The Ark, Kaporet and Keruvim's Structure

 

 

Introduction

 

            Now that we have completed our analysis of the essence of the keruvim, I wish in the coming shiurim to examine the various components of the ark.

 

            This shiur will begin with a discussion regarding the overall structure of the ark, the kaporet, and the keruvim. We will first examine the plain meaning of the relevant verses (Shemot 25:10-22) and see what can be learned from them. We will then consider how these verses were understood by Chazal.

 

The Plain Meaning of the verses

 

The ark:

 

            The materials: The ark must be made of shittim wood and overlaid with pure gold inside and outside. The Scriptural verses relate neither to the form or thickness of the overlay, nor to the significance of the requirement that the ark be made of shittim wood and overlaid with gold inside and outside.

 

            The dimensions: The ark is two and a half cubits long, a cubit and a half wide, and a cubit and a half high. The verses relate neither to the thickness of the walls, nor to the question of whether these are the inner or the outer dimensions of the ark.[1]

 

            A rim of gold: There is a rim around the top of the ark. The verses relate neither to the shape nor to the size of this rim.

 

            Rings: Four rings of gold must be cast and put on the four corners, two rings on one side and two rings on the other.[2]

 

            Poles: Poles of shittim wood must be made and overlaid with gold and then placed in the rings on the sides of the ark, so that the ark may be carried with them. Are the sides of the ark both the length and the width, or only one of them? The poles must remain permanently in the rings of ark and never be removed from them. What is the spiritual significance of this command?

 

            Contents: The testimony that God will give to Moshe must be placed in the ark.

 

The kaporet and the keruvim:

 

            Materials: The kaporet is made of pure gold and the two keruvim are made of beaten gold at the two ends of the kaporet.

 

            Dimensions: The kaporet is placed on top of the ark, and its dimensions therefore match those of the ark – two and a half cubits long by a cubit and a half wide. The verses do not relate to the thickness of the kaporet.

 

            The Torah emphasizes and repeats that the keruvim are at the two ends of the kaporet; the keruvim stretch out their wings on high and overspread the kaporet with their wings. On the one hand, the faces of the keruvim are directed one to the other, while on the other hand, they are directed toward the kaporet.

 

            The Torah repeats its command that the testimony must be placed in the ark.

 

            The Torah tells us that the function of the ark, the kaporet, and the keruvim is to serve as a place of meeting with God (apparently on the kaporet that is placed above the ark). God will speak to Moshe from above the kaporet, from between the two keruvim that are on the ark of the testimony, of all the things that God will command him to tell the children of Israel.

 

The Dimensions of the ark, the Kaporet and the keruvim according to Chazal

 

            The mishna in tractate Keilim records a Tannaitic dispute about this issue:

 

R. Meir said: All cubits were of the moderate length, except that for the golden altar, the horns, the circuit, and the base. R. Yehuda said: The cubit used for the building was one of six handbreadths and that for the vessels one of five handbreadths. (Keilim 17:10)

 

            According to R. Meir, all the cubits were of the moderate length – that is to say, of six handbreadths, except for those of the golden altar, the horns, the circuit, and the base. (The gemara in Eiruvin 4a and in Menachot 97a derives this from the description of the altar in Yechezkel's vision.) R. Yehuda disagrees with R. Meir and says that the cubit used in the building of the Mikdash was of six handbreadths, but the cubit used for the vessels of the Mikdash – e.g., for the ark, the table, and the golden altar - was of five handbreadths.

 

The Rambam rules in Hilkhot Beit Ha-Bechira (3:12) in accordance with the view of R. Meir, that the cubit used both in the building and for the vessels (excluding the exceptions) is that of six handbreadths.

 

The ark:

 

            Since according to the Torah the dimensions of the ark are 2.5 by 1.5 by 1.5 cubits, if we measure with a cubit of 6 handbreadths following the viewpoint of R. Meir, we arrive at an ark that is 15 by 9 by 9 handbreadths. This, indeed, is what the gemara says in Bava Batra (14a).

 

            As stated above, the Torah does not spell out the width of the walls of the ark. Chazal disagree on this matter (Bava Batra 14a). In a passage dealing with the relationship between the ark and the tablets and the book of the Torah resting in it, the gemara tries to infer the thickness of the walls of the ark according to R. Meir and R. Yehuda. From here we see that there is a connection between the size of the ark and the length and width of the tablets and the book of the Torah resting in it, each Tanna in accordance with his respective opinion and measurements.

 

            We will not cite here all the details of the gemara's discussion according to each of the opinions, but we will present the disagreement following the formulation of Baraita de-Melekhet ha-Mishkan:

 

The ark that Moshe made in the wilderness was two and a half cubits in length, a cubit and a half in width, and a cubit and a half in height. As it is stated: "And they shall make an ark of shittim wood: two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its breadth, and a cubit and a half its height."

R. Meir says: With a cubit of six handbreadths. We have here fifteen handbreadths. Deduct twelve handbreadths for the width of the tablets, and two handbreadths for the space in which the book of the Torah rested, and a half of a handbreadth on the one side and a half of a handbreadth on the other side for the thickness of the ark. And the ark was nine handbreadths in width. Deduct six handbreadths for the length of the tablets, and two handbreadths for the space in which the book of the Torah rested, so as to allow it to be put in and taken out without squeezing, and a half of a handbreadth on the one side and a half of a handbreadth on the other side for the thickness of the ark.

R. Yehuda says: With a cubit of five handbreadths. We have here twelve and a half handbreadths. Four tablets rested in it, two whole ones and two broken ones. Each of the tablets was six handbreadths long, six [handbreadths] wide, and three [handbreadths] thick. Deduct twelve handbreadths for the width of the tablets, and a finger on the one side and a finger on the other side for the thickness of the ark. And the width of the ark was seven and a half handbreadths. Deduct six handbreadths for the length of the tablets and one handbreadth for the space in which rested the pillars. And about this it is stated explicitly: "King Shlomo made himself a palanquin of the timbers of the Lebanon; he made its pillars of silver" (Shir ha-Shirim 3:9). And a finger on the one side and a finger on the other side for the thickness of the ark. But the book of the Torah was put on the side, as it is stated: "And put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord" (Devarim 31:26). And similarly regarding the Pelishtim it says: "And put the golden devices which you are restoring to him for a guilt offering in a box by the side of it" (I Shmuel 6:8).

 

            Let us briefly summarize the two opinions:

 

            According to R. Meir, the cubit used was of 6 handbreadths, and so the ark was 15 handbreadths in length.

 

            Lengthwise - each tablet was six handbreadths by six handbreadths (similar to what is stated in the gemara in Bava Batra 14a). It thus turns out that the two tablets of the covenant, one alongside the other, took up twelve handbreadths, plus two handbreadths for the space in which rested the book of the Torah. We are left with one handbreadth, divided into a half handbreadth on the one side and a half handbreadth on the other side for the thickness of the walls of the ark.

 

            Widthwise – the ark was nine handbreadths wide, six handbreadths for the tablets, plus two handbreadths for the space in which rested the book of the Torah, so as to allow it to be put in and taken out without squeezing, plus a half handbreadth on each side for the thickness of the ark.

 

            According to R. Yehuda, the cubit used was of 5 handbreadths, and so the length of the ark was 12.5 handbreadths.

 

            R. Yehuda maintains that the ark housed both the whole tablets and the broken tablets (according to Rashi, the broken tablets rested underneath the whole tablets).

 

            Lengthwise – In any event, the tablets were 6 by 6 handbreadths with a thickness of three handbreadths, and so what was left for the thickness of the walls of the ark was a finger on the one side and a finger on the other side.

 

            Widthwise – The ark was 7.5 handbreadths wide, 6 handbreadths the length of the tablets, 1 handbreadth for the space in which rested the pillars,[3] and a finger on each side for the thickness of the walls of the ark.

 

            According to R. Yehuda, there is no space left for the book of the Torah, and so it is placed along the side of the ark, as the verse states: "And put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord" (Devarim 31:26).

 

The kaporet:

 

            As was noted above, the Torah also does not specify the thickness of the kaporet. Here too, the Gemara spells out what Scripture leaves unclear:

 

The ark [of the covenant] was nine handbreadths high,[4] and the kaporet one handbreadth, making a total of ten handbreadths, and it is written: "And there I will meet with you, and I will speak with you from above the kaporet"… But from where do we know that the kaporet was a handbreadth [high]? From that which R. Chanina taught: As for all the vessels which Moshe made, the Torah gave the measurements of their length and breadth and height, [while in the case of] the kaporet, its length and its breadth are given, but not its height. Proceed, therefore, to deduce it from the smallest of the vessels, concerning which it is said: "And you shall make unto it a rim of a handbreadth round about." Just as there the height was a handbreadth, so was it there also a handbreadth. (Sukka 4b)

 

            In the continuation, the gemara proposes additional possible sources (from the plate, from the rim of the table, from the fact that the kaporet has a "face" [panim], "upon the face of the kaporet eastward" [Vayikra 16:14], and there is no panim less than a handbreadth).

