by Rabbi Nachum Scheiner
We have seen that, according to the Pri Chodosh and the Pri To’ar, there is a fundamental machlokes between the Rashba and Ran. According to the Ran, a mitzvah done just to remove suspicion is not considered a mitzvah (Chanukah candles), and does not require a brocha. According to the Rashba, if the Chachamim mandated that we do something to remove suspicion, (shechita of a ben pakua) it is considered a mitzvah and does require a brocha.
However, from other poskim it would seem that there must be a difference between the cases, as they quote both of these rulings. The poskim quote the ruling of the Ran, not to recite a brocha when lighting to remove suspicion, as well as the ruling of the Rashba to recite a brocha on the shechita of the ben pekua. This proves that they must have held that there is a difference between the cases.
There are, indeed, a number of ways to explain the difference between lighting to remove suspicion, which will not require a brocha, and the shechita of the ben pekua, which will require a brocha.
1) An Established Takana of Beis Din
The Tevuos Shor writes that it is only when it comes to the ben pekua, which is mentioned in the Mishna. This was an official mandate, established by a Beis Din, and is considered a full-fledged rabbinical mitzvah, which requires a brocha.
On the other hand, lighting at the second door was an innovation of Rav Huna, an Amora. Although we must certainly follow his ruling, it was not an official mandate, established by a Beis Din, and is not considered a rabbinical mitzvah, which requires a brocha.
According to this understanding, there is no machlokes, and all agree that ben pekua, which is an official mandate, requires a brocha, and lighting at the second door was not, and does not require a brocha.
2) Suspicion in regard to a Scriptural mitzvah
The Tevuos Shor adds that there is another fundamental difference between the two cases. In the case of ben pekua, the Chachamim required shechita, so that the person is not suspected of not keeping the Scriptural mitzvah of shechita. This is considered a full-fledged rabbinical mitzvah, like any other rabbinical mandate, which requires a brocha.
On the other hand, lighting is a rabbinical mitzvah, and avoiding suspicion for a rabbinical mitzvah is not a full-fledged mitzvah, and does not require a brocha.
According to this understanding, as well, there is no machlokes, and all agree that shechita of a ben pekua requires a brocha, and lighting at the second door on Chanukah does not require a brocha.
Summary
There is a difference between lighting to remove suspicion, which does not require a brocha, and the shechita of a ben pekua, which does require a brocha.
Ben pekuah is an official mandate, and requires a brocha, but lighting on Chanukah at the second door is not, and does not require a brocha. Shechita of a ben pekua is to safe-keep the Scriptural mitzvah of shechita, and is like any other rabbinical mandate, which requires a brocha. But lighting Chanukah candles is a rabbinical mitzvah, and avoiding suspicion for a rabbinical mitzvah, is not a mitzvah, and does not require a brocha.
To be continued...
