Talk:Hanukkah

How Exactly Do We Know This Was A Miracle?

Has it been determined how much oil is actually needed to keep a lamp burning for one day?

What makes olive oil "holy"?

Could this have just been reality? There actually being enough oil in the sealed vessel to keep the particular lamp in question lit for eight days? What kind of lamp; not a menorah with candles clearly.

Any links or sources where actual of-the-day lamps were lit, and oil consumed measured? Just how much oil was actually in the sealed vessel? What was the vessel size back then? Some of the amphoras recovered from ancient Mediterranean shipwrecks stand five feet tall.

Seriously, the lamps stayed lit for eight nights, why might they not simply have been efficient lamps fueled by a sufficient quantity of oil?

I'd like to see some real information in this article.

edit: I looked up oil consumption and found these:

It is the experience with this lamp that taught me many things about myself. No matter what quality of oil etc., if I am back- sliding the lamp will not stay lit for more than a couple of hours. Under the same physical conditions however it would burn for up to 4 days over a long festal week-end if I were attending to "the one thing needful."

Which ironically was posted by an Orthodox Jew about celebrating Hanukkah. He got a small amount of olive oil to burn in a lamp for FOUR days. Maybe the the oil lamps were attended to more closely when it was known the oil supply was limited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:243:0:abe7:803a:2544:5006:d0c5 (talk) 10:31, 20 September 2017

More actual experiences:

We use antique glass lamps when the power goes out, we have kerosene in some and parafin in others. We've used them for eight hours after filling and the 'oil' level has only gone down about a 1/4 inch.

One of the lamps we used to use would go through about half a reservoir (a quart or so) in a week but we had babies when we were camping and left the lamp burning overnight on a very low setting.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:243:0:abe7:803a:2544:5006:d0c5 (talk) 11:04, 20 September 2017

- Answer: I'll expand the question: You can ask the same question about basically every miracle recorded in the Bible. The response is that if you believe in the G-d of the Torah, then you ought to believe in His miracles. (Why you should believe in Him is because 3 million people simultaneously witnessed His giving the 10 commandments. If someone made that up, they would not be able to answer the obvious question: "well, where are your 3 million witnesses?" (Unlike Christianity and Islam, who claim that one person on their own got a revelation...))

- Answer 2: The sources discussing this miracle indicate that finding the vial of oil was in itself remarkable, because all others had been rendered impure by the Greeks. And the sources record that it was small, sufficing only for one day. This one still had the Kohen Gadol's seal on it, indicating it hadn't been tampered with. So again, if you accept the sources that discuss Hanukkah in the first place, you ought to accept that they could measure volume and know how much oil was used daily. (Incidentally, the kohanim would set new wicks/oil daily (as described in the korbanot, "hatavat hamesh nerot kodemet... hatavat shtei nerot ... etc), so it's not about x amount of oil burning continually for 8 days, but x amount of oil filling 8x the volume of Menorah lamps.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.219.163.100 (talk) 08:18, 7 November 2017‎

Answers via an employee at [1]http://www.JudaicaWebstore.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.219.163.100 (talk) 08:17, 7 November 2017

Spelling

Is there a reason why the lede uses the spelling "Chanukah" while the title and rest of the article use the "Hanukkah" spelling? Jessintime (talk) 21:10, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

The lead now uses Hanukkah as the primary title, and I scoured the rest of the article to consistently change it to Hanukkah, as there were still quite a few instances of Chanukah sprinkled throughout the text. However, since 1/3 of the cited sources in the article use the Chanukah spelling, and footnotes aren't terribly accessible (especially on mobile), I added that spelling as a parenthetical alternative per MOS:LEADALT. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 14:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

why is the "modern" H paired with the "classical" double K, while the "classical" Ch gets a "modern" single K?!

is there some particular need to make it 8 letters either way?

seems to me "Hanukah" (modern) and "Chanukkah" (classical) would be the 2 options. and yet, the article -- and most sources -- overwhelming use "Hanukkah" and "Chanukah". 2601:18A:807C:1C40:71:CCE2:81B0:4554 (talk) 06:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

