the mountains; and so many of the people followed him, that he was encouraged to come down from the mountains, and to give battle to Antiochus's generals, when he beat them, and drove them out of Judea. So he came to the government by this his success, and became the prince of his own people by their own free consent, and then died, leaving the government to Judas, his eldest son.

[38] Now Judas, supposing that Antiochus would not lie still, gathered an army out of his own countrymen, and was the first that made a league of friendship with the Romans, and drove Epiphanes out of the country when he had made a second expedition into it, and this by giving him a great defeat there; and when he was warmed by this great success, he made an assault upon the garrison that was in the city, for it had not been cut off hitherto; so he ejected them out of the upper city, and drove the soldiers into the lower, which part of the city was called the Citadel. He then got the temple under his power, and cleansed the whole place, and walled it round about, and made new vessels for sacred ministrations, and brought them into the temple, because the former vessels had been profaned. He also built another altar, and began to offer the sacrifices; and when the city had already received its sacred constitution again, Antiochus died; whose son Antiochus succeeded him in the kingdom, and in his hatred to the Jews also.…

No "miracle of oil."  Again, eight days because of the Succot sacrifices (that went on for eight days) that were not able to be offered due to the Greeks.

What happened? Why was a "miracle of oil" added to Hanukka?

The Pharisees fought with and suffered suffered from the Hasmonean kings, as the Hasmonean dynasty over time became Hellenized and the Sadducees, opponents of the rabbis, allied with the Hasmoneans.

The rabbinic dislike for the Maccabees can be summed up with the following question: How could a miracle have come through a family that would later become so evil?

Within 150 years two disasters would rock the Jewish world. The first, the Destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. after a war initially backed by many of the rabbis. The second took place 65 years after the Destruction when the Bar Kokhba revolt failed and with its defat came the deaths of tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands, of Jews. The chief backer of the revolt was Rabbi Akiva, the leader of Rabbinic Judaism who believed Bar Kokhba to me the messiah. This revolt failed, but the Maccabees, without rabbinic leadership, won their war and liberated the country.

Here we have rabbinic sanction for war and no miracle happens. Why? Were the rabbis less deserving of God's miracles than the Maccabees and their Sadducee allies?

Worse yet, the prayers for Hanukka, established long before Bar Kokhba, glorify the Maccabee's war and do not mention the oil, and the rabbis cannot simply remove or edit a text which was widely known throughout the Jewish world.

I believe the rabbinic response to this problem was to gradually push aside the victory of the Maccabees, which was the true miracle of Hanukka, and replace it with  the "miracle of the oil." By the time the Talmud was codified, the "miracle of oil" had become the "normative" understanding of Hanukka.

Today the "miracle of oil" is well known, but the details of the Maccabees' fight against the Greeks is not.

Hanukka Samayakh.

Comments

[Dovid Komarov]

I think that Josephus mentions chanuka lights in Antiq. XII 7,7.
I did not verify the source but if you investigate it please let me know.
I also had beem bothered why oil is not mentioned in shmonesrey.
Be well

[Neo-Conservaguy]

Another outstanding critical analysis and commentary; this will, no doubt, keep you from getting aliot for another few years...

[Shmarya]

Another few decades, maybe …

[Shmarya]

