Komentarz do Liczb 8:2

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).

WHEN THOU LIGHTEST THE LAMPS. “Why does the section dealing with the candelabrum follow [the section which tells of] the dedication-offerings of the princes? The reason is that when Aaron saw the dedication-offerings of the princes, he became disheartened because neither he nor his tribe participated with them in the dedication; whereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: ‘By thy life! Thy contribution is [of] greater [significance] than theirs, for thou wilt kindle and trim the lamps every morning and evening.’”¹“Every morning and evening.” This is not found in our texts of Rashi. This is Rashi’s language, from a Midrash Agadah.²Tanchuma Beha’alothcha 5. — “Midrash Agadah.” Rabbinic texts on the Five Books of Moses are divided into two classes: “Midrash Halachah” (texts dealing mainly with the legal parts of the Torah), which consist of the Mechilta on the Book of Exodus, Sifra [or Torath Kohanim] on the Book of Leviticus, and Sifre on the Books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. Another set of texts deal mainly with the narrative, ethical and homiletical aspects of the Scriptures. These comprise two major works — the Midrash Rabbah and Tanchuma. There is in addition a large group of smaller Midrashim that belong to this category. The generic term “Midrash Agadah” includes all this second group of texts.
But it is not clear to me why G-d consoled Aaron [by reminding him of his function] in lighting the lamps, rather than consoling him with the burning of the incense every morning and evening, which is [the specific function of his] with which Scripture praised him, as it is said, they shall put incense before Thee.³Deuteronomy 33:10. This was recited by Moses in praise of the whole tribe of Levi consisting of priests and Levites, and he singled out this function of the priests for special praise, thus indicating that the burning of incense was a highly significant act. So why did G-d not console Aaron with this special prerogative of his? Or [G-d could have reminded him of] all the offerings [performed only by his descendants], and the meal-offering of baked cakes [which is brought daily by the High Priest personally],⁴Leviticus 6:13-15. and the Service on the Day of Atonement which is only valid if done by him [i.e., Aaron and subsequent High Priests], and [by the fact that it is] he who enters into the innermost part of the Sanctuary, and he is the holy one of the Eternal,⁵Psalms 106:16. standing in His Temple to minister unto Him, and to bless in His Name,⁶Deuteronomy 10:8. and his entire tribe minister to our G-d! Moreover, what reason was there for Aaron’s uneasiness of mind [upon seeing the offerings of the princes]? Was not his [dedication-] offering greater than that of the [other] princes, for he offered up during those days — all the [seven] days of the initiation [of the priests] — many offerings? And if you reply that [he was disheartened because] his offerings were obligatory and he had been commanded to bring them, and therefore he was dispirited because he did not bring a voluntary offering for the dedication of the altar as they did — [this cannot be so] because the lighting of the lamps with which He consoled Aaron was also a duty which he had been commanded! [Therefore what consolation did Aaron derive for not sharing in the voluntary offerings by being given a commandment which was obligatory?]
But the intention of this homiletic text is to derive an allusion from this section [of the Torah] to the Chanukah (“Dedication”) of lights which occurred in the period of the Second Temple through Aaron and his sons, namely [Matithyahu] the Hasmonean, who was High Priest, and his sons.⁷See Vol. I, pp. 589-590. And I have found this explanation in the following text of Megillath Setharim⁸Literally: “Scroll of Hidden Things.” This was a kind of anthology of various subjects — law, tradition, Biblical exegesis, philosophy, as well as explanations of customs. It is possible that they were primarily notes which the author wrote down for his own benefit, not intending them for public use, hence its name — “Scroll of Hidden Things.” The book was popular in the era of the Rishonim [“the Early Scholars” of the eleventh and twelfth centuries]. It has been lost in the course of time. of Rabbeinu Nissim,⁹Rabbeinu Nissim lived in the first half of the eleventh century of the Common Era. He was the son of Rabbi Yaakov of Kairwan in North Africa, to whom Rabbeinu Sherira Gaon (see Vol. I, p. 97) addressed his famous letter, in which he gives a historical account of how the Mishnah was written and how the traditions were passed on through the later generations. After the death of his father, Rabbeinu Nissim together with Rabbeinu Chananel (see Vol. II p. 106, Note 45, and Vol. III, p. 324, Note 286) were the recognized authorities of the Kairwan community. Rabbeinu Nissim wrote a commentary on many tractates of the Talmud which is existing and is outstanding for its clarity of exposition. who mentions this tradition, saying: “I have seen in the Midrash: When [the princes of] the twelve tribes brought the dedication-offerings and the tribe of Levi did not etc., the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, Speak unto Aaron, and say unto him: When thou lightest the lamps. There is another Dedication in which there will be lighting of the lamps, when I will perform through your sons miracles and salvation for Israel, and a Dedication which will be called by their name, namely, ‘the Chanukah of the sons of the Hasmonean.’¹⁰The sense of the verse here is thus: “It is you [Aaron and sons, through your descendants the Hasmoneans] who will kindle and trim the lamps in the days of the Second Temple.” Therefore He put this section [dealing with the lighting of the lamps] next to the section concerning the dedication of the altar.” Thus far is his [Rabbeinu Nissim’s] language.
