פירוש על שבת 44:2
Rashi on Shabbat
The western lamp: According to the one in Menachot who says the branches were laying east and west, the second lamp from the outside which is on the eastern side (which is west of the lamp next to it) is called western. And according to the one who says that they were laying north and south, the middle one is called western, since its opening is towards the west, and all the other lamps are towards the middle [lamp], as it is written (Numbers 8:2), "towards the face of the candelabrum" - which is the middle - "they shall give light, etc." The ones of the north were facing to the south, and the ones of the south were to the north. Lamps are loces of gold, in which we place oil and wicks.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tosafot on Shabbat
And does He require its light? Didn’t all those forty years: It is a wonder: Why did it mention forty years? The whole world always walks by the light of the Omnipresent! And some explain it as, "Did Aharon need its light when he went inside?" [Accordingly,] didn't the pillar of cloud give light to them in all the places those forty years? It is as we say in the Baraita of the Work of the Tabernacle, "He would look inside a pitcher and know what is inside it; in a barrel and know what is inside it." And it so implied in Torat Kohanim - that it is referring to the priests. As there, it teaches the version, "And did they need the lamp? And didn't all of those forty years they not require the lamp? As it is stated (Exodus 40:38), 'For the cloud of the Lord was over the tabernacle.'" However at the end of [the chapter entitled] Kol Korbanot (Menachot 26b), it is implied that it is referring to the Divine Presence. As it cites it regarding that which Rabbi Elazar said, "I do not require [it] for eating and I do not require it for its light." And there it also said, "'To the curtain of the testimony' (Leviticus 24:3) - it is testimony to all who come to the world that the Divine Presence rests among Israel. But perhaps you will say (ask), 'Do I require its light,' Didn't all those forty years [etc.]?"
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Shabbat
Like the measure of the others: Half a log. They measured it [to be sufficient] for the long nights of the Tevet season. And if it is [still] lit during the day (and the night) during the short nights, let it be lit. But not less, that it not become extinguished in Tevet at night - for the Torah stated (Exodus 27:21), "from evening to morning."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tosafot on Shabbat
And with it he would conclude: [Rashi] explained, "and with it he would conclude" the ordering (cleaning). For he would order the rest in the morning, but he would order this one in the afternoon. And he would hold the old one in his hand or place it in a vessel until he would place the oil and wick and light, and [then] light the others from it. But this is difficult to Riva: For if it is possible to light from the old light - if so - let him also light the other ones from it; so what is the question on Rav? Once he has removed the old wick from the lamp, there is no longer [an issue] of contempt of the commandment, nor [an issue of] weakening the commandment. But rather it is certainly impossible to do this. So when he came to order [the lamps], he would order everything in the lamp and the wick would become extinguished on its own. However while the old wick of the western lamp was still lit, he would light the others from it. And he would [then] order it, put oil and a new wick into it and light it from the others. So "with it he would conclude," [refers to] the lighting.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Shabbat
And he would light from it the lamps in the afternoon.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tosafot on Shabbat
But isn’t it true that here, since the lamps were fixed, etc.: Like the one, in the chapter [entitled] Shtei Middot (Menachot 88b), who said that the lamp was flexible, as it is implied there that it was connected but it was flexible, in order that he could order it properly. But there is [also] one that said there that it was not fixed, but that he would rather remove it completely at the time of the ordering and place it [back] afterwards.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Shabbat
And with it he would conclude: This is the ordering (cleaning) of the lamps. As it lit the whole day and he does not order it until the evening. And this teaching is taught in Torat Kohanim. And it holds that they were laying east to west. And so was it taught before it (Sifra, Emor, Section 13:7), "'To raise a light always' - so that the western light [burn] continuously, as he would begin with it and end with it." And since it is not written, "to raise lights" - we understand from this that one lamp is fixed, to begin with it every day. And that is the western lamp - the second one from the east. And thus do we learn (Tamid 33a), "He entered. [If] he found the two eastern lamps burning, he would remove the ash from the easternmost lamp. But he would leave the western lamp burning, as from that lamp he would kindle the candelabrum in the afternoon. If he found that it was extinguished" - such as when Shimon the Just died - "he would kindle it from the altar of the burnt offering." And it appears in my eyes that the Rabbis said that its being fixed was the second lamp, was because we do not pass over commandments. But when he came to the [Temple] chamber, he first encountered the first [lamp], yet he could not begin with it, since it is written, "shall arrange it [...] before the Lord." [Still] there needs to be one external to it. For, if not, we do not call it, "before the Lord." And thus do we say in Menachot (98b), "It is written about the western lamp, 'before the Lord.' This implies all [the others] are not before the Lord, etc." And he would finish the ordering with it. For he would order the rest in the morning, but he would order this one in the afternoon. And he would hold the old one in his hand or place it in a vessel until he would place the oil and wick and light, and [then] light the others from it. And that which we say in Seder Yoma (33b) - "The arranging [of the candelabrum] is five lamps before the two lamps," implies that he would arrange all of them in the morning; and it learns this from verses - that is when no miracle existed, and he would find that it had been extinguished. For the verse does not rely on a miracle. But all the time that Israel was beloved, it would burn the whole day. And that is its testimony.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Shabbat
But isn’t it that here, since the lamps were fixed in the candelabrum, and he was not able to remove the western lamp to light the others from it - perforce that which is taught, "he would light from it," cannot be that he did not use a wood chip.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Shabbat
And lit the wood chip from the western lamp. And he would light the rest from that wood chip.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy