בהעלותך

The Lights of the Menorah

The instruction relating to the Menorah at the beginning of the Parashah raises some difficult questions:

דַּבֵּר אֶל־אַהֲרֹן וְאָמַרְתָּ אֵלָיו בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת־הַנֵּרֹת אֶל־מוּל פְּנֵי הַמְּנוֹרָה יָאִירוּ שִׁבְעַת הַנֵּרוֹת׃ (במדבר ח':ב)

First, the requirement to light the Menorah was already laid out on two previous occasions (Ex. 27:20-21, Lev 24:2-4), in addition to the reference as part of the construction directives (Ex. 25:37).[1] Why does it appear again here at the dramatic conclusion to the inauguration ceremony of the Mishkan?[2] What, if anything, does the verse impart that we were not already aware of?

Second, the verse expresses a command to be relayed to Aharon yet contains no direct instruction. The word be-ha'alotekha sets the timeframe for the command (i.e. when you light the lamps), but the subject of the verb ya-iru are the lamps.[3] It is unclear, even implicitly, what additional action is required of Aharon in this verse beyond the lighting itself. Lamps by definition provide illumination and the kindling requirement is already assumed in the word be-ha'alotekha.

The only words which may assist in identifying the requirement are 'el mul penei ha-menorah'. But what does this phrase mean?

Rashi informs us that the three wicks on either side had to be bent towards the middle.[4] This well-known explanation is difficult to accept as the straightforward meaning. If the point was that the lights on either side should face the middle, then the verse should have referred to the six lamps, not the seven lamps. Furthermore, since the flame obviously burnt upwards regardless, the visual effect and significance of this gesture seems limited. Finally, as we shall see, this technical point was already referenced (according to Rashi) within the construction directives. It certainly does not explain the strategic placement at the conclusion to the inauguration of the Mishkan.

Some of the other classic commentators understood that the command was to direct the lights across the frontside of the Menorah i.e. towards the Shulchan, which indeed seems to be a smoother translation.[5] This is also the way most modern scholars understand the implied requirement. However, we still remain with several challenges. Does moving the wick a few millimeters really make a difference to the extent of illumination on the Shulchan, given that light emitted from a flame naturally scatters in all directions? We are also left with the problem that the subject of the verb ya-iru is the lamps, and not Aharon. Most importantly, we still need to understand why this requirement appears in this dramatic location, distinct from the other passages relating to the Menorah.

Our last question can be broadened. Why were certain elements of the inauguration of the Mishkan only reported in the book of Bamidbar, separated from the main events (including the special eighth day ceremony) as reported in the book of Vayikra? These deferred components include: Birkat Kohanim, the gifts and offerings of the tribal leaders, and the description of Moshe entering the Kodesh HaKodashim to hear the voice of God emanating from between the Keruvim.

The problem gets worse as Sefer Bamidbar commences on the first day of the second month in the second year whereas the inauguration ended in the first month.[6] The Torah thus moves back in time to return to the inauguration ceremony, meaning this is not simply a point of chronology. Furthermore, Birkat Kohanim was briefly alluded to in Sefer Vayikra, but only in Sefer Bamidbar do we hear the full content of the blessing.

Vayikra and Bamidbar – between Tamid and Mussaf

To address these questions we need to consider the key differences between the books of Vayikra and Bamidbar. In broad strokes, we can say that Sefer Vayikra deals with the fundamental frameworks of the Mishkan and holiness of the nation, whereas Sefer Bamidbar tells the story of a dynamic and non-linear relationship between God and the people. Put differently, Sefer Bamidbar deals with the extraordinary and spontaneous, as opposed to the regular and ordinary.

