Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:8-15

Hook

On the surface, lighting Shabbat candles seems like one of the most straightforward and universally observed Jewish practices. Yet, a deeper dive into the Arukh HaShulchan's discussion reveals a fascinating and fundamental debate among our Sages: is the primary reason for this mitzvah rooted in Oneg Shabbos (Shabbat pleasure and enjoyment) or Kavod Shabbos (Shabbat honor and dignity)? This isn't merely an academic distinction; it's a window into the very essence of what Shabbat means to us and how we are meant to experience and relate to its sanctity. The text we're about to explore meticulously lays out this tension, inviting us to consider how our understanding of the "why" profoundly shapes our experience of the "how."

Context

To truly appreciate the Arukh HaShulchan's nuanced presentation, it helps to understand its unique place in the landscape of halakhic literature. Written by Rabbi Yechiel Michel Epstein (1829–1908) in Lithuania, the Arukh HaShulchan stands as one of the last great comprehensive codes of Jewish law, published roughly a generation after the Mishnah Berurah. While both aim to clarify the Shulchan Aruch, their methodologies often differ. The Mishnah Berurah tends to focus on practical halakha, often presenting the consensus view of later authorities. The Arukh HaShulchan, on the other hand, frequently delves into the sources and reasoning behind the halakha, tracing the development of Jewish law from the Talmud through the Rishonim and Acharonim. Rabbi Epstein often presents the original opinions of the Geonim and Rishonim, even when they diverge from the Shulchan Aruch's final ruling, providing a rich historical and intellectual context. He believed that understanding the full breadth of opinions, even those not ultimately codified, was crucial for a complete grasp of Jewish law. This approach is evident in our passage, where he juxtaposes the Rambam's view with Rashi's, not merely to state the halakha but to illuminate the underlying philosophical currents that inform it. His work is celebrated for its clarity, its comprehensive scope, and its deep respect for the entire chain of tradition, often providing a more expansive and less concise treatment than the Mishnah Berurah. This specific passage, by highlighting the foundational debate between the Rambam and Rashi regarding the ta'am (reason) for hadlakat ner Shabbos (Shabbat candle lighting), exemplifies the Arukh HaShulchan's commitment to intellectual depth alongside practical guidance, inviting us to become partners in the ongoing halakhic conversation.

Text Snapshot

The Rambam wrote, "Lighting Shabbos candles is not (some ordinary) optional act, where you may or may not light them according to your desire. And (to think) it is not a mitzvah and where you are you not required to chase after it... rather it is an obligation for both men and women to have in their homes a light for Shabbos. Even if you do not have your own food to eat, you must go door to door begging for oil and kindle the light because this (light) is included in "Shabbos Pleasure" (the mitzveh to have Oneg Shabbos)." (Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:8)

"And one must say the blessing before the kindling: Blessed are you Hashem our God King of the Universe Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to kindle a light for Shabbos. One recites this blessing just like we do for all Rabbinical requirements." (Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:9)

"Rashi explains the reason is 'Honoring Shabbos' (Kavod Shabbos) since you can only hold an important feast in a well lit place." (Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:15)

"So according to Rashi, (the reason we light a Shabbos candle) is not because of "Shabbos Pleasure" (Oneg Shabbos) but rather due to "Honoring Shabbos" (Kavod Shabbos)." (Arukh HaShulchan, Orach Chaim 263:15)

[Sefaria URL: https://www.sefaria.org/Arukh_HaShulchan%2C_Orach_Chaim_263%3A8-15]

Close Reading

Insight 1: The Arukh HaShulchan's Dialectical Structure

The Arukh HaShulchan's presentation here is a masterclass in halakhic discourse, employing a clear, deliberate, and ultimately dialectical structure. It doesn't merely state the halakha; it builds an argument, introduces a challenge, and then resolves or refines the understanding.

