Overview: the lack of the oil miracle in early sources, possible solutions, and perhaps the true reason for lighting the Menorah candles.
“What is Chanukah? The sages taught that on the 25th of Kislev we begin the 8 days of Chanukah, in which we neither eulogize nor fast. [Our celebration is to commemorate] when the Greeks entered the Sanctuary, they defiled all the oil of the Sanctuary. And when the Hasmonaeans overcame them and defeated them [in war], they searched and found only one jug of oil that was sealed with the imprint of the High Priest, and there was sufficient oil to last only one day [to light the Menorah in the Temple]. A miracle occurred and the oil burned for eight days. A different year [the next year] they established it as a holiday of praise and thanksgiving.” (Shabbos 21b)
This is the classical story of one of the oldest still-extant holidays in the world which is until today celebrated by Jews worldwide. But its history is far more intriguing than we might have thought. The oil miracle is first recorded in the Talmud, Shabbos 21b, some 600 years after the Chanukah story would have occurred. Prior this biblical tradition recorded in the Talmud, we have several historians who record the Chanukah story in great detail. But what is most surprising is the complete lack of mention of any oil miracle – or the lighting of the Menorah whatsoever in the Temple! Instead, these historians describe the military victories of the Hasmonaean guerrilla fighters against the militant Greek soldiers of the Seleucid Empire of Syria. They describe the 25th of Kislev as the day that the Jewish zealots retook the Temple from the Greek military and the Hellenists and they rededicated the Altar.
Just a few years after the Chanukah story, the first book to record the story – Maccabees I – fails to mention the oil miracle in which one jug burned for eight days. The Jewish (likely religious) author describes the story in such great detail – perhaps even with firsthand account access – that the absence of the oil miracle is striking.[1] Written several decades later, the book of Maccabees II also records the story with a more religious bend to the events that transpired. This (unknown) author as well fails to mention the oil miracle story.[2] In the first-century ACE the famed and mostly-reliable Josephus describes the rededication of the Temple that brought about the Chanukah celebration – yet he seems totally unaware of any oil miracle story related to the occasion.[3]
Only some 600 years later does the Talmud record of a tradition recalling an oil miracle. About that same time, the oil miracle was added to the Scholion (commentary) of Megillat Taanit.[4] The natural conclusion we may suppose from this is that the oil miracle story has little historical credibility and developed over the years (for reasons soon to be discussed) only to be first recorded some 600 years after the Chanukah story.
It is interesting to note that many Jewish thinkers have wondered why the additional-prayer of al hanisim recited on Chanukah completely omits the oil miracle, focusing on the military victories instead. If this oil miracle was indeed a later development, this may help explain why the ancient prayer omits the oil miracle.[5]
Possible responses and their weaknesses
Dr. David Berger is among the few who have presented a response to this issue.[i] We will quote his response and then investigate the weight of his arguments.
“A perusal of I Maccabees demonstrates that miracle stories regarding the Hasmonean revolt and the Temple circulated widely. It is virtually beyond question that the author of I Maccabees heard such accounts, and yet he records none at all. This means either that he did not believe them or that he excluded them as a matter of policy. In either case, the absence of a reference to the cruse of oil — which is troubling only because of the inference that the author never heard the story — poses no challenge to one who believes the account of the miracle on the authority of Hazal. Given the author’s consistent historiographic approach, we can be almost certain that he would not have recorded this miracle even if he knew about it.
In the case of II Maccabees, the argument proceeds not from the absence of miracles but from their prominence. Here the author presents various miracle stories so public and so impressive (including, for example, the public appearance of angels) that the miracle of the cruse of oil, which was witnessed by relatively few observers, pales into near insignificance, and he may well have chosen to omit it along with other “minor” miracles. II Maccabees is an abridgment of a five-part work by Jason of Cyrene which has been lost. The full work almost certainly contained miracle stories that were omitted from the abridgment. To us, the story of the oil looms very large. To Jason — or to the man who abridged his work — it may have seemed trivial, particularly since he had an alternate explanation for the decision to celebrate for eight days.
In sum, there are plausible grounds to argue that the authors of both I & II Maccabees could have known the story and nonetheless omitted it from their histories.”
