The narrative in Yechezkel continues,1Yechezkel 40:6. “And he measured the threshold of the gateway,” i.e., the width of the doorposts that cover the thickness of the wall. “It was one measuring rod wide and the [other] threshold was one measuring rod wide.” “And he measured the width of the entrance to the gateway; it was 10 cubits.”2Ibid.:11.
The narrative continues:3Ibid.:15.V’al pnei HaShaar HaEisun…chamishim amah. Rashi explains that the words v’al pnei mean “and the height”. Thus, the verse should be translated as, “And the height of the Entrance Gate was 50 cubits.” He states: “From the fact that the other gateways mentioned in the narrative were 50 cubits high, I derived that the words al pnei here refer to a height of 50 cubits.” Rashi also interprets the term al as referring to height in I Melachim 7:6, וְאוּלָם עַל פְּנֵיהֶם, which he understands as meaning, “He made a high vestibule above the entire building.”
3
וְכָתַב הָרַדַ"ק (יחזקאל מ, טו): וַאֲנִי תָּמֵהַּ עַל פֵּרוּשׁוֹ, כִּי בְּכָל הָעִנְיָן אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר עַל גֹּבַהּ הַשְּׁעָרִים מִדָּה. וְכֵן בְּבִנְיַן בַּיִת שֵׁנִי לֹא הָיָה שַׁעַר שֶׁהָיָה גָּבוֹהַּ חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה, כִּי כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים רָחְבָּן עֶשֶׂר וְגָבְהָן עֶשְׂרִים, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם (פ"ב מ"ג) שֶׁהָיָה גָּבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים (פ"ג מ"ז). וְאָנָה מָצָא לְשׁוֹן אֹרֶךְבהשגת הרד”ק למעיין שם הוא על מה שפרש”י (מ, לו) על אורך השער חמשים אמה שהכוונה הוא לגובה השער. שֶׁעִנְיָנוֹ גֹּבַהּ, אֵין זֶה כִּי אֹרֶךְ מִדַּת הַשֶּׁטַח, וְגֹבַהּ הוּא מִדַּת הָרוּם אוֹ הָעֹמֶק.
Concerning the height of this gateway, Radak writes:4In his commentary to Yechezkel 40:15. I am amazed at [Rashi’s] interpretation, for nowhere in the narrative is a measure for the height of the gateways mentioned. Similarly, in the Second Beis HaMikdash, there was no gateway that was 50 cubits high. All of the gateways were 10 cubits wide and 20 cubits high, except for the gateway to the Ulam (the Entrance Hall),5Middos 2:3. which was 40 cubits high. [Moreover,] where [in Scripture] is the term orech used to refer to height?6Further in the narrative, in his commentary to Yechezkel 40:36, Rashi interprets the words orech chamishim amah as referring to a height of 50 cubits.Orech always refers to one of the coordinates of area. The term govah, by contrast, refers to height or depth.
The fact that the measure of the pillars used in the Beis HaMikdash built by King Shlomoh is referred to as komah in the book of Melachim,7I Melachim 7:15. but as orech in Divrei HaYamim8II Divrei HaYamim 3:15. does not contradict the above. In Divrei HaYamim, the pillars were measured as they lay on the ground [before being erected in the building]. Therefore, they are described by the term orech, “length.” [In contrast, in Melachim,] the pillars are described as they stood, therefore, the term komah, “stature,” is used.
Rashi’s interpretation can be explained as follows: Rashi interprets the first words of the verse, al pnei, as meaning “the height of”. Thus, the verse is discussing height, and the term orech must similarly mean height. Why does Rashi interpret al pnei as “the height of”? Pnei is derived from the word panim, which is often translated as “face” or “surface.” Since a person’s face is part of the upper portion of his body, Rashi understood that this verse is referring to height.
6
אוֹ יִתָּכֵן הֱיוֹתוֹ מִלְּשׁוֹן פִּנָּה, כְּמוֹ הַפִּנּוֹת הַגְּבֹהוֹת בִּצְפַנְיָה (א, טז). וּפֵרֵשׁ הָרַדַ"ק שֶׁהֵם הַמִּגְדָּלִים, וּבְשָׁרָשָׁיוגבספר השרשים להרד”ק (שרש פנה) כתב שפנה היינו זוית. וכתב שם וז”ל: ולפי שחוזק הבית הפנות אמר על המגדלים החזקים פנות: על הערים הבצורות ועל הפנות הגבוהות (צפניה א, טו). ולפי שפנות הבית מן האבנים הגדולות כנה האנשים הגדולים והאצילים בפנות: גשו הלום כל פנות העם (שמ”א יד לח), ויתיצבו פנות כל העם (שופטים כ ב) עכ”ל. כָּתַב הַטַּעַם שֶׁבַּפִּנּוֹת בּוֹנִין הָאֲבָנִים הַגְּבוֹהוֹת.