The passage begins by establishing the absolute, non-negotiable nature of the mitzvah of hadlakat ner Shabbos. It quotes the Rambam, who emphatically states, "Lighting Shabbos candles is not (some ordinary) optional act... rather it is an obligation for both men and women to have in their homes a light for Shabbos." This opening statement serves to firmly ground the practice in the realm of chovah (obligation), dispelling any notion of it being a mere custom or an act of piety left to individual discretion. The Rambam's language is strong, underscoring that this is a mitzvas chovah—a mandatory commandment. He even provides an extreme case to highlight its urgency: "Even if you do not have your own food to eat, you must go door to door begging for oil and kindle the light." This level of commitment elevates the mitzvah far beyond convenience or personal preference, positioning it as a fundamental requirement for celebrating Shabbat. By starting with this definitive statement, the Arukh HaShulchan ensures that the reader grasps the severity and universality of the obligation before delving into its intricacies. The reader is thus prepared for a discussion that takes this fundamental obligation as its starting point.

Crucially, the Rambam immediately provides his reason for this obligation: "because this (light) is included in 'Shabbos Pleasure' (the mitzveh to have Oneg Shabbos)." This initial explanation anchors the mitzvah in the broader principle of Oneg Shabbos, a Biblical commandment to delight in the Sabbath (Isaiah 58:13). For the Rambam, the presence of light is essential for true enjoyment of the Sabbath meal and atmosphere. Without light, one might stumble, eat in discomfort, or experience a sense of gloom, which would detract from the spirit of oneg. Thus, the light directly facilitates the physical and psychological delight that is integral to Shabbat. This initial framing sets the stage for the entire discussion, providing the first major ta'am (reason) for the mitzvah.

The Arukh HaShulchan then transitions to the practical aspect of the berakha (blessing), stating, "And one must say the blessing before the kindling... One recites this blessing just like we do for all Rabbinical requirements." This detail is significant because it explicitly identifies hadlakat ner Shabbos as a mitzva d'Rabbanan (a rabbinic commandment). This categorization is important because it raises a subtle tension: how can a rabbinic commandment be so absolute that one must beg for oil, and how does it relate to the Biblical concept of Oneg Shabbos? The fact that a berakha is recited "just like we do for all Rabbinical requirements" reinforces its status as a distinct, divinely sanctioned obligation, albeit one instituted by the Sages. This also subtly foreshadows the upcoming discussion about the reason for the mitzvah, as rabbinic enactments often have specific, articulated reasons.

Following this, the Arukh HaShulchan introduces a counter-point or an alternative perspective, which is where the dialectic truly comes alive. He notes, "And even though we do not recite a blessing on (each and ) every matter relating to 'Shabbos Pleasure' (oneg Shabbos), nevertheless, the kindling of the light was a Rabbinical ordinance in itself, as it is said, 'The kindling of a light for Shabbos in an obligation.'" This statement addresses a potential question: if ner Shabbos is merely part of oneg Shabbos, why do we make a specific blessing for it, when we don't make blessings on other forms of oneg (like eating delicious food or wearing fine clothes)? The Arukh HaShulchan clarifies that while the reason might be oneg, the act of lighting candles was established as a distinct rabbinic ordinance with its own status, thereby justifying the unique blessing. This explanation reconciles the specific blessing with the general principle.

Finally, the Arukh HaShulchan introduces Rashi's contrasting view: "Rashi explains the reason is 'Honoring Shabbos' (Kavod Shabbos) since you can only hold an important feast in a well lit place." And then, he explicitly draws the distinction: "So according to Rashi, (the reason we light a Shabbos candle) is not because of 'Shabbos Pleasure' (Oneg Shabbos) but rather due to 'Honoring Shabbos' (Kavod Shabbos)." This is the climax of the dialectic. After establishing the obligation, its rabbinic nature, and the Rambam's reasoning, the Arukh HaShulchan presents an equally weighty, yet divergent, perspective from Rashi. By explicitly stating that Rashi's reason replaces the Rambam's ("is not because of... but rather due to..."), he highlights a fundamental disagreement about the primary motivation behind the mitzvah.

