The Oil Miracle of Chanukah: Myth or Fact

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 25^th 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 25^th 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.