Alternatively, the word pnei can be derived from the term pinah, “corner.” Thus the prophet Tzephania9Tzephania 1:16. speaks of pinos hagevohos, which Radak interprets as meaning, “the high towers.” In his Shorashim,10Sefer HaShorashim, shoresh pen.Radak justifies his interpretation by explaining that towers are built with tall stones.
Based on Radak’s explanation that orech refers to length, the recurring statement that the orech of the structure’s different elements was 50 cubits11Yechezkel 40:25, 29, 33, 36. can be explained as follows: As I understand it, the height of all the structures was measured when they were lying on the ground.12With this paragraph, Tosafos Yom Tov is reconciling Radak’s interpretation with that of Rashi. Ultimately, both commentaries are discussing the height of the structures. Radak uses the term “length,” however, because the height of the structures were measured when they were lying on the ground, as Tosafos Yom Tov proceeds to explain. Thus, when explaining the statement that the angel speaking to Yechezkel held “a linen cord in his hand and a measuring rod,”13Yechezkel 40:3.Radak comments that the cord was used to measure large measures of length on the ground.
We interpret that verse as meaning that the angel held the cord in his hand so that he could easily take accurate measures of the objects’ heights. It would have been much more difficult to measure objects that were more than one measuring rod high when the objects were upright, and might have required the angel to measure them several times. The angel would have to mark the place where the measure ended so that he could place the measuring rod there, and measure it again, repeating the process several times. Measuring the structures with the cord avoided this repetitive process. True, an angel was speaking to Yechezkel, and Yechezkel was witnessing a vision from above; there was no actual physical measuring done. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that the vision reflected the most practical way of measuring the structures. Therefore the cord was very long so that it could be used to measure even the highest structures at one time. Afterwards, the cord was laid on the ground and its length was measured with the measuring rod. Measuring the length of the cord on the ground is a far easier process than measuring an object’s height.
If this explanation does not sufficiently explain why the term “length” is used to describe a measurement of height, we can still accept Rashi’s explanation despite the textual anomaly. There was certainly a deep, hidden reason why the text was written this way, for there is neither a small nor a large element in this awesome vision that does not have an underlying reason of untold depth.
Nevertheless, there is still a question regarding Rashi’s interpretation. Rashi writes that all the gateways in the narrative were this height, yet the text does not support this statement.
Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel justifies the questions raised by Radak, but ultimately agrees that Rashi’s interpretation is more compatible with the simple meaning of the text.
"וַיָּמָד אֶת סַף הַשַּׁעַר", פֵּרוּשׁ מְזוּזַת הַשַּׁעַר הַמְכַסָּה עֹבִי הַחוֹמָה, קָנֶה אֶחָד רֹחַב, וְאֵת סַף אֶחָד, קָנֶה אֶחָד רֹחַב (מ, ו). "וַיָּמָד אֶת רֹחַב פֶּתַח הַשַּׁעַר עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת" (מ, יא).
The narrative in Yechezkel continues,1Yechezkel 40:6. “And he measured the threshold of the gateway,” i.e., the width of the doorposts that cover the thickness of the wall. “It was one measuring rod wide and the [other] threshold was one measuring rod wide.” “And he measured the width of the entrance to the gateway; it was 10 cubits.”2Ibid.:11.
"וְעַל פְּנֵי הַשַּׁעַר הָאִיתוֹן [וְגוֹ'] חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה" (יחזקאל מ, טו), וּפֵרֵשׁ רַשִׁ"י וְעַל פְּנֵי – גָּבְהוֹ, וּמִגֹּבַהּ שְׁאָר הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁבָּעִנְיָן, שֶׁהֵם חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה, אֲנִי לָמֵד שֶׁ'עַל פְּנֵי' הָאָמוּר כָּאן, הוּא חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה, עכ"ל. וְכֵן כָּתַבאהכוונה שרש”י מפרש שם על פניהם – גובה. בִּמְלָכִים א' (ז, ו) "וְאוּלָם עַל פְּנֵיהֶם", פֵּרוּשׁ אוּלָם גָּבוֹהַּ עָשָׂה עַל כָּל הַבַּיִת.
