On Chanukah and Purim, a special prayer (al hanissim) is added to the Amidah, thanking G-d for the miracles performed “in those days at this time of year.” To its great credit, the Conservative movement has also added a third al hanissim, to be recited on Yom Haatzmaut, Israel’s Independence Day. It is, needless to say, important to recognize the miracles that take place “in these days, ….
The al hanissim recognizes G-d “For the miracles and for the redemption and for the mighty acts and for the triumphs and for the wars…” It is worth pointing out that there is similar language—similar, but not identical—in the “hanerot hallalu” declaration we recite when lighting Chanukah candles. “We light these candles to recall the miracles and wonders and the triumphs and the wars which you enacted on behalf of our ancestors….” And in the same vein, the “hanerot hallalu” concludes with a similar—but not identical!—list: “For the miracles and wonders and triumphs.”
To summarize:
Al hanissim: miracles…redemption…mighty acts…triumphs…wars
Hanerot hallallu (beginning) miracles……….wonders……………..triumphs…wars
Hanerot hallallu (end) miracles……….wonders……………..triumphs………
Obviously these phrasings are related. We must assume, therefore, that the choice to vary them is significant and meaningful. How shall we explain this?
I would suggest the following. There is deep ambiguity in regard to “the” miracle of Chanukah and Purim. In the Purim story, as told in the Book of Esther, G-d never plays a visible role at all. To refer to the wondrous and unpredictable events and reversals that take place in the story as “miracles,” meaning divine interventions in the world, is stretching things a lot. In a similar vein, “the” miracle of Chanukah is less than clear. The historical texts talk of a “miraculous” Hasmonean victory over the militarily overwhelming Greek-Syrian forces, without ever mentioning the 8 day oil miracle; while the Talmudic text is solely concerned with the oil, never mentioning the Hasmonean victories. Hence, a distinction is made between G-d as spiritual redeemer (“redemption”) and G-d as military champion (“mighty acts”).
The second big difference between the texts is the omission of “wars” at the end of Hanerot hallallu. I would suggest that this variance reflects a different ambivalence. As a great New Jersey spiritual leader once said, “War! What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.” But that’s only half true. After war has broken out, it’s sometimes necessary, and arguably even holy, to respond with the violence of war. Think Pearl Harbor. Or October 7. It is understandable that we would celebrate the victory of the “weak over the strong, the few over the many, the guilty into the hands of the innocent,” in the words of al hanissim. How could we not? It would be just inhuman. On the other hand, to praise G-d for “wars” is just inhumane.
The point of the Rabbis? Even a “good” war is bad.