Yes, but again, no "miracle of oil":
[316] When therefore the generals of Antiochus's armies had been beaten so often, Judas assembled the people together, and told them, that after these many victories which God had given them, they ought to go up to Jerusalem, and purify the temple, and offer the appointed sacrifices. But as soon as he, with the whole multitude, was come to Jerusalem, and found the temple deserted, and its gates burnt down, and plants growing in the temple of their own accord, on account of its desertion, he and those that were with him began to lament, and were quite confounded at the sight of the temple; so he chose out some of his soldiers, and gave them order to fight against those guards that were in the citadel, until he should have purified the temple. When therefore he had carefully purged it, and had brought in new vessels, the candlestick, the table [of shew-bread], and the altar [of incense], which were made of gold, he hung up the veils at the gates, and added doors to them. He also took down the altar [of burnt-offering], and built a new one of stones that he gathered together, and not of such as were hewn with iron tools. So on the five and twentieth day of the month Casleu, which the Macedonians call Apeliens, they lighted the lamps that were on the candlestick, and offered incense upon the altar [of incense], and laid the loaves upon the table [of shew-bread], and offered burnt-offerings upon the new altar [of burnt-offering]. Now it so fell out, that these things were done on the very same day on which their Divine worship had fallen off, and was reduced to a profane and common use, after three years' time; for so it was, that the temple was made desolate by Antiochus, and so continued for three years. This desolation happened to the temple in the hundred forty and fifth year, on the twenty-fifth day of the month Apeliens, and on the hundred fifty and third olympiad: but it was dedicated anew, on the same day, the twenty-fifth of the month Apeliens, on the hundred and forty-eighth year, and on the hundred and fifty-fourth olympiad. And this desolation came to pass according to the prophecy of Daniel, which was given four hundred and eight years before; for he declared that the Macedonians would dissolve that worship [for some time].

[323] Now Judas celebrated the festival of the restoration of the sacrifices of the temple for eight days, and omitted no sort of pleasures thereon; but he feasted them upon very rich and splendid sacrifices; and he honored God, and delighted them by hymns and psalms. Nay, they were so very glad at the revival of their customs, when, after a long time of intermission, they unexpectedly had regained the freedom of their worship, that they made it a law for their posterity, that they should keep a festival, on account of the restoration of their temple worship, for eight days. And from that time to this we celebrate this festival, and call it Lights. I suppose the reason was, because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us; and that thence was the name given to that festival. Judas also rebuilt the walls round about the city, and reared towers of great height against the incursions of enemies, and set guards therein. He also fortified the city Bethsura, that it might serve as a citadel against any distresses that might come from our enemies.

Realize that Josephus was a Pharisee and a kohain, and he does not know anything about a "miracle of oil." And no other ancient source does, either.

[Harbona]

David Komarov
Thanks David ,
Antiq. Book XII , Chapter 7, Paragraph 7 , does indeed mention :
"...and from that time to this we celebrate this festival and call it Lights . I suppose (continues Josephus) the reason was because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us; and that thence was the name given to that festival ..."
This is somewhat perplexing on few counts :
1- While he is relating the name as Lights , all the tale otherwise is about the Maccabean Wars and nothing on the Flask of Oil and the miracle appended to it .
2- He does not mention the most common name of the Festival : Chanuka or inauguration .
3- The equating of Liberty with Lights is not our common fare today .
A very interesting Shiur is given by R' Menachem Liebtag of the Tanach Study Centre on the Haftara of the 1st Shabbat of Chanuka .
The gist being that the prophets that lived during the inauguration of the second Temple had the 25th of Kislev in mind as the date of inauguration . The Maccabees then used that same date deliberately for the rededication of the temple :)

[Harbona]

R' Liebtag's shiur though quite a few years old , it's still fascinating . Available at flg URL

http:// www.tanach.org /special/ chanuka.txt

[sandman]

your shattering ignorance is again on display...points #2 and #4 (book of Maccabees and Josephus) betray your utter ignorance of current historical research...specifically, the bk of mac was preserved by the christian church and though it is a valuable source cannot be relied upon to really "prove" anything...Josephus is considered to be an even worse source...Scheurer, more than 100 yrs ago, led the way in exposing the flaws in Josephus account...he was about as much a Pharisee as you are...

[Shmarya]

sandman --

I see you are as confused about history as you are about kashrut and halakha – you do your employer proud.

See Rabbi Joseph Caro, Shulchan Aruch.
BTW The Rebbe ZT"L answers the question re: Al hanisim so as to not take away from the Macabee Fight and to stress it (the physicle victory)our (religion's) survival!

[Hakst in Chainik]

Oh, when are you going to post that the sea didn't split?

No oil miracle, Gemmara made it up???!!! If anything, discuss why Chnukah is only mentioned in Mishna in terms of destruction. And why do we light candles? And when is the Bracha (Lehadlik ner...Chanukh) from? Start saving up to graduate from am ha'aretz to apikores!