While there certainly is some weight to the arguments he brings, I will push back a little with some counter arguments. First he brings the story details mentioned in II Maccabees as indication that I Maccabees wasn’t as transparent as me might have thought it to be. But the opposite actually seems to be the case. I Maccabees was much closer to the actual account and seems to have a very good picture of the political, geographical, and sociological circumstances of Judea at the time. This cannot be said about II Maccabees who was writing much after the events and seems to almost deliberately give the story religious bends and meaning. I Maccabees leaves out the oil miracle – despite being the most reliable record we have of the Chanukah story, and, similarly, II Maccabees leaves out the oil miracle despite the author’s attempts to give the story as much religious meaning as possible.
As for the oil miracle being too “trivial” or “minor” a detail for II Maccabees to record, there are issues. First is that the detailed account should have at least alluded to it, and second, the Talmud seems to present the oil miracle as the very reason for celebration of Chanukah. It thus seems very strange that the author of II Maccabees (as well as I Maccabees, the al hanisim prayer, and Josephus) would omit that miracle story.
It may be possible that the oil miracle only took emphasis in later Talmudic times, a time when there was much less hope of a military nationalist State of Israel. In this theory, the earlier records would have omitted the oil miracle since it was overshadowed by the more triumphant elements like the military victories and the rededication of the Temple. Only in later times did the religious elements of the holiday (i.e. the oil miracle) take precedence over the political and nationalistic elements of the holiday (i.e. the military victory). But there are two issues with this response. First is that there isn’t even slight mention of the miracle in the early records, and second, that Josephus doesn’t bring this explanation for why it’s called the “festival of lights,” as discussed earlier.
Some suggest that Josephus would have censored out the oil miracle story since he knew the Roman authorities were reviewing his work and would be insulted by the miracle of God done to the zealot rebels who rebelled against the authorities of their times. A counter argument to this is that Josephus had no issue discussing the military triumphs of the Hasmonaeans against the authorities of their time. If he hadn’t censored that out, then why would he specifically censor out the oil miracle?
Yet another suggestion is that Josephus had Hellenistic leanings, sympathized with them, and therefore would have omitted the oil miracle which was an apparent blow to their religious views. This argument has some credibility as we indeed see in many places than Josephus gives a “Hellenized” version of history.[ii]
Some suggest that the oil miracle, which would have been observed by only a select few priests in the Temple, was kept in secret among the priests until a later point in time. This would explain why the early sources were unaware of the miracle. But this answer has its weak points. First, is that even the very scholarly Josephus – who was also a priest – knew nothing of the story. If he hadn’t heard of the story, then there are very few left to have known it. At that point, the story becomes legend, not history, merely passed from generation to generation by a few individuals. That is hardly a history to rely upon. Secondly, if the story wasn’t known at first – then even if it did occur, it cannot be regarded as the reason for celebration of Chanukah. The masses were celebrating the holiday before this apparent secret was revealed in Talmudic times.
As for the al hanisim prayer, discussed earlier, a satisfying answer has been presented.[iii] The point of the prayer is thanksgiving (as context suggests) and only the military victories would require thanksgiving – not the oil miracle. Indeed, this seems like a sufficient answer.
So, while we might be able to muster together an answer here and an answer there, the overall case, in my opinion, seems to favor a later development for the oil miracle story. Indeed, even if we can find an answer for why each of the early sources don’t mention the miracle – the fact remains that none of them mention it. The natural explanation for that omission is that they were unaware of it. This explanation is simpler than a separate answer for each instance the early records don’t mention the oil miracle (refer to Occam’s razor for more on this). This is besides the fact that the answers suggested have weaknesses of their own, as discussed earlier.
We need not feel threatened by this realization. The Talmud is prone to error and indeed there are many examples of such (see here). This is no theological issue either, from an Orthodox perspective (see here). Therefore I do not feel desperate to come up with answers to explain the omission of the oil miracle. It is possible that the oil miracle did indeed happen, but the evidence seems to favor a later development for the legend.
How did the oil miracle story come about?