I will note a few clear examples to illustrate the point. The selection of laws which appear before Birkat Kohanim include the following: a) eviction of contaminated people from the camp; b) special restitution for theft from a convert; c) case of suspected adultery; and d) a person who takes upon himself a Nazirite vow. It is easy to see how these relate to the realm of the exceptional rather than the routine. Following Birkat Kohanim, the tribal leaders spontaneously decide to bring gifts and offerings to participate in the inauguration. Later in our Parashah, Moshe is instructed to make the Chatzotrot (trumpets) whose sole purpose is to announce extraordinary events. The fire and the cloud above the Ohel Mo'ed are cast not as static symbols of God's presence, but actively guide the people in their journey. The laws of Pesach Sheni provide a special dispensation for people who are impure and therefore unable to bring the Pesach at its regular time. The Levi'im are installed to manage the dangers of uncurbed spontaneity. At the tail end of the book, we are provided with the details of the Mussafim which are the special additional offerings on festive days and stand in contrast to the Tamid (daily continual offering).[7] This is followed by the exceptional ability of a father or husband to annul vows in certain situations. The daughters of Tzelofchad boldly challenge Moshe leading to a new inheritance law to cater for their predicament. The actions of Pinchas are of course entirely outside the normative realm. The conquests of the sons of Menashe are undertaken through their own initiative.[8]

There are other examples and some which require more thought, but this should be sufficient for our purposes. The key distinction is also borne out by the very fact that Bamidbar is a narrative at its core with legal portions woven in. Narratives have motion built-in, and typically relate the extraordinary. With Vayikra the reverse is true. It comprises of a well-structured body of law with a few scattered narratives.

Based on the above, we can suggest that the aspects of the inauguration deferred to Bamidbar pertain to this theme. The content of Birkat Kohanim assumes God's immanence in the daily life of the nation. As already mentioned, the offerings and gifts of the princes were spontaneously brought and not an integral part of the planned proceedings.[9]

A similar point may be made about Moshe's entry into the Kodesh HaKodashim. The verse states three times that God spoke to him; however, we are not privy to the words spoken:

וּבְבֹא מֹשֶׁה אֶל־אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לְדַבֵּר אִתּוֹ וַיִּשְׁמַע אֶת־הַקּוֹל מִדַּבֵּר אֵלָיו מֵעַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל־אֲרֹן הָעֵדֻת מִבֵּין שְׁנֵי הַכְּרֻבִים וַיְדַבֵּר אֵלָיו׃ (במדבר ז':פט)

Clearly the content of the speech is less important than the very fact of the speech itself. I am reminded of the story told about the Rebbe who was giving a shiur. The Rebbe began reading: "And the Lord spoke to Moshe (Moses) saying..." However, before he could continue, one of his Chassidim became overwhelmed with emotion and turned pale. Over and over he mutters with shock and amazement: "The Lord spoke... to Moshe...".

In the above verse, the fact of the speech of God really is the drama. When Adam originally "heard the voice" of God in the Garden of Eden, his reaction was to hide (Gen. 3:10). Adam was exiled from Eden and the Keruvim were stationed outside to guard the way to the tree of knowledge. With the Mishkan inaugurated, Moshe now enters in the Holy of Holies (=Eden 2.0) to hear the voice of God emanate from the sacred space protected by the two Keruvim, but this time without a need to hide.[10]

Both the books of Vayikra and Bamidar speak of the entry to the Kodesh Hakodashim. In Sefer Vayikra, the Kohen Gadol enters under the cover of the Ketoret cloud at a set time - once a year - on Yom Kippur. The entry also has a defined purpose - atonement and purification. In Sefer Bamidbar, however, Moshe seemingly enters of his own volition (or perhaps when summoned), to receive a new communication from God.

'Let there be light'

With this background, we can now return to the verse of the Menorah.[11] The original instructions for the construction of the Menorah reference two related functions of the Menorah:

וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת־נֵרֹתֶיהָ שִׁבְעָה וְהֶעֱלָה אֶת־נֵרֹתֶיהָ וְהֵאִיר עַל־עֵבֶר פָּנֶיהָ׃ (שמות כ"ה:לז)

Once again, it is not clear what the difference is between האיר and העלה and what the latter adds to the former.[12] It is notable, however, that the verb form עלה is adopted in the passages dealing with the Menorah in the books of Shemot and Vayikra, whilst the verb האיר is entirely absent:

צַו אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ אֵלֶיךָ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר לְהַעֲלֹת נֵר תָּמִיד׃ מִחוּץ לְפָרֹכֶת הָעֵדֻת בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד יַעֲרֹךְ אֹתוֹ אַהֲרֹן מֵעֶרֶב עַד־בֹּקֶר לִפְנֵי ה' תָּמִיד חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם׃ עַל הַמְּנֹרָה הַטְּהֹרָה יַעֲרֹךְ אֶת־הַנֵּרוֹת לִפְנֵי ה' תָּמִיד׃ (ויקרא כ"ד:ב-ד)

In our verse, the reverse is true. The verb form used to express the required action is האיר, whilst the verb form העלה is used in the infinitive form – be-ha'alotekha - only to express the point in time when the event is to occur.

From the perspective of the book of Vayikra, the lighting of the Menorah is a continual symbol of the divine presence in the Mishkan as expressed in the phrase 'lifnei ha-shem tamid'.[13] This may explain why the Vayikra passage refers to the lamps of the Menorah in the singular notwithstanding that there were seven separate branches each with their own lamp. From the Vayikra perspective, the unity and continuity of the flames is the goal and not the abundance of light derived from it.[14] The lighting of the Menorah is a fixed feature of the Mishkan which, like other core services carried out in the Mishkan (Ketoret, Korban Tamid, Lechem HaPanim), places a strong emphasis on regularity and consistency. As Sefer Vayikra deals with the framework and structure, the daily lighting of the Menorah and the continuous burning of the lamps, sits well within that context.

Sefer Bamidbar, in contrast, embraces change, initiative and creativity. In Sefer Bamidbar, the Torah therefore highlights the capacity of the Menorah to provide light. Light in its essence reveals and enables a new perspective. Before any other creation, God had to create light.

The Menorah of our passage omits the 'Tamid' element of the Menorah which represents stability and consistency. It does not even reference the time when the Menorah is lit. Read in isolation with the preceding passage discussing Moshe's ad-hoc entry to the Kodesh HaKodashim, the word be-ha'alotekha gives the impression that Aharon lights the Menorah as and when he sees fit. Even if this is not what happens in practice, the lack of timeframe and reference to regularity imbues the verse with this sense of spontaneity.[15]

More than the verse intends to provide a new instruction, it highlights a new function of the Menorah (i.e. the quality of illumination).[16] This explains why the subject of the verb in our verse are the lamps, rather than Aharon. It also explains why our passage references all seven lights as this emphasises the greater capacity for illumination. This element was absent from the prior passages which dealt with the Menorah which viewed the flame as a symbol of consistency of the divine presence and therefore referenced the lamps in the singular.

The prior passage relating Moshe's entry into the Kodesh HaKodashim described God's voice piercing the veil of nature, and now our passage presents God's light dispelling the darkness.[17] The Mishkan as a microcosm of creation is well-known and perhaps it is not coincidental that the voice of God and the creation of light which follows the inauguration of the Mishkan, are also the first steps in the Genesis creation story. Like God's speech emanating from the Kaporet, the light of the Menorah reflects God's active interaction and intervention in human affairs.

כִּי־אַתָּה תָּאִיר נֵרִי, ה' אֱלֹקַי יַגִּיהַּ חָשְׁכִּי׃ (תהילים י"ח:כט)

 

                                                         

---

[1] There is a further reference when Aharon is reported to light the Menorah after the Mishkan was finally set up (see Ex. 40:25)

[2] The Menorah as the climax of the inauguration is reinforced by the centrality of the Menorah in the Chanukah story and the associated Torah reading which covers the inaugural offerings of the tribal leaders, concluding on the eight day with the lighting of the Menorah.

[3] According to the Rambam (Hilkhot Bi'at HaMikdash, 9:7) a non-Kohen could light the Menorah. The basis for this view is TB Yoma 24b which states that the lighting was not an avodah. According to R' Chaim Soloveitchik (and various other Acharonim) the Rambam understood there was no Mitzvah to actively light the Menorah, only to ensure it was lit. The view may be connected with the fact that the Kohen is not the immediate subject of the verb (ya-iru) in the verse, as explained above.

