Candle-lighting

See Shabbat candles
See Seder

CORR 60-63

CANDLE LIGHTING AT KOL NIDRE

QUESTION:

The congregation has an established custom of conducting a candle lighting ritual at the late Friday evening service. It is now planned to have such a candle lighting ritual at the Kol Nidre service (or is it, perhaps, already an established custom?). An official of the congregation objects to this Yom Kippur Eve ritual. It is not clear whether his objection applies just to this year, when Yom Kippur fell on the Sabbath or whether he objects to the candle ritual for any Yom Kippur. Should such a ritual at Kol Nidre be established or, if already established, should it be continued? (Asked by Rabbi Albert A. Michels, Sun City, Arizona.)

ANSWER:

THE OBJECTIONS of the officer of the congregation should be taken seriously, especially if his opposition to the candle ritual is shared by many members of the congregation. Even if there could be very little objection to such a ritual in a Reform congregation, nevertheless if a considerable portion of this congregation objects to such a ritual, even without justification, then it is wiser not to institute such a ritual if it does not already exist as a congregational custom.

This concern for the feelings of the congregation, regardless of whether they are justified or not, is based upon the well-known caution in the Talmud (Pesachim 50b) namely, that if people believe that something is forbidden, then even though actually it is permitted, you may not declare it permitted in their presence. In other words, we must be careful not to shock the religious sensibilities of people, even though they may not be justified. If, therefore, there is no such established custom at present in the congregation, and such a custom is now contemplated, then one must judge, carefully, the sentiment of the congregation in this matter.

However, the feelings of the congregation, pro or con, are not the basic consideration. They are only the grounds for caution. The question can best be decided objectively, i.e., according to law and tradition. Should such a custom exist (or continue to exist)? As to the actual law, the Halacha in the matter, there is no question that the custom of lighting candles at a late Friday evening service after dark is violative of the traditional laws of Sabbath rest. However, this lighting of candles in the synagogue has, by now, become a well established custom in Reform synagogues and our people have come to accept it. Our rabbinate, also, favors the ritual on the ground that its spiritual benefits outweigh the fact that it is violative of the laws of Sabbath work. The question now is: Should this established custom carry over to Yom Kippur also?

We mentioned above the possible sensitivities of people who accept the kindling of candles late Friday night but nevertheless object to it on Yom Kippur. Beyond the necessity of considering their sensitivity to the matter, we must now ask ourselves objectively: Do the laws of Sabbath rest apply more strictly to the Day of Atonement, since that is called “The Sabbath of Sabbaths”? As a matter of law, the laws of Sabbath rest apply also to the Day of Atonement (of course, even if it occurs on weekdays). See Minchas Chinuch, commandments 316, 317. But one may well say that the laws of Sabbath work apply, not more strictly, but less strictly to the Day of Atonement, since in the days of the old Jewish state, violation of the Sabbath was punished as a capital crime by the courts (Sekilla); whereas violation of the Yom Kippur laws of rest were not punished by the courts, but left to the punishment from heaven (Karres).

More specifically, the Sabbath lights belong properly in the home, on the table, not in the synagogue. The Mishnah (M. Sabbath 2:7) says that when a man comes home from the synagogue, he must ask the household, “Have ye kindled the lights?” There is, therefore, no strong legal reason for having these home lights kindled in the synagogue, as has become our modern Reform custom. On the other hand, the lighting of candles in the home on Yom Kippur is only a custom which varies in different cities (see Orah Hayyim 610:1). But lights in the synagogue on Yom Kippur are virtually mandatory; not only the memorial light (Neshama light) but lights in general are to be multiplied in the synagogue on the Day of Atonement (Orah Hayyim 610:4). Of course those lights were meant to be lit before dark. However, it can be stated that on the basis of tradition the kindling of lights on the Sabbath belongs primarily in the home, and the kindling of lights on Kol Nidre belongs primarily in the synagogue. Therefore, as far as tradition is concerned, we can say that if the custom had developed in Reform congregations to have a candle lighting ceremony only on Kol Nidre, that would be much more in consonance with tradition than our present custom of lighting candles on Friday night in the synagogue.

To sum up: If the ritual of candle lighting on Kol Nidre has not yet been established as a congregational custom and it is a question of initiating it now, then careful consideration should be given to the sentiment of the congregation on this matter. If there is no strong feeling against it in the congregation, and especially if it is already a custom of the congregation, then it is evident that lighting candles at Kol Nidre can find much more justification in the tradition than lighting them in the synagogue on Friday night, which is already an established custom with us.

