Why Chanukah was instituted

(1) Chanukah candles are not lit before sunset, but rather with the end of sunset, neither later nor before. And there are those who say that if one is busy, it is permissible to light from Plag Hamincha and onward, as long one puts enough oil [so that the lamp will remain lit] until people stop passing through the marketplace.

(2) If one did not light with sunset, either due to forgetfulness or on purpose, s/he should go ahead and light until people stop passing through the marketplace, which is approximately half an hour, because then the people are passing and coming home and thus the miracle is publicized. Therefore one must place enough oil for that time, and if one put more oil in, s/he may extinguish the candle after that time has passed, and may use the light after that time. [Re"ma: There are those who say that in this time, when people light indoors, there is no need to be careful to light before people stop passing through the marketplace (these are his own words, and the words of the Tur, quoting Tosafot), and regardless, it is good to be careful even now.] And this is the ideal case. But it this time has passed and s/he has not lit, go ahead an light all night, and if the entire night has passed and s/he has not lit, there is no making up for it later. [Re"ma: And on other nights, one should light like all other people, even though s/he did not light at first. (He found this written in the name of the Maha"ril and also shared it as his own opinion.)]

(4) TO CAUSE A LAMP TO BURN ‘TAMID’ (CONTINUALLY). “Doing something each and every night is called tamid (continually), just as you say, olath tamid (a continual burnt-offering)Numbers 28:6. and yet it was brought only from day to day. Similarly in the case of the meal-offering made on the griddle [brought every day by the High Priest] it is said tamid, Leviticus 6:13. and yet it was brought only half of it in the morning, and half thereof in the evening. Leviticus 6:13. However, the word tamid used in connection with the showbread Above, 25:30. signifies [the whole period without interruption] from Sabbath to Sabbath.” Thus is Rashi’s language.
But the Midrash [interpretation] of our Rabbis is not so. Instead they taught in the Sifre as follows: Sifre, beginning of Seder Beha’alothcha.“The seven lamps shall give light." I might think that they are to burn always; Scripture therefore says, from evening to morning. I might then think that they are to burn from evening to morning and then he is to extinguish them; Scripture therefore says, the seven lamps shall give light. — How is this to be understood? The seven lamps shall give light from evening to morning. Before the Eternal continually, — this refers to the neir ma’aravi, Literally: “the western light.” which is to burn perpetually, since the candelabrum was lit from it in the evening.” In the Torath Kohanim Sifra Emor 13:7. — the Rabbis have likewise said: “To cause a lamp to burn continually — this means that ‘the western light’ should burn perpetually.” They have further taught there: “If [the priest who came into the Sanctuary in the morning to trim the candelabrum] found that it had gone out, he cleaned it out and kindled it from [the fire upon] the altar of the whole-offering.” Thus it is clear that even at daytime he kindled the neir ma’aravi, for that lamp always burnt regularly [and not as Rashi has it that the candelabrum was lit only in the evening]. And in Tractate Tamid we have been taught as follows: “[The priest] who was privileged to clean out the candelabrum [during the morning service] entered [the Sanctuary], and if he found the two easternmost lamps burning, he cleaned out the rest [leaving them to be lit during the evening service], but the two easternmost lamps he left burning as they were. If he found that [the two easternmost lamps] had gone out, he cleaned them out and kindled them from those that were still burning, and then cleaned out the rest” [leaving them to be kindled during the evening service]. This text again shows that there were lamps burning in the candelabrum the whole day. — In case the priest found that all the lights had gone out it has already been mentioned above in Ramban’s text quoting the Torath Kohanim that the neir ma’aravi was then kindled from the fire upon the altar of the burnt-offering which stood outside in the Sanctuary Court. Now this anonymous Mishnah conforms to the opinion of Rabbi Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi. who says that the lamps of the candelabrum were placed in an east-west direction, and the neir ma’aravi (the western light) in his opinion is the second light from the east side. For since the candelabrum was standing with its six branches extending in an east-west direction, the first [the easternmost] light could not be considered as being before the Eternal, since that expression implies that there is one light still further away from the Holy of Holies [where the Divine Glory abided]. Hence the first lamp of which it might be said that it is before the Eternal is the second from the east, and since we must not pass over an occasion for performing a religious act, the second light from the east becomes affixed as being before the Eternal, and that is the neir ma’aravi (the western light). — There is, however, another opinion [mentioned further on in the text] that the candelabrum was placed in a south-north direction, and the term neir ma’aravi was given to the middle lamp, because the three lamps on each side turned towards the center one. — Menachoth 98b. It is called ma’aravi (western) because it is to the west of the first, and since he has to kindle the western light to fulfill therewith the Divine command before the Eternal continually, he must kindle also the easternmost lamp, for the second lamp cannot be called “western” until there be an “eastern” next to it. Hence if the ministering priest found that the two easternmost lamps had gone out, he trimmed them and kindled them both. For although the command regarding the perpetual lamp [burning day and night] applied essentially to the second — the western — light, yet since it could not be called “western” unless there was an “eastern” in front of it, the priest lit both. But according to the opinion of the Sage This is Rabbi Eleazar the son of Rabbi Shimon (Menachoth 98 b). who says that the candelabrum was placed in a north-south direction, the neir ma’aravi was the middle one — on the central shaft of the candelabrum — and that light alone he kindled in the morning [for since none of the lamps were “outside” of it towards the east it was not necessary that another lamp be lighted]. Thus there appears an important difference as to the number of lights that burned a whole day in the candelabrum. According to Rabbi who holds that the candelabrum was placed in an east-west direction, the two easternmost lamps burned a whole day [for reasons explained in Note 24]. But according to Rabbi Eleazar the son of Rabbi Shimon who says that the candelabrum was placed in a north-south direction, only the middle lamp burned a whole day. Thus the principle is clear that the expression before the Eternal continually applies to “the western light,” which burns regularly day and night.

