The Torah could have omitted "Rek"! From "Ein Bo Mayim" alone, we would infer that it had snakes and scorpions, since it did not say veha'Bor Rek!

Iyun Yakov, Etz Yosef citing Minchas Yehudah: From Ein Bo Mayim, we would infer that it has something else, e.g. earth, pebbles or mud. "Veha'Bor Rek" teaches that it was empty, but snakes and scorpions are common in holes and crevices, like it says in Pesachim (8a).

Did the brothers know that there are snakes and scorpions inside?

Etz Yosef citing Minchas Yehudah: They did not. Therefore, Reuven thought that he will be able to save Yosef. Also, had the brothers known that a miracle saved him from the snakes and scorpions, they would not have sold him!

Rav Elyashiv: They knew. Even though one who falls into a pit of snakes and scorpions, we may testify that he died to permit his wife to remarry, Reuven relied that Yosef's merits will save him. The Zohar says that merits can save only from living beings without choice. Had they thrown him into a pit of water, this is like drowning him; his merits would not have saved him.

What is the question 'does Ner Chanukah have Kedushah'?

Rav Elyashiv: Is it forbidden even a small haphazard benefit, like counting coins?! Ba'al ha'Ma'or holds that there are three opinions. (a) Rav (21b) totally forbids using its light, for they enacted it like the Menorah. (b) Shmuel permits lighting from Ner to Ner. He permits using it, just he forbids moving it from place to place, for then it looks like he lit it for his needs. (c) Rav Yehudah holds that there is no Isur to use it, just Mitzvos should not be disgraceful in his eyes, therefore one may not count coins via its light. Some texts say 'Amar Rav Yehudah', without 'Amar Rav'; it is unlike Rav's opinion. One may learn from it - this is a need of Kedushah; it is not a disgrace of the Mitzvah. Likewise, one may eat Seudas Shabbos via its light. Other texts include 'Amar Rav.' Above, Rav forbade fixed tasks via its light. Here he forbids even a minor use, even though there is no concern lest people say that he lit it for this use, lest Mitzvos be disgraceful in his eyes.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Darchei Teshuvah (YD 28) says that Poskim were unsure whether disgrace of Mitzvah is mid'Oraisa, or it is only mid'Rabanan, and the verse of Kisuy ha'Dam is a mere Asmachta. Tosfos (DH Sukah), the Ran (Beitzah 30) and Beis Yosef (OC 638) imply that it is only mid'Rabanan. The Sha'agas Aryeh (40), Pnei Yehoshua (Beitzah 30) and Chayei Adam (68:2) say that it is mid'Oraisa. Midrash Tanchuma (Vayigash 6) says, Hash-m commanded 'honor the Mitzvos. They are My Sheluchim - one's Shali'ach is like himself. Honoring or disgracing them is like honoring or disgracing Me.' We expound "Zeh Keli v'Anvehu" - beautify yourself in front of Him with Mitzvos. Rivash (220, citing the Ra'avad) says that since Hidur Mitzvah is mid'Oraisa, all the more so disgracing Mitzvos is mid'Oraisa. A parent or Rebbi can pardon honor, but not disgrace. The Ritva (Sukah 11) holds that even Hidur Mitzvah is only mid'Rabanan. Shulchan Aruch ha'Rav (Kuntres Acharon 250:2) says that we find that Amora'im honored Shabbos - we are commanded to honor it greatly. We do not find that they honored other Mitzvos, just they may not be disgraced. Tevu'os Shor (28:14) says that 'it is a greater to do the Mitzvah himself than via a Shali'ach' (e.g. for Kisuy ha'Dam) is lest the Mitzvah be disgraced in his eyes. If he honors others to do the Mitzvah, this is not disgrace.

May one use Ner Chanukah for a matter of Kedushah, e.g. to learn Torah?

Etz Yosef: The Tur brings from the Rosh that it is forbidden. The Ran and Levush explain, since the miracle was enacted due to a miracle for the Menorah, they enacted it like the Menorah - one may not use it at all! It was inside the Heichal; people did not see its light.

Rav Elyashiv: Shulchan Aruch 673:1 forbids. This is like Rav. Shmuel [and Rav Yehudah, if he argues with Rav] permit, like I explained above. Even though we say 'ha'Neros Halelu Kodesh Hem', based on Maseches Soferim, they are not truly like Hekdesh. Shmuel asked in astonishment, does Ner Chanukah have Kedushah?! Rather, it is to show honor to Ner Chanukah. Any use of the light is disgrace of the Mitzvah, as if it is not important due to itself. The Neros are Kodesh, i.e. special and designated for their Mitzvah. If he will not conduct honor with them, also other Mitzvos will be disgraced in his eyes.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Parnes l'Doro (p.230): The Ran (Reish Perek 3 of Megilah) says that even though Mitzvos such as Sukah and Lulav have Kedushah of honor at the time, after the Mitzvah they may be discarded. Likewise, ha'Neros Halelu Kodesh Hem, but after the Mitzvah, 'do they have Kedushah!?'