And I have further seen in Yelamdeinu¹¹Tanchuma Beha’alothcha, 5. On the meaning of the term Yelamdeinu, see Vol. II, p. 131, Note 196. and also in the Midrash Rabbah¹²Bamidbar Rabbah 15:5. [the following text]: “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Go and tell Aaron — ‘Fear not! You are designated for something of greater importance than this. The offerings are brought only as long as the Sancutary is in existence, but the lamps will give light in front of the candelabrum forever; and all the blessings that I have given you with which to bless My children will never come to an end.’” Now it is an obvious fact that when the Sanctuary is not in existence and the offerings are not brought because of its destruction, the lighting of the lamps [of the candelabrum in the Sanctuary] also ceases [so what does the Midrash mean in saying that G-d promised Aaron that the lighting of the lamps would never stop]! Therefore [we must say] that the Sages of the Midrash were alluding to the lights of the Dedication of the Hasmoneans, which applies [on the festival of Chanukah] even after the destruction of the Sanctuary, in our exile. Similarly the priestly blessing¹³Above, 6:24-26. which is also juxtaposed to the dedication-offerings of the princes applies forever. Thus the Rabbis interpreted the proximity to the chapter of the dedication-offerings of the princes of both [the section] before and after it, in honor of Aaron who was not included with the princes [in those dedication-offerings].
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explains that this section was placed next to [the verse above, stating, And when Moses went into the Tent of Meeting that He might speak with him …],¹⁴Ibid., 7:89. in order “to inform us that the Divine communication [to Moses] would come at night as well, for there [in the Tent of Meeting] the lamp would be burning and would not become extinguished.” But this is not so according to the opinion of our Rabbis, who say:¹⁵Mechilta Pis’cha 2. “Did He not speak to him [Moses] only in the daytime?” And if Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra would have understood the difference between the prophecy [experienced by] Moses and that of the other prophets,¹⁶Ramban clearly refers to the explanation of Rambam in his introduction to the tenth chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin, where he elucidates the ways in which the prophecy of Moses our teacher differed from that of all other prophets: “…Secondly, in the case of all other prophets, prophecy only comes to them either in the course of natural sleep … or when overtaken during the day by such a deep sleep as to be deprived of all consciousness, their minds being completely suspended … In the case of Moses, however, the word of G-d came to him during the day, and whilst he was standing between the two cherubim [of the ark of the covenant]” (see my translation of this introduction, in “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 275-276). he would not have thought so [i.e., that the Divine communication also came to Moses at night]; as Scripture states, If there be a prophet among you, I the Eternal do make Myself known unto him in a vision, I do speak with him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so,¹⁷Further, 12:6-7. for his prophecy was not through a dream, since dreams take place when it is actually night. But the order of arrangement of these sections [of the Torah] is as I have explained,¹⁸In the introduction to this book, and above in Seder Naso 7:1. for Scripture’s purpose in this book is to complete the laws of the offerings and all that must be done in the Tent of Meeting. Now He had said originally, And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure olive oil beaten for the light, to cause a lamp to burn continually,¹⁹Exodus 27:20. but He did not mention the candelabrum there, and therefore [one might have thought] that it indicates that they [only] have to kindle [the lamps] in the candelabrum when it is available, just as He said in [the section concerning] the making thereof, and he shall light the lamps thereof, to give light over against it.²⁰Ibid., 25:37. But if it were perchance lost or broken [we might have thought that] they should light the lamps without the candelabrum, and that the candelabrum is not essential for the lighting, since the commandment is to cause a lamp to burn continually¹⁹Exodus 27:20. for all time. Therefore²¹The word “Therefore” is added in the Tur. He commanded again afterwards, [so that it would be applicable] at once and for all generations, Command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure olive oil,²²Leviticus 24:2. stating, He [Aaron] shall set in order the lamps upon the pure candelabrum,²³Ibid., Verse 4. meaning that he may only set the lamps in order upon the pure candelabrum. And since He completed here the account of the erection of the Tabernacle, He also finished all the laws of the lamps, and commanded that the seven lamps should always be burning for all generations in front of the candelabrum,²⁴In Verse 2 before us. just as He had mentioned at the making of the candelabrum, and he shall light the lamps thereof, to give light over against it²⁰Ibid., 25:37. — but not without the candelabrum, and not unless all the lamps give light over against it. He did not mention the Tent of Meeting in this section, in order to instruct [us] that this [law] applies also in the Sanctuary [at Jerusalem], for one might have thought that because there were no windows in the Tent of Meeting it was necessary to have this light, whereas in the Sanctuary [at Jerusalem] where there were windows broad within, and narrow without²⁵I Kings 6:4. The windows were made in that way in order to indicate that it is not light from the outside world that comes into the Sanctuary but on the contrary — it is from the Sanctuary that the light goes forth to the world (Menachoth 86b, Rashi). [such a light] would not be necessary, therefore He did not mention here the Tent of Meeting.

בהעלותך את הנרות, when you kindle the six lamps,

דבר…ואמרת. speak…and say! We need to understand why the Torah wrote both "speak" and "say!" Also, why did the Torah choose two different expressions when referring to how Moses was to communicate with Aaron? Midrash Tanchuma 8 and others on our verse query the reason why the instructions about lighting the candlestick are written here instead of where the construction of the candlesticks is described. The Midrash answers that when Aaron observed that the princes of all 12 tribes had offered inaugural offerings for the altar, all except the tribe of Levi, he became despondent over the fact that neither he nor his tribe had been allowed to participate in this inauguration. Thereupon G'd assured him that his share in the inauguration would be greater than that of the princes who had just concluded bringing their respective offerings. G'd told him that he, Aaron, would light the candlestick in the Sanctuary on a daily basis and would prepare the oil and wicks both mornings and evenings. Thus far the words of the Midrash. These words themselves beg for an explanation. In what way did G'd console Aaron about not having participated in the inaugration of the altar when He told him he could perform duties relating to the candlestick? How is the candlestick and its function related to the altar and its function? Besides, why didn't G'd put Aaron's mind at rest by referring to all the public offerings he would offer on the altar on an ongoing basis as opposed to the princes who performed a one-time inaugural offering? He could offer the daily תמידים, the additional offerings on the festivals, as well as the twice daily portion of incense which would be offered on the golden altar inside the Sanctuary. He even performed the rites when the bulls of the princes were placed on the altar and their blood sprinkled thereon. So why did G'd choose the matter of the candlestick as the vehicle which would appease Aaron?

'בהעלותך וגו, seeing that this is a procedure which is repeated daily it is mentioned here. Even though the Tabernacle had been completed, all the work had been done, the menorah was incomplete inasmuch as in order to remain functional the oil and the wicks had to renewed on a regular basis, and the lighting of the flame was required as an ongoing procedure on a daily basis.

בהעלותך את הנרות, “when you kindle the lights, etc.” The day on which the Tabernacle was erected was comparable to the day on which the universe was created. This is why just as the report of the creation of the universe began with G’d commanding that there be light, the Torah here begins with detailing how Aaron should kindle the lights of the menorah. The reason why the paragraph dealing with kindling the menorah was placed immediately after the paragraph describing the gifts of the princes on the occasion of the consecration of the Tabernacle, is, as Rashi has pointed out already, that Aaron had been upset that he had apparently not been given a role in those rituals. In order to set his mind at rest, G’d told him that He had reserved a more important role for him even than that of the princes, i.e. the kindling of the menorah. Nachmanides questions Rashi’s comments, asking why G’d consoled Aaron with the kindling of the lights, when He could so easily have pointed out to him that since he had been chosen for presenting the most welcome of the offerings, the incense, surely he must have realized that he had not been overlooked? There is a long list of sacrifices that is acceptable to Hashem only if offered by Aaron, or the High Priests after him, respectively, so that his mental depression seems totally unjustified? We must therefore try and understand the allegorical explanation quoted by Rashi in the name of the Midrash Tanchumah as referring to the Hasmoneans in the distant future, Aaron’s descendants, consecrating the entire Temple anew by lighting the menorah with oil that had been miraculously blessed by Hashem so that it burned for longer than could be expected (8 days instead of one day). Whereas on this occasion the inaugural rites were performed by members of the other tribes, not including the kindling of the lights, on that occasion, in the distant future, the kindling of the lights would become the central feature in the whole rededication of the Temple to the service of Hashem. Moreover, the consecration of the Temple in the days of the Hasmoneans was a more significant event than the consecration of the Altar, seeing that the Altar can only perform its function [the burning of animal sacrifices, etc. Ed.] as long as there is a Temple, whereas the consecration of the Temple by the Hasmonean priests was something of an enduring nature, seeing that we commemorate that event [the annual eight day celebration of Chanukkah and the kindling of the lights every evening. Ed.] still nowadays long after the Temple has been destroyed and there is no longer an Altar on which to offer animal sacrifices. It is clear therefore that the consecration of the Tabernacle was of a subordinate significance when measured against the millennia of Jewish history. Ibn Ezra states that the reason why the Torah attached our paragraph to that of the princes’ offerings is to teach that G’d communicated with Moses also at night, seeing that at least one light of the menorah would be burning around the clock. Nachmanides claims that Ibn Ezra’s comments do not conform to the opinion of our sages who claim that G’d communicated with Moses only during the day. [Rabbi Ch. Chavell, in his notes on Nachmanides’ commentary, points out that Abravanel has already justified Ibn Ezra’s commentary, and that what the sages meant was only that Moses did not receive communications from G’d at night, i.e. in a dream, such as other prophets. Ed.] Nachmanides adds that the sequence of the subject matters in our portion is justified, seeing that with these details about the kindling of the menorah the whole legislation pertaining to the offerings in the Tabernacle is concluded. The subject of the menorah and its function had commenced originally in Exodus 27,20 with the words: ואתה תצוה את בני ישראל ויקחו אליך שמן זית זך כתית למאור להעלות נר תמיד, “you are to command the Children of Israel that they shall take for you pure, pressed olive oil for illumination, to kindle the light continuously.” In that verse the menorah had not even been mentioned. The impression left from that verse had been that the menorah be lit at all times as long as the menorah was itself in a usable condition. Should the menorah be stolen, become dysfunctional, etc., we would have assumed that the command to keep it lit would automatically have become redundant. This is why the Torah in Leviticus 24,4 elaborates על המנורה הטהורה יערוך את הנרות לפני ה' תמיד, that “Aaron shall arrange the lights on the ritually pure menorah before Hashem, continuously.” The condition that enables kindling the menorah is that it is in a state of ritual purity. Now, in our portion, when the Torah concludes with the subjects of the offerings, after the Tabernacle has been completed and become functional, the details of the seven lamps on the menorah, the décor on its arms, etc., are repeated once more. Even the fact that the lamp on the center shaft was more important than the three arms on either side of it is mentioned, seeing the lights on the arms were burning in the direction of the center shaft. The Tabernacle is not mentioned in our paragraph at all, as had it been mentioned we might have concluded that the need for the menorah existed only in the Tabernacle, a structure that was not equipped with windows. Solomon’s Temple, however, which had a number of windows, might not require artificial lighting during the daytime, at least. To avoid our arriving at such faulty reasoning the Torah skipped mention of the word “Tabernacle,” or its equivalent in our paragraph.

