צַ֞ו אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֨וּ אֵלֶ֜יךָ שֶׁ֣מֶן זַ֥יִת זָ֛ךְ כָּתִ֖ית לַמָּא֑וֹר לְהַעֲלֹ֥ת נֵ֖ר תָּמִֽיד׃
“Perintahkanlah kepada bani Israel supaya mereka membawa kepadamu minyak zaitun murni hasil tumbukan untuk penerangan, untuk menyalakan pelita senantiasa.
Bartenura
ומדליקו מעל מזבח העולה – for they would not kindle the western lamp/candle/light ever other than from the fire of the altar of the burnt offering, as it is written (Leviticus 6:6): “A perpetual fire shall be kept burning on the altar [not to go out],” and it is written (Leviticus 24:2): “for kindling lamps regularly”, above the outer altar it was kindled.
Siftei Chakhamim
Because the flame rises. Rashi is answering the question: How is the term “When you cause to rise” appropriate for lamps such that Scripture writes בהעלותך (when you cause to rise) instead of בהדלקתך (when you light)? He answers that it is because the flame rises, meaning that this was why the terminology of ‘rising’ is appropriate. Rashi also answers another question: Nonetheless the Torah should have written “when you light,” so why does it write “when you cause to rise”? It is certain that the term “when you cause to rise” may also be appropriate regarding lamps, as Rashi explains “because the flame rises,” however the term “when you light” is more correct. He answers that it is written “when you cause to rise” in order to teach that “he is required to ignite…” However [one may ask another question:] in Parshas Tetzaveh (Shemos 27:20) regarding the lighting of the continual flame, Rashi only answers why it is written “to cause to rise” rather than “light.” He says that he is required to ignite [the lamp] until the flame rises by itself. The answer is that there it is written להעלות “to cause to rise” in the command form, therefore Rashi explains why the command was given with the term “to cause to rise” rather than the term “to light” which is a clearer command. He answers that because “he is required to ignite…” which is a component of the command, therefore it is written “to cause to rise.” See Re’m. Parshas Emor (Vayikra 24:2) is the real source of this command, as Rashi explains there. The question is why did Rashi did explain anything there? The answer is that he relies upon his explanation in Parshas Tetzaveh about the term “to cause to rise” which was in the command form, as explained. Re’m explains similarly that a commentator will sometimes explain all matters that relate to a term, sometimes he will explain some of them and sometimes he will rely upon what he explained elsewhere. Therefore Rashi gave no explanation in Parshas Emor, even though the term “to cause the continual flame to rise” is written there.
Or HaChaim
צו את אהרון, "Command Aaron, etc." Torat Kohanim comments that the expression צו is always one which denotes a sense of urgency covering both the present and future generations. [I believe the meaning of "future generations" is that the commandment does not merely involve a one-time contribution such as the materials for the Tabernacle. Ed.]. Rabbi Shimon says that this expression is used especially when performance of the commandment involves personal expense. According to the first opinion quoted, the reason the expression צו is justified here more than elsewhere is because the legislation involving the burnt or total-offering involves also night-time activity, something which is not the case with any of the other offerings. The priests therefore had to be impressed with a special sense of urgency. We find a parallel passage in the Torah (Leviticus 24,2) where the expression צו is used in connection with the oil for the candlestick which was used primarily at night. That commandment also involved personal expense for the people contributing the oil. Aaron was commanded with those words, and the Torah reports in Numbers 8,3 that Aaron carried out the instructions to the letter. The word לדורות used by Torat Kohanim means that the rules laid down here after the word צו are not subject to change in the future. We encounter the following comment in Pessikta on our verse. "The need for the Torah to legislate with the word צו was based on the Israelites having said: 'in the past while we were wandering through the desert we used to offer daily communal burnt-offerings. Now that we have have stopped wandering, we will also discontinue the practice of these offerings.'" We see from the above that there was room for error as to the application of the daily תמידים offerings.
Siftei Chakhamim
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumSiftei Chakhamim
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumSiftei Chakhamim
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumRashi
בהעלתך WHEN THOU LIGHTEST [THE LAMPS] — Why is the section treating of the candelabrum put in juxtaposition with the section dealing with the offerings of the princes? Because when Aaron saw the dedication offerings of the princes, he felt distressed because neither he nor his tribe was with them in the dedication, whereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “By your life! Your part is of greater importance than theirs, for you will kindle and set in order the lamps” (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Beha'alotcha 5; see also Nachmanides).
Rashi
בהעלתך lit., WHEN THOU MAKEST [THE LIGHTS] RISE — Because the flame rises upwards (עולה), an expression denoting “ascending” is used of kindling them (the lights), implying that one must kindle them until the light ascends of itself (Shabbat 21a). — Furthermore our Rabbis derived from here (from the expression בהעלתך) that there was a step in front of the candelabrum upon which the priest stood while preparing the lights (Sifrei Bamidbar 59).
Rashi
אל מול פני המנורה OVER AGAINST THE CANDLESTICK — i.e. over against the central lamp which is not on one of the branches, like the others, but on the body (the central shaft) of the candelabrum itself (cf. Menachot 98b).