Also the gold Mizbe'ach was "Lifnei ha'Paroches Asher Al Aron ha'Edus"! We cannot expound so there!

Maharsha #1: The Paroches was not Al (for) the Edus (the Luchos in the Aron), rather, Al ha'Aron, in which the Edus was. Here, it does not mention the Aron, so we expound that the Menorah itself was Edus.

Maharsha #2: Here we rely on the question 'He does not need the light!' According to Tosfos, that the Gemara asked 'Aharon did not need the light', this applies to the Menorah, but not to the Mizbe'ach. And if it means 'Hashem does not need the light', regarding the Ketores burned on the Mizbe'ach, even though the entire world is His and He has no needs, it is a pleasant Ru'ach that His will was done. This does not apply to the light, since we went via His light in the Midbar.

Why did we prove that Hash-m does not need the light from the 40 years in the Midbar? He always illuminates the entire world!

Tosfos: Some explain, Aharon did not need the light, for the cloud always illuminated for Yisrael. A Beraisa teaches that one would look at a pitcher and know what is inside. Also Toras Kohanim implies that we ask that the Kohanim did not need its light. However, Menachos 86b implies that it means that Hash-m does not need the light. It says there, 'do I need to eat? Do I need the light? The 40 years...'

Iyun Yakov: Even though the entire world goes via His light, since one needs a commoner's lamp in a dark house, one might have thought that also in the Mikdash, there were dark rooms that needed light of a lamp. We refute this from the Midbar. A Midrash says that a person entered a room, and it was as if a lamp entered with him - "l'Einei Chol Beis Yisrael b'Chol Mas'eihem."

Rav Elyashiv: In Gitin (54b), the Gemara tried to prove that one witness is believed to say that a Korban became Pigul, from the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur, who was alone in the Heichal. He is believed to say that he was Mefagel, even though he is a lone witness! We reject this - perhaps others saw via an opening in the wall of the Heichal. Why don't we bring a proof from Chatas Yom Kipur in the Mishkan - there was no opening in the Mishkan to see via it! Chavatzeles ha'Sharon answered, in the Midbar people could see via the cloud. The attempted proof was only from the Beis ha'Mikdash. (NOTE: Surely the cloud did not enable people to see matters that should be covert. R. Yehudah holds that surely the Mizbe'ach in the Mishkan was not 10 Amos tall, for then people would see the Kohen serving on it. (R. Yosi disagreed.) However, if there is a need to know whether Chatas Yom Kipur became Pigul, perhaps the cloud would enable [e.g. two esteemed] people to see inside the Heichal. - PF) However, we could bring a proof from when the Mishkan was in Nov or Giv'on. People could not see via the cloud then, and there was no opening! Hagahah - R. Y"D of Belz answered that there was no Avodas Yom Kipur in Nov and Giv'on, only Temidim. (NOTE: Sifra Acharei Mos 4:6:1 refutes him! - PF)

Iyun Yakov: We ask, perhaps the miracle was not for testimony [that Shechinah dwells in Yisrael], rather, for it would be lowly to light the Menorah from another fire, if not after Shimon ha'Tzadik died and they needed to light it from the outer Mizbe'ach. We reject this - all 40 years in the Midbar, there was a pillar of fire to illuminate for them. It would not be lowly to light from it! Rather, the Nes was for testimony.

How was this testimony to the entire world? Only Kohanim enter the Heichal?

Rav Elyashiv: Even so, it was known to everyone. They would hold up the Shulchan during the festivals to show Yisrael's dearness to Hash-m. The Lechem ha'Panim was [steaming] like when removed from the oven over a week earlier (Menachos 96a). (NOTE: We can say similarly about the Menorah. Yisrael did not see that they put the same amount of oil in each Ner, or that a Kohen did not add oil and relight it before they showed it to Yisrael - they would not suspect the Kohanim of doing so, just like they did not suspect that they baked new bread, put it on the Shulchan and showed it to the people! - PF) The Rambam says that a Zar may light the Menorah.

Which is the Ner Ma'aravi?

Rashi: According to the opinion that the length of the Menorah was east-west, this refers to the more western of the two easternmost lamps. According to the opinion that the) Menorah is north-south, the middle lamp tilts westward.

Did the Ner Ma'aravi always burn until the next evening?

Rashi: When Yisrael were dear to Hash-m, yes, but not [always] after Shimon ha'Tzadik died.