Category: Monthly Written Article

  • Hatikva Ministries – JerusalemTempleStudy eNewsletter

    Hatikva Ministries – JerusalemTempleStudy eNewsletter

     Shevat 5786


    Tu BiSh’vat falls on Sunday evening, February 1st and ends on Monday evening, February 2nd
    Chaverim of Hatikva Ministries and Members of JerusalemTempleStudy.com!
    We are excited to bring you this different format this month with some sites of places you can get a Tu BiShvat seder and guide. We wanted to get this out quickly in the hope you will receive it prior to Tu BiSh’vat! If not, please know that you can still celebrate and have a seder anytime in Shevat! We hope you find this month meaningful and learn something new! Chodesh tov!


    Significant Dates in the Month of Shevat
    1 Shevat
    • Alternate tradition for the birth of Asher.
    • Moshe begins repeating the Torah to the Israelites (opening of Devarim/Deuteronomy).
    15 Shevat — Tu BiShvat
    • New Year of the Trees.
    • Historically used for determining tithes of produce from the Land of Israel.
    • We celebrate with the fruits of Israel and themes of growth, renewal, and environmental appreciation.
    17–18 Shevat
    • Purim of Saragossa, marking the rescue of the Jewish community from danger.
    24 Shevat
    • Prophecy of Zechariah (517 BCE), recorded in Zechariah 1:7–16.


    Some other interesting aspects of Shevat include the following…
    One unique custom is to pray for a beautiful etrog. Since it is the month when the life returns to the trees, this is the time all of our etrogim begin to grow. Also, Shabbat Shekalim falls in Shevat sometimes. If so, there will be an additional Torah scroll that Shabbat. This is one of those years when it falls in Shevat on February 14, 2026. Another Shevat fact has to do with the collection of the Half Shekel. That means the chatzi shekel was collected beginning in Shevat. All the shekalim were due to the Temple treasury by Rosh Chodesh Nisan. We found this connection in The Book of Our Heritage by Eliyahu KiTov. You can find more out about this in your own independent study. Due to time constraints and the winter storms, we were limited on time and could not elaborate on this topic this month. Here is the info on the book and we highly recommend getting this amazing work!
    The Book of Our Heritage illuminates the many phases of the Jewish calendar – its holidays and festivals, fast days, and days of rejoicing and sorrow. It explains the meanings of the laws of observance and includes a wealth of Midrashic commentary and inspiring insights by earlier and later Sages. Written almost fifty years ago, The Book of Our Heritage quickly became an exceedingly popular and essential work for every Jewish home, exploring the breadth of our glorious tradition and heritage. It captured the hearts of Jews from all backgrounds and walks of life, as a book to teach and learn from, either at the Shabbos table or any time a Jew wants to draw knowledge and inspiration for any occasion. 3 volume gift boxed set.


    About the author: Rabbi Eliyahu Kitov, of blessed memory, is one of Israel’s most acclaimed religious authors, whose books on the Jewish way of life and on the Chassidic movement have become renowned bestsellers. The publication of this edition in 1997 coincided with the twenty-first anniversary of his passing. https://feldheim.com/book-of-our-heritage-2+edition-Large


    More about Shevat:
    Shabbat Shirah (also called Shabbat Shira, meaning “Sabbath of Song”) and Tu Bishvat (the 15th of Shevat, known as the “New Year for Trees”) are closely linked in the Jewish calendar, often falling adjacent to each other or even coinciding (which happens about 30% of the time).


    Shabbat Shirah refers to the Shabbat when the weekly Torah portion is Parshat Beshalach (Exodus 13:17–17:16). This portion includes the dramatic Splitting of the Red Sea and the Israelites’ response: the Song of the Sea (Shirat HaYam / Az Yashir), a powerful song of praise and thanksgiving to God for deliverance from Egypt and the Egyptians. That’s why it’s called the “Shabbat of Song”—it’s a time focused on themes of song, praise, redemption, and spiritual elevation through music and gratitude. Tu Bishvat, meanwhile, marks the new year for fruit trees in Jewish law (originally for tithing purposes, as mentioned in the Mishnah). It’s celebrated today as a holiday honoring nature, the land of Israel, fruits (especially the seven species), renewal, growth, and environmental awareness. Customs include eating fruit, planting trees, and reflecting on spiritual “growth” parallels to physical trees. The connection isn’t coincidental; many Jewish sources (including Rebbe Natan of Breslov and various commentaries) highlight why they align so frequently:


    Timing in the agricultural and spiritual cycle — This period (mid-Shevat) is when winter rains in Israel have nourished the trees, and sap begins rising, signaling renewal and the start of fruit production. It’s a time of blessing from rain (geshem) and preparation for the land’s bounty. Parshat Beshalach often falls here as the Jewish people, post-Exodus, begin transitioning toward entering the Land of Israel—where agriculture, trees, and mitzvot tied to the land (like tithing fruits) become relevant. The desert generation couldn’t fully observe many land-based commandments; now, songs of freedom lead toward rootedness in the land.


    Themes of song and nature — Creation itself is said to “sing” praises to God. Sources draw parallels between the Song of the Sea (human song of redemption) and the “song” of trees and nature awakening on Tu Bishvat. Some teachings speak of trees and fruits “testifying” to Shabbat’s holiness or nature joining in praise. The power of song sweetens bitterness (like the bitter waters turned sweet in Beshalach), mirroring how Tu Bishvat brings hope and growth after winter.


    Redemption and planting — The Exodus (in Beshalach) is like “planting seeds” of the Jewish nation—sometimes involving descent or “rotting” (challenges) before growth. Tu Bishvat symbolizes that planting and sprouting process, both literally (trees) and spiritually (personal/ national renewal). In short, the proximity emphasizes moving from liberation and song (freedom/redemption) to rootedness, growth, and gratitude for the land’s fruits. When they coincide, it’s seen as especially auspicious for reflecting on these intertwined ideas. Many communities hold Tu Bishvat seders (meals with fruits and explanations) around this time, often tying in themes from Shabbat Shirah like joy, praise, and harmony with creation. Remember, the monthly theme is one of time of renewal, growth, and blessing!


    English Tu BiShvat Seder options https://voices.sefaria.org/collections/sNvBy-B7?tab=sheets
    Spanish Tu BiShvat seder https://aishlatino.com/seder-cabalistico-de-tu-bshvat/
    Tu BiShvat Q & A from Chabad.org www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/356805/jewish/Tu-BiShvat-Q-A.htm.
    Blessings, shalom and G-d bless you!


    Joseph Good, Hatikva Ministries and JerusalemTempleStudy.com
    Shevat Announcements
    New Ministry Office Phone # with Voicemail!
    Please call us anytime at 832-821-6050 and leave a message if we do not answer. We will attempt to answer during normal business hours and on Sundays. If you call on Shabbat or a Festival, please understand you may have to leave a message as we will generally have the phone off. We endeavor to reply to phone calls within 24 hours.


    Got Questions or Ideas? We’d love to hear from you! Email: Office@JerusalemTempleStudy.com Please allow up to 48 hours for email responses.
    Mail us! Hatikva Ministries • PO Box 948 • Crosby, TX 77532


    We have received some questions about the best way to contribute or donate. We can receive paper checks by mail to the PO Box address above. Electronic contributions and memberships to the website which are a great way to support Hatikva regularly can be done through JerusalemTempleStudy.com/donate or JerusalemTempleStudy.com/Gold-membership/


    Become a JerusalemTempleStudy.com Gold Member – Only $25/month Unlock the full JerusalemTempleStudy app with all videos, live streams, and archives on your phone—plus instant access to our 14-lesson “Introduction to the Temple” course (quizzes & exams included) at no extra charge! Join at JerusalemTempleStudy.com


    Free Monthly Paper Newsletter by Mail Want this newsletter delivered to your mailbox every month? Just email your mailing address to Office@JerusalemTempleStudy.com – it’s completely free!


    Watch Us Every Week – Israel Update with Joe & Gilla – on God’s Learning Channel (GLC), YouTube, and Roku – Chavurah Live – Every Tuesday 7 PM Central on YouTube & Facebook (JoeGoodHatikva channel) → All episodes archived at JerusalemTempleStudy.com (new episodes posted by Wednesday)
    Curious about kosher rules on meat & dairy? Watch our free video


    “The Meat and Cheese Question” at https://jerusalemtemplestudy.com/the-meat-and-cheese-question/

    Download the JTS RADIO App – Jerusalem Temple Study Radio– Now live on Apple App Store & Google Play! – 100% FREE – no login, no subscription, no ads – 24/7 commercial-free stream of solid Temple teachings – Includes: Measure the Pattern series, Chavurah Live recordings, Warfare series, ARBA 4, Daughters of Wisdom, Hebrew Nation Radio shows, and more! Simple radio-style: just hit Play and let it run (no pause/rewind) Search “JTS RADIO” in your app store and start listening today!

  • eNewsletter for Tevet 5786

    eNewsletter for Tevet 5786

    Hatikva Ministries and JerusalemTempleStudy.com TEVET 5786

    Shalom chaverim!  To preface, it is important to realize that most historians date the destruction of the First Temple to 586–587 BCE, based on Babylonian records, archaeology, and biblical chronology.  Sefaria notes: “The First Temple was destroyed in 586 BCE by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.”  The Bible does not give us any years to go by so it is calculated based on Biblical genealogies and reigns of kings.