The structural brilliance lies in this progression: absolute obligation -> Rambam's reason (Oneg) -> Rabbinic status & blessing -> Rashi's contrasting reason (Kavod). This isn't just a presentation of facts; it's an intellectual journey that forces the reader to grapple with the underlying principles and appreciate the depth of halakhic reasoning. The Arukh HaShulchan masterfully uses this structure to demonstrate that while the halakha l'ma'aseh (practical law) of lighting candles is undisputed, its fundamental ta'am (reason) is a subject of profound debate among the greatest authorities.

Insight 2: The Core Tension: Oneg Shabbos vs. Kavod Shabbos

At the heart of this passage lies a profound conceptual distinction between Oneg Shabbos and Kavod Shabbos. While both are integral aspects of Shabbat observance, their emphasis and implications subtly shift our understanding of why we light candles, and by extension, how we approach the entire day.

Oneg Shabbos: The Rambam explicitly grounds the mitzvah of ner Shabbos in Oneg Shabbos. Oneg translates to pleasure, delight, or enjoyment. The Biblical source for Oneg Shabbos is often cited from Isaiah 58:13, "and you shall call the Sabbath a delight (oneg)." This commandment encourages us to actively seek out and cultivate a sense of physical and spiritual pleasure on Shabbat. For the Rambam, light is a direct facilitator of this pleasure. Imagine a Shabbat meal in darkness: one might stumble, spill food, struggle to see the faces of loved ones, or simply feel a sense of gloom. Such an environment is hardly conducive to delight. Light, conversely, allows for comfortable eating, clear vision, a cheerful atmosphere, and the ability to fully engage with the Shabbat experience without practical impediments. The Rambam's emphasis on even "begging for oil" underscores the essential nature of light for a truly pleasurable Shabbat. It's not a luxury; it's a prerequisite for fulfilling the oneg aspect of the day. From this perspective, the light serves our personal comfort and enjoyment, enhancing the sensory and social experience of Shabbat. The light makes the home pleasant.

Kavod Shabbos: Rashi, on the other hand, posits that the reason for ner Shabbos is Kavod Shabbos. Kavod translates to honor, dignity, or respect. The Biblical source for Kavod Shabbos is often derived from the phrase "zachor et yom haShabbat l'kadsho" (remember the Sabbath day to sanctify it) or "shamor et yom haShabbat l'kadsho" (observe the Sabbath day to sanctify it), where kadosh implies setting it apart and honoring it. Rashi's explanation, "since you can only hold an important feast in a well lit place," directly links the light to the concept of honoring the day. An "important feast" (like one held for a king or a dignitary) is never conducted in darkness or dim light. It requires bright, abundant illumination to signify its significance, to highlight the grandeur of the setting, the quality of the food, and the importance of the gathering. The light, in this view, is not primarily for our personal comfort, but rather to elevate the status of Shabbat itself. It's about demonstrating reverence and respect for the holy day, treating it as a distinguished guest or a regal occasion. The light makes the home honorable.

The tension arises because while both Oneg and Kavod lead to the same practical halakha (lighting candles), their underlying rationales are distinct. Oneg focuses on the experiential aspect for the individual, emphasizing personal comfort and delight. Kavod focuses on the objective status of Shabbat, emphasizing its inherent sanctity and the need to honor it publicly and visibly.

This distinction is not merely semantic. If the primary reason is oneg, then the minimum requirement might be enough light to simply see and not stumble. If the primary reason is kavod, one might be inclined to use more lights, brighter lights, or more aesthetically pleasing lights, reflecting a desire to "beautify the mitzvah" (hiddur mitzvah) and enhance the honor of the day beyond mere functionality. The Arukh HaShulchan doesn't necessarily rule between them here but expertly lays out this fundamental divergence, inviting us to consider how these two powerful concepts shape our approach to ner Shabbos and, by extension, other Shabbat practices. The fact that the Arukh HaShulchan explicitly states that Rashi's reason "is not because of 'Shabbos Pleasure' but rather due to 'Honoring Shabbos'" highlights the perceived exclusivity of these two reasons in Rashi's view, emphasizing that for him, the kavod aspect takes precedence as the primary ta'am.

