Don't Use The Lights

The Gemorah in Shabbos (21b) saysאמר רבי זירא אמר רב מתנה ואמרי לה אמר רבי זירא אמר רב פתילות ושמנים שאמרו חכמים אין מדליקין בהן בשבת מדליקין בהן בחנוכה בין בחול בין בשבת אמר רבי ירמיה מאי טעמא דרב קסבר כבתה אין זקוק לה ואסור להשתמש לאורה.  Rashi explains why it is prohibited to benefit from the Chanukah light שיהא ניכר שהוא נר מצוה וליכא למיחש להטייה.  On the very next page the Gemorah gives a different explanation for the prohibition not to use the candles and that is not to cause ביזוי מצוה.  In the words of the Gemorah, אמר רב יהודה אמר רב אסי אמר רב אסור להרצות מעות כנגד נר חנוכה כי אמריתה קמיה דשמואל אמר לי וכי נר קדושה יש בה מתקיף לה רב יוסף וכי דם קדושה יש בו דתניא ושפך וכסה במה ששפך יכסה שלא יכסנו ברגל שלא יהו מצות בזויות עליו הכא נמי שלא יהו מצות בזויות עליו:  So why does Rashi say a different explanation on the preceding page?  Rashi seemed to learn like many Rishonim that the second Gemorah is coming to add a chiddush on the first Gemorah that even just to count money, which is only a light, short time usage of the candles is also prohibited.  This approach is followed by the Rosh, Rif and Ramban.

The Baal Hameor takes a variant approach.  He says that the two statements in the Gemorah are in disagreement.  The first Gemorah holds that the prohibition is derived from the candles of the Mikdash. Just as those candles have kedusha and are prohibited from mundane usage, so too the candles of the menorah.  According to the Baal Hameor the second Gemorah isn’t a stringency like the other Rishonim, on the contrary, it is a leniency, for since the prohibition is only because of ביזוי מצוה, to use the menorah candles for another mitzvah purpose will be permitted.  [The other Rishonim maintain its ביזוי מצוה even to use the lights for another mitzvah purpose.]  Seemingly, the Rishonim go לשיטתם, according to the approach of Rashi that the first Gemorah prohibits the usage of the lights so that its clearly designated  as a mitzvah candle, then one can entertain the possibility that a light, short time usage doesn’t detract from this recognition.  However, according to the Baal Hameor the explanation is the comparison to menorah, then there no reason to make such a distinction, hence he learns it’s a machlokes.

However, this doesn’t seem to hold water in the Ran that says the סברא of the menorah and yet explains the Gemorah of the other Rishonim?  However, this may be answered by looking carefully at the Baal Hameor and the Ran.  The Baal Hameor says: כיון שהם זכר לנרות ושמן של היכל אסורות הן בהנאה כל עיקר.  According to his view Chazal treat the menorah as a איסור הנאה just as the menorah.  They viewed one's personal lights like the menorah of the mikdash lights.  However, the Ran doesn't say that its an איסור הנאה, he says that since the mitzvah came about through a miracle of the menorah, hence they said you can't use the lights.  He doesn't say that there is an issur hanah as the Baal Hameor does. In other words, according to the Baal Hameor one's personal menorah has kedusha like the menorah of the mikdash and is prohibited in hanah.  The Ran holds they prohibited usage of the lights to appear like the menorah of the mikdash and in his view one can entertain that a small usage will not take away from looking like the menorah of the mikdash. 

In the הנרות הללו we say קודש הם.  According to the opinion of the Baal Hameor this nusach makes sense for the issur is based upon the kedusha of the nerot pattered after the mikdash.  However, according to most Rishonim its difficult for the prohibition is based upon the candles looking like they were lit for the mitzvah or because of ביזוי מצוה, but what does that have to do with them being kodesh?  However, the Ramban says that the idea of ביזוי מצוה is because during the time of the mitzvah there is kedusha upon the mitzvah object, hence its prohibited to "embarrass" the mitzvah.  According to this we can make some sense of the text קודש הם (based upon Yerach Lamoadim.)