    The First Temple is dated by historians to 586–587 BCE, based on Babylonian records and archaeology. Some Jewish groups follow traditional rabbinic chronology from Seder Olam Rabbah which places the destruction in 422 BCE instead. The 164-year difference comes from how long the Persian Empire is understood to have ruled: historians count about 200+ years for the Persian kings while Seder Olam counts only 34, compressing the timeline between the First and Second Temples. The compression counting uses the traditional date of 422 BCE because it treats Seder Olam as authoritative for Jewish historical and religious chronology.  Regardless of which dating of years you ascribe to, the dates and months are still consistent.  Ok, so on with the show!

    What are the significant dates in Tevet?

    The 8th, the 9th and the 10th are all significant but the main one is the Fast of the 10th of Tevet.  Asarah B’Tevet is a minor Jewish fast day marking the beginning of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar on the 10th of Tevet.  Despite repeated warnings from prophets like Jeremiah—which the people ignored, even imprisoning him—G‑d delayed the final destruction to allow repentance. The siege lasted about 30 months, ending with the breaching of the city walls on the 17th of Tammuz and the destruction of the First Holy Temple on the 9th of Av 586 BCE, leading to the Babylonian exile. 

    This fast is unique among minor fasts because it is observed even if it falls on a Friday (interfering slightly with Shabbat preparations). It symbolizes the start of a chain of calamities that led to the Temple’s ruin and ongoing exile, from which the Jewish people have not fully recovered—even the Second Temple lacked the original’s full glory.  We see this date spoken of in Ezekiel 24: 

     [Tree of Life Bible]  24 The word of Adonai came to me in the tenth day of the tenth month of the ninth year saying: 2 “Son of man, record this date, this exact day—this very day the king of Babylon has laid siege to Jerusalem

    The phrase in Hebrew, “etzem hayom hazeh” is found in this verse.   It means on this exact day-this very day, this decisive event occurred

     בֶּן־אָדָ֗ם (כתוב) [כְּתׇב־]לְךָ֙ אֶת־שֵׁ֣ם הַיּ֔וֹם אֶת־עֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה סָמַ֤ךְ מֶֽלֶךְ־בָּבֶל֙ אֶל־יְר֣וּשָׁלַ֔͏ִם בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֥וֹם הַזֶּֽה׃

     It is only found in the Bible limited times and at decisive points in history.  It means that from that day forward, the world would never be the same.

    **What does it commemorate in this case?** 

    Primarily, it commemorates the siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, viewed as the onset of events culminating in the First Temple’s destruction and the exile.  Additionally, the fast incorporates (in its Selichot prayers) two other tragic events from nearby dates:

    – On the 8th of Tevet: The forced translation of the Torah into Greek (Septuagint) under Ptolemy, seen as a spiritual threat.

    – On the 9th of Tevet: The death of Ezra the Scribe, a key leader in restoring Jewish life after the Babylonian exile.

    In modern times, the 10th of Tevet has also been designated in some communities (especially in Israel) as a general day of Kaddish (Yom HaKaddish HaKlali) for Holocaust victims whose exact death dates are unknown.  May it come speedily in our days!

    Your friend, 

    Shalom, shalom! Hatikva Ministries & JerusalemTempleStudy.com

    Check out a new story  entitled From Settlement to Sanctuary: Israel’s Call to Illuminate the World

    from guest author Victor Schultz by scanning this QR code  or read it below!

    From Settlement to Sanctuary: Israel’s Call to Illuminate the World

    In the rolling hills of Canaan, after decades of trials, exile from his homeland, deceit at the hands of Laban, the wrenching loss of Rachel, and reconciliation with Esau, Jacob yearned for peace. He had built his family, weathered storms, and returned to the land of his fathers. Who could blame him for seeking to dwell securely, to “settle” as the Torah describes in Genesis 37:1? Yet, this moment of intended tranquility became the threshold of greater upheaval: the sale of Joseph, descent into Egypt, and ultimately, the miraculous Exodus that revealed God’s power not just to Israel, but to the entire world.

    Jacob’s story whispers a timeless truth: True settlement in the Land is not about retreating into comfort amid challenges. It is about aligning with a divine purpose that extends far beyond our borders. Today, as Jews return to Israel in fulfillment of ancient prophecies, we must affirm that living in the Land is no mistake. It is a commandment, a blessing, and a step toward redemption. Views that once questioned this, held by some groups in the diaspora, are evolving as the reality of our homeland draws hearts closer. But here’s the heart of the matter: Settlement without sanctuary risks missing the point. Like Ezra and the returnees from Babylonian exile, who wasted no time in restoring the altar and laying the Temple’s foundations despite opposition (Ezra 3), we are called to prioritize God’s House, a beacon not just for us, but for all nations.

    Consider Joseph’s journey as a blueprint. Cast into servitude in a foreign land, he did not merely survive. He thrived, blessing every household he served: Potiphar’s, the prison warden’s, and Pharaoh’s own (Genesis 39:2-5). “The Lord made all that he did prosper in his hand,” the Torah recounts. This was not coincidence. It stemmed from a deep ethic of care for others, perhaps rooted in the teachings of Shem and Eber, the ancient academies that preserved a “Torah of Exile,” principles of integrity and service amid dispersion. Joseph’s dreams, prophetic visions of stars and sheaves bowing, pointed not only to his personal rise but to an end-times fulfillment where blessings flow outward.

    Jews have echoed this pattern throughout history. Scattered among nations, we have managed “houses” with remarkable success, from the courts of medieval Europe to the boardrooms of modern America, infusing innovation, ethics, and prosperity wherever we go. Yet, like Joseph, we have often faced false accusations and expulsions, reminders that our role is not perpetual wandering but preparation for a greater gathering. In exile, we learned to think beyond ourselves, to steward the welfare of our hosts. Now, back in the Land, that lesson must evolve: Not isolation in our victories, but extension of that blessing to a world starving for spiritual direction.

    In our contemporary reality, Israel stands as a miracle, a nation reborn, defending itself against existential threats while achieving technological and cultural wonders. We have won big battles, built thriving communities, and nurtured families in the face of adversity. But amid this hard-earned stability, a subtle shift can occur: We nuzzle into routines, fearing world leaders more than revering the Divine, content to live among lingering shadows of enmity without fully igniting the light we are meant to share. The world today gropes in moral twilight, unaware of the God who split seas and thundered at Sinai. Nations need a compass, a House where they can encounter that wonder, not as intruders, but as cherished guests.

    This is where the prophets’ vision comes alive. Isaiah declares, “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples” (Isaiah 56:7). King Solomon, dedicating the First Temple, prayed explicitly for the foreigner who turns toward it, that “all the peoples of the earth may know Your name and fear You” (1 Kings 8:41-43). Even in the sages’ teachings, the Temple is not an exclusive club. It is humanity’s spiritual epicenter, with Israel as its devoted servants. Ramban and others emphasize that our offerings and rituals radiate outward, drawing gentiles to recognize the One God. In Zechariah’s prophecy (14:16), survivors of the nations ascend to Jerusalem yearly, transforming potential conflict into communal celebration.

    Yet the path to that House remains blocked by a deeper impurity, the spiritual corpse contamination that has lingered since the destruction of the Second Temple. The Torah teaches that voluntary offerings, the free-will gifts of the heart, require the ashes of the red heifer for purification (Numbers 19). Many have waited for that perfect red heifer to appear as a sign. But perhaps the order is reversed. The obligatory altar offerings, the tamid and musaf sacrifices commanded daily and on festivals, remain binding upon us even now. Though current authorities withhold permission, this refusal stands in error against the Torah’s clear mandate. Even the pagan king Cyrus, whom Hashem called “My anointed” (Isaiah 45:1), issued a decree allowing the Jews to return and rebuild the Temple, explicitly authorizing the resumption of offerings. Today’s leaders in Israel, who bear the responsibility of a sovereign Jewish state, fall short of that standard when they hinder what the Torah requires. When we earnestly pursue what is required of us today, rebuilding the altar through sincere advocacy and preparation, placing God first in our national priorities, then Hashem may grant the red heifer, clearing the way for full purification, voluntary korbanot, and the ultimate restoration of the House of Prayer for all nations.

    Ezra’s generation understood this urgency: Upon return, they rebuilt the altar “as it is written” (Ezra 3:2), even before walls or homes, placing God first to invite divine presence back. The time is now. We do not rebuild through force or folly, but through teshuvah, returning to Hashem with hearts aflame. Imagine: An Israel that prioritizes spiritual restoration, where Torah study groups welcome seekers from afar, where ethical innovations in tech, medicine, and ecology embody divine wisdom for global good, and where acts of kindness bridge divides. By serving as custodians of this universal sanctuary, we fulfill Joseph’s prophetic arc, blessing the “master’s house” that is the world Hashem loves so dearly. No longer do we risk corrective exiles. Instead, we co-author a voluntary Exodus, where nations stream to Sinai not in chains, but in awe.

    This is not about abandoning the Land, far from it. It is about inhabiting it fully, as commanded, with eyes on the horizon. When we put God’s House first, we honor the struggles of Jacob, Joseph, and Ezra. We transform settlement from mere survival to sacred service. And in that shift, the flicker of Hashem’s fear becomes a blazing light, drawing all peoples to witness His love. Let us move forward together, not in complacency, but in courage, rebuilding, revealing, redeeming. The world awaits, and so does our destiny.

    Announcements/Updates 🎙️ New: Free JTS RADIO App – Now Available!