We cannot know for certain but, like always, we can speculate. Myth formation takes on unique characteristics and developments over the years. We have many myths throughout religions worldwide and not always can we pinpoint how and when it started. Most likely these myths took time to develop, becoming more and more popular and taking on more imaginary features and surreal details. That is the story of the myths worldwide, and the Chanukah oil miracle may just be one of those. The original celebration was about the military victories against the Greeks and the rededication of the Temple. But later, this story would have developed into the oil miracle story that we now share with our families at the Menorah lighting each year.
There are a few possibilities for how the oil miracle could have developed.
There’s the genre of allegory so loved by the sages, traditionally called Midrash or Aggadah. It is a non-historical and non-literal genre of interpretation, especially of the biblical stories. The Midrash and Talmud (as well as so many other books in the ancient world) often convey religious messages in the form of allegorical commentary to the biblical stories. These additions to the biblical stories are often fantastic and surprisingly absent from the biblical text. For example, the Midrash records fascinating stories of Abraham and his unwavering commitment to God. There is no indication that these stories are actual historical; instead, the inventor of these stories was conveying religious messages in the power of parable and allegory. See “Did the Wild Stories of Midrash Actually Happen” for more on this subject.
Yet despite that these Midrashic stories were originally intended as non-historical, most Orthodox Jews today believe in the historicity of many, if not most, of these Midrashim. For example, most Orthodox Jews today will believe that Moses was ten cubits high and that 1 out of 5 Jews left Egypt when clearly these were intended as allegory and not history.[6] This is an example of Midrash-turned-history. It is very possible that the oil miracle was first intended as Midrashic allegory – perhaps to emphasize the divine satisfaction of the Hasmonaean revolt – and has later been misinterpreted as actual history. We see the trend of Midrash-turned-history nowadays and we can assume that history repeats itself again and again.
It’s also possible that the oil miracle developed – either as Midrash or as actual history – in order to deemphasize the military nationalistic elements of the holiday’s celebration. At times like the aftermath of the Bar Kochba revolt, some 300 years after the Chanukah story, celebrating nationalism in the occupied Roman state of Judea would have been unwise. The meaning of the Chanukah may have therefore taken on a different dimension during that time-period.
Yet another possibility for the development of the oil miracle comes from a very interesting sentence from first-century historian Josephus:
“And from that time to this we celebrate this festival, and call it Lights. I suppose the reason was, because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us; and that thence was the name given to that festival.”[iv]
Josephus was a scholarly man well versed in Torah and worldly knowledge. Yet, surprisingly, he doesn’t mention the oil miracle as the explanation for why the festival is called the “festival of lights.” This clearly would have been the most natural explanation – had that explanation actually been around at his time. But clearly the oil miracle story wasn’t well known, or known at all, to the point that the scholarly Josephus fails to use it as an explanation for the “festival of lights.”
We will get more into why it was once called the festival of lights in just a bit, but one point needs to be made here. The name “festival of lights” may have given birth to the legend of an oil miracle. The sages weren’t shy to give often novel interpretations in order to answer questions about biblical phraseology and in this case with the phrase “the festival of lights.” They may have slowly developed the oil miracle based on this ancient “festival of lights” reference to the holiday of Chanukah.
The significance of the Menorah and the 8 days of celebration
Given the critical approach to the oil miracle story, what significance does the Menorah lighting have and why is Chanukah celebrated for 8 days?
We see that already in early times, the festival was referred to as “the Festival of Lights.” Josephus is unsure why it is called such and gives his (perhaps unsatisfying) explanation, as discussed earlier. Another possible answer in addition to the answer that Josephus gives, is that lighting candles on the streets may have been a form of public celebration. Indeed nowadays too we see similar celebration with public displays of lights such as with Christmas.[7] If this was the case, then there would be meaning to the candle-lighting beyond the oil miracle. It’s also possible that candle-lighting was a way to commemorate the rededication of the Temple and the lighting of the Menorah that was done by the Hasmonaeans.
The significance of the 8 days celebrated is already recorded in II Maccabees. It is not because of an oil miracle that lasted 8 days, but because of the original holiday that was celebrated for 8 days straight. The Hasmonaeans were attempting to mimic the dedication of the Temple as done in the days of Nehemiah upon return from the Babylonian exile.[v] It was Sukkot at the time so Nehemiah, Ezra, and the Jewish community with them celebrated the dedication of the Temple for 8 days straight.[vi] (The Talmud as well makes the connection between Sukkot and Chanukah in Shabbos 21b.)