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.

V. 2. בהעלתך (siehe Schmot zu Kap. 27, 20). — מנורה ,אל מול פני המנורה im eigentlichen Sinne ist der die Mittellampe tragende Mittelschaft, aus welchem nach beiden Seiten je drei Arme hervorgehen, die ebenfalls jeder eine Lampe tragen. Es wird hier nun Aharon geboten, dass er die Seitenlampen von beiden Seiten der Richtung der Mittellampe auf dem Mittelschafte zukehren soll, so, dass alle sieben Lampen ihr Licht in diese eine Richtung vereinigen. Es ist dies nur eine nähere Ausführung des Schmot 25, 37 ausgesprochenen והאיר על עבר פניה Schmot zu 25, 39 haben wir die beiden Ansichten entwickelt, die hinsichtlich der Stellung der Menora im Heiligtume auseinandergehen. Nach der einen hatte sie die Stellung zwischen Nord und Süd, die Mittellampe war westwärts dem Allerheiligsten zugewendet, die drei Lampen rechts richteten ihr Licht von Nord zu Süd, die drei Lampen links von Süd zu Nord. Nach der andern hatte sie ihre Stellung zwischen Ost und West, ihr Mittellicht brannte gerade aufwärts auf dem Mittelschafte, die drei östlichen Lampen richteten ihr Licht westwärts, die drei westlichen Lampen ostwärts. In der ersten Stellung wäre der im Heiligtume zu pflegende Geist, der Gott in seinem Gesetze und in seinem um das Gesetz mit Israel geschlossenen Bundesverhältnisse suchende Geist, der mit seinen nordwärts gewandten Südlichtern das Ziel aller geistigen Erkenntnis in der Durchgeistigung alles Materiellen, und mit seinen südwärts gewandten Nordlichtern das Ziel alles Materiellen in dessen Hingebung an das Geistige als Fruchtboden für die Lichtsaaten des Guten und Rechten sucht, und mit beiden, dem das Materielle durchdringenden Geiste und dem dem Geistigen sich hingebenden Materiellen, nichts anderes, als die Verwirklichung des in dem Allerheiligsten ruhenden Gesetzes und der auf ihm als Verheißung ruhenden Gottesnähe anstreben will. In der andern Stellung kündigte sich das im Heiligtum zu pflegende Licht als der zu Gott hinaufstrebende Geist an, der mit seinen aus West nach Ost strahlenden Lichtern die aus dem im Allerheiligsten ruhenden Gesetze und aus der auf ihm ruhenden Verheißung der Bundesnähe Gottes zu schöpfende Erkenntnis dem seiner Heiligung und Weihe im Osten harrenden Israel entgegenträgt, und mit seinen aus Ost nach West gerichteten Lichtern alles Sinnen und Wollen des seiner Heiligung und Weihe harrenden Israels der aus dem göttlichen Gesetze und seiner Verheißung quillenden Erleuchtung und Belebung entgegenführt und mit beiden, mit dem in Israel zu verwirklichenden Geist des Gesetzes und mit Jisaels begeisterter Hingebung an diesen Geist, nichts als das einzige Hinaufleben zu Gott sucht und findet. In welcher Stellung auch immer sind diese מול פני המנורה einander zugewandten und im Mittellichte ihre Vereinigung suchenden und findenden sieben Lampen nichts, als die innigste Vereinigung der praktischen בינה, גבורה und יראת ד mit den theoretischen עצה ,חכמה und דעת zu einer von יראת ד getragenen, von יראת ד also belebten und vollendeten Blütenentfaltung des Geistes, dass ונחה עליו רוח ד dass auf dem also entwickelten Menschengeiste der Gottesgeist seine Ruhe nehme (Jesaias 11, 2. — Siehe Kommentar zu Schmot zur Menora, Kap. 25 Ende).

דבר אל אהרן, speak to Aaron, etc.; the commandment about lighting the lamps on menorah appears immediately following the consecration rites of the altar because we have heard about twelve tribal leaders each offering a sacrifice on that occasion, while the tribe of Levi, i.e. its representative, Aaron, has not been allocated any role in that important event. The Levites had started to grumble about having been excluded from these festivities. They wanted to know the reason why they had been excluded. As a result, G-d immediately told Aaron and his sons that what the representatives of the other tribes had done was only in the nature of something preparatory, whereas it had been reserved for them to do the actual consecration of the Temple/altar. The reader is referred by our author to Nachmanides’ lengthy and comprehensive commentary on this paragraph. Aaron is initially to involve his sons in these activities and subsequently also other members of the tribe of Levi.

