I have been reviewing some discussions of a married woman's obligation to light Channukah candles. It appears that according to some, a married woman, whose husband is lighting at home does not light. I read that

when a husband sees that he will only arrive home late, he should appoint his wife to light on his behalf and he will consequently fulfill his obligation. However, if this was the situation on the first night of Chanukah, the husband will not have recited the “Shehecheyanu” blessing customarily recited on the first night. Thus, if the individual is home on the second night and will be lighting the Chanukah candles himself, he must consequently recite the “Shehecheyanu” blessing since this is his first actual lighting of the Chanukah candles.

The same article states

Nevertheless, according to the Ashkenazi custom that each member of the household lights for himself, even if the husband has traveled abroad, if he finds himself in a place where he can light, it is preferable that he light in his current location without a blessing and his wife should light at home with a blessing. If at all possible though, the husband should try to hear the blessings on the lighting from another person.

So if a man does not light on the first night, when he does light on a subsequent night, he says a shehechyanu. It seems that a woman's lighting fulfills some household obligation, but does not fully remove from him the "newness" of actual lighting.

But what about the reverse?

If a woman relies on her husband's lighting (ner ish ubeiso or ishto k'gufo as the logic) on the first night and then has cause to light on a later night, does she then say a shehechyanu? While it is her "first" lighting, she has already been included in the mitzvah through her husband's lighting and unlike the case of her husband, she need not even try to light on her own – her obligation seems more fully fulfilled.

  • 2
    Not everyone agrees with the ruling you cited that one who had a messenger light on the first night recites Shehechiyanu on the next night. See judaism.stackexchange.com/a/67/759
    – Double AA
    Dec 24, 2019 at 14:46
  • 1
    Anyone relying on the communal home lighting should be there to listen to the blessings, to avoid any need to say the Seeing blessings themselves when seeing someone else's lights. Your case can still happen if they happened to have been unavailable the first night.
    – Double AA
    Dec 24, 2019 at 14:47
  • 1
    While you are using a married woman in an Ashkenazi home, the same applies to any family member who is relying on the communal lighting, such as everyone but 1 person in all Sefardi homes. You'll probably find more discussion in halakhic literature about that.
    – Double AA
    Dec 24, 2019 at 14:49
  • On the Hebrew version of the page brought, in the 'questions and answers' section, this question is asked, and the answer is given: "היא אינה מברכת שהחיינו, משום שהיא כבר שמעה את הברכה מבעלה ביום הראשון, ויצאה ידי חובה" ("she does not say 'Shehecheyanu', as she already heard the blessing from her husband on the first night, and has become not obligated to say it").
    – Tamir Evan
    Dec 24, 2019 at 15:01
  • @TamirEvan That's not this question. This question is where the person fulfilling their obligation wasn't there the first night. (See my second comment above)
    – Double AA
    Dec 24, 2019 at 15:05


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .