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 theMidrash 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.

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.

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.

וזה מעשה המנורה, “and this was the workmanship of the menorah:” Ibn Ezra writes that the wording of the Torah here is to be understood as pointing to the unique workmanship with which this menorah had been made. Nachmanides writes that the words וזה מעשה המנורה מקשה are to be read together, meaning that the unique feature of the workmanship of this menorah was that it was cast completely out of a single chunk of gold and then hammered into the desired shape. This feature was to be preserved throughout the generations whenever for whatever reason the menorah in the Temple had to be replaced. The fact that only this feature, מקשה has been repeated here, whereas the decorative features on the arms of the menorah have not been repeated here indicates that the indispensable feature was the fact that the entire menorah was to consist of a single chunk of gold. [When the people could not afford gold, a chunk of silver would also be acceptable. Ed.] (based on Sifrey)

קח את הלוים, “take (aside) the Levites, etc.” According to Ibn Ezra the reason why this paragraph was written here is to teach us that whereas only Aaron would perform the kindling of the lights, there were many other functions connected with the Temple service in which the Levites could participate, thus lightening the burden of the priests. [My edition of the Ibn Ezra describes the Levites as having been scattered among all the tribes, and they were now to be concentrated in one area. The same supposedly applied to the other tribes, also. Ed.] Nachmanides writes that after the firstborn and the Levites had been counted, they lined up in front of Moses awaiting his instructions. They were presented with the wagons that the princes had donated ready to commence their diversified duties around the complex occupied by the Tabernacle. There was an immediate need to ritually purify the Levites, who previously had not needed to be especially concerned about this in their daily routines.

הזה עליהם מי חטאת והעבירו תער על כל בשרם, “sprinkle upon them water of purification, and let them pass a razor over their entire flesh.” Ibn Ezra points out that the shaving of their flesh had preceded their being sprinkled with the waters of purification. [He derives this from the switch by the Torah from the singular הזה, an instruction to Moses, whereas the word והעבירו is in the plural, referring to something the Levites had already done.]

ואקח את הלוים, “I shall take the Levites, etc.” Ibn Ezra comments that in spite of the fact that G’d had already said (past tense) לקחתי אותם לי, “I have taken them for Me,” (8,16) it is the style of the Torah to repeat what had been said before if an interruption had occurred in the interval, one that interferes with one’s trend of thought. (Verse 17 which provides historical background) The Torah is saying that as soon as the Levites had been singled out by G’d, He handed them over for instruction in their duties by the priests.

וינף אהרן אותם תנופה...ויכפר עליהם, “Aaron performed a waving motion with each of them,…..and he provided atonement for them.” Ibn Ezra again explains that at that stage the atonement had already been provided for them. [The steps leading to their atonement had already been described in the previous verse. Ed.]

מבן חמש ועשרים שנה ומעלה יבוא לצבא צבא, “from 25 years of age and up he shall join the legion of service.” Rashi, in commenting on the apparent contradiction in Numbers 4,3 where the Torah gives this age as 30, says that the Levites are to commence training for their duties from the age of 25 and to assume those duties once they have attained the age of 30. Nachmanides commenting on Rashi, says that if so, the meaning of the words לצבא צבא have to be understood as the Levites joining the community of their older colleagues from that age and stand there observing how their senior colleagues performed their duties and to familarise themselves with the details of all the laws governing their activities. This would also explain the absence of the words לעבוד עבודה, “to perform service,” as we are used to reading in connection with this. According to the plain meaning of the text, the people counted by Moses and Aaron were indeed the thirty year olds, whereas here the Torah calls upon those who knew that they were at least 25 years old to come forward on their own. Such relatively young men were allowed to perform duties although they were not promoted to the status of supervisors over other Levites. In those days, while people did not necessarily keep track of each year they had lived, they did keep track of decades they had lived, as it was commonly known that certain changes in one’s body are experienced with the passing of every decade. Turning 25 did not leave a noticeable impression on their bodies, so that there was no point in counting 25 year olds. Everybody knew when he turned 30. Ibn Ezra claims that the Levites were employed to perform heavy duties from the age of 30 and up, whereas until that age they were allowed to perform only duties carried out within the confines of the Tabernacle. Nachmanides does not accept this, as the Torah uses the term לצבא צבא both for the 25 year olds and for the ones above 30 years of age.

ולא יעבוד עוד, “and he shall work no longer.” This does not mean that a Levite above the age of 50 will “retire,” but that he will no longer perform the kind of physical labour involving carrying heavy loads either on his shoulders or otherwise. He will, however, participate in such tasks as opening the Temple’s gates, sing in the choir accompanying the priests’ sacrificial service, etc., etc. This is Rashi’s understanding of the words ולא יעבוד עוד. Nachmanides questions Rashi’s interpretation saying that if correct the Torah would not have placed an age limit on the Levites’ participating in the choir, and if so why were the Gersonides and the Merrari-ites counted from the age of thirty and up only to the age of 50 seeing that neither of them had to perform such physically strenuous labour as the Kehatites even when they were younger than 50 years of age? He claims therefore that the Levites above the age of 50 were also excluded from participating in the choir accompanying the Temple service, and this was the reason why the other two groups of Levites are counted only if they were between 30 and 50 years of age. [At this point, at least according to this editor’s understanding of both the versions available to us, Nachmanides and the Sifrey, matters become a bit confusing, and I believe the simplest solution is that in the desert when the functions of the Kehatites were different from that of the other Levites as they had to carry the Holy Ark on their shoulders, etc, they might have completely retired from activities in and around the Tabernacle, whereas once there was a permanent Temple instead of a collapsible structure, there no longer was such a distinction between the members of the Kehatites and the other Levites. Ed.]