Chanuka for the (Physically) Challenged

1. Even if a person cannot light the Neiros without assistance, he may recite the Bracha if he performs the lighting himself, even if somebody holds and guides his hand. However, if he cannot do it on his own (for example, due to paralysis or extreme weakness) and the person assisting him moves his hand toward the candle, he is not considered to have performed the act of lighting. It is akin to lighting through a Shli’ach (see below).
2. He may also fulfill the Mitzva if his wife lights for him in his house.^[1]
3. A widower or a man whose wife is not home can fulfill the basic Mitzva of “Ner Ish uBeiso” if his son (or another family member) who relies on him financially (“Somech al Shulchano”) and lives at home on a permanent basis lights the Neiros. This is according to the Shulchan Aruch^[2] who rules that one candle is sufficient for all members of the family. If he follows the Rema^[3](as do most Ashkenazim) and wants to fulfill the Mitzva of Mehadrin by lighting a candle for each person but cannot do so himself, his family member should light a candle or oil purchased with his money. It is correct for the family member to light an additional candle for himself.^[4] The family member should recite one Bracha which will cover both lightings.^[5]
4. The wife of a blind man may light for him and fulfill his obligation.^[6] If he has no family members, he should light with assistance from another person but should not recite a Bracha.^[7] However, some Poskim hold that he is obligated in the Mitzva and should recite the Bracha.^[8] Others contend that he is obligated to recite the Brachos of “She’asa Nisim” and “Shehecheyanu” according to all opinions.^[9] However, if he can see the flame slightly he should perform the lighting and recite a Bracha according to all opinions.^[10]
5. A deaf person who can speak is obligated to light.^[11] A person who can hear but is mute is likewise obligated to light.^[12]

Appointing a Shli’ach

• A person living alone who is unable to perform a Hadlaka should appoint somebody to do it in his stead (either a man or woman^[13]), as a Shli’ach for both the Hadlaka and the Bracha. A person can act as a Shli’ach even if he has already fulfilled the Mitzva in his own home.^[14] If the person can recite the Bracha himself, some say he should do so after the Shli’ach performs the Hadlaka.^[15] Others say that he should only say the Brachos of “She’asa Nisim” and Shehecheyanu (on the first day) but the Shli’ach should say the Bracha “l’Hadlik Ner Shel Chanuka”.^[16]

7) Even if a disabled person can light but cannot reach the Menora in its proper place, such as if he is bedridden or attached to medical equipment, he should appoint a Shli’ach. He should not light next to his bed and have the candles moved to the correct place afterward.^[17]

8) If a person is physically able to perform the Hadlaka but unable to or does not know how to recite the Bracha, a Shli’ach should recite the Brachos and he should light immediately afterward.^[18]

9) In all these cases, the Shli’ach may only recite the Brachos if the Meshale’ach is present and hears them.^[19] If this is not possible, such as when the Meshale’ach is in a distant room or on a different floor, the Shli’ach should first light in his own home. He should recite the Brachos intending to exempt the lighting that he will later perform on behalf of the Meshale’ach. He should then hurry to light in the Meshale’ach’s home without speaking or any other Hefsek.^[20] He should recite “haNeros Halalu” only after lighting for the Meshale’ach.^[21]

If a person lit his candles with a Bracha and was only requested to act as a Shli’ach for another afterward, and the Meshale’ach is not present, he should light for the Meshale’ach without a Bracha.^[22]

The Poskim rule that a Nachri caregiver or employee may not act as a Shli’ach to light for a Jew.^[23]

[1] [Even if he is not at home.] Mishna Berura (677:2). [A married woman always fulfills her obligation with her husband’s lighting due to the principle of Ishto k’Gufo. She need not light her own Menora, even according to Minhag Ashkenaz. (Based on Mishna Berura 671:9.)]

[2] O.C. 671:2. [See the Sefer “Chovas haDar” (Ner Chanuka 1, footnote 2) who asserts that if the father is not home, one of the other family members can be Motzi the others. In other words, the Din of “Ner Ish uBeiso” does not require Davka the Ba’al haBayis to perform the Hadlaka.]

[3] Ibid.

[4] Heard from haGaon R’ Asher Weiss Shlit”a. His reasoning was that me’Ikar haDin both fulfill their Mitzva with this lighting. The father is Yotzei because the Ner was purchased with his money and the son is Yotzei because he performed the Hadlaka (as in any case of a person who is “Somech Al Shulchan Aviv” that lights a Ner belonging to his father and is Yotzei the Din of Mehadrin.) However, since the Hadlaka is essentially the father’s since it was performed for him, it is better for the son to light an additional Ner and recite one Bracha for both lightings.

[5] See below for detailed Halachos of an elderly parent who lives with one of his children or whose children live with him.

[6] Mishna Berura (675:9).