    – **Listen on the go** to commercial-free, continuous stream of Temple-focused teachings from JerusalemTempleStudy.com.   Available on **Apple App Store** or **Google Play Store**.

    Dozens of teachings from over 40 years and new ones added monthly!

    📱 Jerusalem Temple Study App (Separate from JTS RADIO)

    – Gold members receive **free access** for on-the-go videos and live streams.

    – **Gold membership:** Only $25/month (supports the ministry and unlocks premium content).

    – Take the **Introduction to the Temple** course — 14 lessons with quizzes & exams (paid subscribers only).

    ### 📺 Watch & Join Our Programs. – **Israel Update** — with Joe and co-host Gilla Trebich (Jerusalem correspondent) is  available on: **God’s Learning Channel (GLC)**, **YouTube**, and **Roku TV**.  Also see – **Chavurah Live** — Every **Tuesday at 7:00 PM Central Time** on YouTube and Facebook.  – Archived episodes available at www.JerusalemTempleStudy.com.

    📩 More Info & Contact Us- **Monthly eNewsletter** — longer version & available free; email your request to Office@JerusalemTempleStudy.com.  – **Questions, comments, ideas?**  – Email: same – Call: 972-757-2326 (speak to Kevin or leave a message — we’ll call back!)  

     Contributions and donations may be done on the JerusalemTempleStudy.com site 

    – If you are sending it by Mail:  Hatikva Ministries, PO Box 948, Crosby, TX 77532. 

    Feel free to call and let us know it is coming.  We will confirm all mailed donations by phone and letter with a handwritten thank you card!

    Shalom & enjoy the teachings! 🙏

  • The Priestly Garments

    The garments of both the ordinary priest and High Priest are one of the most interesting topics of Temple study. Our day has seen the restitution of the biblical colors, ancient weaving techniques and understanding. Today these garments for the first time in almost two thousand years are now being made. In the case of the High Priest the garments are constructed.

    Chanukah and Garments 025Chanukah and Garments 055Chanukah and Garments 027

    Chanukah and Garments 028
    [one_fourth]Chanukah and Garments 029Chanukah and Garments 030Chanukah and Garments 039Chanukah and Garments 054Chanukah and Garments 046Chanukah and Garments 052

    Chanukah and Garments 040Slide 26 Top View

  • The Inner Courtyard according to Rambam

    This building housed the Lishkat haGazit (Chamber of Hewn Stone where the Sanhedrin Gedolah sat, the Lishkat haEitz (Chamber of the Wood - the quarters for the High Priest), the Beit Kior (House of the Laver) Beit Osei Chavittim (House of the Pancake Offering Bakery), Chambers for the singers and more.
    This building housed the Lishkat haGazit (Chamber of Hewn Stone where the Sanhedrin Gedolah sat, the Lishkat haEitz (Chamber of the Wood – the quarters for the High Priest), the Beit Kior (House of the Laver) Beit Osei Chavittim (House of the Pancake Offering Bakery), Chambers for the singers and more.

    The fourth chapter of Hilchot Beit haBechirah by Rambam describes the Temple building while Chapter Five lists the structures of the Azarah or Inner courtyard. In this Rambam mostly follows the information provided in Middot of the Mishnah. Several areas of his commentary need to be amended to provide a better view of the Azarah.

    1) There are additional structures not listed by Rambam found in the Tanach, other texts of the classical Oral Torah (such as other buildings and chambers referenced in other tractates of the Mishnah, Tosefta, Talmud Bavli and Talmud Yerushalmi). Also throughout the Tanach many buildings are mentioned that are not described here. You must be careful to determine the exact location of a structure as it was common for buildings, chambers, and gates to have more than numerous names defining either different time periods or multiple functions of buildings. Josephus provides the names and locations of several of these. The Temple Scroll (from the Dead Sea Scrolls) describes many structures that are not listed in Middot or Hilchot Beit haBechirah).

    2) Rambam lists seven gates to the Azarah as described in Middot. However, Middot also lists the number of gates to the Azarah as five and thirteen while Josephus describes both eight and nine gates. All these listings are essentially correct and  are described according to different functions that are being expressed. Basically it deals with perspective. There were a total of thirteen gates to the Azarah.

    3) Rambam states there were six chambers (Lishkot) to the Azarah. In fact there were numbers of other chambers to the Azarah. These six chambers are in reference to two of the corner buildings. The three chambers Rambam describes on the south are actually on the north and those Rambam lists on the north are on the south. The southern chambers are within the Beit Avtinas on the southeast corner and the northern chambers are within the Beit haNitzotz on the northeast corner. Rambam reversed the order of these chambers as listed in Middot due to a comment made in Pesachim 19a of the Talmud Bavli. From other texts we are able to determine that the listing in Middot was correct.

    4) The Cheil is described by Rambam as a wall. Rather it was a pavement ten cubits wide that surrounded the Azarah. It is the stabilizing level that is equal on all sides. The Azarah continually goes up from this point so the Cheil provides both a common area to the Azarah and gives a base that you calculate all rises in  elevation from.

    With the above understandings and corrections, the work of Rambam is extremely valuable primarily to a concise reading of the order of the structures of the Azarah

  • The Problem of the Kior

    To understand the layout of the Temple and to recover the Tavnit (blueprint) 0f the Holy Temple is required to attempt the building of the Temple in our day. This is also critical to our understanding of Hashem’s word. The tavnit must agree with the text of scripture, halachah and function. The classic example of this is the case of the Kior or Laver.

    The Kior (Laver) was the basin by which the kohanim sanctified their hands and feet before ascending the Mizbeiach (Altar) or entered the Beit haMikdash (Temple Building). Specifically, the kohanim had to sanctify their hands and feet before beginning the sacrificial service. According to the Temple Scroll, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the kohanim were also required to wash their hands and feet, due to the sanctity of the blood they would have on their garments and body, at the conclusion of their sacrificial service. During the First Temple period the Kior was known as the Yam (Sea). Middot states that the Kior was located between the Ulam (Porch of the Temple Building) and the Mizbeiach (Altar) toward the south.

    The basin was between the ulam and the altar, drawn towards the south. Between the ulam and the altar were 22 amot. . . .
    Middot 3.6

    The first impression from Middot 3.6 is that the Kior sat within the 22 amot between the eastern wall of the Ulam (the Porch of the Temple) and the western wall of the Mizbeiach (Altar). However, there are problems with this concept. These are described below.

    Description of the Mukni of ben Katin
    The Mukni (Machine) is often described as a type of crane that hoisted and lowered the Kior into a cistern. The Kior was make of bronze or brass. Water that remained overnight in a vessel made of bronze or brass became impure. Therefore, many scholars have interpreted that the Mukni lifted the kior after it was emptied and lowered it into a cistern for overnight. Immersing the vessel into a cistern with a large volume of water eliminated the possibility of impurity.  The Kior (Basin) was raised the following morning by the kohen (priest) who was selected to clear the Mizbeiach (Altar).

    Frequently the Mukni (Machine) is represented as a wheel (Galgal) or pulley system attached to the Ulam (Porch) of the Beit haMikdash (Temple Building) that lowered the Kior (Basin) into a cistern located between the Ulam (Porch) and the Mizbeiach (Altar).

    The traditional theory of how the Mukni worked and where it was located is not possible. These two points may be discerned from the Mishnah as well as the location of the cisterns of the Azarah.

    The one chosen to pick up from the altar (Mizbeiach), he would pick up from the altar (Mizbeiach). And they would say to him: Beware, lest you touch the utensil before you wash your hands and feet from the basin (Kior)! And behold the shovel is placed on the corner, between the ramp (Kevesh) and the altar (Mizbeiach), on the west side of the ramp (Kevesh)! No man entered with him, and there was no candle in his hand; rather, he would walk by the light of the pile. They did not see him, nor did they hear his voice, until they heard the sound of the wood, that Ben Katin made as a mukhni for the basin, and they would say: The time has come! He washed  his hands and feet from the basin (Kior), took the silver shovel, and went up to the top of the altar (Mizbeiach), and pushed aside the coals this way and that way. He shoveled out from the burnt up inner ones, and went down, He reached the floor, turned his face to the north, walked alongside the east of the ramp (Kevesh) about ten amot (cubits). He piled up the coals on the floor, three tefahim (handbreadths) away from the ramp (Kevesh), in the place where they put the bird crops, and the ashes of the inner altar (Mizbeiach Zahav) and of the menorah.
    Tamid 1.4

    The expression “no man entered with him” indicates that the kohen must have entered a structure   and there activated the Mukni (Machine). As no one was able to see him, this must have been a building. There was no structure between the Ulam (Porch) and the Mizbeiach (Altar).  Even though it was dark as it was prior to dawn, the area was well lit by the fires of the Mizbeiach (Altar). It is also obvious that the Mukni (Machine) could be activated by a single individual. Therefore, the Mukni (Machine) must have been within a chamber inside this building.

    The mishnah above also refers to the other kohanim in addition to the one who entered the building hearing “the sound of the wood, that Ben Katin made as a mukhni for the basin (kior). This naturally calls to mind the Galgal (Wheel) of the Lishkat haGolah (Chamber of the Returnees). Could the Galgal of the Lishkat haGolah be the same Galgal of the Mukni (Machine) of ben Katin? One is a machine to supply water to the kior, while the wheel within the Lishkat haGolah was used to supply water to the entire Azarah.

    The Mukni (Machine) of ben Katin was described as a wooden machine that is usually thought of as a pulley that lowered and raised the Kior (Basin) each evening and morning. This strongly suggests that the wood of the Mukni (Machine) and the wheel (Galgal) of the Lishkat haGolah (Chamber of the Exile or Returnees) were the same. This would mean that the Mukni (Machine) would have been located within the Lishkat haGolah (Chamber of the Exiles or Returnees).

    The very name of the chamber has been the subject of controversy. A note from the Kehati Mishnah Middot where this chamber was being discussed is helpful.

    The chamber was named golah because the returnees from the Babylonian exile dug the well. (Bartenura). Others relate golah to galgal  (“wheel” or “pulley”), i.e., the chamber was named after the pulley which lowered the basin (kior) into the well at night (Raviah  cited by Tosefot  Yom Tov). Some pronounce this word as gulah (bowl; cf. “and a bowl upon its top”; Zech. 4:2), i.e., a large round bowl which held the water drawn from the well (Tiferet Yisrael); cf. the variant reading: “Where there was a well with a fixed bowl, and a wheel placed over it” (Rabbenu Yehonatan cited by Tosefot Yom Tov).287

    There is another reason why the traditional theory will not work. It is impossible to lower a vessel into a cistern as there are no cisterns or subterranean openings in that area. The nearest cistern to the Mizbeiach (Altar), the Kevesh (Ramp of the Mizbeiach) and the Ulam (Porch), is cistern #28 according to the map of Conrad Schick of the Palestine Exploration Fund. In addition, this present day cistern was not a cistern in the time of the Temple but rather a tunnel system thought to sit over the actual Bor Golah (Cistern of the Golah). For the Kior to have been located in the traditional spot (the 22 amot between the eastern edge of the Ulam and the western side of the Mizbeiach (Altar) would required a crane to lift the Kior (Laver) through the colonnaded Achsadrah (Portico) surrounding the Azarah and lower it to the tunnel beneath the Beit Avtinas (House of Avtinas) from which it would still have to have been lowered from the tunnel to the actual Bor Golah (Golah Cistern). This in turn was raised the next morning by a single kohen and returned to its place. Another matter would be that the weight of the Kior  filled with water and then shifted to its position in the Azarah  proper would have exceeded the technology of the time.

    The solution is that the Kior was not located within that 22 amot. The requirement was that the Kior sat between the Ulam and the Mizbeiach. By comparing a mishnah from Kelim which lists progressively the different levels of sanctification within the Temple, an enlarged measurement for the area between the Ulam and the Mizbeiach is revealed.

    Within the walls is more sanctified than these, for we may eat  there kodashim kalim  and ma’aser sheni (second tithe). Har Habayit is more sanctified than this, for zavim and zavot, niddot and yoldot may not enter there. The Heil is more sanctified than this, for Gentiles, and one rendered impure by a corpse, may not enter there. Ezrat Nashim (Court of the Women) is more sanctified than this, for a tevul yom may not enter there, but they are not liable to a sin-offering for it. Ezrat Yisrael (Court of Israel) is more sanctified than this for one lacking atonement may not enter there, and they are liable to a sin-offering for it. Ezrat Kohanim (Court of the Priests) is more sanctified than this, for Israelites may enter there only at a time when they are needed, for laying hands, for slaughtering, for heaving.
    Kelim 1.8

    Between the Ulam and the altar is more sanctified than this, for those with a blemish and those with wild hair may not enter there. The Hekhal is more sanctified than this, for one may mot enter there without washing hands and feet. The Holy of Holies is more sanctified than these, for only the kohen gadol may enter there, on Yom Kippur at the time of service. R. Yose said: In five ways, between the Ulam and the altar corresponds to the Hekhal: those with a blemish, and those with wild hair, and those who had drunk wine, and one who had not washed hands and feet, may not enter there; and they must withdraw from between the Ulam and the altar at the time of burning the incense.
    Kelim 1.9

    One may not Enter the Area Between the Ulam and the Mizbeiach until they had Washed their Hands and Feet from the Kior
    The last phrase of the above mishnah states that one who had not wash his hands and feet may not enter into the area between the Ulam and the Mizbeiach. This is further emphasized in a text from the Tosefta.

    “Those whose hands and feet are not washed enter [the area] between the porch (Ulam) and the altar (Mizbeiach),” the words of R. Meir. And sages say, “They do not enter.” Said R. Simeon the Modest before R. Eliezer, “I entered [the area] between the porch (Ulam) and the altar (Mizbeach) without having washed [my] hands and feet.” He said to him, “Who is more beloved, you or the high priest (Kohen Gadol)?” He was silent. He said to him, “You are ashamed to say that [even] the dog of the high priest (Kohen Gadol) is more beloved than you!” He said to him, “Rabbi, you have said it.” He said to him, “ By the [sacred] service! Even the high priest [who without washing hands and feet enters the area between the porch (Ulam) and the altar (Mizbeiach)] – they break his head with clubs. What will you do that the guardsman not find you!” . . . .
    Tosefta Kelim Baba Qamma 1.6

    In this tosefta several points must be emphasized. No one was allowed into the area, not even the kohen Gadol, until they had washed their hands and feet from the Kior. The penalty for this breach of halachah  was death by clubbing. The statement “And sages say” designates that this was a decision of the Sanhedrin and therefore binding. Therefore, the Kior had to be accessible before one reached this area. This creates a dilemma. According to Middot the Kior was between the Ulam and the Mizbeiach, but according to Kelim an individual could not go into this same area until they had washed from the Kior. Either there was a disagreement or a way to fulfill both commandments.

    Some commentators stated that they washed from another vessel before entering the area, but that would defeat the purpose of the Kior.292 In addition, the Torah commandment specfied that the Kohanim were to wash specifically from the Kior before their service.

    ‘Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and the base thereof of brass, whereat to wash; and thou shalt put it between the tent of meeting and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein.
    Exodus 30.18

    And thou shalt set the laver between the tent of meeting and the altar, and shalt put water therein.
    Exodus 40.7

    And he set the laver between the tent of meeting and the altar, and put water therein, wherewith to wash; that Moses and Aaron and his sons might wash their hands and their feet thereat;  when they went into the tent of meeting, and when they came near unto the altar, they should wash; as the L-rd commanded Moses.
    Exodus 40.30-32

    The key to how all of this worked is found in the phrase from the Mishnah concerning the placement of the Kior when compared to other texts from the Tanach  and the Temple Scroll and a review of the law concerning the kedushah or sanctification of the buildings opening onto the Azarah.

    The basin (Kior) was between the ulam and the altar, drawn towards the south.
    Middot 3.6

    The phrase ‘drawn towards the south’ in Hebrew is וּמָשׁוּךְ כְּלַפֵּי הַדָּרוֹם. Yigal Yadin expressed in his work on the Temple Scroll a similar expression in the placement of a building known as the Beit Kior (House of the Kior).

    And you shall make a house for the laver (Kior) in the southeast (נגב מזרח).
    The Temple Scroll XXXI.102

    Yigal Yadin’s commentary makes some interesting observations about the location of the Kior in comparing this phrase with those of the Mishnah and Tanach.

    There is no identical biblical or mishnaic usage. The purpose of the scroll is to determine the exact place of the house of the laver (Kior) as against its site in Ex. xxx:18 and in relation to the “sea”, the location of which is explicitly specified in I Kings: מכתף הבית הימנית קדמה ממול                                                נגב (vii:39). As emerges from this description, the house of the laver is located in the southeast corner of the Temple.295

    By so placing the house of the laver (Kior), the author attempted to bridge the gap between the words “you shall . . . make a laver (Kior) of bronze . . . and you shall put it between the tent of meeting (Ohel Moed) and the altar” (Ex. xxx:18; see also Ex. xl:7, 30) and the words “and he set the sea (Yam) on the southeast corner of the house.” (I Kings vii:39; for the term נגב מזרח (negev mizrach), cf. II Chron. iv:10). That is to say, it was an endeavor to relate the text on the placement of the laver (Kior) in the Tabernacle to that on the location of the sea (Yam) in Solomon’s Temple. On the strength of these references, the Mishnah says: “The laver (Kior) stood between the Porch (Ulam – Vestibule) and the Altar, towards the south” (Middoth iii:6); the accepted interpretation of these words is that the laver (Kior) stood opposite the eastern facade of the Temple, at its southern end.296

    A point of clarification needs to be made in reference to the various expressions used in designating the location of the Kior to the southeast of the Temple. It should be understood that there are two ways this could be understood. The first is how it has been perceived through the ages as to the southeast of the Temple building, between the Ulam (Porch) and the Altar. The second interpretation is that the Kior was located to the southeast of the Temple Courtyard (Azarah).

    Before examining the passages on the location of the Yam (Sea) as described in I Kings and II Chronicles, a review of the law concerning a building that opened to the Azarah  having the kedushah (sanctification) of the Azarah is helpful. According to the halachah the entire building had the sanctification of the Azarah. However, if the building also opened to the Cheil, then the building was divided into two sections with posts (Rashai Pispisin) marking when one passed from one section to the other. The section of the building that opened to the Cheil had the kedushah (sanctification) of the Cheil.