[4] Rashi points to additional laws derived from the use of the word be-ha'alotekha to refer to the lighting

[5] See Rashbam, Bechor Shor, Shadal. NJPS translates: "let the seven lights lamps give light at the front of the lampstand". Regarding the word mul, Prof. Yoel Elitzur argues that it means 'adjacent', not 'opposite' as commonly translated and the meaning in modern Hebrew (Elitzur, "מול: 'Near, Below, On the Same Side As.'" Leshoneinu 67 (2005): 7-20 [Hebrew])

[6] Either ending on Rosh Chodesh Nissan (Rashi, Ramban) or 8 Nissan (Ibn Ezra)

[7] The Mo'adim themselves appear in Vayikra to outline the essential character of the days and establish them as Mikra'ei Kodesh. The Tamid referenced in Pinchas is set as the backdrop to the Mussafim and, in any event, requires explanation as it appears in two prior passages (Ex. 29:38-42, Lev. 6:2).

[8] We might add that the one spontaneous act in Vayikra of Nadav and Avihu ends in tragedy.

[9] A common suggestion is that the book of Bamidbar focuses on the Israelite interaction with the Mishkan whilst Vayikra focuses on the Kohanim. But this doesn't quite follow through. One of the difficulties is the lighting of the Menorah is in Bamidbar, yet it is performed by Aharon (however see note 2). Additionally, Parashat Vayikra itself does not deal with the Kohanim, but on the Israelite bringing the Korban. There is a general correlation, however, which I think derives from the fact that the Kohanim are symbols of law and structure.

"The priestly mind sees the universe in terms of distinctions, boundaries and domains, in which each object or act has its proper place and they must not be mixed. The Kohen's task is to maintain boundaries and respect limits. For the Kohen, goodness equals order." (R' Sacks, introduction to the Yom Kippur Machzor).

[10] The connection with the story of Eden continues in our Parashah as the episode of the 'grumblers' (Num. 11:1) who complained about the Manna contains allusions to the 'original sin'.  

[11] As discussed here the Menorah structurally parallels the Kaporet, which also helps to explain their juxtaposition here.

[12] Rashi and Rashbam interpret the phrase consistently with their respective explanations of the phrase 'el mul penei ha-menorah'. According to Rashi, the verse means the lights should face inwards towards the central stem, whilst according to Rashbam the meaning is the lights should point forwards towards the Shulchan.

[13] In the language of Chazal (TB Menachot 86b):

'מחוץ לפרכת העדות באהל מועד' עדות הוא לכל באי עולם שהשכינה שורה בישראל ואם תאמר לאורה אני צריך והלא כל ארבעים שנה שהלכו ישראל במדבר לא הלכו אלא לאורו אלא עדות הוא לכל באי עולם שהשכינה שורה בישראל מאי עדותה אמר רבא זה נר מערבי שנותנין בה שמן כנגד חברותיה וממנה היה מדליק ובה היה מסיים

[14] According to some, the ner ma'aravi (see previous note) burnt continuously by way of miracle. The Rambam himself does not reference anything miraculous about the ner maaravi (the centre lamp in his view). According to some interpreters of the Rambam, however, all the lights were meant to burn continuously and relit whenever they went out. Other Rishonim argue altogether that the command is only to light the Menorah at night.

[15] See note 14.

[16] Interestingly if we return to Adam's reaction upon hearing God's voice, Adam defends himself saying that he hid because he was ashamed of his nakedness. In response God makes for them כתנות עור. The Midrash, however, presents an alternative 'version' which can be tied into the discussion:

וַיַּעַשׂ ה' אֱלֹהִים לְאָדָם וּלְאִשְׁתּוֹ כָּתְנוֹת עוֹר וַיַּלְבִּשֵּׁם (בראשית ג, כא), בְּתוֹרָתוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי מֵאִיר מָצְאוּ כָּתוּב כָּתְנוֹת אוֹר (בראשית רבה, כ':יב)

[17] The light of the Menorah described in our passage may be seen as a tangible representation of the priestly blessing – יאר ה' פניו אליך