(5) Ten wonders were wrought for our ancestors in the Temple: [1] no woman miscarried from the odor of the sacred flesh; [2] the sacred flesh never became putrid; [3] no fly was ever seen in the slaughterhouse; [4] no emission occurred to the high priest on the Day of Atonement; [5] the rains did not extinguish the fire of the woodpile; [6] the wind did not prevail against the column of smoke; [7] no defect was found in the omer, or in the two loaves, or in the showbread; [8] the people stood pressed together, yet bowed down and had room enough; [9] never did a serpent or a scorpion harm anyone in Jerusalem; [10] and no man said to his fellow: the place is too congested for me to lodge overnight in Jerusalem.

§ The baraita taught that the priestly vestments may not be worn outside the Temple. The Gemara challenges this: Is it really not permitted to wear priestly vestments in the country? Wasn’t it taught in another baraita, in Megillat Ta’anit: The twenty-fifth of Tevet is known as the day of Mount Gerizim, which was established as a joyful day, and therefore eulogizing is not permitted. What occurred on that date? It was on that day that the Samaritans [kutim] requested the House of our Lord from Alexander the Macedonian in order to destroy it, and he gave it to them, i.e., he gave them permission to destroy it. People came and informed the High Priest, Shimon HaTzaddik, of what had transpired. What did he do? He donned the priestly vestments and wrapped himself in the priestly vestments. And the nobles of the Jewish People were with him, with torches of fire in their hands. And all that night, these, the representatives of the Jewish people, approached from this side, and those, the armies of Alexander and the Samaritans, approached from that side, until dawn, when they finally saw one another. When dawn arrived, Alexander said to the Samaritans: Who are these people coming to meet us? They said to him: These are the Jews who rebelled against you. When he reached Antipatris, the sun shone and the two camps met each other. When Alexander saw Shimon HaTzaddik, he descended from his chariot and bowed before him. His escorts said to him: Should an important king such as you bow to this Jew? He said to them: I do so because the image of this man’s face is victorious before me on my battlefields, i.e., when I fight I see his image going before me as a sign of victory, and therefore I know that he has supreme sanctity. He said to the representatives of the Jewish people: Why have you come? They said to him: Is it possible that the Temple, the house in which we pray for you and for your kingdom not to be destroyed, gentiles will try to mislead you into destroying it, and we would remain silent and not tell you? He said to them: Who are these people who want to destroy it? The Jews said to him: They are these Samaritans who stand before you. He said to them: If so, they are delivered into your hands to deal with them as you please. Immediately, they stabbed the Samaritans in their heels and hung them from their horses’ tails and continued to drag them over the thorns and thistles until they reached Mount Gerizim. When they arrived at Mount Gerizim, where the Samaritans had their temple, they plowed it over and seeded the area with leeks, a symbol of total destruction. This was just as they had sought to do to the House of our Lord. And they made that day a festival to celebrate the salvation of the Temple and the defeat of the Samaritans. It is apparent from the baraita that Shimon HaTzaddik wore the priestly vestments even outside the Temple. This would seem to be in contravention of the ruling of the other baraita prohibiting this. The Gemara resolves the contradiction: If you wish, say Shimon HaTzaddik did not wear a set of genuine, sanctified priestly vestments; rather, he wore garments that were fitting to be priestly vestments in that they were made of the same material and design. And if you wish, say instead that he indeed wore a set of genuine priestly vestments, but in times of great need, such as when one seeks to prevent the destruction of the Temple, it is permitted to violate the halakha, as indicated by the verse: “It is time to act for the Lord, they have nullified your Torah” (Psalms 119:126).