    Come and hear: [With regard to] the chambers built in the sacred area and opening into the non-sacred area, their inside is non-sacred, while their roofs are sacred? — R. Hisda explained this [as meaning] where their roofs were level with the ground of the Temple Court. If so, consider the second clause: [As to] those built in the non-sacred [area] and opening into the sacred [area], their inside is sacred, while their roofs are non-sacred. Now if you think that it means where their roofs are level with the ground of the Temple Court, then they are cellars, whereas R. Johanan said: The cellars were not sanctified? — R. Johanan said this only in respect of those opening into the Temple Mount; [whereas] that was taught in respect of those opening into the Temple Court. But it was taught, R. Judah said: The cellars under the Hekal were non-sacred? — That was taught where they opened into the non-sacred [area].
    Talmud Bavli Pesachim 86a

    It can be proved that the Beit Avtinas (the southeast corner building) opened both to the Azarah and the Cheil by a mishnah from Yoma that states that the building had a consecrated and a non-consecrated section of the building, In the non-consecrated section of the building on the roof the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) immersed in a mikveh as opposed to the 4 immersions he performs on the roof of the Beit haParvah (same as the Beit haNitzotz) on the north wall of the Azarah in the Sanctified section.

    They led the High Priest down to the place of immersion. This was the general rule in the Temple; Whoever covered his feet in the Temple required immersion, and whoever passed water had to sanctify his hands and feet. One may not enter the Azarah (Temple Inner Court) for Service, even if clean, until he has immersed himself. The High Priest immersed himself five times and sanctified himself ten times on that day, and each time in the Temple by the Bet Haparvah chamber, save only this one.
    Yoma 3.2-3

    The commentary on this mishnah locates this first immersion in the non-sacred area as above the Shaar haMayim (the Water Gate), which passed through the Beit Avtinas and was next to the Chamber of the High Priest, the Lishkat haEitz or Lishkat Palhedrin/Parhedrin.

    save only this one – the first immersion,which every person who entered the Temple Courtyard (Azarah) to perform a service was required to undergo, as taught in the first section of the mishnah, which was in a non-holy place, i.e., in the mikveh on the Water Gate which was next to his chamber ( a baraita quoted in Yoma 31b).

    Therefore, this building definitely opened onto the Cheil at its southern outlet and to the Azarah at its northern. This is also established by a text from the Talmud concerning the Lishkat haGazit.

    Abaye said: We can infer from this the Cell of Hewn Stone (Lishkat haGazit) was [situated] half on holy ground, half on non-holy ground; that the Cell had two doors, one opening on holy ground, the other opening on non — holy ground. For, if the thought should arise in you that the whole of it was on holy ground — how could the elder sit to the west; has not a Master said: Nobody could sit in the Temple Court (Azarah) except the kings of the House of David. Furthermore, if you could think that the whole cell was outside holy ground, how could the count take place on its eastern side, is it not required: ‘In the house of G-d we walked with the throng’ and this would not be [the house of G-d]! Hence [the inference is valid]: It is half on holy ground, half on non-holy ground. And if the thought should arise in you that the Cell has but one door opening on holy ground, how could the elder sit to the west, and we have learnt: If the cells are built on non-holy ground and open on holy ground the space within them is holy. And if the thought should arise in you that it opened into unholy ground how could the count take place in the eastern part [of the Cell]; have we not learnt: If they are built on holy ground and open out on non-holy ground, their space within is non-holy, hence you must needs say: the Cell had two doors, one opening on holy ground, the other on non-holy ground. . . .
    Talmud Bavli Yoma 25a

    Each of the four corner buildings were built in similar fashion. It is critical to understand that each of the entire buildings had the sanctification of the Azarah. Even though the side that opened to the Cheil followed the rules of the Cheil, it still had a sanctification higher than the Cheil proper. This can be proved by examining several texts from Ezekiel and the Mishnah.

    In the Ezekiel Temple there are four corner buildings (each of these are called Lishkah – Lishkot – pl) with the same dimensions as the four corner buildings of both the First and Second Temples,301 100 amot (cubits) by 50 amot (cubits). These four corner buildings will have the same sanctity as the Azarah of Ezekel’s Temple. In many ways the floorplan of the First and Second Temple differ from Ezekiel’s Temple, but in many other ways there are more similarities than previously thought.

    Then said he unto me: ‘The north chambers and the south chambers, which are before the separate place, they are the holy chambers, where the priests that are near unto the L-rd shall eat the most holy things; there shall they lay the most holy things, and the meal-offering, and the sin-offering, and the guilt-offering; for the place is holy. When the priests enter in, then shall they not go out of the holy place into the outer court, but there they shall lay their garments wherein they minister, for they are holy; and they shall put on other garments, and shall approach to that which pertaineth to the people.’
    Ezekiel 42.13-14

    From the Mishnah it is established that the Kohanim in the Beit haMokeid (House of the Hearth) were allowed to carry their sacred garments into the non-holy half of the building where they could sit, sleep, etc.

    There were four chambers in Bet Hamoked, like side rooms opening to a drawing room, two in the sanctified area and two in the unsanctified area, and the ends of beams separated the sanctified area from the unsanctified area. And what was their function? The south-western one was the Chamber of the Sacrificial Lambs; the south-eastern one was the Chamber of the Makers of Lehem Hapanim; the north-eastern one — in it the Hasmoneans stored the stones of the altar, which the kings of Greece had contaminated; the north-western one — through it they would descend to the place of immersion.
    Middot 1.6

    He said to them: Go out and bring a lamb from the chamber of lambs. And the chamber of lambs was in the north-western corner. And four chambers were there: One was the chamber of lambs, and one was the chamber of tokens, and one was the chamber of Bet Hamoked, and one was the chamber where they would make the lechem hapanim.
    Tamid 3.3

    . . . Bet Hamoked was a dome, and it was a large building, surrounded by stone slabs, and the elders of the bet av would sleep there, and the keys of the azarah were in their hands. And the young kohanim, each one with his cushion on the ground — they would not sleep in the holy garments, but rather would take off, fold up, and place them under their heads, and cover themselves with their own covering. .  .
    Tamid 1.1

    Several points must be understood before proceeding. These points would apply to all four of the corner buildings.

    The total building had the sanctity of the Azarah as they each had an opening onto the Azarah.
    As the buildings also had an opening to the Cheil, Rashi Pispisin (markers in the walls) were employed halfway through the building.
    The side that opened to the Cheil (known as the non-sacred area) allowed activities such as sitting, sleeping, etc.
    Items such as Kodshai Kodashim (Most Holy Offerings), Holy Garments, and sanctified vessels could be taken into this area. These same items could not be carried to the Cheil.
    The side that opened to the Azarah had the kedushah (sanctity) of the Azarah. The rules that applied within the Azarah applied in this section of the building, i.e., such as sitting and sleeping. This area might be seen as the Azarah peripheral or extension.
    Such items as the Kior could be placed in this section of the building, which had the sanctity of the Azarah. With the Kior placed at this location all halachot were fullfilled. It was between the Ulam and the Altar according to the definition supplied in Kelim. Therefore, the kohanim (priests) were able to wash their hands and feet before entering the Azarah proper.

    II Chronicles 4.9-10 confirms that the Kior was placed within the northern end of the Beit Avtinas.

    Furthermore he made the court of the priests (Chatzar  haKohanim), and the great court (haGedolah laAzarah), and doors for the court (laAzarah), and overlaid the doors of them with brass. And he set the sea (Yam) on the right side (miKetef)[of the house] eastward   (Kaidmel), toward (mimul) the south.
    II Chronicles 4.9-10

    The 9th verse records the building of the Azarah and the doors for that courtyard. In the 10th verse the ‘right side” is understood to have been the southern wall of the Azarah. The word ketef is usually translated as ‘shoulder’ or ‘side’. The precise location that is given is the southern wall to the east. This was the exact location of the Beit Avtinas. The northeastern corner of this building was within the sanctity of the Azarah but not in the Azarah proper. This corner of the building had the sanctity of the Azarah and was ‘between the Ulam and the Altar’ according to the definition given in Kelim .

    There is one more word in the verse that is important for locating the Kior/Yam. The last phrase of II Chronicles 4.10 states ‘toward (mimul) the south.’ This same phrase is used in I Kings 7.39 in discussing the location of the Yam (Sea). This verse is almost identical to the one in II Chronicles. In Rashi’s commentary on the Tanach, he discussed this passage and how it should be understood.

    39 On the side of the house Against the right side of the house. On the right side of the house It [was in the southeast corner’] extended [along the eastern wall’] from the south side toward the north side. And the following is:  קֵדְמָה מוּל נֶגֶבthe northeast corner against the space which is between the northern wall of the house and the wall of the court. And the northern wall [alone’] is called מוּל נֶגֶב extended and removed far away from the south’ and מוּל and מִמוּל are not translated the same.
    Rashi Kings 1 Chapter 7

    Rashi, saw the Yam (Sea) as well as the Kior within the Azarah proper and therefore understood this phrase in relationship to the southeast corner of the Temple building rather than the southheast corner of the Azarah. Based upon the commentary by Rashi, many translations render this phrase “opposite the south’306 and place the Yam (Sea) in the north of the Azarah. Rashi’s translation shows that the passage pinpoints the northeastern corner. However, rather than referring to the northereastern sector of the Azarah, the Yam was opposite the southern wall of the Azarah in the northeastern corner of the Beit Avtinas.

    Placing the Kior/Yam outside the Azarah proper in the Azarah extension of the Gates and buildings may seem odd at first, but in light of examples in the Ezekiel Temple, it matches a similar example found in the Tanach.