Insight 3: The Rabbinic Nature and the Blessing's Significance

The text explicitly states that hadlakat ner Shabbos is a "Rabbinical ordinance" and that the blessing is recited "just like we do for all Rabbinical requirements." This detail is incredibly significant, adding another layer of depth and potential tension to the discussion.

Firstly, acknowledging it as a mitzva d'Rabbanan (rabbinic commandment) means that it was instituted by the Sages, not directly commanded in the Torah. This raises a crucial question: how can a rabbinic enactment be so profoundly weighty that the Rambam mandates "begging for oil" even if one lacks food? This highlights the immense authority of the Sages. Their enactments are not mere suggestions; they are binding obligations, and in certain cases, they can be given a stringency that rivals Torah law, especially when they serve to protect or enhance a Torah mitzvah. In this instance, ner Shabbos is understood by all as being instituted l'tzorech Shabbos—for the needs of Shabbat, either to facilitate oneg or to enhance kavod, both of which are Torah-level principles. The Sages recognized that without light, the essence of Shabbat (whether pleasure or honor) would be severely diminished, hence their stringent decree.

Secondly, the recitation of a berakha (blessing) on a rabbinic commandment is a cornerstone of Jewish practice. The formula "Asher kid'shanu b'mitzvotav v'tzivanu" (Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us) appears to imply a direct divine command. How can we say "v'tzivanu" (and commanded us) on a mitzvah that is rabbinic in origin? This question is famously discussed by the Rishonim. The common explanation, cited by numerous authorities including the Ramban (in his commentary to Sefer HaMitzvot, Shoresh 1), is "Kol d'tikkun Rabbanan k'ein d'Oraita tikkun" – whatever the Rabbis enacted, they enacted as if it were from the Torah. Meaning, their authority to legislate derives from the Torah itself (e.g., "lo tasur"—Deuteronomy 17:11), and therefore, their commands are implicitly "His commandments." So, when the Sages commanded us to light Shabbat candles, it is as if God Himself commanded it, through the agency of His Sages.

The Arukh HaShulchan reinforces this by noting, "And even though we do not recite a blessing on (each and ) every matter relating to 'Shabbos Pleasure'... nevertheless, the kindling of the light was a Rabbinical ordinance in itself." This addresses a potential conceptual difficulty: if the reason for the mitzvah is oneg Shabbos, and oneg Shabbos is a broader, multi-faceted concept, why is a specific blessing recited only for ner Shabbos and not for other aspects of oneg (like eating delicious food, sleeping well, or wearing nice clothes)? The answer is that while the ta'am (reason) for ner Shabbos might be oneg (according to Rambam), the act of lighting candles was singled out by the Sages as a distinct gezeirah (ordinance) that stands on its own, meriting its own berakha. It is not merely a means to oneg; it is a mitzva in itself, albeit one with a distinct purpose.

This insight into the rabbinic nature of the mitzvah and the explanation for its blessing underscores a crucial principle in halakha: the Sages have the authority to institute new mitzvot that are binding and carry divine sanction. Furthermore, it highlights that even when a mitzvah serves a broader principle (like oneg or kavod), it can simultaneously exist as a distinct, actionable commandment with its own specific requirements, including a blessing. The Arukh HaShulchan thus clarifies that the debate between Oneg and Kavod is about the underlying rationale for this specific rabbinic enactment, not about its status as a binding mitzva d'Rabbanan with a blessing. The stringency (begging for oil) and the blessing are both consequences of the Sages' profound understanding of what is necessary to truly observe Shabbat according to the spirit of the Torah.

Two Angles

The Arukh HaShulchan masterfully presents two distinct and influential perspectives on the reason for lighting Shabbat candles: the Rambam's emphasis on Oneg Shabbos and Rashi's focus on Kavod Shabbos. While both Sages ultimately agree on the halakha l'ma'aseh (the practical law) that one must light candles, their differing rationales offer profound insights into the nature of Shabbat itself and the purpose of its observances.

