The Books of Megillos, Maccabees, Antioches and More
December, 2023
Rabbi Moshe Taub
There is something about the story of Chanukah.
Of all the events that we commemorate each year, there is no doubt that Chanukah is the one that many know the least about.As a child, I vividly recall my initial confusion when I first discovered that the events of Chanukah took place well after the story of Purim, and then, as I got older, discerning the dearth of a record of the events surrounding these events that are recorded by chazal. It only became more confounding from there. Famously, the gemara only discusses, briefly, the ness of the oil (Shabbos 22b), while in al hanissim only the milchama is mentioned -and again, very pithily. Due to the ambiguity of these days in general, and its story in particluler, we have used this time of year to discuss these days’ many, many obscurities, largely choosing topics based on the most common questions of Chanukah I was receiving in shul each year. We have discussed the history of fried foods, the story of Chana/Yehudis, who was Matisyahu kohein gadol, etc.
There has been one subject, however, that I have thus far avoided. While questions relating to this subject are always from the most common I receive – and although its more basic answer is known – I have avoided it as it nevertheless opens a pandora’s box of intrigue and history.
“Why is there no sefer in tanach detailing the events of Chanukah?”.
Of course, the answer is rudimentary: Chanukah took place after the era of neviim and long after the sifrei tanach had been canonized and concluded, therefore such a sefer would be an nonstarter.
But here comes the natural follow-up question: “So where do we get our mesorah on these events?”
This is a complex question that will take (at least) the next two weeks of Chanukah issues to uncover.
Let us start with megillas taanis, which may be from the earliest recording from our mesorah of the events
Chazal share that Chanukah -along with many other celebratory dates initially found in megillas taanis -were nullified after the destruction of the second beis hamikdosh. Remarkably, chazal explain in the name of Rav Yosef that it was only due to an unexpected anomaly that the klal decided to nevertheless keep Chanukah for generations (rosh hashana 18b).
Megillas taanis was written during the time of the second beis hamikdosh, andcompleted by the tanna Chananya ben Chizkiya and delineates more than thirty joyous dates and salvations that have occurred to the our nation.
Before sharing what is stated there about Chanukah, it is critical to share with the reader that, according to the Chasam Sofer, megillas taanis was written before torah sh’baal peh was chronicled. It was therefore only written like a luach; divided into the months of the year, with a sentence or two by certain dates. It was only later, during the period of the (later) tennaim, that the events behind these brief words were expounded upon in greater detail. For this reason, he explains, the gemara will quote from this megillah with the words ‘d’ksiv’ (as is written) – a phrase usually reserved for text from tanach or other holy catalogue. However, he continues, when quoting from the fuller sections of this megillah, the gemara uses terms like ‘tanya’, which is reserved for braissos and other tannaic writings (see Chasam Sofer to rosh hashnah 18b and Maharitz Chiyus, maamer Divrei Neviim, Divrei Kabala; see the introduction to the Oz V’Hadar edition of megillas taanis for further views).
With this in mind, the earlier prose reads simply as follows:
“On the twenty fifth of the month is Chanukah, eight days on which we do not offer hespeidim”.
The added section by early chazal expands on this, as says:
“When the Syrian-Greeks entered the heichel they made all the oil impure. Then, the chashmonaim overwhelmed them, and defeated them. They searched and could not find any [oil] but one container, that rested with the kohein gadol’s seal, and that was not made impure. However, there was only enough for one day, yet a ness happneed where it lasted for eight. The next year, the established this as a yom tov…At the time of the ness they sang praises of thanksgiving…Since the Syrian-Greeks had defiled all the vessels, there was nothing with which to light. When the chashmoniam were victorious, they brought seven spits of iron and covered them with tin and began to light [as a makeshift menorah]…”
It goes on to record the obligation in the recital of hallel for each day, how we light the menorah in our homes, and the time frame of ‘mishetaka hachama ad sh’tichelh regel min hashuk’. According to the meforshim, the few references in shas to Chanukah are taken directly from here.
However, the reader may still not be satisfied, as they surely have heard more details regarding the Chanukah vents than those recorded above.
Where did these details come from?