 

The keruvim:

 

            The Torah itself does not relate to the essence of the keruvim themselves – neither to their shape nor to their size or height. All that it says is that they are made of beaten gold on the two ends of the kaporet and that they overspread the kaporet with their wings, with their faces directed one at the other and at the kaporet.

 

            The gemara in Sukka learns from the Temple that a sukka must be ten handbreadths high:

 

The fact is that the deduction is made from the Temple, of which it is written: "And the house which King Shlomo built for the Lord, the length thereof was sixty cubits, and the breadth thereof twenty cubits, and the height thereof thirty cubits" (I Melakhim 6:2), and it is written: "The height of the one keruv was ten cubits and so was it of the other keruv" (ibid. v. 26).

And it was taught: Just as we find in the Temple that the keruvim reached to a third of the height thereof, so also in the Mishkan they reached to a third of its height. Now what was the height of the Mishkan? Ten cubits, as it is written: "Ten cubits shall be the length of a board" (Shemot 26:16). How much is this? Sixty handbreadths. How much is a third? Twenty handbreadths. Deduct the ten of the ark and the kaporet, and ten handbreadths remain; and it is written: "And the keruvim shall spread out their wings on high, covering the kaporet with their wings." [From which we see that] the Divine Law calls [the wings that were stretched] above a height of ten handbreadths a "covering." But from where do we know that their wings were above their heads? Is it not possible that they were on a level with their heads? R. Acha bar Yaakov answered: It is written "on high." But perhaps this means that the wings were raised very high? Is it then written: "On high, on high"? (Sukka 5b)

 

            The gemara first clarifies with respect to the First Temple the relationship between the height of the Temple – thirty cubits – and the height of the keruvim fashioned by Shlomo, which was ten cubits, a third of the height of the Temple. The gemara argues that the relationship found in the First Temple is identical to that found in the Mishkan. If the height of the Mishkan was ten cubits, which is sixty handbreadths, a third of their height is twenty handbreadths. If we deduct the height of the ark and the kaporet, which is ten handbreadths, we are left with ten handbreadths. According to this calculation, the height of the keruvim themselves from top to bottom was ten handbreadths.

 

            The gemara then notes that the Torah uses the term "sekhakh" with respect to wings of the keruvim that were stretched above a height of ten handbreadths. It then suggests that perhaps the wings were level with the heads of the keruvim. It concludes that the wings were directly above the heads of the keruvim, and from this we see that to be called "sekhakh," an empty space of ten handbreadths suffices.

 

            The gemara explains that this is all correct according to R. Meir, who maintains that all the cubits were of the moderate length, i.e., of six handbreadths. But according to R. Yehuda, who says that the cubit used for the building was one of six handbreadths while that used for the vessels was of five handbreadths, the calculation of the dimensions changes. The height of the ark and the kaporet was eight and a half handbreadths – seven and a half handbreadths for the ark and a handbreadth for the kaporet, and so eleven and a half handbreadths remained under the wings of the keruvim. Thus, according to R. Yehuda, the law of ten handbreadths was learned as a Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai, for R. Chiyya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: The laws governing minimal standards, interpositions, and partitions are a part of the Halakha Le-Moshe Mi-Sinai.

 

Interim conclusion:

 

            Let us summarize the matter of the height of the ark, the kaporet and the keruvim.

 

            First, it is interesting that the Torah does not explicitly spell out the height of the entire unit, but only the height of the ark – a cubit and a half, which according to R. Meir, is equivalent to nine handbreadths.

 

            The other components – the thickness of the kaporet and the height of the keruvim – are not spelled out in the Torah. We saw that according to Chazal, the kaporet was a handbreadth thick and the keruvim were ten handbreadths high.

 

            It is important to note that according to this, the combined height of the ark and the keruvim was identical to the height of the keruvim. Can we draw any conclusions from this about the conceptual relationship between the ark and the keruvim, with the kaporet serving as a cover for the ark that fills in its height to ten handbreadths?