    The tables for the slaughtering of the kodshai Kodashim (Most Holy Offerings) are within the northern gate to the Azarah  in the Ezekiel Temple. These slaughtering tables in both the First and Second Temples were located in the Beit haMitbeychayim (the Slaughter House) in the Azarah proper.

    And in the porch of the gate were two tables on this side, and two tables on that side, to slay thereon the burnt-offering and the sin-offering and the guilt-offering.  And on the one side without, as one goeth up to the entry of the gate toward the north, were two tables; and on the other side of the porch of the gate were two tables. Four tables were on this side, and four tables on that side, by the side of the gate; eight tables, whereupon to slay the sacrifices. Moreover there were four tables for the burnt-offering, of hewn stone, a cubit and a half long, and a cubit and a half broad, and one cubit high, whereupon to lay the instruments wherewith the burnt-offering and the sacrifice are slain. And the slabs, a handbreadth long, were fastened within round about; and upon the tables was to be the flesh of the offering.
    Ezekiel 40.39-43

    Merging the information found in the Mishnah and Tosefta with that of the Temple Scroll reveals how functional the Temple was. It also shows that the buildings and chambers were arranged in a fashion so that each activity flowed into the next, the chambers laid out with each successive task in mind.

    How the Water was Delivered to the Kior
    Earlier it was stated that it was impossible to pick up the Kior and move it to a location where it could be submerged into a cistern. With the Kior located in the northwestern corner of the Beit Avtinas, the need to move the Kior is eliminated. However, the problem remains of lowering  the Kior into a cistern and hoisting it back up again. Immediately below the Beit Avtinas was the tunnel labelled as cistern #28 Even though this underground structure is a cistern today, during the time of the Temple it was a tunnel. It is believed that this tunnel was an integral part of a water conveyance system. The actual cistern (known as the Golah/Gulah Cistern must be below this tunnel. This in itself makes it impossible to lower or raise the Kior into the Golah/Gulah cistern. The solution is found in commentary concerning the Yam of the First Temple.

    Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, it was round, and five cubits its height; and a line of thirty cubits encircled it: And under it were figures of an oxen, which surrounded it; ten in a cubit, encircling the sea; Two rows of oxen were cast with it, when it was cast: It stood upon twelve oxen, three facing north, and three facing west, and three facing south, and three facing east; and the sea was set upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward: And the thickness of it was a handbreadth, and the brim of it like the work of the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies; and it received and held three thousand bats: He made also ten basins, and put five on the right hand, and five on the left, to wash in them; such things as they offered for the burnt offering they washed in them; but the sea was for the priests to wash in:
    II Chronicles 4.2-6

    The Artscroll commentary on this passage gives insight as to how the Yam (Sea) was filled with water and operated. The third passuk (verse) above includes the phrase ‘figures of an oxen’ which Artscroll translated accurately as ‘the likeness of cattle.’ Below are their comments on this phrase.

    1 Kings 7:24 has פְּקָעִים (p’kaim) instead of  בְּקָרִים (b’karim). Rashi, based on Targum, thinks that פְּקָאִים (p’kaim) are egg-shaped protrusions. We might render the word knobs. We assume that these knobs had faces of cattle etched upon them (Metzudos).

    The above quotation refers to the row of protrusions (or knobs) around the Yam (Basin) where the round part is connected to the square base. Perhaps this is a case of using an animal name to refer to a similarity in looks or function, like ‘sawhorse’, etc., might be used as a figure of speech.
    The translation above renders the last phrase of verse 6 ‘but the sea (Yam) was for the priests to wash in. The Artscroll commentary on this phrase states:
    וְהַיָּם לְרָחְצָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בּוֹ – the basin served the Kohanim for immersion….. The basin would surely not have been used under circumstances in which the Kohanim had to immerse their whole body; for this there were other mikvaos within the Temple complex. However, there are situations in which only the hands require immersion [see Zevachim 20b], and it was for that purpose that the basin was used (Mikra UMassores).
    Normally, a vessel cannot be used as a mikveh. Two conditions were made in order that the basin should not be disqualified. Holes were punched into the feet of the supporting oxen, and the water in the basin was connected to the free-flowing waters of the Stream of Eitham (Yerushalmi Yoma 3:8).
    Apparently the protrusions or knobs mentioned earlier were spigots used to wash the hands and the feet just as those described in the Mishnah and Talmud for the Kior.
    The Eitam Spring
    Yerushalmi Yoma 3.8 addresses both the Yam (Sea) of the First Temple and the Kior (Laver) of the Second Temple. In each of these two periods the Eitam Spring fed water into the vessel from beneath. This dictates that the Yam or Kior remained stationary and was not lowered into a cistern overnight.

    [As to Ben Qatin’s twelve stopcocks,] why not arrange spigots one on top of the other [rather than arranging them around the laver]?  [And why were twelve needed?] [“The number,”] said R. Jonah, “accords with the day on which the most priests have to work with the daily whole-offering [that is, twelve for the ram].” The spigot on top was set there on the count of a utensil damaged in its greater part [is not regarded as a utensil].  Hence the water in the laver will not be regarded as drawn by a utensil and so unfit. But [what difference does this make]?  For is not the one on the bottom also going to produce drawn water, on the count of the water’s coming within the contained space of the utensil?  [So what good does this do?] Said R. Joshua b. Levi, “There was a water channel, which brought water to the laver (Kior) from the depths.  [So it was not drawn water anyhow.]” And the feet of the laver (Kior) on the south side were broken down to the size of pomegranates.

    R. Simeon bar Karesna in the name of R. Aha: “The sea (Yam) was a place of immersion for priests.  ” ‘[He also made ten lavers in which to wash, and set five on the south side, and five on the north side.  In these they were to rinse off what was used for the burnt-offering,] and the sea (Yam)  was’ for the priests to wash in’” (2 Chron. 4:6).  And was it not a utensil?   A water channel brought water to it from the depths. And its feet were broken down on the south side like pomegranates.
    Talmud Yerushalmi Yoma 3.8

    Returning to the Temple Scroll and its treatment of the Beit Kior (House of the Laver) supplies the key to unlocking the mysteries of Beit Avtinas (House of Avtinas) and how it operated. The scroll describes the Kior in two parts. The first part was the square base, which was three amot (cubits) high, and the second the round basin, which was two amot high. In this, the kior of the Temple Scroll matches the dimensions of the Yam (Sea) of the Tanach.

    Following the description of the Kior, the Temple Scroll speaks of the niches in the wall for storing the Priestly Garments. According to the Mishnah theses niches were in a chamber adjoining the Lishkat haGazit. However, in the Temple Scroll these niches were described as a part of the Beit Kior (House of the Kior).

    Earlier it was discussed that kohanim (priests) coming on duty had to appear before the Sanhedrin Gadolah in the Lishkat haGazit (Chamber of Hewn Stone). Following their inspection they donned either white or black garments according to their status. This indicated that garments were kept within the Lishkat haGazit or an adjoining chamber.312 This is further developed in another mishnah from Tamid. In Tamid 5.1 the kohanim had assembled within the Lishkat haGazit to select from the group who would do the various task of the avodah (service) and to pray prescribed prayers. Then the kohanim that had been chosen by lots went through the following procedure. This all occured before the kohanim left the building and entered the Azarah.

    They handed them over to the sextons. They would strip them of their clothes, and not leave on them anything but their breeches. And there were windows there on which were written the function of the clothes.
    Tamid 5.3

    More information on these niches is found in the Tosefta.

    There were twenty-four rings, one each for the twenty-four priestly watches.
    Tosefta Sukkah 4.2

    According to the Rambam there were 96 niches or windows, four for each course so that the different types of clothing were not mixed. He described these as one large window with three smaller windows in each one. This corresponds to the information in the Temple Scroll.

    Yigael Yadin further comments on the windows recorded in the Beit Kior.

    The niches in the House of the Laver were plaited with gold because they held holy garments. The author attaches great importance to the whole subject of purity and impurity – a later section of the scroll goes into great detail – and he therefore gives careful prescriptions to ensure the purity of the priestly garments. His prime concern is with the clothes to be donned by the priests before they come ‘to minister in the holy place’; they were not to approach the altar unless ‘clothed with the holy garments’. But he also issues careful orders about the reverse procedure of clothes-changing, when the priests, after officiating and sacrificing at the altar, change from sacred to ordinary garments. These orders end with the ban on priests when leaving the inner court and going out to the people to do so while still dressed in their holy robes: ‘and they shall not communicate holiness to my people with their holy garments in which they minister’.

    This agrees with the command stated by the prophet Ezekiel.

    And he said to me, The north chambers and the south chambers, which are before the main wing, they are holy chambers, where the priests who approach to the Lord shall eat the most holy things; there shall they lay the most holy things, and the meal offering, and the sin offering, and the guilt offering; for the place is holy: When the priests enter in it, then shall they not go from the holy place into the outer court, but there they shall lay their garments in which they minister; for they are holy; and shall put on other garments, and shall approach to those things which belong to the people:
    Ezekiel 42.13-14

    And it shall come to pass, that when they enter in at the gates of the inner court, they shall be clothed with linen garments; and no wool shall come upon them, while they minister in the gates of the inner court, and inside: They shall have linen turbans upon their heads, and shall have linen breeches upon their loins; they shall not gird themselves with any thing that causes sweat: And when they go out into the outer court, into the outer court to the people, they shall take off their garments with which they ministered, and lay them in the holy chambers, and they shall put on other garments; and they shall not sanctify the people with their garments:
    Ezekiel 44.17-19

     

     

  • The Yehoash Stone

    The Yehoash Stone

    A few years ago an inscribed plaque appeared on the Antiquities market. The stone known as the Yehoash (Jehoash, Joash) Stone is one of the most significant finds in the Archaeological World. It is the only plaque from any of the Judean Kings. The Plaque was discovered while digging a grave for a Moslem terrorist in the Moslem cemetery on the western slope of the Kidron Valley just below the Temple Mount Walls. The plaque commemorates the repairs done by Yehoash to the Temple and compliments the information we have in II Kings 12 and II Chronicles 24. The story of Yehoash is one of the most amazing reports of the First Temple Period.

  • A Day in the Temple

    A Day in the Temple

    The daily service of the Temple was described in the Tractate Tamid of the Mishnah. Complimenting this account is the Tractate Yoma. These pictures joined with the Gallery from a tour of the Temple will aid the student in understanding how the ceremony progressed.

  • Locating the Ark of the Covenant

    Locating the Ark of the Covenant

    The quest for the Ark of the Covenant has been a hot topic for centuries. Popularized by the Indiana Jones movies, and the subject of Internet speculation, this study will look at the evidence and allow us to be fairly certain where the Ark of the Covenant was located. Theories that are commonly found are that Jeremiah hid it in a cave on Mount Nebo in Jordan, or that Solomon gave it to the Queen of Sheba and it is now located in Ethiopia. One documentary on television gave its location in South Africa and presented it as a drum. The Rabbinical texts place the Ark beneath the Temple Mount. What is the evidence and what conclusions can we draw.

  • Women in the Temple

    Women in the Temple

    While there are many aspects to women and their worship in the Temple that can be documented and help us to understand the major aspect of Jewish Temple service, it is today that so much is coming forth to enhance that knowledge. Specific sites that related to women where the Ezrat Nashim (Court of the Women), Shaar Nashim (Women’s Gate), a Mikveh and Toilet for Women. Of particular interest is the return of the Aperion (Wedding Litter) and Jerusalem of Gold crown that came back for the first time in 1992.

  • The Red Heifer

    The Red Heifer

    Before you can build a Temple or conduct Temple Services, you have to cleanse the area of the Temple from corpse impurity as described in Bamidbar (Numbers) 19. Not only will the Temple Mount have to be cleansed but also all who would participate in the services, including the kohanim (priests) Levites, and Jews entering within the Inner courtyards. The Ceremony takes seven days. The process of how this was and will be accomplished is described for us in Tractate Parah from the Mishnah as well as a corresponding Tractate Parah in the Tosefta, There are many difficulties in securing a Red Heifer, in Hebrew known as the Parah Adumah. First the heifer must be completely red, with careful inspection of even the roots of the hair inspected. In addition the cow must be free of blemishes or scars of any type. The handling of the cow must also be done with extreme care as it is very easy to disqualify the cow.

    In the past ashes from previous red heifers were mixed together with a newly slain cow giving a ready supply of ashes to cleanse those requiring it. The kohanim participating in the ceremony must be free from corpse impurity. In order to accomplish this the participating kohanim were sprinkled with the available ashes. Following their sprinkling through the seven days, then they were sequestered within the Azarah in a chamber within the Beit haNtzotz (House of the Spark or Flame) known as the Beit Even (House of Stone) for an additional seven days. However, if a time arose, such as today, where the ashes of the previous heifers was not available, provision was made where women who were kohanim and pregnant would go to a house within Jerusalem, built over bedrock and arches, give birth and remain in this house until the children were ole enough to conduct the ceremony and a qualified red heifer was available.

    The ceremony of the slaughtering and burning of the cow was conducted on Har haMishchah (Mount of Anointing) with a ramp (kevesh) leading from the main eastern gate (Shaar Mizrachi alav Shushan haBirah – The Eastern gate on which was depicted the Palace of Susa) to ehe location where the Heifer was to be slain. Their was a mikvah at the location as well as a room where one third of the ashes were stored. The cow crossed the ramp in front of the participating kohanim and elders of Jerusalem (Sanhedrin Members) to the location. A special pyre of wood, built like a tower (migdal) was constructed. The cow was slain, laid on the pyre with its body south to north, the head to the south and the face to the west (in the direction of the Holy of Holies). The kohen who slaughtered her stood to the east facing the west. Not only did he slaughter the heifer but was required to catch her blood. He takes the blood and faces the Temple. He is required to see the Great Gate (within the Ulam – Porch) as this is the entrance to the Heical/haKodesh (the middle room of the Temple) which was also the ohel Moed (Tent of Meeting). Using his right index finger he must dip, pop his blood soaked finger like a whip seven times towards the Ohel Moed. He must out loud count each time he whips his finger. The cow is then burnt. When the cow burst open from the fire, the kohen will toss a cedar stick wrapped with shani tolat (crimson) cloth and hyssop into the carcass of the cow, When all is burnt, other kohanim will gather the ashes, pounding the bones into dust, and collect them into a vessel made from the dung of the cow. The kohen who slaughtered and burned the heifer, was initially clean from the ceremony has now become unclean and must go to the mikvah, immerse and wait until the sun sets before he is clean again.

    Several young kohanim free from corpse impurity were required to draw water for the ceremony from the Shiloach Pool at the bottom of the City of David. These young priests (at least eight years old) rode upon large doors on the backs of oxen to the pool. There they gathered the water and made the climb on the backs of the oxen to the Temple Mount. A stone pot was filled with this water, a handful of ashes were dropped on top of the water and a pine cone was lowered into the bottom of the pot. A rope was tied to the pine cone on one end while the other end was tied to a stick. The stick was placed between the horns of a ram. The ram was swatted causing him to jump, jerking his head and pulling the pine cone out of the pot, spilling water with ashes on the floor of the Temple. This ceremony required seven days. The first day a declaration was made with water spilt on the third and seventh days.

    An individual who needed to be cleansed repeated the seven day process of the sprinkling described above. This is only a brief summary of the ceremony of the Red Heifer.

  • Proofs of the Location of the Temple Mount

    Proofs of the Location of the Temple Mount

    Here are some of the additional Proofs.

  • The Location of the Temple Expanded

    The Location of the Temple Expanded

    One of the most controversial topics today is Where was the Temple actually located? We did a program on this several months ago before we started “Measure the Pattern” on Hebrew Nation Radio. Since then, I have seen so much on the Internet and Facebook that I felt it warranted a more detailed explanation.

  • A Brief Synopsis about the different theories for the location of the Temple.

    A Brief Synopsis about the different theories for the location of the Temple.

    There are four current theories. What are they?

    The four theories are: The northern theory. That the Temple building, (specifically that the Kodesh haKodashim – Holy of Holies) was located on the Moslem Platform north of the Dome of the Rock where the Dome of the Spirits is located. This theory is put forth by Asher Kaufman. This theory will not work as the northern wall of the Azarah (Inner Courtyard) had two buildings that went further to the north 100 cubits. The size of the cubit that was used within the Azarah was the six tefachim (handbreadths) cubit. During the entire First Temple period and up until shortly before Herod expands the Temple in the late Second Temple period there was a dry moat (fosse) located on the northwestern corner. This moat was located only 52 feet from the northwestern corner of the Moslem Platform. This would place the northern wall of this Temple in the moat. Therefore, the Temple was not located where the Dome of the Spirits is located. The Northern Theory does not work. I will post the Southern Theory in a little while. This theory is put forth by Asher Kaufman. This theory will not work as the northern wall of the Azarah (Inner Courtyard) had two buildings that went further to the north 100 cubits. The size of the cubit that was used within the Azarah was the six tefachim (handbreadths) cubit. During the entire First Temple period and up until shortly before Herod expands the Temple in the late Second Temple period there was a dry moat (fosse) located on the northwestern corner. This moat was located only 52 feet from the northwestern corner of the Moslem Platform. This would place the northern wall of this Temple in the moat. Therefore, the Temple was not located where the Dome of the Spirits is located. The Northern Theory does not work. Note: You will need to Zoom these pictures in order to read the references and notes within the drawings.

    Asher Kaufman TheoryThis is Asher Kaufman’s layout of the Temple. To understand why this will not work you need to first locate the trapezoid shaped Moslem Platform. Look to the northwest corner of the Moslem Platform (the picture is with the north at the top, west to the left, south, at the bottom and east to the right. Now look at the location of the map showing the Fosse. Kaufman’s northwestern wall is in the Moat.

    Location of the FosseThe Second Theory on where the Temple was located is known as the Southern Theory. This is in reference to the Dome of the Rock and on what we call the Temple Mount. The Southern Theory is promoted by Tuvia Sagiv. This places the location of the Temple south of the Dome of the Rock and north of the Al Aksa Mosque. There is a Moslem fountain known as the Al Kos fountain and where Sagiv places either the Temple Building or the Altar. The problem with this theory is that the southern extension of this area, where the southern wall of the Azarah was located with its two 100 cubit buildings extending further to the south would have been in an area that was not part of the Temple Mount until the time of Herod. This theory will not work.

     Tuvia Sagiv's LayoutIn the drawing to the left you can see the red box surrounding the Inner Courtyards and the Mikvaot with toilets to the south of those courtyards. This red box indicates the original Temple Mount which was the entire Temple Mount until the Hasmonean era. Notice the two T shaped Mikvaot. These were identified by Professor Ronnie Reich of Haifa University. To the east of the Mikvaot is the grid of conduits below the ancient toilets. The Al Kos Fountain is centered between the two Mikvaot to the south. It would be approximately on the red line indicating the southern wall of the 500 Cubits by 500 cubits of the original Temple Mount. Sagiv’s Temple building is in the same location as this fountain. Therefore half of the Temple building as well as the entire southern complex of the Azarah would not have been there until at the earliest the Hasmonean period. This theory does not work at all.Toilets in LayoutThe third theory of where the Temple is located is actually off the Temple Mount at Ir David (the City of David) next to the Gihon Springs. The theory also states that what we call the Temple Mount was really the Antonia Fortress. This theory is based on the sound of water heard from the Temple Mount, the Gihon Spring being the source for water of ancient Jerusalem and various quotes from Josephus as well as the northern wall of the so called Temple Mount is not the actual wall. The location is a little over a third of a mile from the Southern Steps of the Temple Mount. The Fortress Antonia is described by Josephus a s having been large with all types of facilities within. Josephus stated that it was like a city within. I agree that the small representation of the Antonia Fortress on the extreme northwestern exterior corner does not meet this criteria. However, we are also told by Josephus that the Antonia was built over the Fortress Baris, probably present since the First Temple period (called at that time Birah). In the excavations of the Western Wall Tunnel, Dan Bahat (one of Israel’s best archaeologist) discovered the foundation trenches of the Baris at the northwestern corner of the Temple Mount. Ehud Netzer, the leading authority on structures of King Herod, disagreed with other scholars, in stating that the Antonia was not only on the exterior northwestern corner but that it actually penetrated into the Temple Mount all the way to the dry moat (fosse) located just north of the Moslem Platform. The northeastern area would have served as the parade ground were the Roman troops drilled up till the time of the revolt. Josephus makes note that Titus paid his troops on this parade ground with his legions and auxiliaries in full battle dress as they marched in parade fashion in plain site of the Jewish defenders on the northern wall of the Temple. This is impossible if the Temple is at the Gihon Springs. In addition, there are 3 cisterns that indicate that the Antonia penetrated into the Temple Mount. With the Antonia penetrating into the Temple Mount the descriptions of Josephus can easily be realized.

    Secondly is the actual location situation of the Gihon Springs. There simply is not enough room. The Biblical descriptions as well as those provided in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Josephus could never be fulfilled in this location. Ir David, The City of David is only 13 acres. Our cubit would end up as less than a 10 inches apiece, at the largest. In addition, Professor Ronnie Reich and Baruch Yuval, have excavation the Gihon Springs area to the bedrock and have not found in evidences of the Temple’s presence. None. Thirdly, the water supply. According to the Talmud Yerushalmi and other sources, the water for the Temple did not come from the Gihon Spring but rather from the Eitham Spring. Ronit Amiel, a leading authority in Jerusalem on the Gihon Spring and in charge of the project several years ago as the Gihon Spring was cleared has worked with me on the research of the temple Water System and at no point believed that this was the source for the water of the Temple. Fourth, the Northern Wall of the Temple Mount is reported not to be the wall that was present in the late Second Temple Era. This is not true, both Leen Ritmeyer and Eilat Mazar have established that this was the original wall from the time of King Herod. Eilat Mazar has chronicled all the stones in the exterior Temple Mount that relate to Temple periods. Her work has been published by the Israel Exploration Society. In effect, the theory that the Temple was at the Gihon Spring has no  actual basis nor was the Temple Mount in its entirety the Antonia Fortress.

    Martin Theory at Gihon SpringThese three theories are each a result of taking a portion of information without examining the entire body of information. First we have to see the information that the Tanach supplies us. Next we have to look at the Rabbinical texts which are quite accurate but take some skill in using, Next we look at the accounts by Josephus. Another important text to work with is the Temple Scroll translated by Yigal Yadin. Equally important is the archaeological reports as well as the tremendous work done by the Palestine Exploration Fund explorers.

    The fourth theory about the location of the Temple is that the Temple stood where the Dome of the Rock is located. At this point we can now confirm that this is the correct location. First, based on a photograph from 1870 taken by a Palestine Exploration Fund photographer, C.F. Tyrwhitt-Drake, who passed away shortly after taking the photo. His latest pictures were returned to his family rather than to the fund. This picture was donated by the family to the PEF only twenty years ago and finally published. Shimon Gibson and David Jacobson published an article on this stairway suggesting that the stairway was referenced by Josephus as the stairway leading up to the Cheil on the south. The Cheil is a ten cubit wide pavement that encircled the Inner Courtyards and is described as a leveling platform. From the Cheil one would enter immediately into the buildings and gates adjoining the Azarah (the Inner Courtyard). Above the stairs Charles Wilson had discovered an ancient pavement.

    Monumental StairwayThere was a problem with this theory, as it would triple the size of the inner courtyard. If this was indeed the Cheil then this would mean one of two solutions. Either the size of the cubit used in the Temple was much larger than previously thought or the buildings adjoining the Azarah were up to 100 cubits in length (south to north). Previously it had been discovered from the Tanach that the Beit Yair haLevanon (House of the Forest of Lebanon) was also known as the Shaar haElyon (the Upper Gate) which was the gate on the southwest corner of the Azarah. This building had the dimensions of 100 cubits by 50 cubits. This is the same size as the buildings in the Ezekiel Temple were there are four buildings, connecting to the Azarah, one on each corner. We had been able to determine from texts found in the Tanach, Mishnah, and Talmud that the four buildings that were on the corners of the Azarah opened both onto the Cheil and the Azarah.

    Monumental Stairway showing plazas for middle gatesThis indicated that while these buildings which were also gates opened to the Cheil, the other gates (two on the south and two on the north sandwiched between the corner buildings/gates did not but rather had a plaza between them with and the Cheil (See illustration above where the plaza –rehov between the corner buildings is shown). These plazas are described by Josephus with stairs ascending to the gates. At this point in the research we only had a theory that this stairway was the stairway leading to the Cheil described by Josephus. In both Middot and Tamid from the Mishnah there is a description of how a disqualified priest (due to a nocturnal seminal emission) exited the Azarah. We are told that in the Beit haMokeid (House of the Hearth on the northwestern corner of the Azarah) the dormitory of the Priest on duty for a week, there was a messibah (winding stairway) in the northwest corner that went to a tunnel which led to a mikveh and toilet below ground for the priest.

    Location of Beit haTevilah on north

    The text just above the edge of the Moslem platform almost due north of the Dome of the Rock indicates the location of the underground mikvah and toilet.

    The location of this structure has been located just to the north of the Moslem Platform. The priest went to the Mikvah and then through an underground tunnel that went to another tunnel with benches where they remained until the gates of the Temple were opened. Charles Wilson (PEF Explorer) discovered a tunnel fitting this description in 1865. It is just north of the Dome of the Rock. The tunnel is now blocked up and has been converted (probably by the Moslems) into a cistern. If the blocking wall of the cistern was removed it would travel north (about 20 yards) to the northern edge of the Moslem Platform. Here it would intersect with another tunnel discovered by Charles Warren (PEF Explorer) in December, 1868. These tunnel systems perfectly agree with the Mishnah text and provide us with a critical piece of information as they state that the last tunnel is directly below the Cheil on the north.

    Northern tunnel System

     #31 in the above drawing shows the tunnel found by Charles Wilson in 1865. This tunnel had benches for the priest to sit on as they waited for the Gates of the Temple to be unlocked. #37 is the tunnel discovered by Charles Warren in 1868. Just to the east of this tunnel is the suspected location of the Tadi Gate. #37 went directly below the northern Cheil.Tunnel beneath Cheil  A drawing by Charles Warren of the tunnel that went beneath the Cheil.

    Tunnel under Cheil, with building inserted

    This drawing shows the Cheil above the tunnel and one of the corner buildings coming right to its edge.

    Dome of the Rock in the Center

    When we measured the distance between the Cheil on the north (above the tunnel) and the Cheil on the south (the pavement above the stairs) we found that the Dome of the Rock was dead center.

    Further evidence was gained from following the path of one entering the Temple. The worshipper entered from the south through the Sharrai Chuldah, (Chuldah Gates thought to be the Beautiful Gate). This gate system of two gates enters into the Chuldah Gate tunnels taking you north. I have been into the tunnels and you understand why they were known as the Beautiful Gates with artistically designed domes and beautiful monolith columns that take your breath away. on exiting the tunnel there are two mikvaot (innersion chambers) one for the men and another for the women. Just to the east of these Mikvaot which are all aligned perfectly in a straight line from east to west is a grid of conduits to take water into and out of this very large building that is no longer present. This was obviously the toilets referenced in the Mishnah in the outer courtyards just outside of the Azarah. Between this complex of buildings and the stairs was the Soreg (a wall tow cubits high with signs one cubit high) forbidding anyone who was not Jewish to enter the Inner Courtyards. Ten cubits further the stairs begin, then the Cheil and so on. All of this fits exactly as it is described. There of course is further evidence that proves this is the location of the Temple.

    Drawing of features of the Temple MountIn the illustration below you can see all the various features with the southern entrance, the Mikvaot and toilets, the Soreg, the stairs, the Cheil, the Corner Buildings and the Plaza between them. Then the Azarah with the Temple and the Altar. In this drawing the tunnel system is completed on the north.

    The Glory of the Temple, May it come soon.