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).

אל מול פני המנורה, facing the lamp on the center shaft; this means that the wick is to be inclined towards this center shaft so that the flames will point in this direction from the respective sides of the menorah. Then, and only then,

אל מול פני המנורה, he was inclining the tips of the wicks on all seven lamps in the direction of the table to provide illumination for its surface.

בהעלותך את הנרות, “when you kindle the lamps, etc.” I am puzzled by the fact that here G’d apparently singled out Aaron for receiving these instructions, without including his sons at the same time. After all, any ordinary priest is entitled to perform the kindling of the lights on the menorah. When thinking about this it occurred to me that there is no problem seeing that the wording of what Moses was to tell Aaron was not a command at all. Aaron had not been told to light, i.e. תעלה, the lamps, but had been informed about the sequence in which the menorah’s lamps were to be lit. The same sequence would have to be followed by any priest who performed the ritual of kindling these lamps. It is possible that by addressing Aaron in the first instance, the Torah, alluded to the miracle of Chanukkah which occurred in the days of the Hasmoneans when they miraculously discovered a cruse of ritually pure oil, and a descendant of Aaron was able to proceed with the kindling of the menorah without having to wait a number of days until new oil would be prepared. Nachmanides writes that perhaps the words מחוץ לפרוכת יערוך אותו אהרן, “outside the dividing curtain Aaron is to arrange for the kindling of the lights” (Exodus 27,21), were an indication to Moses that his brother had been chosen for this task so that he understood the word ובניו which follows, as referring to after Aaron would have died, although subsequently not only the High Priest was allowed to perform this rite. This is also why the Torah reports in verse 3 that Aaron performed this rite, i.e. that as long as he was alive he would not delegate this task even to his sons.

That there was a platform. Even though we [already] learned from here that he had to ignite until the flame rises by itself, one may explain that the main source for expounding this is from the verse in Parshas Tetzaveh concerning the lighting of the continual flame, and here Rashi mentions it in passing. Another answer is that if it only came to teach that the flame should rise by itself, Scripture should have written “to cause to rise” and not “when you cause to rise.” And if it came only to teach about the platform then it should have written “when you rise up.” Rather the Torah writes “when you cause to rise” to expound both points. Re’m explains that the implicit meaning of this teaching (about the platform) and the one that the flame should rise by itself are evenly balanced; therefore [since neither is more implicit than the other] we are able to learn both.

This matter can best be understood in connection with Menachot 88. The Talmud there discusses the cleaning of the lamps on the candlestick and the filling up of the bowls (lamps) with half a log of oil each. The Talmud describes the removal of the bowls (lights) with their wicks, the bowl being deposited on the floor before being cleaned with a sponge and filled with oil and new wicks being inserted. According to the view that these bowls (lamps) were not detachable, the priest had to bend the candlestick in order to perform the cleaning of these bowls and the wicks (compare Rashi on the same folio).

Es waren, wie im Vorgehenden berichtet, die Fürsten der Stämme Israels mit dem Edelsten und Besten ihrer Habe, mit ihrem Silber und Gold, ihrem Mehle und Öl und würzigen Stoffen, mit dem Besten ihrer Herden zum Heiligtum hingetreten, hatten dieses alles zum Ausdruck der Hingebung aller Güter und alles Seins und Wollens an Gott und sein Gesetzesheiligtum und der Freude an dieser Hingebung für sich und ihre Stämme gestaltet und, indem sie damit ihre und ihrer Stämme einmütige Stellung zum Heiligtum bekundeten, damit zugleich die חנכת המזבח vollbracht und den Altar in die Wirksamkeit seiner Bestimmung eingeführt. Der Stamm Levi und Aharon sein נשיא (Kap. 17, 18), fehlten in dieser Kundgebung der Stämme Israels und ihrer Stammesfürsten. Ihrer war ja nicht das Mehl und das Öl, das Silber und Gold und die Würze der Wohlgerüche, ihrer ja nicht der Reichtum der Herden, sie standen ja überhaupt nicht zum Heiligtum, sondern beim Heiligtum, und das Heiligtum selber war ihr irdischer Anteil am Leben.