[Shmuel]

Last year I had the privilege of attending a lecture series (hosted by Drisha) by Rabbi Adam Mintz, now of Kehilat Rayim Ahuvim in Manhattan. The series was titled, "Can we learn history from Rabbinic texts?" and on October 26, 2004 he devoted one lecture to this very issue. His material was based on the recent scholarly work of Prof. Vered Noa of Tel Aviv University.
Here's the theory (I'm setting forth all the relevant notes I have):

The Mishna was codified in @200 CE. The Chanukah story had taken place @350 years before. There was a live tradition about the event. The questions were, how did it happen? How long did the holiday last? If you want to remain in the Jewish tradition, you have this holiday, and there's no way out of that. [Perhaps the (unrecorded) question was, so why was it not explicitly and with great detail recorded in the Mishna?]

The Apocryphal works were uncannonized and thus not codified into the Hebrew Biblical cannon. Thus neither 1st nor 2nd Maccabees were cannonized.
However: 1. they tell the same story --though by different authors. [1st Mac. was written in Hebrew, now lost; we only have it in Greek] and 2. They were both written before 100 BCE, so that the author either saw the event(s) himself or received it firsthand--that's noteworthy.

In neither account is there a mention of the miraculous finding of the jug of oil, and, instead, a different reason is offered for the 8 day holiday: the fact that the Jews missed observing Sukkos, an 8 day holiday, during the defiled years, so they did it at the rededication, complete with boughs and palms, etc. (as per 2nd Mac.)!

Problems: In 63 BCE the Hasmoneans lost to the Romans. Not long thereafter, in 70 CE, the Temple was destroyed. The rededication was fairly short-lived, as a result. With no Temple, what's to celebrate? Post Chashmonaim, and especially post Churban Bayit Sheni, we had a holiday existing but it was no longer...shall we say, relevant.

Further wrinkle: based on 2nd Mac., the Jews were celebrating this rededication for 8 days. The religious authorities felt they must give legitimacy to the 8 day holiday, and pin it on something that exists, that's there.

With no Chashmonaim around any longer [and with uncannonized works like Maccabbes not to be looked at], how did they rabbis know about Chanukah?

They looked to the work known as the Scholium (in Hebrew, "Skolyon")(a commentary from 2nd Temple times on Masechet Taanit). What does it say in the Skloyon?

Here's Prof. Vered:
"The Tale of the Cruse of Oil, its Metamorphoses and its place among the traditions of the Scholia"

"Scholium P begins its explanation about Hanukkah with the story of the cruse of oil. This is also the explanation given in the Talmud, in the discussion: "What is the reason for Chanukah?" (Hebrew: "Mai Chanukah?")[See BT Shabbat 21b] quoted in the introduction to this article. However, there are distinct differences between the version appearing in Scholium P and the version appearing in the Talmud
[the following is the Scholium's version]:

[What is Chanukah?] "Because the heathens defiled the Temple. And when the Hasmonean dynasty prevailed they searched it and found in it pure oil. And they kindled the lights therewith. All of those days on which they kindled the lights they appointed a festival."

Concludes Rabbi Mintz: The rabbis looked to the Scholium and it's a small jump from its version to theirs. They elaborate on the story. In the Scholium they saw a finding of oil. They then elaborated. Here, history impacted on the rabbis. Their need allowed them to reinterpret the story this way. There was a story in the Scholium, and they elaborated on it.

So there you have it: a modern theory as to the origin of the 8 day Festival of Lights. Again, the evidence: No mention in 1st or 2nd Maccabbees of the amazing jug of oil (uncannonized works, true, but fairly contemporaneous), no mention of it in Josephus ("And from that time to this we celebrate this festival, and call it Lights. I SUPPOSE THE REASON WAS, because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us; and that thence was the name given to that festival.") ---he doesn't even know the real reason it's called Lights!--- and no mention of it in either Al Hanisim or the Scholium, rabbinic writings themselves! It makes its first appearance in the Talmud.
Was it an invention? Maybe not: they did find oil, after all, as per the Scholium. But did it last miraculously for 8 days?
Who knows? But the authorities had to explain and make relevant an 8 day holiday called "Lights" in the painful exile, with military victories and a rededicated Temple a long forgotten memory.