(8) The difference between Torah scrolls, and phylacteries and mezuzot, in terms of the manner in which they are written, is only that Torah scrolls are written in any language, whereas phylacteries and mezuzot are written only in Ashurit, i.e., in Hebrew and using the Hebrew script. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even with regard to Torah scrolls, the Sages permitted them to be written only in Greek. Torah scrolls written in any other language do not have the sanctity of a Torah scroll.

The Gemara continues: And this was due to the incident of King Ptolemy, as it is taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving King Ptolemy of Egypt, who assembled seventy-two Elders from the Sages of Israel, and put them into seventy-two separate rooms, and did not reveal to them for what purpose he assembled them, so that they would not coordinate their responses. He entered and approached each and every one, and said to each of them: Write for me a translation of the Torah of Moses your teacher. The Holy One, Blessed be He, placed wisdom in the heart of each and every one, and they all agreed to one common understanding. Not only did they all translate the text correctly, they all introduced the same changes into the translated text. And they wrote for him: God created in the beginning [bereshit], reversing the order of the words in the first phrase in the Torah that could be misinterpreted as: “Bereshit created God” (Genesis 1:1). They did so to negate those who believe in the preexistence of the world and those who maintain that there are two powers in the world: One is Bereshit, who created the second, God. And they wrote: I shall make man in image and in likeness, rather than: “Let us make man in our image and in our likeness” (Genesis 1:26), as from there too one could mistakenly conclude that there are multiple powers and that God has human form.

§ Apropos the Second Temple period, when High Priests were frequently replaced, the Gemara cites that Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The fear of the Lord prolongs days, but the years of the wicked will be shortened” (Proverbs 10:27)? The fear of the Lord prolongs days; that is a reference to the First Temple, which stood for four hundred and ten years and in which only eighteen High Priests served, as is written in the lists of the genealogy of the priests in the Bible. But the years of the wicked will be shortened; that is a reference to the Second Temple, which stood for four hundred and twenty years and in which over three hundred High Priests served. In calculating the tenures of the High Priests, deduct from the figure of four hundred and twenty years forty years that Shimon HaTzaddik served, and eighty years that Yoḥanan the High Priest served, ten years that Yishmael ben Pavi served, and some say eleven years that Rabbi Elazar ben Ḥarsum served. These men were all righteous and were privileged to serve extended terms. After deducting those one hundred and thirty or one hundred and forty-one years, go out and calculate from this point forward and conclude: Each and every one of the remaining High Priests did not complete his year in office, as the number of remaining High Priests is greater than the number of years remaining.

Excerpt from Rabbi Leibel Gniwish:

The ascension of Antiochus IV Epiphanes to the Seleucid throne in 175 BCE marked the beginning of the end of true High Priesthood. Onias III, a descendant of Zadok, served as Kohen Gadol at the time. A victim of slanderous accusations, Onias was deposed and replaced by his Hellenized brother, Jason, who promised Antiochus higher tax revenues from the Jews and a secularization of the holiest Jewish office. A few years later, Menaulus, a non-Kohen from the tribe of Benjamin, promised Antiochus a larger sum for the position of Kohen Gadol. His wish was granted with the assistance of the Seleucid army.21