בהעלותך את הנרות, “when you light the lamps, etc.;” this command was issued on the day that the Tabernacle had been erected (and stayed up) because they started to light the lamps in order to teach that these lamps burned throughout the night, also. The light in the Tabernacle was like an eternal flame (Ibn Ezra) We find something similar in connection with the prophet Samuel, (Samuel I 34) 'ונר אלוקים טרם יכבה״״ויקרא ה אל שמואל“the lamp of G-d had not yet gone out, and Samuel was sleeping in the Temple, when called to Samuel.” (Our author directs the reader to the commentary known as karney or, to follow up on this subject) בהעלותך את הנרות אל מול פני המנורה, “when you kindle the lamps towards the front of the menorah;” the priest or High Priest performing this procedure was to take up position facing the seven lamps on the menorah. As a result, the lights would all illuminate. The words: אל מול פני המנורה, do not refer to the words that follow: יאירו שבעת הנרות, as understood by Rashi, but as is clear from what Aaron actually did as reported in the verse following, אל מול פני המנורה העלה נרותיה, “he had lit the lamps while facing them.”A different interpretation: the words בהעלותך את הנרות, are to be understood literally. i.e. “when you raise the lamps;” you will then place the wicks in their positions. They are not considered as fixtures in their respective positions, seeing that we have read in Exodus 37,17: ויעש את המנורה, “he constructed the candlestick,” and subsequently we read: (Exodus 37,23) ויעש את נרותיה שבעה ומלקחיה, “and he made the lamps thereof, seven, and their tongs;”“ ,אל מול פני המנורה יאירו שבעת הנרות He turned the seven mouths for the wicks towards the center shaft of the front of the candlestick, which faced the dividing curtain in the Sanctuary which was hung between the Sanctuary and the innermost holies housing the Ark. This would make sense according to the sage who claims that the position of the menorah was in a northsouth direction i.e. its broadside was facing the dividing curtain, in one direction whereas the opposite broadside faced the entrance of the Sanctuary. According to the sage who claims that the menorah was positioned in an eastwest direction, it would have faced the Table in the Sanctuary. This is how we can interpret what is written in Exodus 4,24: וישם את המנורה נוכח השולחן, “he placed the menorah opposite the Table.”

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).

יאירו שבעת הנרות, all seven lamps will fulfill their function of illuminating and being the conduits of spiritual light descending on to the Jewish people. [obviously, the individual lamps would be able to provide physical light before being positioned in the manner described. Ed.]
The mussar, allegorical lesson conveyed by the lights of the menorah is us that only by the “right” side representing preoccupation with eternal values, life in the future, working together with the “left” side which represents the concerns with physical life on our planet, will we be able to attain our purpose on earth. Our sages in Chulin 92 phrased it thus: אלמלי עלייא לא מתקיימא אתכליא, “if not for the input from celestial regions, spiritual input, the creatures on earth would not be able to survive at all.” [I have not found this precise quote, but it means more literally that if there were no wise people who could tutor the ignorant, the world as we know it would collapse. Ed.] In order for this universe to function as G’d wanted it to, all social levels of the people have to make their respective contributions.
A major function of the combined activity by the “tutored and the ignorant” is to ensure that G’d’s name would be hailed, revered and enthusiastically acknowledged by every segment of mankind, all of His creatures. An example of such a thing happening is found in Exodus 19,8 ויענו כל העם יחדו ויאמרו כל אשר דבר ה' נעשה, the emphasis here being on the word יחדו, i.e. all the people in unison would combine to carry out G’d’s will.

אל מול פני המנורה יאירו שבעת הנרות, “its seven lamps shall illuminate towards the center shaft of the menorah.” The commentators all ask that the wording is misleading, seeing that only 6 of the lamps can direct their light towards the center shaft. They answer that what is meant is that whereas the lamp on the center shaft illuminates the area perpendicularly above it, the other six lamps direct their light either to the left or to the right. Altogether there would be seven lamps.

Upon which the kohein stood. You might ask: Surely a man is four amos high, corresponding to twenty-four tefachim, while the height of the menorah was only eighteen tefachim, as Rashi explains in Parshas Terumah (Shemos 25:35). If so, why does he need a platform? The answer is that the tefachim of the Temple were ‘extended,’ such that the eighteen tefachim of the menorah were equal to twenty-four regular tefachim, i.e. equal to the height of a man. If one comes to clean the lamps he needs to see inside the lamps in order to clean them, therefore he needed a platform. (Divrei Dovid) Were all the kohanim of equal height? Surely it is possible that a kohein has a slightly shorter stature. Thus there needs to be a platform there so that every kohein can comfortably perform the service of the menorah.

Had I been present when the scholars discussed if the lamps were fixtures that could not be detached from their respective arms of the candlestick, I would have proven that they were most certainly detachable. Firstly, there is the fact that although the Torah gives us details of all the various parts and decorations of the candlestick, it did not mention anything about the lamps being part of the "cast candlestick." Only the parts which formed part of the single chunk of gold were mentioned in the Torah. Had the lamps been part of that chunk, the Torah would have had to report it. Another proof that these lamps were removable can be gleaned from Numbers 4,9 where the Torah described how the candlestick was to be wrapped up prior to transportation. The Torah there specifies a number of separate components. 1) the candlestick of the light, 2) and its lamps, 3) and its tongs, 4) and its snuff-dishes, 5) and all the oil vessels thereof. This is a clear indication that just as the tongs were separate from the main shaft so the lamps were separate components. If the lamps had been an integral part of the shafts the Torah had no business to mention them separately as they could not have been packed separately.

