Hanukka as an Expression of Appreciation

Ḥanukka, commemorating, as it does, post-Biblical events, is a rabbinic holiday, yet Chatam Sofer (Rabbi Moshe Sofer, 1762–1839) asserts that there is a Torah-ordained mitzva to celebrate Ḥanukka, since we are required to appreciate God’s miracles. Thus, the obligation to celebrate is Torah-ordained, though the specific nature of the celebration was left to the Sages. In essence, commemorating Ḥanukka is a matter of Hakarat haTov (recognizing the good done to/for one). As the late Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe noted, the obligation of Hakarat haTov applies not only between man and fellow man (bein adam l’havero), but between man and the Creator as well (bein adam laMakom). Just as we must appreciate the good done to us by our fellow human, so we must appreciate the good done for us by God.

The Torah readings for the eight day of Ḥanukka are the description of the offerings of the tribal princes at the dedication of the Tabernacle [Numbers 7:2ff]. Since the Torah does not waste a single letter, let alone a word, it seems surprising that the verses repeat, almost verbatim, the same formula for each of the twelve princes.  Naḥmanides explains that “God wished to mention each prince by name and specify their offering in order to give full honor to each prince.” Thus, Rabbi Wolbe explains, the matter of Hakarat haTov goes a step further and applies bein haMakom l’adam as well. As we are to appreciate that which God does for us, so He appreciates that which man does for Him!

Rabbi Wolbe adds that there is an additional plane on which Hakarat haTov applies, between man and himself. Thus, in Parashat VaEra we read that it was Aaron, not Moses, who struck the River Nile to bring the plague of blood, that Aaron brought the frogs out of the Nile, and that Aaron, not Moses, was instructed to hit the soil of Egypt to bring out the lice. [Exodus 7:19, 8:1] In each instance, Rashi, quoting our Sages, explains that Aaron acted because had Moses done so, he would have demonstrated a lack of Hakarat haTov. Because the Nile had saved him when he was an infant, and because the soil of Egypt which had protected him when he killed the Egyptian and buried the body in the sand, Moses was obligated to appreciate what the river and the land had done for him.

          Of course, both the River Nile and the land of Egypt are inanimate objects, which cannot feel being struck, but personifying the Nile and the soil, if they are to be struck, it makes not a whit of difference to them whether they are struck by Moses or by Aaron. Thus, we learn that Moses refrained from striking the River and the soil for his own benefit, not for the benefit of the Nile or the land of Egypt. It would be morally wrong, hence a sin against himself, for Moses to ignore the fact that he had been saved both by the Nile and by the land. Rabbi Wolbe explains that the Torah teaches the important lesson that Hakarat haTov extends beyond man’s relation with his Creator and beyond his relationship with fellow man. Hakarat haTov is obligatory in man’s relation to himself as well.