Thus began the practice of buying the High Priesthood from the government which continued (with some exceptions) throughout Hasmonean and Roman sovereignty. This explains the extremely high number of Kohen Gadols during this era (around 285 in 279 years), since most died when they entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur.22 Many of those High Priests were ignorant of the requirements of their position, and some were outright Sadducees who scorned accepted religious practice. The Mishnah23 required the sages to ask the Kohen Gadol if he had ever learned how to perform the Yom Kippur service; another Mishnah has the Kohen Gadol vow that he will carry out the incense ceremony properly. The Sadducees were of the opinion that the ritual had been misinterpreted by the rabbis and there was some risk that the Kohen Gadol would follow the Sadducee method.24

The Second Temple’s final Kohen Gadol was Phinehas ben Samuel of Havta (68-70 CE) who was put into place by the zealots during the Roman siege of Jerusalem. Instead of looking to the prestigious priestly families for a worthy successor, the zealots chose Phinehas by casting lots. This disregard for the sacred office was deliberate; the zealots intended to weaken the Kohen Gadol’s authority so they could maintain power.25 Some say Phinehas was a poor stonecutter who needed financial help from his fellow priests, while others posit he was independently wealthy.26

The destruction of the Second Temple brought an abrupt end to the High Priest’s role.

(12) At the outset, when the Temple was constructed, the Supreme Sanhedrin would hold session in the Chamber of Hewn Stone in the Courtyard of the Israelites. The place where the judges would sit was not consecrated. For only kings of the House of David were permitted to sit in the Temple Courtyard.
When the moral character of the Jewish people declined, the Sanhedrin went in exile. They traveled to ten different places in exile, the last being Tiberias. Afterwards, until the present age, the Supreme Sanhedrin has never been convened. And it is an accepted tradition, that in the future, the Sanhedrin will first convene in Tiberias, and from there, they will proceed to the Temple.

(13) 40 years before the destruction of the Temple, capital punishment was nullified among the Jewish people. Although the Temple was still standing, since the Sanhedrin went into exile and were not in their place in the Temple, these laws could not be enforced.

(1) In [the era of] the Second Temple, (The Chanukah miracle took place in the year 3596 (165 BCE). The Greek persecutions began several years beforehand.) the Greek kingdom (More particularly, the Seleucid kingdom of Syria, whose ruling hierarchy was of Greek origin.) issued decrees against the Jewish people, [attempting to] nullify their faith (Bereshit Rabbah 2:4 relates that the Greeks would have the Jews "write on the horn of an ox that they have no portion in the God of Israel." ) and refusing to allow them to observe the Torah and its commandments. (See Megillat Antiochus, which relates that the Greeks prevented the Jews from observing the Sabbath and performing circumcision.)

They extended their hands against their property and their daughters; (In this era, the Greek rulers established gentile cities in Eretz Yisrael and deprived the Jewish population of its livelihood. Rashi, Shabbat 23a, states that before a Jewish virgin was married, she was required to have relations with a Greek officer.) they entered the Sanctuary, wrought havoc within, (See Middot 1:6, 2:3 and Shekalim 6:3, which speak of the Greeks breaking open portions of the Soreg, a divider on the Temple Mount, and destroying portions of the wall around the Temple Courtyard. and made the sacraments impure. (As we find with regard to the oil for the Menorah, the Greeks did not destroy the oil; they made it impure.)
Herein, there is a lesson regarding the nature of the conflict between the Greeks and the Jews. The Greeks were not anxious to stamp out Judaism entirely. They were prepared to accept Judaism as one of the cultures of the Mediterranean area, which they would incorporate into an all-encompassing collection of knowledge and values; i.e., the sacraments of Judaism would remain, but they would become impure, tainted by Greek culture.
The Jews suffered great difficulties from them, for they oppressed them greatly until the God of our ancestors had mercy upon them, delivered them from their hand, and saved them. (By calling attention to the Divine origin of the Jews' victory before mentioning the Hasmoneans, the Rambam emphasizes the miraculous and spiritual nature of the miracle.) The sons of the Hasmoneans, the High Priests, overcame [them], slew them, and saved the Jews from their hand. (The valiant struggle of the Hasmoneans who were able to defeat the most powerful armies of the world with guerilla forces is recounted in many sources.)
They appointed a king from the priests, and sovereignty returned to Israel for more than 200 years, until the destruction of the Second Temple. (There is a significance to these statements beyond the laws of Chanukah. There are many Rabbinic authorities who are highly critical of the Hasmoneans for assuming the kingship of the Jewish people. (See the Ramban's commentary on the Torah, Parashat Vayichi.) Although in Hilchot Melachim 1:7-8, the Rambam writes that King David's descendants have an eternal right to the monarchy in Jerusalem, his description here of the Hasmoneans as kings does not have the slightest intimation of criticism; if anything, the contrary is true.
Several laws regarding the nature of kingship are derived from the Hasmonean kings and others, even from the kings of Herod's dynasty, who ruled after them.)

