Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16-22

Sugya Map

• Issue: The fundamental ta'am (reason) behind the mitzvah derabanan of hadlakat ner Shabbos (kindling Shabbos lights). Is it rooted in oneg Shabbos (Shabbos pleasure) or kavod Shabbos (Shabbos honor)?
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • Bracha Recitation: How does the specific ta'am inform the appropriateness of reciting a bracha "על הדלקת נר שבת," especially given that mitzvot of oneg Shabbos generally do not carry a distinct bracha?
  • Priority/Stringency: While both oneg and kavod are significant, which ta'am underscores the extreme stringency that one must even beg for oil?
  • Scope of Obligation: Does the ta'am impact who is primarily obligated (men vs. women, shalom bayis considerations)?
• Primary Sources:
  • Rambam, Hilchot Shabbos 5:1¹
  • Rashi, Shabbos 25b s.v. "הדלקת נר שבת"²
  • Gemara, Shabbos 25b ("הדלקת נר שבת חובה")³
  • Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16-22⁴

Text Snapshot

The Arukh HaShulchan initiates a pivotal discussion by citing the Rambam:

"וכתב הרמב"ם הדלקת נר שבת לא רשות היא שאם רצה מדליק ואם רצה אינו מדליק ואינה מצוה שאדם אינו רודף אחריה... אלא חובה היא לאיש ולאשה שיהיה להם בבתיהם נר דלוק בשבת. ואפילו אין לו מה יאכל אלא שמבקש על הפתח חייב הוא לבקש שמן ולהדליק את הנר מפני שהדלקת נר זו בכלל עונג שבת היא. ומברך עליה קודם הדלקה ברוך אתה ה' אלקינו מלך העולם אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להדליק נר שבת. כשאר כל מצוות דרבנן. ואע"ג שאין מברכין על כל עניני עונג שבת מ"מ הדלקת נר היתה תקנה בפני עצמה".⁵

The Arukh HaShulchan then juxtaposes this with Rashi's perspective:

"ורש"י פירש הטעם משום כבוד שבת כדי לעשות סעודה חשובה במקום מואר. דלרש"י לא משום עונג שבת אלא משום כבוד שבת".⁶

Dikduk/Leshon Nuance

The Rambam’s formulation, "לא רשות היא" (it is not optional), immediately elevates ner Shabbos from a mere custom to an unequivocal obligation. The phrase "חובה היא לאיש ולאשה" underscores its universal and stringent nature. The Arukh HaShulchan's subsequent observation, "הדלקה בפני עצמה" (the kindling itself was an ordinance unto itself), serves as a crucial terutz to reconcile the bracha with the oneg Shabbos rationale, implying that while oneg generally lacks a bracha, this specific takana is distinct. Rashi's "כדי לעשות סעודה חשובה במקום מואר" (in order to make a significant feast in a lit place) precisely articulates the kavod aspect, linking the light directly to the dignity of the Shabbos meal.

Readings

Rambam: Ner Shabbos as Oneg and a Distinct Takana

The Rambam, in Hilchot Shabbos 5:1, unequivocally states that hadlakat ner Shabbos is a chova (obligation) for both men and women, so stringent that one must even beg for oil to fulfill it. His rationale is explicit: "מפני שהדלקת נר זו בכלל עונג שבת היא" (because this kindling of the light is included in oneg Shabbos).⁷

• Chiddush: The Rambam's chiddush lies in declaring ner Shabbos a component of oneg Shabbos while simultaneously mandating a bracha upon it "כשאר כל מצוות דרבנן" (like all other Rabbinic commandments). This presents a conceptual challenge, as oneg Shabbos generally encompasses a broad range of activities (e.g., eating fine foods, wearing nice clothes) which do not warrant individual berachot. The Rambam's position implies that despite its classification under oneg, ner Shabbos possesses a unique status as a specific takana (Rabbinic ordinance) that merits its own bracha.

Rashi: Ner Shabbos as Kavod

Rashi, commenting on Shabbos 25b, explains the ta'am for ner Shabbos as "משום כבוד שבת" (due to the honor of Shabbos). He clarifies this by stating, "כדי לעשות סעודה חשובה במקום מואר" (in order to make an important feast in a lit place).⁸

• Chiddush: Rashi's chiddush offers an alternative ta'am to the Rambam's oneg Shabbos. By framing the obligation as kavod Shabbos, he highlights the necessity of light for the dignity and proper conduct of the Shabbos meal, rather than purely for sensory pleasure. This distinction becomes significant when considering the bracha, as kavod might be perceived as a more concrete, actionable aspect of the mitzvah than the more abstract concept of oneg.

Arukh HaShulchan: Highlighting the Machloket and its Ramifications

The Arukh HaShulchan, in our source text, meticulously presents both the Rambam's and Rashi's positions, effectively setting up a machloket (dispute) regarding the underlying ta'am. He explicitly notes the Rambam's assertion that ner Shabbos is part of oneg Shabbos and his subsequent, somewhat challenging, justification for the bracha: "ואע"ג שאין מברכין על כל עניני עונג שבת, מ"מ הדלקת נר היתה תקנה בפני עצמה" (And even though we do not recite a blessing on all matters of oneg Shabbos, nevertheless, the kindling of the light was a Rabbinical ordinance in itself).⁹ He then offers Rashi's kavod Shabbos as a distinct and arguably more straightforward explanation for the bracha.

• Chiddush: The Arukh HaShulchan's chiddush is his role as an analytical expositor, contrasting these two foundational views. He implicitly raises the kushya inherent in the Rambam's position concerning the bracha on oneg Shabbos and shows how Rashi's kavod Shabbos might resolve this tension more elegantly. He emphasizes that for Rashi, it is "לא משום עונג שבת אלא משום כבוד שבת" (not because of oneg Shabbos but because of kavod Shabbos), drawing a sharp distinction that clarifies the ta'am.

Friction

The Fundamental Kushya: A Bracha on Oneg Shabbos?

The most potent kushya arises from the Rambam's assertion that ner Shabbos is "בכלל עונג שבת" (included in oneg Shabbos)¹⁰ while simultaneously mandating a bracha "להדליק נר שבת."¹¹ Generally, mitzvot whose primary purpose is oneg (pleasure), such as eating fine foods on Shabbos or Yom Tov, do not have a dedicated bracha "על עונג שבת." If the ta'am for ner Shabbos is purely oneg, why does it uniquely merit a bracha when other mitzvot of oneg do not? This tension is implicitly recognized by the Arukh HaShulchan's comment: "ואע"ג שאין מברכין על כל עניני עונג שבת, מ"מ הדלקת נר היתה תקנה בפני עצמה".¹²

Terutz 1: Takana B'Pnei Atzma (Rambam's Approach)

The Rambam's position is understood by many Acharonim (and hinted at by the Arukh HaShulchan) as follows: While ner Shabbos contributes to oneg Shabbos, the act of kindling itself was instituted by the Sages as a distinct takana (Rabbinic ordinance) that stands "בפני עצמה" (on its own). The bracha is therefore not recited on the general concept of oneg Shabbos, but on the specific, codified act of hadlakat ner Shabbos. This approach, articulated by the Arukh HaShulchan, suggests that the Sages, in their wisdom, identified this particular aspect of oneg (or shalom bayis as some explain) as sufficiently critical to warrant a formal takana with a bracha, elevating it beyond other, less formal oneg activities. R' Chaim Brisker, for example, would differentiate between the cheftza (object/act) of the mitzvah and its gavra (person/reason). Here, the cheftza (kindling) is a distinct takana, even if its gavra (reason) is oneg.

Terutz 2: Kavod Shabbos (Rashi's Approach)

Rashi's ta'am of kavod Shabbos provides an elegant resolution to this kushya. If the primary reason for ner Shabbos is to ensure the honor and dignity of the Shabbos meal ("כדי לעשות סעודה חשובה במקום מואר"),¹³ then the bracha is recited on the performance of this specific act of kavod. Unlike oneg, which can be subjective and broad, kavod through a specific act like lighting is a more tangible and definable fulfillment of a Rabbinic command. The bracha "להדליק נר שבת" therefore fits seamlessly with the idea of fulfilling a specific takana for kavod Shabbos. This reading is simpler as it doesn't require differentiating between a takana being "part of" oneg but also "standing on its own." For Rashi, it's simply a distinct takana for kavod.