Rambam's Angle: Light for Oneg Shabbos

The Rambam, as cited by the Arukh HaShulchan, firmly roots the mitzvah of hadlakat ner Shabbos in the concept of Oneg Shabbos – the delight and pleasure of Shabbat. His statement is unequivocal: "Even if you do not have your own food to eat, you must go door to door begging for oil and kindle the light because this (light) is included in 'Shabbos Pleasure' (the mitzveh to have Oneg Shabbos)." For the Rambam, the presence of light is not merely an aesthetic enhancement; it is a fundamental prerequisite for experiencing the joy and comfort that are integral to Shabbat. Without light, he implies, the essential oneg of the day would be compromised.

The Rambam's perspective here reflects a broader understanding of oneg Shabbos as encompassing physical comfort, emotional tranquility, and the ability to enjoy the Sabbath in a state of ease and well-being. Eating a meal in the dark, stumbling around, or sitting in gloom would detract significantly from any sense of delight. The light, therefore, is a practical necessity that directly contributes to a pleasant atmosphere, allowing for clear vision, comfortable dining, and unhindered social interaction. His insistence on begging for oil highlights the absolute necessity of this light for oneg; it's not a luxury but a core component of how one "delights" in Shabbat. This approach emphasizes the subjective, experiential aspect of Shabbat, focusing on how the individual perceives and enjoys the holy day through the provision of a comfortable and cheerful environment. The mitzvah, from the Rambam's view, is primarily for our benefit, enabling us to fulfill the commandment of taking delight in the Sabbath.

Rashi's Angle: Light for Kavod Shabbos

In contrast, Rashi, as presented by the Arukh HaShulchan, offers a distinct rationale, attributing the mitzvah of hadlakat ner Shabbos to Kavod Shabbos – the honor and dignity of Shabbat. The text states: "Rashi explains the reason is 'Honoring Shabbos' (Kavod Shabbos) since you can only hold an important feast in a well lit place." And the Arukh HaShulchan clarifies, "So according to Rashi, (the reason we light a Shabbos candle) is not because of 'Shabbos Pleasure' (Oneg Shabbos) but rather due to 'Honoring Shabbos' (Kavod Shabbos)." For Rashi, the light serves to elevate the status of Shabbat itself, treating it as a day of exceptional significance and grandeur.

Rashi's reasoning draws a parallel to "an important feast." Just as a royal banquet or a gathering for esteemed guests would never be held in dimness but rather with abundant illumination to signify its importance and respect for the attendees, so too must Shabbat be honored. The light, in this view, is a symbol of the day's inherent sanctity and prominence. It's not primarily about making us comfortable, but about demonstrating respect for the holy day. The light creates an ambiance of dignity and solemnity, transforming the ordinary home into a "well-lit place" fit for a "feast" that honors the King of kings. This perspective emphasizes the objective, reverential aspect of Shabbat, focusing on how we outwardly demonstrate its holiness and distinguish it from the mundane days of the week. The mitzvah, from Rashi's view, is primarily for the sake of Shabbat, to bestow upon it the honor it deserves.

Contrasting the Two Angles

The core difference lies in the ultimate beneficiary and the primary motivation. For the Rambam, the light is primarily for our oneg, our personal pleasure and comfort, which then allows us to fulfill a Torah mitzvah. For Rashi, the light is primarily for Shabbat's kavod, an act of honor and respect towards the day itself, which then elevates our experience.

While both result in the act of lighting candles, the subtle implications are profound. If it's oneg, the focus is on utility: enough light to see, to eat comfortably. If it's kavod, there's an implicit drive for hiddur mitzvah – to beautify the mitzvah, perhaps by using more candles, brighter lights, or more decorative candelabras, not just for comfort but to enhance the visual honor of the day. The Rambam's view might emphasize the practical outcome for the individual, while Rashi's emphasizes the symbolic statement made to the day itself. Ultimately, the Arukh HaShulchan presents these as distinct, yet equally valid, foundational understandings of a universally observed mitzvah, demonstrating the richness and depth of halakhic thought where the "why" can be as complex and debated as the "what."