This Chanukah I will be lighting the candles in celebration of the freedom from oppressing occupiers, the rededication of the Temple, and the myths and legends that give us the rich culture that we have.
___________________
[1] Chapter 4 of the book:
Then said Judas and his brothers, Behold, our enemies are crushed: let us go up to cleanse and dedicate the sanctuary. So all the army assembled and went up to Mount Zion. There they saw the sanctuary desolate, and the altar profaned, and the gates burned up, and shrubs growing in the courts as in a forest, or as on one of the mountains. They also saw the chambers of priests in ruins. They rent their clothes, and made great lamentation, and cast ashes upon their heads, and fell down flat to the ground upon their faces. And when the signal was given with the trumpets, they cried toward heaven. Then Judas appointed certain men to fight against those that were in the fortress, until he had cleansed the sanctuary. He chose blameless priests devoted to the law. They cleansed the sanctuary, and removed the defiled stones to an unclean place. They consulted what to do with the altar of burnt offerings, which was profaned and thought it best to pull it down, lest it should be a reproach to them, because the heathens had defiled it. So they pulled it down and laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, until there should come a prophet to show what should be done with them.
Then they took unhewn stones according to the law, and built a new altar like the former. They rebuilt the sanctuary, and the interior of the temple, and consecrated the courts. They made also new holy vessels, and into the temple they brought the candlestick, and the altar of burnt offerings, and of incense, and the table. And upon the altar they burned incense, and the lamps that were upon the candlestick they lit, that they might give light in the temple. They set the loaves on the table, and hung up the curtains, and finished all the works which they had undertaken. Early in the morning on the twentieth fifth day of the ninth month, which is called the month Kislev, in the hundred forty and eighth year, they rose up and offered sacrifice according to the law upon the new altar of burnt offerings, which they had made. At the very season and on the very day that the Gentiles had profaned it, it was dedicated with songs, and citherns, and harps, and cymbals. Then all the people fell upon their faces, worshipping and praising the God of heaven, who had given them good success. And so they kept the dedication of the altar eight days and offered burnt offerings with gladness, and sacrificed the sacrifice of deliverance and praise. They also decked the forefront of the temple with crowns of gold, and with shields; and the gates and the chambers they renewed, and hanged doors upon them. Thus was there great joy among the people, for that the disgrace of the Gentiles was put away.
Moreover Judas and his brothers with the whole congregation of Israel ordained that the days of the dedication of the altar should be kept in their season from year to year for eight days, from the twentieth fifth day of the month Kislev, with joy and gladness.
[2] Chapter 1:18
Since on the twenty-fifth day of Kislev we shall celebrate the purification of the temple, we thought it necessary to notify you, in order that you also may celebrate the feast of booths and the feast of the fire given when Nehemiah, who built the temple and the altar, offered sacrifices. And later in Chapter 10: It happened that on the same day on which the sanctuary had been profaned by the foreigners, the purification of the sanctuary took place, that is, on the twenty-fifth day of the same month, which was Kislev. And they celebrated it for eight days with rejoicing, in the manner of the feast of booths, remembering how not long before, during the feast of booths, they had been wandering in the mountains and caves like wild animals. Therefore bearing ivy-wreathed wands and beautiful branches and also fronds of palm, they offered hymns of thanksgiving to him who had given success to the purifying of his own holy place. They decreed by public ordinance and vote that the whole nation of the Jews should observe these days every year.
[3] Book 12 ch. 7
Now Judas celebrated the festival of the restoration of the sacrifices of the temple for eight days, and omitted no sort of pleasures thereon; but he feasted them upon very rich and splendid sacrifices; and he honored God, and delighted them by hymns and psalms. Nay, they were so very glad at the revival of their customs, when, after a long time of intermission, they unexpectedly had regained the freedom of their worship, that they made it a law for their posterity, that they should keep a festival, on account of the restoration of their temple worship, for eight days. And from that time to this we celebrate this festival, and call it Lights. I suppose the reason was, because this liberty beyond our hopes appeared to us; and that thence was the name given to that festival.