[7] Mishna Berura ibid.; Mor u’Ketzia, cited by the Sha’arei Teshuva (ibid. 3).

[8] Maharshal (Shu”t 77), R’ Moshe Feinstein zt”l (Mo’adei Yeshurun 1:4, footnote 10), Chazon Ovadia (Chanuka p113). See Yalkut Yosef (Chanuka 390) who asserts that this is the Minhag Yerushalayim. See Shevet haLevi (4:67) who concurs with the Maharshal. The Kovetz miBeis Levi (10, p7) quotes in the name of the Maharshal that a blind person may recite all the Brachos.

[9] Shevet haLevi (ibid).

[10] Da’as Torah (O.C. 675:3).

[11] Mishna Berura (670:12 citing the Pri Megadim).

[12] In line with the Shulchan Aruch’s ruling (O.C. 55:8) that he is considered a Pike’ach in all matters.

[13] It is evident from the Mishna Berura (675:9) that a woman may serve as a Shli’ach for Ner Chanuka.

[14] Magen Avraham (676:4).

[15] Ben Ish Chai (Vayeshev, Hilchos Chanuka 6), Halichos Shlomo (Chanuka 16:5).

[16] R’ Yitzchak Zilberstein Shlit”a (Vavei haAmudim v’Chashukehem, Kovetz 2, p117). R’ Elyashiv zt”l (Peninei Chanuka p31-2) states simply that the Shli’ach should recite the Brachos, not distinguishing between “l’Hadlik Ner Shel Chanuka” and the other two.

[17] See Shulchan Aruch ibid., Ben Ish Chai (Shana Rishona, Vayeshev, Hilchos Chanuka 6), Chazon Ovadia, Chanuka (p116, 6).

R’ Ovadia Yosef (ibid. in a footnote) cites the Pri Chadash who asserts that if a person lights a Menora he may move it after the lighting since its shape proves that it was lit for the Mitzva. However, after citing several Poskim who are lenient like the Pri Chadash, R’ Ovadia concludes that it is correct for a Choleh to appoint his wife or someone else as a Shli’ach.

The Poskim rule that even if both the lighting and placing in position were performed in one place (inside or outside the house), the candles should not be moved to another location (until half an hour has passed). Some Achronim are lenient in this matter, but the Pri Megadim asserts that one should be Machmir l’Chatchila (Mishna Berura 675:6). It is clear from the Ben Ish Chai (ibid.) that even for those who light inside, a Choleh should not light next to his bed and have it moved to the doorway, even though the lighting and placing were performed in the same room. Instead, he should appoint a Shli’ach. However, the Shu”t Emek haTeshuva (6:265) rules that among those who light inside, a Choleh may be lenient to light next to his bed and then have it placed at the doorway. This is because a Choleh is a case of Bedieved and it is better to perform a mitzva oneself than through a Shli’ach.

If a person usually lights outside or at the window but cannot do so since he is bedridden, and he also cannot appoint a Shli’ach, it is unclear if he may light next to his bed. Perhaps we could say that just as it is permissible to light inside one’s home at a time of Sakana, the same applies to any physical constraints that prevent him from performing the Mitzvah in the normal fashion and he may light anywhere in the home. The Peninei Chanuka (p69) cites R’ Elyashiv zt”l (discussing a person who cannot light in a place that will be seen by others due to his living conditions) who states that although we may infer this line of reasoning from several Rishonim, which would allow him to light in his home, since this view is not mentioned in the Poskim he should light without a Bracha. The same would apply to our case.

[18] Aruch haShulchan 676:10.

[19] Mishna Berura (675:9 citing the Pri Megadim).

[20] R’ Elyashiv zt”l (Peninei Chanuka p28-9).

[21] Ibid.

[22] Sha’arei Yemei Chanuka 7 (R’ Yehuda Chesner).

[23] The Shu”t Chesed l’Avraham (T’omim, Mahdura Tinyana O.C. 80) rules that if a Nachri acts as a Shli’ach for the lighting, the Meshale’ach fulfils his obligation. The Da’as Torah rules likewise (O.C. 673:2 based on the Pri Megadim). However, the Melachim Omnecha (3:1) rules that it is ineffective since the Nachri is not obligated in the Mitzva. See also Halichos Shlomo (Chanuka 16, Dvar Halacha 8) who cites the lenient opinions, questions them, and remains unsure l’Halacha (see also his words in Me’orei Eish 5:2:5 where he suggests that a Nachri may not act as a Shli’ach for Chanuka lighting).

However, the Shu”t Mishnas Yosef (11:116) rules that, Bedieved, one may rely on the lenient opinions in a Sha’as haDechak. It is stated in the name of R’ Tzvi Webber (Azara k’Halacha 6:23) that a Nachri may light but the Jew should not recite a Bracha. See Nishmas Avraham (Mahdura Chadasha 1, p831) who asserts that a Jew should not recite any Brachos in that situation.