There is no evidence that there is a mitzvah in this.
And on the other hand, there is also an apparently agreed prohibition that does not exist in this.
Sources: Ya'vei' in Lent Kaa 1a about the candle with which a miracle was performed by Rav Ben Dosa and fuel until Mochash and Mochash they brought light from it for the Havdalah, and there was a place for the well that in this there is a ma'ale dachiyon da'itabida biya hada mitzvah liabida biya mitzvah ahariti, As for mixing, and so the rulings also regarding the wax of the synagogue candles to use it for a mitzvah candle.
However, in the commentary (attributed to Rashi) on Lent there P. that afterwards they extinguished it so as not to enjoy miracles, and yet what they took in the GM about that candle from which they brought light for the separation is only to make us hear that after that they no longer used this candle (and only for the purpose of a mitzvah the kilo to use an act of miracles where they had to because they had no other fire at the time, just as the kilo in the matter of lighting a Shabbat candle as above mentioned in the act cited in Gm' there), and on the other hand, even in the interpretation it is not proven to interpret yes, it is difficult to say that the interpretation came to explain why it only burned until then and no more , i.e. since the miracle caused it to light for some reason it finally went out, but the reason they used it for a candle is possible because Databid etc.
However, in the Mishnah and in the Gemara, at the end of the egg, there are several laws, it is explained that a flame has no substance in it, and only from Darbanan, you will buy some things also in a flame, such as in a thing that has a literal, there, and yet for our purposes, there is a place to say that a DAG should not use precisely the flame that was used for a candle Sabbath.
And indeed, we note that there are certain laws that were also said in Shalvet, i.e. in Bitza there, and also regarding the candle on Shabbat we note that the Shachaz [Rachz 20] mentioned that there is a second candle from the first light.
And it should also be noted that Dahana mentions in Shoa S. Tarched that one should use a candle on Shabbat at the end of the Yok, while regarding Shabbat it is mentioned in S. Rahats Sho. The candle of lighting the candle of Shabbat
(And what they didn't mention is that it is permissible to use the same candle in person that was left over from Shabbat AH, this is included in what they mentioned above regarding the synagogue's wax, that is, you).
And it should also be noted that in the 19th century Hanukkah candle S. Tared mentioned several mitzvah candles that are lit there that it is permissible to light them apart from each other, and he did not mention at all that there is a priority to take from a mitzvah candle to a mitzvah candle, so perhaps this means that with regard to the flame it was not said This matter of because I will serve, etc.
So far we have not found it necessary to say that he has to light a candle left over from lighting the Shabbat candle for a Havdalah candle.
And on the other hand, it seems to know how many rulings should not do so, and it is the explanation of the Gra and Hamed Moshe that the Mishnav brought in Hal Hanukah there SS Tared, as well as in Eshel Avraham of Botshatash there, and it is true that in C. Kand SC Ned the Mishnab took as an opinion in the "A. Makila, but surely one should not exclude something that is a prohibition for other judges, if it is implied that there is an exclusion in it as above.
And we have to look at the body of the rulings that regarding the remains of the wax 20 to permit and regarding the lighting of the candle itself 20 to prohibit ACP in some cases and some opinions in all cases.
And it seems that their taste is valid because in the flame I didn't say, because and I've been, etc. for the reason mentioned that there is no real flame, but because in the transfer of the flame there is a denigration of the Shachak in the remains of wax that remain.
And it is also explained in Shoa C. Kand C. D. A denarius of Bahkenas after a layer is allowed to light a candle of sand from it, and in Mishnab Sec. Na Dela is better than a Hanukkah candle after the time of his mitzvah, and also in a candle of Havdalah 20 Habe "L" and its origin in the 16th century in the Hanukkah there is a saqj that after they discriminated against him, his commandment ended.
Therefore, if Nima Dagra and Hamed Moshe in Hal Hanukkah C. Tared acknowledge the words of the Shu'a and Shnab there in S. Kand, therefore there is no prohibition regarding lighting a candle on Shabbat after Motzash when the time for his mitzvah has already passed, etc. Q. In fasting there (even though there is no clear evidence from the Gam' Shem Ladidan Dachal regarding the matter of lighting from candle to candle Efi' with a Hanukkah candle of Issan Taliya in Ashli Rebarbi and Achmal), but we also do not have clear evidence that there is a mitzvah that prefers to use a Shabbat candle to light from it A candle of difference.
מק"ט התשובה הוא: 5286