Practice Implication

The debate between Oneg Shabbos and Kavod Shabbos as the primary reason for lighting Shabbat candles, while seemingly theoretical, has subtle yet significant implications for our daily practice and decision-making, particularly concerning the hiddur mitzvah (beautification of the commandment). While the basic halakha mandates a light, the underlying rationale can guide us in how we perform that mitzvah beyond the bare minimum.

If we prioritize the Rambam's view of Oneg Shabbos, our focus might naturally gravitate towards ensuring sufficient light for practical comfort and enjoyment. This would mean placing candles strategically to illuminate the dining area, ensuring enough brightness to see one's food, read, and converse without straining. The emphasis would be on functionality: is the light serving its purpose of making Shabbat pleasurable and easy? A person with limited resources might choose one efficient, bright candle that adequately lights the table, feeling they have fully discharged the mitzvah by ensuring a comfortable Shabbat experience. The aesthetic quality or the sheer number of lights might be secondary to the practical utility of enhancing personal enjoyment and preventing discomfort. For example, if one could choose between a single, powerful LED light that provides ample illumination for the whole room or multiple small, dim candles, the Oneg perspective might lean towards the former for maximal comfort, even if the latter is more traditional.

Conversely, if we lean towards Rashi's perspective of Kavod Shabbos, our approach to ner Shabbos might take on a more expansive and ceremonial quality. The goal would be not just adequate light for comfort, but light that signifies the importance and grandeur of the day. This could manifest in several ways: using more candles than strictly necessary for illumination, choosing aesthetically pleasing candelabras, ensuring the candles are prominent and beautifully arranged, and perhaps even placing them in areas beyond the dining table to spread the "honor" throughout the home. The idea is to create an atmosphere that speaks to the dignity of Shabbat, treating it as a royal guest. The light becomes a symbol of reverence, a visual statement that "this is an important feast." Even if one has sufficient light from other sources, the Kavod perspective would still encourage the lighting of candles specifically for the honor of Shabbat, perhaps prioritizing their beauty and traditional symbolism over sheer lumens. For example, a person might choose traditional wax candles, even if they are less efficient at lighting the room than electric lights, because the flickering flame and the act of lighting them hold more symbolic kavod.

In practice, many observant Jews integrate both perspectives, intuitively seeking both oneg and kavod. We want our Shabbat to be both pleasant and honorable. However, when faced with choices, especially regarding hiddur mitzvah – how much effort, expense, or artistry to invest – the underlying rationale can subtly guide our decisions. Do I buy the slightly more expensive, ornate candelabra, or the simpler, more functional one? Do I light just two candles (the minimum custom) or four, six, or more? Do I ensure the area is brightly lit by the candles themselves, or do I rely on electric lights for illumination and use the candles primarily for their symbolic value? The Rambam's view urges us to prioritize function for pleasure, while Rashi's nudges us towards form for honor. Understanding this debate encourages us to be more intentional about our practice, consciously choosing how we wish to express our relationship with Shabbat through the seemingly simple act of lighting candles. It's a reminder that even in the most established mitzvot, there's room for personal interpretation and emphasis rooted in millennia of halakhic thought.

Chevruta Mini

1. If one's financial situation is extremely dire, and they can only afford oil for either lighting Shabbat candles (to fulfill the rabbinic mitzvah) or providing a meager, but warm, meal for their family (which contributes to Oneg Shabbos more broadly), which should take precedence, and why? This question forces a tradeoff between a specific rabbinic enactment for oneg/kavod and a broader sense of oneg that impacts the entire family's well-being.
2. Considering Rashi's emphasis on 'Kavod Shabbos' for candle lighting, how might our approach to other aspects of Shabbat preparation—like setting the table, dressing, or even tidying the house—be influenced differently than if we focused solely on 'Oneg Shabbos'? What implications might this have for the aesthetic versus the comfort elements of our Shabbat observance?

Takeaway

The debate over whether Shabbat candles are for Oneg or Kavod reveals that even universally accepted mitzvot are rooted in profound, sometimes divergent, philosophical principles that shape our deeper understanding and practice of Jewish law.