Während daher die Fürsten Israels ihre Chanuckaopfer zum Altare brachten und damit der Beziehung der Nation zum Heiligtum Ausdruck gaben, ward Aharon und sodann (V. 5 ff.) seinem Stamm ihre Stellung zum Heiligtum in Mitte der Nation zum Bewusstsein gebracht. להעלות את הנרות also, dass אל מול פני המנורה יאירו שבעת הנרות, der Lichter also zu warten, dass die ganze Mannigfaltigkeit aller geistigen Bestrebungen sich in dem Streben zu Gott durch Verwirklichung seines Gesetzes vereinige, das ist die Aufgabe des Priesters und die Bedeutung und Wirksamkeit der Leviten im Volke fürs Heiligtum. Was in jenen gehobenen Tagen der Weihe durch die Fürsten der Nation zum Ausdruck gekommen, dessen haben die Priester täglich zu warten und dafür zu sorgen, dass dieser Geist der alltägliche werde und das ganze Leben der Nation, ihrer Bestimmung getreu seiner geistigen und sittlichen Vollendung unablässig entgegenreife. Dieser Priesteraufgabe hatte daher Aharon in allseitiger Zuwendung der Lichter zum Mittellichte den stillen Ausdruck im Heiligtum zu geben und, fügt sofort

יאירו שבעת הנרות, “the seven lamps shall provide illumination. This would refer to the six lamps, three on either side of the center shaft of the candlestick. According to our author this would be the correct text in Rashi, but the scribes of Rashi’s manuscripts have omitted a word by mistake, i.e. the word האמצעי, “the centre shaft” (the lamp on it)

יאירו שבעת הנרות SHALL THE SEVEN LAMPS GIVE LIGHT — the seven lamps: this central lamp itself which naturally gave light over against the shaft (the פני המנורה) and the six lamps which were on the six branches, viz., the three on the east side of the central shaft should have their wicks turned towards the central one, and similarly the three on the west should have the ends of their wicks turned towards the central one (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 59). And why was this? In order that people should not say: He (God) is in need of its (the candlestick’s) light (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Beha'alotcha 5).

Their wicks. Meaning that since it is written “shall the seven lamps cast light,” one is forced to say that it refers to the wicks, since they cast light. For if it refers to the lamps, the cups (containing the oil), it should have said “toward the face of the menorah shall the seven lamps tilt.” You might ask: The verse writes “toward the face of the menorah” meaning that all seven lamps should cast light towards the lamp of the middle branch, but Rashi explains that only six cast light towards the middle lamp. The answer is that Rashi is answering a different question: “Shall the seven lights cast light” implies that all of them cast light before the middle branch, i.e. above it, which is termed the ‘face of the menorah.’ However this is not possible. Granted that the lamp on the middle branch casts light above it, however the six other lamps only illuminate the area above their own branches. Such is the manner of all lamps, which cast light upon themselves. He answers that the six other lamps that were on the six branches also cast light towards the middle branch. Because of the six lamps that were on the six branches, the three eastern ones turned towards the middle … meaning that the ends of the wicks were bent towards the middle branch, and the same with the western ones. Thus “the seven lamps cast light” means that in this fashion the seven lamps cast light towards the middle branch. Re’m expands upon this. (See Responsa of Rivash siman 400). (Gur Aryeh) raises a difficulty: If this is so, the Torah should have said “the six lamps cast light” because only six cast light toward the menorah. Some explain that the verse is to be understood as follows: “When you light the lamps, towards the face of the menorah” meaning that when you light them the lamps should be towards the menorah — six should face toward the middle. But “the seven lamps shall cast light” is a separate phrase meaning that in this fashion the seven lamps should cast light.

In Chronicles II 4,20 where the candlesticks for Solomon's Temple are described we read: "and the candlesticks and their lamps." This means that the lamps are not included when one speaks of the candlesticks. Rashi comments as follows on that verse: "This is stated in order to disabuse the commentators of the belief that the lamps were part of the cast part of the candlestick. This is why the verse mentions the נרות, lamps, separately. Rashi continues at some length on the whole subject of the candlestick. At any rate, the plain meaning of the verse indicates that the lamps were detachable.

Let us now examine the answer G'd gave to Aaron according to the Midrash. G'd wanted Aaron to know that the task of taking the candlestick apart daily when he would clean the lamps and then reassemble them constituted a daily inaugural. In effect, Aaron put the candlestick together every single day. Every time he would light the candlestick would be like inaugurating the candlestick anew. According to the Midrash G'd told Aaron that he would light and clean the lamps evenings and mornings whereas in actual fact we find that he lit the lamps only in the evenings. We are told in Tamid 6,9 that the נר מערבי the lamp in the middle shaft of the candlestick, had to burn both night and day, i.e. it was cleaned only in the evening and immediately relit. [This is not actually spelled out there. Ed]. Torat Kohanim on Leviticus 24,2 comments as follows: "The words להעלות נר refer to the lighting of the נר תמיד, the eternal flame, the lamp which is to keep burning around the clock. In the event that it became extinguished, Aaron would clean it and rekindle it at once using the fire from the copper altar." Thus far Torat Kohanim. This means that the נר מערבי burned around the clock. At any rate, we see that Aaron inaugurated the candlestick daily whereas the princes performed only a single inauguration of the altar. The expression דבר introduced the commandment which was the necessary introduction to any commandment G'd conveyed to the people or to a specific person. The expression ואמרת describes that Moses should talk so softly when instructing Aaron that he would put his mind at ease concerning the inauguration service of the altar he had not been a part of. Moses did this by pointing out that Aaron's privileges were far greater than those of the princes. We could also interpret the word ואמרת as similar to the word והאמרת in Deut. 26,17, where it implies the spiritually elevated status of the people addressed.