Any questions? No? Class dismissed. Thanks for reading this long post.

[Shmuel]

One more thought, sorry:
Rabbi Mintz pointed out that the Braisa in BT Shabbos 21b of "Mai Chanukah?" is, strangely, in Aramaic, though like most Braisos it should have been in Hebrew. Though they spoke Aramaic, the rabbis wrote their Mishnaic material in Hebrew to keep up a connection to the Land and its language. Yet this Braisa's first half is in Aramaic. Why?

Rabbi Mintz' theory: Its Aramaic language suggests a very old origin, even pre-dating Mishnaic material. But then note that the Aramaic stops, without recounting the story of the miraculous jug of oil. It's only in the Hebrew continuation, i.e. of later Mishnaic origin, that you get the story of the jug.

[Shmarya]

Very interesting theory! Thanks!

[sandman]

a google search using the words "Josephus " and "reliable" is most instructive...

[Shmarya]

sandman –

1. This is not simply about Josephus. There are other ancient records of the Maccabees. NONE mention a "miracle of oil."

2. I did your Google search. This is what was in the first link:
"In behalf of Josephus, it must be recalled that all these defects…were widely shared among ancient historians, few of whom brought critical tools to their craft in any modern sense. Josephus, in fact, was more reliable than most historians of his day. Whenever he is not referring to himself, his material is basically reliable." The New Complete Works of Josephus, Commentary by Paul Maier, 1999.

As usual, you do not know what you are talking about.

[Shmarya]

And, the #2 link is an article by Magen Broshi of the Israel Museum who shows Josephus to be largely accurate in his reporting. Broshi concludes:
It has not been our intention here to prove that [Josephus] is always exact or correct in every statement, but to show that his data are in many instances accurate, and that they stem from reliable sources to which he had access from the very beginning of his literary career.

[Shkol Milim]

So what, King David did not have a six pointed star on his shield. Do we now strip the MD of the flag of Israel, off many jewish artifacts both new and antiquated?

So its a story they told for whatever reason. Get over it man and stop your denigration of peoples beliefs just because you dont know what you yourself believe anymore and think that by dissing other Jews myth or history or whatever you wont feel so alone in your little disbelieving world.

I got news for ya chum, there was no Golem either. Woe lets hang those Rabbis for spinning that tale ehhh?

[Dovid Lerner]

Shmarya, I have to say I am very disappointed in you.
If you are going to doubt/deny/disbelieve something from the Talmud, where does it end? Will you only wear Rabeinu-Tam Tefillin because they found them like that in the caves? If you are going to say that the people that wrote the Talmud invented a story as a reason for a (albeit Rabbinic) holiday, where do you draw the line? Maybe they made up some of laws that they say are De'oiraisoh?!!!

Is there any point at all that you believe in Rabbinic/Talmudic sources over (so-called) historic sources?!

[Shmarya]

Dovid –

Read the comments to this post, especially the one's about Rabbi Mintz's class on this issue. I'm not the first person to raise these issues. Further, there is an interesting resolution of sorts as mentioned above regarding the scholium version.

The was no "miracle of oil."

[S.]

>The rabbinic dislike for the Maccabees can be summed up with the following question: How could a miracle have come through a family that would later become so evil?

That's a little speculative. The truth is, there is actually surprisingly very little rabbinic discussion about the Hasmoneans, period. When it is described, the relationship is given as complex and not uniformly negative.

[S.]

> "Whenever he is not referring to himself, his material is basically reliable." The New Complete Works of Josephus, Commentary by Paul Maier, 1999."

>As usual, you do not know what you are talking about.

And to think, I was just about to point out to sandman, who said, " the flaws in Josephus account...he was about as much a Pharisee as you are..." that Josephus said that he himself was a Pharisee. Guess not. ;)

[Nachum]

Remember that lighting lights is a major part of Sukkot as well.

Whenever there are dedication ceremonies in Tanach- the Mishkan under Moshe, the first Bayit under Shlomo, a rededication under Chizkiya, Nechemia's rededication- they go on for eight days. And many of them involve fire in a big way. Likely that's where Chanukah comes from too.

One more note: There's even a Gemara where they're not sure if Chanukah happened before or after the Beit HaMikdash was destroyed. Doesn't sound like their history was solid.

Are you stephan Rosenberg of the Jerusalem Post, or did you coincidentally write (or plagerise) the same deal?

[Shmarya]

I have no idea what you are refering to. Care to provide a link so we can all see what your are talking about?

This weeks print eddition of the J-post has an article featuring much that has been discussed by Stephen Rosenberg

[Shmarya]

So you accused me of plagerism because someone else wrote about the topic?

Please.

[Neo-Conservaguy]

"Is there any point at all that you believe in Rabbinic/Talmudic sources over (so-called) historic sources?!"

Should we remain ignorant of whatever other information is available to us to help us better apply critical thinking on the subjects of our religion? Not me, thanks. I don't fear the answers, whatever they may be; too bad more Orthodox rabbis don't share that courage.

[Dovid Lerner]

Well, excuse me, I found it impossible to believe that the Talmud made it up.

[Nachum]

Let's stress again: 650 years. In our terms, think 1350. We tell lots of stories about things that happened less time ago than that that didn't. By the mid-1800's, the story of Washington and the cherry tree was widely reported as fact. That's only about a century after the supposed event, and yet it never actually happened.

I just raised plagerism and coincidence as possibilities. Anyway - check out the article.
BTW - I know you're a great writer, that's why I thought you may go by Stephen Rosenberg.
In the Chanukah story the oil is a secondary miracle. The main miracle was the military victory which is commemorated by kindling lights representing spirituality which the Greeks wanted to destroy.

[David Berger]

Shmarya, you nare so full of shit. Face the facts!

[Ploni Almoni]

How do you know that there was Rabbinic support for the uprising against the Romans
at the time of the Churban?

[Shmarya]

Most scholars believe the Zealots were an offshoot of Beit Shammai, in part because of known family connections between the two groups.

[sy]

My guess is that many people who comment on this page never played the game telephone as a kid

You are correct

"Let's stress again: 650 years. In our terms, think 1350. We tell lots of stories about things that happened less time ago than that that didn't. By the mid-1800's, the story of Washington and the cherry tree was widely reported as fact. That's only about a century after the supposed event, and yet it never actually happened."

[formelyfrum]

My guess is that many people who comment on this page never played the game telephone as a kid

You are correct

"Let's stress again: 650 years. In our terms, think 1350. We tell lots of stories about things that happened less time ago than that that didn't. By the mid-1800's, the story of Washington and the cherry tree was widely reported as fact. That's only about a century after the supposed event, and yet it never actually happened."

[Moishe]