NRR 28-32

DISPUTE OVER CANDLE-LIGHTING AND KIDDUSH

QUESTION:

In our congregation at the Friday night services, women light the Sabbath candles and the congregation remains seated; men recite the Kiddush and the congregation stands. A dispute has arisen on the ground that this indicates greater respect for the man’s part of the service than for the woman’s part of the service. Hence, it is sex discrimination. Are there clear rules as to when the congregation must stand during services? (Asked by Rabbi Stephen S. Pearce, Stamford, Connecticut.)

ANSWER:

A GENERATION AGO this question might have been dismissed as trivial and not worth serious consideration. Nowadays, however, with the nationwide agitation for women’s rights, the charge of such a supposed sex discrimination could well lead to divisive disputes in many a congregation. Therefore nowadays the problem deserves full and careful consideration.

First, let us consider the general question of what tradition demands as to the places in the service where the congregation must stand. This question is not easy to answer, first, because the services are composed of many different elements which have a different legal status, and second, because the law is not always definite as to standing or sitting, and local custom varies. Perhaps it would be helpful just to list what is fairly clear about standing or sitting during the service.

The Sh’ma, the most important part of the service, may be recited when a person is standing or walking or riding, since it is important to recite it at its proper hour (Orach Chayim 63). As for the Shemone Esra, standing is obligatory; hence it is called the Amida. Not only must the worshiper stand when he recites it, but also when the cantor repeats it, and the people must stand (according to the opinion of Isserles, 124:4). All agree that people should stand when the cantor, repeating the Shemone Esra, comes to the Kedusha. As for the reading of the Torah, while there are strict rules against leaving the synagogue during the reading, it is nevertheless not required that people should stand during the reading (146:4). At the Duchan, when the priest blessed the people, it was not necessary for the people to stand (see Be’er Hetev, Note 25 to Orach Chayim 128). There is also a custom (apparently Hungarian) for the congregation to stand while the Ark is open (cf. Contemporary Reform Responsa, p. 38).

Now, specifically as to standing or sitting during the Kiddush in the synagogue—first of all, the status of the Kiddush as part of the public worship is in doubt. Joseph Caro, in Orach Chayim 269, says the Kiddush properly should be recited in the place where the meal is eaten, and that it was inserted into the synagogue worship for the sake of strangers who would eat in the synagogue. Since such meals for strangers on Sabbath eve in the synagogue are no longer provided, Caro says it would be better not to have the Kiddush in the synagogue, and he calls attention to the fact that in Eretz Yisroel they do not have the Kiddush in the Friday evening service at all.

However, we Ashkenazim do have the Kiddush in the synagogue on Friday evenings, and Isserles says it is the general custom to stand up for this Kiddush {Orach Chayim 269). One other dispute about standing or sitting during the Kiddush concerns the Kiddush recited in the Succah. This question is left undecided {Orach Chayim 643:2).

Now, if the status of the Kiddush in the synagogue is debatable, the status of blessing the Sabbath candles in the synagogue is still more debatable. There is some sort of vague precedent for it cited by Isaac Lamperonti in his Pachad Yitzchok under the heading of Hadlakah. He speaks of a custom of giving a man the privilege of kindling the two lights which will stand on the reading desk during the Friday evening service. In general, however, the lighting of the Sabbath eve candles in the synagogue is an innovation of Reform synagogues. It would be impossible for this lighting ceremony to take place in Orthodox synagogues since, especially in winter, the candles are lit after dark. While it is the especial obligation of women to light the Sabbath candles {Orach Chayim 263:3), men too are expected to light them when they are away from home. There is no statement that I have found any where as to whether those who are present at the lighting of the candles should stand or be seated.

As to the general status of women as to taking a public part in Jewish services, it must be understood that whatever participation they have today has been given them by Reform congregations. According to Orthodox law, a woman is not required to recite the daily Sh’ma (Mishnah Berachos 3:3). Authorities disagree as to whether a woman is required to recite the Tefillah (of course, that does not mean she is prohibited from reciting any of the prayers she wishes to recite), but according to the Halachic rule, she cannot discharge the obligation of the congrega-tion by acting as cantor for prayers which she herself is not required to recite. There is an interesting note on this question in the Be’er Hetev to Orach Chayim 106:1, in which he says that most women recite their own devotions. (That is, of course, why the special Techinnos developed for the use of women. See my Conference paper on “Devotional Literature in the Vernacular.”)

In the light of all the above complexities of law and custom, what would be the most correct and also the most practical solution to the problem which the question asked here has presented? There are two possible solutions. One is to exchange the roles of the participants; that is to say, to have a woman occasionally make Kiddush and a man bless the lights. Another possible solution is not to change the roles of the participants but to change the posture of the congregation, namely, that they should stand for both ceremonies or sit for both. Which of these two possible solutions is the better practically and also the more justified of the two by tradition?