(2) When the Jews overcame their enemies and destroyed them, they entered the Sanctuary; this was on the twenty-fifth of Kislev. Significantly, the wording of the Rambam appears to indicate that the victory of the Hasmoneans took place on the twenty-fifth of Kislev. Rabbenu Nissim and other authorities explain that the victory took place on the twenty-fourth, and it was on the twenty-fifth that the Jews rested from the war and entered the Sanctuary. Indeed, an allusion to this is found in the very name Chanukah, חנוכה, which is broken up into two words, חנו כה, "they camped on the twenty-fifth." )

They could not find any pure oil in the Sanctuary, with the exception of a single jug. It contained enough oil to burn for merely one day. They lit the arrangement of candles from it for eight days until they could crush olives and produce pure oil (The commentaries raise the question: Why was the miracle of the jug of oil necessary? With regard to communal offerings, in which category falls the kindling of the Menorah, we follow the rule that "the requirement for ritual purity is suspended," if it is impossible to bring the offering in purity (Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 4:7-17). Thus, if the jug of pure oil had burned out, the Jews could have used impure oil. Why did God perform a miracle when there was no absolute necessity?
Among the explanations for this is that God saw the dedication of the Jewish people as evidenced by their search for pure oil, and, in a greater sense, by their entire struggle against the Greeks. This commitment which extended beyond the limits of their intellect evoked a miracle from God that transcended the limits of nature.

The fact that it took 8 days to produce a new batch also provokes a question: Why did it take so long to produce pure olive oil? Although there is an obligation to use oil of the finest quality for the Menorah (see Hilchot Issurei HaMizbe'ach 6:1, 7-8-10), when there is no other alternative, inferior oil prepared for the Menorah is also acceptable. Seemingly, it would have been possible to produce oil from olives in the Jerusalem vicinity in less than eight days.)

(3) Accordingly, the Sages of that generation ordained that these eight days, which begin from the twenty-fifth of Kislev, (Shabbat 21b states that the celebration of the holiday was ordained in the year following the miracle.) should be commemorated to be days of happiness and praise [of God]

(There are many who question why the holiday is celebrated for eight days, since the miracle was only for seven (for there was enough oil for the Menorah to burn for a single day). The Rambam's words seem to allude to a resolution of this difficulty. The miraculous lighting of the Menorah began on the twenty-fifth of Kislev and continued for eight days.
[Note, however, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chayim 670:1), who explains that, according to the Rambam, the first day of the celebration was instituted in appreciation of the military victories, while the remaining seven came in recognition of the miracle of the Menorah, an acknowledgement of God's miracles in a material context in appreciation of the military victories.
As the Rambam explains in Hilchot Purim, Chapter 2, "happiness" is associated with feasting. In this context, the Yam shel Shlomo, Bava Kama 7:37, explains that according to the Rambam - in contrast to the rulings of the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 670:2) - the festive meals customarily served on Chanukah can be considered to be feasts associated with a mitzvah.

The aspect of praising God acts as the spiritual acknowledgement of God in appreciation of the miracle of the Menorah. These two aspects of the celebration of the holiday reflect the different nature of the miracles mentioned in each of the first two halachot (Likkutei Sichot, Vol. 10).

Candles should be lit in the evening at the entrance to the houses on each and every one of these eight nights to publicize and reveal the miracle. (Both factors, the kindling of the Chanukah candles at night - when their light could be seen - and their placement at the entrance to the house - where their light will be projected into the street - emphasize the principle of pirsumei nisa, publicizing the Chanukah miracle.)
These days are called Chanukah. (According to the Rambam, the choice of this name is somewhat problematic: As mentioned above, there are authorities who associated the name with the expression, חנו כה, "they camped on the twenty-fifth." This certainly does not express the Rambam's view. Megillat Ta'anit associates Chanukah with chanukat hamizbe'ach, the rededication of the altar in the Temple, but there is no mention of this event by the Rambam here.)