Intertext

"וקראת לשבת עונג" (Yeshayahu 58:13)

The concept of oneg Shabbos itself is rooted in the prophetic call of Yeshayahu: "אם תשיב משבת רגלך עשות חפצך ביום קדשי וקראת לשבת עונג לקדוש ה' מכובד וכו'".¹⁴ This verse establishes oneg Shabbos as a fundamental principle of Shabbos observance, parallel to kavod Shabbos. The Rambam's choice to link ner Shabbos to oneg places it firmly within this scriptural imperative. This highlights that while the bracha on oneg is unusual, the underlying principle is deeply ingrained in the essence of Shabbos. However, the verse itself doesn't define specific acts of oneg that would warrant berachot, thus deepening the kushya on Rambam's position regarding the bracha on ner Shabbos.

Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 263:3 and Shalom Bayis

The Shulchan Arukh, in a related context, states that women are primarily obligated in hadlakat ner Shabbos because "מפני שהיא מצויה בתוך הבית ועוסקת בצרכי הבית" (because she is generally present in the home and occupied with household needs).¹⁵ Many Rishonim and Acharonim (e.g., Rashi in Shabbos 31b, Tosafot in Shabbos 25b)^16,17 attribute another significant ta'am to ner Shabbos: shalom bayis (peace in the home). A home without light on Shabbos leads to stumbling, friction, and lack of peace. This introduces a third, powerful ta'am. While not explicitly mentioned in our Arukh HaShulchan text's direct discussion of Rambam vs. Rashi, it is a crucial cross-reference. Shalom bayis is often seen as a ta'am that bridges oneg and kavod – a peaceful home is both pleasurable and honorable. Crucially, the mitzvah of ner Shabbos ensures shalom bayis through a specific, actionable takana. This makes the bracha more understandable, as shalom bayis is considered a weighty principle, potentially warranting a distinct bracha on the act that preserves it. The Magen Avraham (O.C. 263:3) and Mishnah Berurah (O.C. 263:11) explicitly mention shalom bayis as a primary reason.

Psak/Practice

The psak halacha firmly establishes that hadlakat ner Shabbos is a chova for both men and women, and a bracha is recited upon its performance. While the Arukh HaShulchan presents the machloket between Rambam (oneg Shabbos) and Rashi (kavod Shabbos), this debate regarding the ta'am does not alter the practical outcome concerning the bracha or the stringency of the mitzvah. The Shulchan Arukh itself (O.C. 263:10) states the bracha "אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו להדליק נר שבת,"¹⁸ aligning with the Rambam's view that a bracha is recited. The Arukh HaShulchan's own conclusion implicitly accepts this practice.

From a meta-psak heuristic perspective, when Rishonim offer multiple ta'amim for a mitzvah, the halacha often adopts the interpretation that ensures the most comprehensive or stringent fulfillment of the mitzvah. Here, whether it's for oneg, kavod, or shalom bayis, the common denominator is the absolute necessity of the light and the bracha upon its kindling. The existence of multiple ta'amim (including shalom bayis) only strengthens the mandate and the bracha, demonstrating the mitzvah's multifaceted importance.

Takeaway

The Arukh HaShulchan masterfully exposes the foundational debate between Rambam and Rashi regarding the ta'am of ner Shabbos – oneg vs. kavod – and its implications for the bracha. Ultimately, irrespective of the specific rationale, hadlakat ner Shabbos is a distinct, stringent Rabbinic obligation, universally observed with a bracha.

---

¹ Rambam, Hilchot Shabbos 5:1. ² Rashi, Shabbos 25b s.v. "הדלקת נר שבת". ³ Shabbos 25b. ⁴ Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16-22. ⁵ Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16. ⁶ Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16. ⁷ Rambam, Hilchot Shabbos 5:1. ⁸ Rashi, Shabbos 25b s.v. "הדלקת נר שבת". ⁹ Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16. ¹⁰ Rambam, Hilchot Shabbos 5:1. ¹¹ Rambam, Hilchot Shabbos 5:1. ¹² Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:16. ¹³ Rashi, Shabbos 25b s.v. "הדלקת נר שבת". ¹⁴ Yeshayahu 58:13. ¹⁵ Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 263:3. ¹⁶ Rashi, Shabbos 31b s.v. "אמר ריש לקיש נשים חייבות בנר חנוכה". ¹⁷ Tosafot, Shabbos 25b s.v. "הדלקת נר שבת". ¹⁸ Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 263:10.