The "H" is the "classical" spelling (it represents the ancient Hebrew pharyngeal /ħ/ phoneme), whereas the "ch" is a "modern" spelling (it represents the Yiddish and modern Hebrew dorsal /x/ phoneme). AJD (talk) 06:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

oh, sorry, misread that.

that whole paragraph is confusing! saying "Ch" is not native to english before having any reason to even bring it up makes no sense. shouldn't it be written such that the HEBREW SOUND (or SOUNDS if the classical pronunciation is also under consideration) is not native to english, and then give the pros and cons of transliterating to "H" vs "Ch"?

also, line "...based on using characters of the English alphabet as symbols to re-create the word's correct spelling in Hebrew" is silly -- that's what transliteration IS. the real focus of the sentence should be the "in Hebrew" part, as opposed to "in Yiddish" for the Ch version, no?

in any case, bottom line:

hanukkah - modern / preferred by linguists

chanukah - out of favor with linguists / reflects yiddish influence?

hanukah - not common

chanukkah - not common

correct? 2601:18A:807C:1C40:C94E:BE86:B3C9:691A (talk) 05:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Remove photo

This photo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanukkah#/media/File:The_National_Library_of_Israel,_Jewish_New_Year_cards_C_HL_12.JPG

Is of a temple menorah, 7 lights. Should be removed. Irrevelant. Philfromwaterbury (talk) 18:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Andre🚐 21:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Can we rename the article?

This article is currently named "Hanukkah," but this spelling is incorrect if you look at the Hebrew (חֲנֻכָּה), you will see that there is a better spelling. Let's go letter by letter. First we have חֲ, making the sound Chah (The "ch" is a guttural sound from the back of the throat without a proper English letter combination). Next we have נֻ, making the sound noo (or new). Then כָּ, making the sound kah. Finally we have ה, which is silent, but means we should have an "h" at the end of the word. With all this in place, the proper spelling is "Chanukah" or "Channukah" (I do not know the rules for the double n). So can we change all instances of "Hanukkah" to "Chanukah"? Bitten87 (talk) 19:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

hi! can we not do chanukka spelling discourse. since its not an english word, there isnt actually a "correct" way to spell it in english. while personally i prefer "ch" for that sound, i know many people prefer just a plain "h". 96.225.171.246 (talk) 15:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The spelling "Hanukkah" is a decent rendition based on the ancient Hebrew pronunciation, if not the modern Hebrew pronunciation. I prefer "Chanukah" also. However, the evidence seems to indicate that "Hanukkah" is the more common spelling, and it makes a better article title for that reason. AJD (talk) 15:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

i am still baffled as to why the "H" version usually gets a double K but the "Ch" version does not. that is, we are all debating "Hanukkah" vs "Chanukah", but what about "Hanukah" and "Chanukkah"? is there some "8 letters for good luck" superstition or something?

btw, i feel that the "Ch" version was far more common 50 years ago when i was young. did linguists simply sour on this transliteration, same as they did on "Peking" or "Bombay"? 2601:18A:807C:1C40:9113:1381:A8CC:9CA7 (talk) 15:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The spelling "Hanukkah" is based on the ancient Hebrew pronunciation, while "Chanukah" is based on the modern Hebrew pronunciation. In Ancient Hebrew, the word began with a pharyngeal fricative (whose best approximation in English spelling is "h"), and had a double K. In modern Hebrew, there are no double consonants, and the pharyngeal fricative has been replaced with a velar or uvular fricative, which is rendered as "ch". That's why the "ch" goes together with the single K and the "h" does with the double K. AJD (talk) 15:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

ok thanks. i think u basically said this already, but i didn't quite grasp it the first time!

that said, do u agree that "Ch" was the default back in the 70s or so? or is this mandela effect on my part? 2601:18A:807C:1C40:9113:1381:A8CC:9CA7 (talk) 16:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea. Google Books ngram viewer suggests that "Hanukkah" has been more common than "Chanukah" consistently, except in the 2010s, but I have no way of knowing how reliable that is. AJD (talk) 16:31, 24 December 2024 (UTC)