Recently, a retired couple in my shul sold their empty-nest home after several decades in the neighborhood. They called me to offer that I look through any sefarim before being sending them to shaimos. I was delighted to discover disparate items such as first-issue records of Yosseleh Rosenblatt, manuals for Jewish soldiers in World War II, and cheder volumes from pre-War New York.
One sefer in particular caught my eye. It was a pocket size book, black, and very thin -maybe fifty pages -in size. Its back jacket translated into English what was written on the front. “Megillas Antioches; Ness Chanukah – Scroll of Antioches -Miracle of Chanukah”.
Now, many readers may be aware of this ‘megilla’ (and, if not, we will explain below), but what was even more fascinating about this volume is what is written underneath its title: ‘Mesivta Tiferes Yerushalim, 145-147 East Broadway New York City. 1936’.
While most would associate this yeshiva with Rav Moshe Feinstein, this volume was published about twelve months before Rav Moshe would arrive in America (the following kislev, in fact). The leader of MTJ at that time was Rav Yosef Adler, who wrote a historical introduction to this volume for this yeshiva publication.
A talmid of Volozion, Rav Adler was a massive talmud chacham who arrived in America around 1910 (Toldos Anshe Shem, p. 1). While serving as a rav in New York, in 1924 he began teaching at Torah V’Daas. It was in 1931 when he was hired by MTJ. Soon before his shocking death in 1938 (by drowning) he hired Rav Moshe Feinstein, explaining to his talmidim that “No matter how much you continue to grow in their learning, you shall never surpass him!”
He writes (translated):
“The chacham Tzvi Fillipowski discovered the manuscript of an Aramaic megilas antioches in the British Museum in London…Now the Mesivta Tifferes Yerushalim in New York accepted upon itself to distribute among the Jews this megillah in an Aramaic, lashon kodosh and a new English translation. This so that we may know the true events of the miracle of Chanukah and the miracle of the oil from its most original source, from this megila whose ancient kedusha hovers above it. For it, and only it, has been seen through the eyes of our chazal…therefore it is a great mitzvah to print and publicize this volume, so that Jews do not follow the apocrypha…Perhaps it is due to the long-suffering exile, and our beaten down spirit, that this sefer is not known to most..”
Just what is megillas Antioches? Who wrote it? Why do we not read it publicly on Chanukah? And, what about The Books of Maccabees?
While Rav Adler references a specific edition of this sefer (from Tzvi Hersh Filipowski, London), this ‘megillah’ had been known-and used-for millennia.
It opens with the familier refrain borrowed from esther: ‘Vayehi bi’mey antioches melech yavan, melech gadol v’chazak hayah v’sakif b’memshalto, v’chol ha’melachim yishm’u lo- And it came to pass in the days of Antiokhus, king of Greece, the great and mighty monarch, firm ruler over his dominion, to whom all kings hearkened”
first maamer to Chanukah (Pachad Yitzchok, 1). There, Rav Hutner first asks an additional question: why didn’t the anshei knesses hagedolah allow parts of the story of Chanukah to be canonized in tanach?
Some may feel that this question is far simpler to answer than our first: the books of tanach may only include those written in the era of nevuah. Since all prophecy ceased at the beginning of the second beis hamikdosh, there was no way to include the Chanukah narrative together with other sifrei kodesh written with nevuah/ruach hakodesh.
Yet, Rav Hutner points out that it is deeper than that. Chazal tell us “Why is Esther compared to the morning (Tehillim 22:1)? To teach us that just as morning ends the night, so too Esther was the end of miracles.” In response to this teaching, the gemara asks, “But what about Chanukah?” The gemara answers cryptically, “We meant to say that Purim was the last of the Nissim to be recorded in writing” (Yoma 29a).
With this gemara, Rav Hutner answers both questions. When the gemara shares that Chanukah was not given to be written down, it is describing the very essence of this yom tov.
The Greeks failed because while one can try to besmirch the value of the written Torah by watering it down with their translation (the Septuagint) and with their cultural influences, one can never take away our true secret of survival –Torah sh’baal peh, and mesorah. Because this is the very element that saved us -saves us still! -we represent this fundamental part of the story of Chanukah by maintaining a largely oral tradition regarding its own events -both in tanach and in mishneh! The Sefas Emes has a similar idea (year ‘684)
One of my father-in-law’s rebbeim in high school is the prolific Rav Yitzchak Sender. In one of his sefarim, he shares something remarkable.The term ‘Chanukah’ is given many meanings, such as chanu choff hei –they rested (from war) on the 25th (of kislev), however it also represents something deeper.