 

The relationship between the height of the keruvim and the height of the building

 

            There is a very interesting relationship between the height of the ark, the kaporet, and the keruvim, and the height of the building. In this context, I wish to cite the instructive words of R. Margoliot in his book, "Aleh Yona." In a chapter dealing with the Mikdash and the Mishkan, R. Margoliot relates to the height of the keruvim in relation to the height of the structures of both the Mishkan and the Mikdash:

 

The gemara toiled to find sources from which we derive the well-known rule that up to ten handbreadths, but no less than that, the space is called a sukka and the covering is called sekhakh. In the course of the passage (Sukka 5b), they wished to learn this from the Temple - from the keruvim of Shlomo, which were ten cubits high in the space of the Holy of Holies, which was thirty cubits high. They derive this by way of an analogy: Just as we find in the Temple that the keruvim reached to a third of its height, so also in the Mishkan they reached to a third of its height. Since the height of the Mishkan was ten cubits, which are equivalent to sixty handbreadths, Moshe's keruvim reached to twenty handbreadths. And since the height of the ark and the kaporet was ten handbreadths, it turns out that the keruvim covered with their wings a space that was ten handbreadths high.

However, the gemara's conclusion is that the rule that the measure of a sukka is ten handbreadths is a Halakha given to Moshe at Sinai, just as all measurements are a Halakha given to Moshe. For the proof from the keruvim is not a valid proof according to all opinions, for there are Tannaim who maintain that the height of the ark and the kaporet did not reach ten handbreadths. But according to the one who maintains that this was the height of the ark, the proof stands.

It is exceedingly puzzling: From where does the gemara know to draw this analogy between the keruvim of Shlomo and the keruvim of Moshe? Were they similar to each other? Surely many objections can be raised against this analogy. Shlomo's keruvim stood on the ground, whereas Moshe's keruvim emerged from the kaporet. Shlomo's keruvim were an enactment of the prophets, whereas Moshe's keruvim were commanded by the Torah. Can we learn anything about a Torah matter from a matter of the prophets?

It seems that here our Sages revealed to us the secret of Shlomo's keruvim. They understood… that the reason for these keruvim of Shlomo was the relationship between their height and the height of the building. It was only because the height of the Holy changed in the building of the Temple that King Shlomo had to make new keruvim. We, who have forgotten the height of Moshe's keruvim, are permitted to draw inferences about them retroactively from the height of Shlomo's keruvim.

Let us explain: Moshe's keruvim were marked by two traits. They emerged from the keruvim to a certain height – as will be clarified, to a height of a third of the building. King Shlomo built the Temple to a magnificent height, and saw that from now on Moshe's keruvim would almost disappear in this magnificent edifice. What is more important, there is nothing in the building of the Mishkan that does not allude to sublime and transcendent things (we will immediately see the great matter that lies in this measure of a third). Shlomo understood that he could not add anything to Moshe's ark… and that he would have introduced golden gods into the Temple had he added a second [set of keruvim] on the kaporet of the ark itself. He [therefore] set up two additional keruvim in the Holy of Holies. The first two rose up from the ark, but did not reach a third of the height of the building. The second two reached this height, but did not rise up from the kaporet. Were it not for the four of them together, the Mikdash would not have been like the Mishkan. Only with the four together was the Mikdash built like the Mishkan. And now the building was completed: Moshe's keruvim rose up as in the Mishkan to a third of the height of ten cubits, whereas the giant keruvim spread out their wings like a roof, and these giant keruvim reached a third of the entire height of the building, like the keruvim of Moshe (and since this was clear to the Talmud, it could learn one from the other). We have clarified Shlomo's reasoning and his derivation from the Torah, and the words of the Talmud have also been reconciled. (See also Bava Batra 99a, where the commentators have difficulty with the gemara's question from Moshe's keruvim to those of Shlomo, but according to what we have said, it is clear.)

But we must add the following: Anyone who knows anything about the deep reasons of the Torah's measurements and of the measurements of Chazal understands the nature of the measure of a third wherever it is found. A third is a minority, but the largest possible minority that is still countered by a majority. A seventh, a sixth, a fifth and a quarter – are minorities, but there are minorities that are bigger than them. A half is no longer a minority, and it is not countered by a majority. The nature of the measure of a third is like what I said: A third remains a minority of whatever it is a third of, but it already reaches the upper limit of a minority that is countered by a majority double in size.

Therefore, for example, the measure of embellishing a mitzva is up to a third (Bava Kama 9b). The Sages did not obligate one who performs a mitzva in an embellished manner with more than a third, to the point that the secondary component – the embellishment – would become primary and the fundamental mitzva secondary. But they did obligate him up to a third, for a person should add to the fundamental mitzva the greatest possible minority. It is most becoming for the tzitzit to be wound around for a third of its length and the remaining two thirds to hang loose as locks (Menachot 39a). The wound part must remain the minority, but the largest possible minority. There are other such examples.