[4] Megilat Taanit is a Tannaic-era book listing the days of celebration throughout the year in which fasting and eulogizing is forbidden under Jewish Law. The original work doesn’t explain why these days are celebrated; only several hundred years later was the Scholion added to give explanatory glosses to the work. See https://www.thetorah.com/article/megillat-taanit-and-its-scholion
[5] The exact origins of the al hanism prayer are unknown but it first appears in the siddur of Rav Amram Gaon, although the Talmud does speak of an additional thanksgiving-prayer without quoting the text of that prayer.
[6] In the example of Moses being 10 cubits high, the Midrash seems to clearly be a metaphor for the great spiritual stature of Moses, the number ten representing completeness. That same Midrash describes the Pharaoh of the time to be only 1 cubit high, testimony to his low spiritual status. Of curse this would be more than absurd to take as literal history since no 1 cubit-man (roughly a foot and half) would become King of Egypt (besides for the fact that we possess almost every mummy of the kings in the 18th dynasty – the time of the Exodus).
In the example of 1 out 5 Israelites leaving Egypt, that very same Midrash records another opinion that it was 1 out of 50 and yet another opinion that it was one out 500(!) If we are to take this Midrash literally, then we are left with a grand total of 2 billion Jewish slaves, at a time when the universal population wasn’t even a quarter of a billion and Egypt had less than a 5 million population figure.
[7] The only issue with this approach, though, is that Josephus didn’t mention it.
[i] http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2006/11/human-initiative-and-divine-providence.html
[ii] See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquities_of_the_Jews#Content
Josephan scholar Louis Feldman highlights several of the misconceptions about the Jewish people that were being circulated in Josephus’ time. In particular, the Jews were thought to lack great historical figures and a credible history of their people. They were also accused of harboring hostility toward non-Jews, and were thought to be generally lacking in loyalty, respect for authority, and charity.[4] With these harsh accusations against the Jews fluttering about the Roman empire, Josephus, formerly Joseph ben Matthias, set out to provide a Hellenized version of the Jewish history. Such a work is often called an “apologia,” as it pleads the case of a group of people or set of beliefs to a larger audience.
In order to accomplish this goal, Josephus omitted certain accounts in the Jewish narrative and even added a Hellenistic “glaze” to his work. For example, the “Song of The Sea” sung by Moses and the people of Israel after their deliverance at the Red Sea is completely omitted in Josephus’ text.[5] He does mention, however, that Moses composed a song to God in hexameter—a rather unusual (and Greek) metrical scheme for an ancient Hebrew.[6] Josephus also writes that Abraham taught science to the Egyptians, who in turn taught the Greeks, and that Moses set up a senatorial priestly aristocracy, which like Rome resisted monarchy. Thus, in an attempt to make the Jewish history more palatable to his Greco-Roman audience, the great figures of the biblical stories are presented as ideal philosopher-leaders.
In another example, apparently due to his concern with pagan antisemitism, Josephus omitted the entire episode of the golden calf from his account of the Israelites at Mount Sinai. It has been suggested that he was afraid that the biblical account might be employed by Alexandrian antisemites to lend credence to their allegation that the Jews worshiped an ass’s head in the Temple (cf. Apion 2:80, 114, 120; Tacitus, Histories 5:4).[7] He also made discredited allegations that the Ancient Egyptians forced the Jewish slaves to build the pyramids, writing “They [the Egyptian taskmasters] set them also to build pyramids.”.[8]
[iii] https://dafaleph.com/home/2015/12/8/the-historicity-of-the-miracle-of-oil
[iv] Book 12 ch. 7.
[v] The book of Maccabees II ch. 1 and 10.
[vi] Nehemiah ch. 8.
Josephus who was alive and writing during the Second Temple period 250 years after the events of Channukah writes that the holiday is called “Lights,” but he never mentioned an oil miracle.
In fact, there is no mention of a so-called oil miracle in books of Maccabees 1 & 2. The Maccabees is very descriptive, describing in detail the Greeks defiling the temple and its rein dedication and creation of new vessel, including an explicit description of the lighting of the menorah. Thus, the Pharisees wanted to commemorate and invent or embellish the story of the oil miracle. If there was an oil miracle the books of Maccabees would have mentioned it.