There are twenty-four books in tanach, the anshei knesses hagedolah ‘rested’ for the 25th book -the story of Chanukah! In fact, there is even a greater allusion to this. ‘Chanukah’ stands for ‘cheis’, eight (books) in ‘nun’ nevium; ‘vav’, six (books) in ‘choff’ kesuvim, and finally, ‘hei’, five megillos!
In any event, all of the above serves to explain why chazal wished to keep Chanukah limited in writing, both in tanach and shas.
- The Secret Mesechta
We know that there are certain mesechtos of gemara in the Talmud Yerushlami that were written yet are no longer extant. In a similar vain, both the Vilna Gaon (in his son’s hakdama to Midrash Agadas Bereishis) and the Ben Ish Chai (hakdama to Rov Peolim) teach that there was a mesechta of mishnayos on Chanukah that has since been lost!
On a related note, the Chida (Devarim Achadim, derasha 32) points out that megilas taanis -written before the mishneh and containing many celebratory dates along with their histories and practices -already shares with us the story and halachos of Chanukah. For this reason, there was no need to add its own tractate.
Part 2
In the last section, we began examining a significant question: From where did we receive our mesorah as to the events of Chanukah, especially considering
that chazal only dedicate the briefest of space to its background?
We shared with the reader that one of, if not the, earliest source to the story is ‘Megillas Taanis’, written during beis sheni, and from which chazal excerpt whenever they fleetingly discuss these days.
From there, we touched-upon ‘Megilas Antioches’, specifically, a 1936 edition which was published and translated by Rav Yosef Adler, then head of Mesivta Tifferes Yerushlaim.
Let us pick up from there.
While Rav Adler references a specific edition of this sefer (from Tzvi Hersh Filipowski, London -d.1872; his edition was completed in 1851), this ‘megillah’ had been known-and used-for millennia. In fact, its first known printing was in Spain in 1482 (See, ‘Antioches’, Natan Fried, 1966). Its original language, interestingly, was Aramaic, and, according to many, was first referenced in 9th century by the gaonic work Halachos Gedolos. There its authorship is attributed t nooen other than the yeshivos of Hillel and Shamei (Warsaw ed. P. 174)! A century earlier, the Behag writes of simler authorship (hilchos soferim), although it debated if he was also referring to this same work.
Entering into the 10th century, it is mentioned again by Rav Saadia Gaon (d. 942) -who also quotes from it -yet under a different title: ‘Kesav Bnei Chashmonai’. Amazingly, he attributes its authorship to the protagonists of the story itself -the five sons of Matisyahu. He writes, “Kmo sh’kusvu bnei chashmonai, Yehudah, v’Shimon, v’Yochanan, v’Yonasan, v’Elezar the sons of Matisyahu sefer b’mah sh’evad alehem –‘Like the sons of Matisyahu, Yehudah, Shimon, Yochanan, Yonasan and Elezar wrote a sefer relating the evets that occurred to them…”(Sefer HaGaluy). While it is hard to argue that all of the five brothers wrote all of this megillah – as it concludes with beis sheni being destroyed, as well as recording the demise of two out of the five brothers -such concerns are also found, lahavdil, in sifrei Tanach (see Bava Basra 14b-15; see also ‘Inside Chanukah’, note #571 for possible resolutions to this difficulty here; see also Two Judeo-Arabic Translations of the Scroll of Antiochus from Ghardaïa (Algeria), by Ofra Tirosh-Becker)
In any event, this would certainly make this the oldest mesorah for these events!
The Tosfos Rid (d. 1250) refers to a minhag in his time where many would read it publicly on Chanukah but, he asserts, no beracha should be made on it (his commenst to sukkah 44b, s.v. ‘v’chabit’).
As to when it would be read, some older siddurim bring a minhag to read it on Shabbos at the end of minchah (after kaddish tiskabel), whearas others bring a custom reading if following the haftara Shabbos Chanukah.