It may therefore be proposed that neither man nor the chayyot or keruvim can ever attain but a minority of the holiness that is found in the heavens. Therefore, in the Holy of Holies, the primary site of the Shekhina in the lower world, whose true sanctity is in the upper world, those who bear the Shekhina will remain in the class of a minority. Who will dare to attain sanctity that is more than a minority? But he who aspires to sanctity should raise himself with all his strength and attain it. The keruvim should serve as a model for people, for they are at the level of the minority of the Holy of Holies, but the largest possible minority - namely, a third. If the keruvim would not rise to that level, they would not be able to prepare a seat for the Shekhina in the lower world, and the Shekhina would not descend.

Shlomo saw that Moshe's keruvim reached a third of the tent. He too did what he did – at the order of a prophet. And he kept his reason to himself. (pp. 365-367)

 

            The first point noted by R. Margoliot rises from an examination of the gemara in Sukka 5a. According to him, Shlomo introduced the new keruvim that stood on the ground out of a desire to preserve the relationship between the height of the keruvim and the height of the Temple.

 

            Since the height of the sanctuary changed in the Temple, had they kept only the keruvim of Moshe, they would have almost disappeared in such a tall building. Therefore, the height of Moshe's keruvim was a third of ten cubits – the height of the Mishkan, whereas Shlomo's keruvim, at a height of ten cubits, reached a third of the height of the Temple, which was thirty cubits tall.

 

            A second interesting point that he makes relates to the significance of a third in general. He argues that a third represents a minority, but the greatest possible minority that is still countered by a majority. For this reason, the embellishment of a mitzva is up to a third, and it is most becoming for the tzitzit to be wound around for a third of its length and the remaining two thirds to hang loose as locks. So too in the world of sanctity; both man and keruvim can only attain a minority of the supernal sanctity, and therefore in the Holy of Holies, the primary site of the Shekhina in the lower world, the bearers of the Shekhina must remain in the category of the minority. On the other hand, if the keruvim do not rise up to the level of a third, they cannot prepare a seat for the Shekhina in this world and the Shekhina will not descend.

 

            Regarding the height of the ark and the kaporet, I wish to mention the gemara in Yoma:

 

Rechava said in the name of R. Yehuda: Betzalel made three arks: the middle one of wood, nine [handbreadths] high; the inner one of gold, eight high, the outer one of gold, a little more than ten high. But surely it was taught: A little more than eleven [high]? There is no difficulty: The one opinion agrees with the view that it was one handbreadth thick, the other agrees with the view that it was not one handbreadth thick. And what purpose served the "little more"?  It is the space of the rim.

 

            Let us explain the gemara: Thus far, we have related to the height of the ark and the kaporet without going into detail about the internal structure of the ark and the relationship between the wooden ark and the golden overlay on the inside and the outside. Rechava cites a tradition in the name of R. Yehuda according to which Betzalel made three different arks, and that tradition relates to the height of each ark. The middle ark made of wood was 9 handbreadths high. This, of course, accords with the height of the ark of shittim wood described in the Torah.

 

            According to R. Meir who says that the cubit used for the ark was six handbreadths, the inner golden ark was eight handbreadths, while the outer golden ark was ten handbreadths. In other words, there were three arks one inside the other – an outer golden ark, an ark of shittim wood inside that, and an inner golden ark.

 

            The assumption is that the base of the ark was flat and one handbreadth thick.

 

            According to this assumption, the internal height of the wooden ark was eight handbreadths, and the outer golden ark, which was ten handbreadths and a little more, covered the middle wooden ark, which was nine handbreadths, as well as the sides of the kaporet, which was a handbreadth deep.

 

            The gemara asks: Surely there is a baraita that says that the height of the outer ark was eleven handbreadths and a little more (rather than ten handbreadths and a little more). The gemara answers that the baraita which maintains that the height was eleven handbreadths understands that the thickness of the base of the outer ark was also a handbreadth and that the base of the middle wooden ark was a handbreadth. Therefore, the outer ark had to be eleven handbreadths from the outside – one handbreadth of the base of the outer ark, nine handbreadths covering the middle ark of shittim wood, and one handbreadth to cover the thickness of the kaporet. R. Yehuda, on the other hand, agrees with the viewpoint that the thickness of the base of the outer ark was only some minimal amount.

 

            It turns out according to this gemara that there is an additional factor that must be considered when calculating the height of the ark - the thickness of the base of the ark.

 

            There is also a viewpoint according to which the combined height of the ark and the kaporet was eleven handbreadths, and not ten handbreadths, as we have thus far explained the various sources.

 

(Translated by David Strauss)

, full_html