The genuine tradition of Israel, preserved in the Oral Law, explains the true nature of the Hannukah celebration. "What is Hannukah? (RSHI: For which miracle was it instituted?) The Sages taught .... A miracle took place and they kindled the Menorah from it (from the vessel of oil) for eight days" (Shabbos 21 B). The miracle of the lights was the central cause of celebration; for the battles were by no means finished, for soon afterward the power went over to the Hellenisers entirely, after the death of Judah the Maccabbee, and the worst part of the Shmad commenced, followed by 25 years of war. It is thus clear that the celebration of Hannukah was not because of any victory, but because of their rejoicing at the demonstration of the Shechinah in their midst. The episode of the miracle of Hannukah "was not permitted to be written" (Yoma 29 A). It is certain that none of the Sages ever mentioned the book of the Hasmoneans (the book of the Maccabbees); and this book has not been in the hands of our nation throughout the past two millenia. It was illegal for loyal Jews to have any public writings other than the Scriptures. All secular narratives were forbidden as "outside books" (Sefarim Hitzonim) (Sanhedrin 90 A), and no sacred writing other than the 24 books of the Scriptures was permitted. It was forbidden to write even prayer-books (Shabbos 115 B), and there is no mention of a written Mishnah or Talmud until the days of the Rabbanan Savorai, after the last of the Amoraim. All historical narrative was contained in the Oral Tradition in the form of carefully-memorized Baraisas, of which a number are found in the Talmud and other compilations, such as Seder Olam and Midrashim; but, like all the Oral Tradition, this had been forbidden to put into writing. Even Josephtus states: "We do not possess an unlimited number of books among us ... but only the books of the Scriptures" (Contra Apion I, 8), and he states: "Every one is not permitted of his own accord to be a writer" (ibid. I, 7). Josephus wrote his own books not for the Jews (vid. Jos. Vita 76). The book of Hasmoneans (including II Hasmoneans) was therefore certainly not composed by any of the Sages or their disciples (who were always the majority of the nation, as testified even by Josephus-Antig. XIII, 10, 5; XIII, 10,6). The narrative of the book of Hasmoneans concludes soon after the period of Jochanan Hyrcanus (I Hasmoneans 17: 25 ). Since it goes no further, it obviously was composed at that time (for if it were merely a chronicle of the Syrian wars, it did not need to include the history of Jochanan Hytcanus). This demonstrates that it was written under the regime of the Sadduccee-Hasmonean rulers, of whom Jochanan Hyrcanus was the first; and the writer was under their dominion. Because the Sadduccee regime of Jochanan Hyrcanus forbade the practice of all Rabbinic laws and inflicted punishment (in some instances death) upon those who observed these laws (Antiq. XIII, 10, 6), the writer was careful to omit any mention of the Rabbinical law of kindling the Hannukah lamp. He could therefore make no mention of the miracle of the Menorah which the entire nation knew as the occasion for this Rabbinical law. The practice of Hannukah was not repressed, although it was a Rabbinical edict, for it was the memorial of the glory of the Hasmonean family and the sole justification of their authority. Josephus, who followed the Sadduccee chronicles throughout, also omitted the miracle of the Menorah; but he could not brush off the fact that the entire nation kindled the Hannukah lamps, and he therefore mentions the festival called Lights (Antiq. XII, 7, 7). He gives a lame explanation: "I suppose the reason (for this name of Lights) was because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us" (ibid.). Despite the attempts of the Sadduccees to suppress the fame of the miracle of the Menorah and the practice of the Mitzvah, the Sages and the nation made every attempt to publicize this miracle; and the universal practice of the people was to kindle the Hannukah lamps at the gates of their homes, in the public thoroughfare (Shabbos 22 A; Bava Kama 62 B). from "Tzur teudah" by Avigdor Miller

[Shmarya]

1. 1& 2 Maccabees were written by DIFFERENT authors.

2. No early rabbinic text supports what you say.

3. All non-rabbinic or pre-rabbinic texts OPPOSE what you say, including non-Saducee texts.

4. What does all this mean? Your argument is worthless.

[Shmarya]

Last point. Avigdor Miller was:

1. A racist.

2. A liar.

3. A fool who regularly distorted history to try to 'prove' his points.

Quoting Avigdor Miller to anyone who has learned history is not going to help you.

[dovid komarov]

You are right shmarya, Josephus does not mention the miracle of light. He does mention it by the name of "festival of lights".

[dovid komarov]

Moishe | February 05, 2006 at 10:21 AM

You quoted Rav Miller. He failed to mention two separate rabbinic sources which give completely different reason for lighting menorah and do not mention miracle of jug at all. Pesikta Rabbosa chapter 2 and 6. Megillah Taanis chapter 9.
See http://failedmessiah.typepad.com/failed_messiahcom/2006/01/the_little_meno.html
Both of these sources mention 8 iron spears which had candles inserted upon them and lit.
If you think about it - 8 spears makes more sense that jug miracle story. Our menorahs have 8 lights just as spears and not like 1 light of the jug.
So there you have it - Rav Miller failing to mention such vital rabbinic sources regarding the hanukah story.
By the way - almost everything you quoted from is either wrong or seriously twisted.
If you want more info - contact me at gkomarov@yahoo.com