For further study, the reader is encouraged to see Kuntros Beis Ahron V’Yisreol (kisleiv, 1992 p.111, Rav Nosson Fried)
It is of interest to conclude the discussion of Megillas Antioches by sharing a ‘pasuk’. It opens with the familiar refrain borrowed from Megillas Esther (using one of the lashon kodesh versions):
‘Vayehi bi’mey antioches melech yavan, melech gadol v’chazak hayah, v’sakif b’memshalto, v’chol ha’melachim yishm’u lo- And it came to pass in the days of Antioches, king of Greece, the great and mighty monarch, firm ruler over his dominion, to whom all kings hearkened”
What about the Book of Maccabees?
It is interesting to first note that the word ‘Maccabee’ itself is debated, both its spelling and meaning. Some say it comes from the Aramaic word, meaning hammer, thereby describing their strength in battle. This would also mean that we should spell it with a kuf (see mishneh bechoros 7:1). Others agree with this spelling, but not its meaning, arguing that this term is derived from Yeshayahu (62:2) where it means ‘to pronounce’, or ‘to assert’. Another source for the name, with a kuf, is ‘ha’matzvi’, or ‘the general’. Often when translating to Greek -some posit- the tzadi is exchanged with a kuf.
As for thos ewho spell it with a chuff, many say it is an acronym for Matisyahu kohen ben Yochanan, or to stand for ‘mi komacha b’keilim (Y)Hashem’(from shiras hayam, where we reference that Hashem is in charge of all wars and battles).
While there are a number of Books of Maccabees, Macabees I, and perhaps Maccabees II may be reliable for us, or at least are mentioned in some of our sefarim. Some posit that this was the very ‘Sefer Chashminoim’ to which the Bahag was referring above.
More than this is not for now, and the reader is directed to his rav for guidance. We did not even get to ‘Midrash Chanukah’ and other sefarim of, perhaps, mysterious origin. Perhaps next year we will, iy’H conclude this discussion.
We have one final question to answer: Why, indeed, didn’t chazal choose to write down or record these events in a clearer manner?
In his first maamer to Chanukah (Pachad Yitzchok), Rav Hutner shares a fascinating insight.
Chazal ask, “Why is Esther compared to the morning (Tehillim 22:1)? They answer that this was to teach us that just as morning ends the night, so too Esther was the end of the period of nissim/miracles. In response to this, the gemara wonders, “But what about Chanukah?” The gemara responds cryptically, “We mean to say that Purim was the last of the nissim to be recorded in ‘writing’” (yoma 29a).
With this gemara, Rav Hutner finds an answer to our question. When the gemara shares that Chanukah was not given to be written down, it is not describing an absencefound within Chanukah, rather it is defining the very essence of these days.
The Greeks failed to defeat us because while one can seek to besmirch the value of the written Torah by watering it down with their translation (the Septuagint) and with their cultural influences (Hellenism), one can never take away our true secret of survival –Torah sh’baal peh, and mesorah. Because this is the very element that saved us -saves us still! -we represent this fundamental part of the story of Chanukah by maintaining a largely oral tradition regarding its own events -both in tanach and in mishneh! The Sefas Emes has a similar idea (year ‘684).
Rav Yitzchak Sender shares something remarkable.The term ‘Chanukah’ is given many meanings, such as chanu choff hei –they rested (from war) on the 25th (of kislev), however it also represents something deeper.
There are twenty-four books in tanach, the anshei knesses hagedolah ‘rested’ for the 25th book -the story of Chanukah! In fact, there is even a greater allusion to this. ‘Chanukah’ stands for ‘cheis’, eight (books) in ‘nun’ nevium; ‘vav’, six (books) in ‘choff’ kesuvim, and finally, ‘hei’, five megillos!
In any event, all of the above may serve to explain why much of what we know of these events is mired in mystery and reliant on mesorah more than any other yom tov.
May this very gift –mesorah and Torah sh’baal peh -be embraced even more during these days.
Rabbi Moshe Taub is the rabbi of Young Israel of Holliswood and rabbinic editor and weekly contributor for Ami Magazine. He is the author of Jews in the World (Mosaica Press) and writes on Jewish law, history, and thought at ShulChronicles.com.
Leave a Reply