In Eretz Yisroel we know there is a custom to eat sufganiyot on Chanukah. Actually, a few weeks after Succos the sufganiyot begin to appear in the bakeries. This minhag is quite old. It is brought down in various seforim[i] that it is an old Teimani minhag; it is brought down in the name of Rebbi Maimon ben Yosef, the father of the Rambam. The reasoning behind the minhag is that the sufganiyot are fried in oil and it is a zecher to the special bracha and special neis that Hashem gave us on Chanukah through the oil.

Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt”l brings another fascinating source for this custom. It is interesting that the bracha of al hamichya is called “me'ein shalosh” which means that it is a condensed version of the first three brochos of birchas hamazon. The bracha of al hamichya is similar to, “me'ein,” the first three brochos of birchas hamazon.

The sentence which begins with “rachem” in al hamichya corresponds to the bracha of “rachem” in bentching. However, there is an interesting difference. In the “rachem” sentence of al hamichya we ask Hashem to have mercy on Yisroel amecha, Yerushalayim, tzion and Your altar, the mizbeyach. In the “rachem” bracha in bentching, we do not mention the mizbeyach. This is a striking difference.

Rav Shlomo Zalman[ii] thinks that maybe the minhag developed to eat sufganiyot on Chanukah in order to specifically say al hamichya on Chanukah. Why? Because we specifically want to mention “mizbichecha,” the mizbeyach. When the Chashmonaim rededicated the beis hamikdash, they started doing the avodah again. The Gemara (Avodah Zara 52b) describes in great detail that the Chashmonaim were not able to be metaher the mizbeyach, and the Gemara further explains why they were not able to use the mizbeyach in any way. Rather, the Chashmonaim were forced to put the stones of the mizbeyach into geniza. They then built a new mizbeyach. We could not reuse the mizbeyach, and we dedicated a new one- chanukas ha’mizbeyach. Therefore, it is a fulfillment of me’en ha’meora to mention the mizbeyach. Chanukah is the correct time to mention the mizbeyach[iii].

Furthermore, it is part of our simcha of Chanukah to mention the mizbeyach. The Maharsha (Shabbos 21b) writes that the name Chanukah is based on the chanukas ha’mizbeyach. The Shulchan Aruch (Siman 670) poskens there is no chiyuv to have a seudah on Chanukah. The Rama (Siman 670) agrees, but adds that there is ‘k’tzas mitzvah’ to have seudos on Chanukah because that is when we had the chanukas ha’mizbeyach[iv]. Some of the history books of the time say that the Yevanim began offering sacrifices to their avodah zara on the 25th of Kislev. Therefore, it was a special simcha for the Chashmonaim to begin offering korbonos on the new mizbeyach specifically on that very date.

On Chanukah, one should say al ha’michya[v], and specifically the reference to the mizbeyach, with extra special kavana. This is a fabulous chiddush from Rav Shlomo Zalman[vi].

Chanukah Sameach,

B. Ginsburg 

[i] In the older seforim, the word used is “sufganin.” I do not know if they had jelly doughnuts or caramel doughnuts, but it was something broadly similar. This is an old custom. This source from the father of the Rambam is brought down in the sefer Halichos Shlomo, Moadim Volume Two, pages 318-319.

[ii] See Halichos Shlomo cited above.

[iii] This approach was developed mostly by R’ Shai Gerson shli”ta.

[iv] The Yam Shel Shlomo (Bava Kama 7,37) and other Rishonim maintain there is an actual chiyuv seudah on Chanukah, unlike the psak of the Shulchan Aruch. One reason for the chiyuv is because of the chanukas ha’mizbeyach. See also the Meshech Chochmah (Bamidbar 10,10) who describes the special simcha associated with the chanukas ha’mizbeyach.

[v] There are two possible, practical differences between this explanation and the standard one. First, according to this approach, the custom would be to specifically eat sufganiyot outside of the meal, in order to be able to say al ha’michya. (I would guess some people are ‘machmir’ to eat the sufganiyot both during the meal and separate from the meal in order to fulfill all of the opinions.) Second, according to this approach, one could ‘fulfill’ the minhag by eating fruit of the zayin minim and then say the brocho of al ha’etz.

[vi]There really are two ways of explaining this chiddush of Rav Shlomo Zalman zt”l. Rav Shlomo Zalman explains that the minhag of eating sufganiyot developed in order that we should davka say al hamichya on Chanukah because al hamichya mentions the mizbeyach. What exactly is the point? The language quoted in the 'Halichos Shlomo' is that because they were not able to be metaher the mizbeyach they were mi'tzta'er. Again, it is a little bit unclear what the punchline is. I thin there are two possible approaches. (I discussed these ideas with Rav Chizkiyah Nevenzahl shli”ta.)

One approach is that although the simcha of Chanukah was great, at the same time it was not complete. They would have rather have been able to be metaher the old mizbeyach, and since they were not able to reuse the original mizbeyach, there was some tza'ar. True, they were happy about chanukas hamizbeyach, and that is one of the reasons of the names of Chanukah. But, at the same time, there was some tza’ar, and there is no contradiction. Overall they were happy about chanukas hamizbeyach, but they were still sad that they were not able to reuse the old one. Therefore, we specifically mention the mizbeyach to remind us of that aspect of Chanukah. This approach fits with the language in the sefer.

There is another approach. This does not appear to be what Rav Shlomo Zalman himself meant, but one can take the kernel of what he explained and go in a slightly different direction. The kernel is that we specifically say al halmichya on Chanukah. The different direction is almost the opposite idea. Chanukas hamizbeyach is part of our simcha of Chanukah. We know that bentching is a mitzvah d'Oraisa of thanking Hashem for the food and al hamichya is me'ein shalosh, so al hamichya, in general, serves as thanking Hashem for the food. So, within our thanking Hashem for the food we davka mention the mizbeyach. This reflects our simcha that we were fortunate enough to have a new chanukas hamizbeyach on Chanukah, and this is part of the simcha of Chanukah. I do not think Rav Shlomo Zalman meant this, but Rav Chizkiyah thought that this is another possible angle based on the kernel that Rav Shlomo Zalman said, although going in a different direction.

These are two different angles on the approach of Rav Shlomo Zalman regarding saying al hamichya on Chanukah.