The first possible solution—namely, to exchange occa-sionally the roles of the participants—is subject to strong objection as follows: While the legal and traditional status of Kiddush and candle-lighting in the synagogue is rather shaky and uncertain, the status of both of these ceremonies in the home is firmly established both in law and in custom. After all these centuries, candle-lighting and the Kiddush at home have created an almost immovable mental association in the minds of our people. It is the mother who blesses the candles, the father who comes home from the synagogue and makes the Kiddush. This is the revered mental association in the heart of the people of Israel; and so it is neither justified nor wise to tamper with it.

As for the second solution, it is reasonable and has greater justification in the tradition precisely because there is no clear rule to be derived from traditional sources, as seen above, as to standing or sitting during either of those two ceremonies. Therefore, we have more latitude, and from this point of view the second solution is by far the better. We can change the posture of the congregation and make it identical for both ceremonies. Since there is some inclination in the law, as mentioned above, for the people to stand during the Kiddush in the synagogue, the logical solution then would be to have the congregation stand both for the Kiddush and for the candle-lighting.

May this solution be acceptable and end the controversy in the congregation. It seems to me to be the more logical as it is also the more justified of the two by tradition.

CARR 263-265

CCAR RESPONSA

Contemporary American Reform Responsa

175. Lighting the Candles and the Qiddush ­ Man’s or

Woman’s Prerogative

QUESTION: It has thus far been customary for a

woman to light the candles at the Friday evening service and for a man to recite the qiddush.

Does the woman have a primary responsibility for lighting candles, or is this only a matter of

custom? Is there value in the current synagogue practice which encourages a woman to light

candles and a man to lead the qiddush, or is there a middle ground which would permit a

man on rare occasion to light the candles and the woman to lead the qiddush? (N. Hirsh,

Seattle, WA)ANSWER: It is certainly clear to all that both these segments of the

service have been moved from the home to the synagogue. Orthodox Judaism moved the

qiddush, and Reform Judaism moved the lighting of the shabbat candles. The

Orthodox rational was clearly stated by Joseph Caro, who specified that the qiddush

should be recited wherever a meal was eaten. It was moved to a synagogue for the sake of

strangers who ate in the synagogue (Pes. 10a; Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 269). He felt

that the practice should have been halted in his day, as meals were no longer taken in the

synagogue. However, Isserles added that it was Ashkenazic custom to continue the recital of the

qiddush in the synagogue. This followed Natronai Gaon (Siddur Rav Amram, ed.,

Jerusalem, p. 65). As no woman participated in any public portion of the Orthodox service, the

question of a woman reciting qiddush was never raised. The Reform

innovation of lighting the candles in the synagogue may have been intended as a revival of an

ancient custom of lighting shabbat candles following the afternoon service in the

synagogue (Siddur Rav Amram, ed. Jerusalem, 1971, p. 61). It came as an addition to

the late Friday evening service, which had its origin with Isaac Mayer Wise. His first

congregation was not enthusiastic about such a service, but permitted him to establish it in 1869

(G. Plaut, “The Sabbath in the Reform Movement,” C.C.A.R. Yearbook, Vol. 75, p. 177).

This service did not contain the ritual lighting of candles in the synagogue, nor did the early

editions of the Union Prayer Book. It was introduced in the newly revised edition of 1940,

and has become an accepted part of liturgy. Lighting the shabbat candles at

home is a mitzvah which was primarily assigned to women, but not exclusively

(M. Shab. 2.6). It is one of the three mitzvot specifically commanded to women as

also stressed by the Shulhan Arukh (Orah Hayim 263.3), yet the duty of executing this

commandment rests upon both men and women. If a male is traveling alone, he is responsible

for lighting the shabbat candles (Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 263.2,

6). It is not clear why this commandment, which must be carried out before a specified

time on Friday evening, was recommended to women, as women are free from all positive

mitzvot which were dependent upon time. Some authorities felt that the execution of such

commandments might interfere with family responsibilities (Simon Duran, Magen Avot

2.6). This explanation did not deal with women without family responsibility. The commandments

from which they are exempt may, of course, be performed by women, although these are not

incumbent upon them. As they are not obligated to execute these mitzvot, they can not

discharge the obligation for others (Shulhan Arukh Orah Hayim 106.1). This would

preclude their recital of the qiddush. Naturally, this conclusion has been rejected by

Reform Judaism in keeping with its emphasis on the equality of men and women. Either

mitzvah, lighting the candles or qiddush, may be performed by women both at

home and at a public service. Although it has become customary for women to light

the candles and for men to recite the qiddush, there is absolutely nothing within Reform

tradition which would preclude a reversal of these roles. This would be appropriate both at home

and in the synagogue. In keeping with the current emphasis on equality, it would be good to vary

the practice in the synagogue.December 1981

If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.

✕