According to the view that the lamps were an integral part of the candlestick, one must assume that the tubes which contained the oil were very narrow and that the whole candlestick had to be bent until it was almost horizontal in order to perform the daily cleaning of the lamps and the wicks. This too could be understood as a daily renewal, i.e. inaugural process.

בהעלותך את הנרות. "when you 'raise' the lamps," etc. Why did the Torah use the term "raise" when it could have used the normal term for lighting, i.e. בהדליקך? Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 15 as well as in the Sifri offer a variety of explanations about this, such as that the lamps were to be raised. Another problem with our verse is why G'd did not issue the instructions to kindle the candlestick on the first day when the first of the princes offered his offering, seeing that the kindling of the candlestick was part and parcel of the regular service in the Tabernacle? Moreover, the very commandment we have here has been recorded already in Exodus 25,37, i.e. והעלה את נרותיה והאיר על עבר פניה? "He who kindles its lamps will cause its light to shine towards its 'face' (centre)." Furthermore, why does the Torah speak about יאירו, they will cause it to give light, instead of תאיר, you shall cause it to give light? After all, the verse commenced in direct speech? When you compare the verse we quoted from Exodus you will find that the entire verse is in the third person, i.e. והעלה,…והאיר.

When you take into consideration our introduction to this subject from the Talmud in Menachot you will find that the wording makes perfect sense. The reason the verse commenced with the word בהעלותך is because seeing that the lamps were not an integral part of the candlestick G'd had to give a commandment that whenever the lamps would be removed for cleaning purposes this should be done in a prescribed sequence, i.e. in the order in which the lamps shone towards the centre shaft, the eternal light. The entire commandment was not an instruction to light the candlestick but to arrange its lights in a certain order. This explains why it would have been inappropriate to use the direct תאיר, "you shall let them give light."

This also explains why the Torah had to repeat what appeared at first glance to be a repetition of the instructions given in Exodus 25,37. Up until now Moses had performed these tasks during the seven days of the inauguration of the Tabernacle from the first to the seventh of Nissan. G'd was concerned that Aaron would think that it did not matter in which order the various lamps would be cleaned and filled with oil for the following day. In fact, Aaron would have reasoned that logic dictated that the various lamps be cleaned in a sequential order either from the left to the right, or from the right to the left and not as described in the Talmud that five lamps on one side were cleaned followed by two lamps on the other side. G'd had decided that this was the appropriate moment to instruct Aaron in these details and to impress on him that the correct order for this procedure was an essential part of the whole service. By not informing Aaron of these details when he was informed about other details of the sacrificial service, G'd wanted to demonstrate that He held Aaron in such high esteem that He had accorded him tasks that were more important than those performed by the princes.

אל מול פני המנורה, towards the front of the candlestick, etc. The reason for this line may be understood when we consider the Talmud Shabbat 22 where the words "outside the dividing curtain" are discussed. The Talmud asks if G'd needed the light of the candlestick? Was it not a fact that the Israelites marched through the desert for forty years receiving their light from G'd and not vice versa? The light of the candlestick therefore was merely testimony to the nations of the world that G'd's Presence resided amongst Israel. The Talmud goes on to ask "what kind of testimony was this?" Rav answered that the middle one of the lamps which did not receive any more oil than any of the other six lamps of the candlestick and which was used to kindle the other lamps nonetheless kept on burning even though all the other lamps went out in the morning. It was the last lamp to be cleaned and replaced on the following evening. Accordingly, the Torah gave instructions to light the lamps so that they faced the lamp in the middle to draw attention to the fact that everyone should point to the miraculous nature of that lamp in the centre called נר המערבי.

Tossaphot query why the Talmud speaks only of the 40 years the Israelites were in the desert when they enjoyed G'd's light. They say that all of mankind needs G'd's light at all times throughout the ages? They amend the text of the Talmud somewhat. Our author does not feel that Tossaphot's question was justified so that it needed to be answered. A look at the Talmud in Menachot 86 would take care of Tossaphot's question.

In view of the fact that the function of the candlestick was only to demonstrate the miracle of the נר המערבי burning longer than the lamps on either side, why did the Torah require a candlestick with seven lamps? Three lamps, one on either side of the נר המערבי would have sufficed! We may say that the other lamps were there for aesthetic reasons. It would not do to furnish the Tabernacle with a candlestick containing fewer than the accepted number of lamps.

If we were to use a symbolic approach we could see in the seven lamps a hint at the seventy nations, each lamp representing 10 nations. The idea would be that the miraculous nature of the lamp in the centre represents the Jewish nation; the other lamps all focus on the Jewish people, who in turn represent the concept of מערב, West, a concept familiar to students of kabbalah. The fact that all the other lamps burn out symbolises the eventual disappearance of all the other nations, only Israel surviving. The fact that the lamps burned only at night are a reminder of our exile, which is called לילה. The time of redemption is referred to by our prophets as בקר, morning, compare Isaiah 21,12. At that time the lights of the nations will go out only Israel's light remaining. When kindling the candlestick, the priest doing so should also think that its light should face the front of the candlestick, i.e. he should think of the needs of the Jewish people and that G'd should turn His face towards them.