It is forbidden to eulogize and fast on them, as on the days of Purim. (As mentioned in the commentary on Chapter 2, Halachah 13, the prohibition to eulogize and fast applies only on the days of Chanukah themselves, and not on the preceding or succeeding days.
Significantly, unlike Purim, there is no prohibition against work on Chanukah (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 670:1). Lighting the candles on these days is a Rabbinic mitzvah, like the reading of the Megillah.

(1) (Numb. 8:2:) “When you set up the lamps.” What is written above the matter (in Numb. 7:1–2)? “So it came to pass on the day that Moses had finished [ … ] that the princes of Israel, [the heads of their ancestral houses, namely the princes of the tribes, the ones in charge of those being numbered,] made their offerings.” Then afterwards (in Numb. 8:2), “Speak unto Aaron [and say unto him], ’When you set up [the lamps].’”Numb. R. 15:6. This text is related (to Ps. 34:10), “Fear the Lord, O you His holy ones, for those who fear Him lack nothing.” You find above (in Numb. 7) that eleven tribes made offerings, while the tribe of Levi made no offering. So while the tribe of Ephraim made offerings and all of the princes made offerings, the prince of Levi [did not]. Now who was the prince of Levi? This was Aaron, as stated (in Numb. 17:18), “And you shall write the name of Aaron upon the rod of Levi.” So Aaron did not make an offering with the princes, for he said, “Woe to me! Perhaps it is because of me that the Holy One, blessed be He, is not accepting the tribe of Levi.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moshe, “Go, say unto Aaron, ‘Do not be afraid. You are destined for something greater than this.’” It is therefore written (in Numb. 8:2), “Speak unto Aaron [...], ‘When you are raised.’” The offerings remain in force as long as the Temple exists, but the lamps are forever (according to Numb. 8:2 cont.) “in front of the menorah.” Moreover, all the blessings which I have given you to bless My children shall never pass away. Another interpretation (of Numb. 8:2 cont.), “in front of the menorah.” So that you will not despise this menorah. It is so stated (in Zech. 4:10), “For whoever has despised the day of small things shall rejoice to see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel, [even] these seven [...].” This is the menorah. And what are “[these] seven?” These are the seven lamps corresponding to the seven planets that (ibid. cont.) “roam around all the earth.”Numb. R. 15:7. These seven likewise are dear to Me. Thus you may not despise them. It is therefore written (in Numb. 8:2:) “let the seven lamps give their light in front of the menorah.” Lest your [evil] drive lead you astray into saying that He (i.e. The Holy One, blessed be He) has need of light, [see] what is written about the windows of the Temple (in Ezek. 40:16, 25), “Now there were narrow windows into the cells [...]. Like the windows (kehahallonot) mentioned above.” "Kahallonot"The midrash is explaining an extra he (h) which does not belong there. is not written here but "kehahallonot" (understood here as kehah halonot which means "dim windows"), in that they were wide on the outside and narrow on the inside in order to send forth light to the outside.Above, Numb. 3:2. R. Berekhyah the Priest said, “This lightning is the result of fire from on high. When it goes forth it brightens up the whole world, as stated (in Ezek. 1:13), ‘As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like coals of fire burning with the appearance of torches … [and from the fire there went forth lightning],’ and it brightens up the whole world. And I would need your light? [So] why did I tell to you to give Me light? Simply in order to exalt you (ha'alotekha),Cf. Numb. 8:2: WHEN YOU SET UP THE LAMPS (ha‘alotekha). as stated (in Numb. 8:2), ‘When you set up (beha'alotekha).’” R. Hanina said, “Concerning your own eyes they have within them both black and white. Still you see not out of the white but out of the black. [Now if in the case of your eyes, which have within them both black and white, but with you seeing only out of the black], would the Holy One, blessed be He, who is all light need your light?” Another interpretation (of Numb. 8:2 cont.), “in front of the menorah.” Flesh and blood lights a lamp from a burning lamp. Could one [ever] light a lamp from the darkness? The Holy One, blessed be He, however, did make a lamp give light from the darkness, as stated (in Gen. 1:2), “with darkness upon the face of the deep.” What is written after that (in vs. 3)? “Then God said, ‘Let there be light.’” [Since] I have brought light out of the darkness, do I have need for your light? So why did I say [to light lamps]? Simply to exalt you (rt.: 'lh), (in the words of Exod. 27:20) “to set up (rt.: 'lh) an everburning lamp.”