The narrative continues:3Ibid.:15. V’al pnei HaShaar HaEisun…chamishim amah. Rashi explains that the words v’al pnei mean “and the height”. Thus, the verse should be translated as, “And the height of the Entrance Gate was 50 cubits.” He states: “From the fact that the other gateways mentioned in the narrative were 50 cubits high, I derived that the words al pnei here refer to a height of 50 cubits.” Rashi also interprets the term al as referring to height in I Melachim 7:6, וְאוּלָם עַל פְּנֵיהֶם, which he understands as meaning, “He made a high vestibule above the entire building.”
וְכָתַב הָרַדַ"ק (יחזקאל מ, טו): וַאֲנִי תָּמֵהַּ עַל פֵּרוּשׁוֹ, כִּי בְּכָל הָעִנְיָן אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר עַל גֹּבַהּ הַשְּׁעָרִים מִדָּה. וְכֵן בְּבִנְיַן בַּיִת שֵׁנִי לֹא הָיָה שַׁעַר שֶׁהָיָה גָּבוֹהַּ חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה, כִּי כָּל הַשְּׁעָרִים רָחְבָּן עֶשֶׂר וְגָבְהָן עֶשְׂרִים, חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם (פ"ב מ"ג) שֶׁהָיָה גָּבְהוֹ אַרְבָּעִים (פ"ג מ"ז). וְאָנָה מָצָא לְשׁוֹן אֹרֶךְבהשגת הרד”ק למעיין שם הוא על מה שפרש”י (מ, לו) על אורך השער חמשים אמה שהכוונה הוא לגובה השער. שֶׁעִנְיָנוֹ גֹּבַהּ, אֵין זֶה כִּי אֹרֶךְ מִדַּת הַשֶּׁטַח, וְגֹבַהּ הוּא מִדַּת הָרוּם אוֹ הָעֹמֶק.
Concerning the height of this gateway, Radak writes:4In his commentary to Yechezkel 40:15. I am amazed at [Rashi’s] interpretation, for nowhere in the narrative is a measure for the height of the gateways mentioned. Similarly, in the Second Beis HaMikdash, there was no gateway that was 50 cubits high. All of the gateways were 10 cubits wide and 20 cubits high, except for the gateway to the Ulam (the Entrance Hall),5Middos 2:3. which was 40 cubits high. [Moreover,] where [in Scripture] is the term orech used to refer to height?6Further in the narrative, in his commentary to Yechezkel 40:36, Rashi interprets the words orech chamishim amah as referring to a height of 50 cubits. Orech always refers to one of the coordinates of area. The term govah, by contrast, refers to height or depth.
וּמַה שֶּׁאָמַר בְּמִדַּת הָעַמּוּדִים בְּבִנְיַן שְׁלֹמֹה, שֶׁאָמַר בְּסֵפֶר מְלָכִים א (ז,טו) קוֹמָה, וּבְדִבְרֵי הַיָּמִים ב' (ג, טו) אֹרֶךְ, כְּבָר פֵּרַשְׁנוּ שָׁם כִּי בְּדִבְרֵי הַיָּמִים סָפַר מִדָּתָן בְּעֵת יְצִיקָתָן בַּקַּרְקַע שֶׁהִיא מִדַּת הַשֶּׁטַח, לְפִיכָךְ אָמַר אֹרֶךְ. וּבָעֵת שֶׁהֶעֱמִידָן וְסָפַר מִדָּתָן אָמַר קוֹמָה כִּי כֵן הָיָה, עכ"ל.
The fact that the measure of the pillars used in the Beis HaMikdash built by King Shlomoh is referred to as komah in the book of Melachim,7I Melachim 7:15. but as orech in Divrei HaYamim8II Divrei HaYamim 3:15. does not contradict the above. In Divrei HaYamim, the pillars were measured as they lay on the ground [before being erected in the building]. Therefore, they are described by the term orech, “length.” [In contrast, in Melachim,] the pillars are described as they stood, therefore, the term komah, “stature,” is used.
וְהַנִּרְאֶה לְיַשֵּׁב פֵּרוּשׁ רַשִׁ"י הוּא שֶׁלָּמַד מִלְּשׁוֹן "וְעַל פְּנֵי", שֶׁפֵּרוּשׁוֹ בְּגָבְהוֹ כְּמוֹ הַפָּנִים שֶׁהוּא בְּגֹבַהּ הָאָדָם.
Rashi’s interpretation can be explained as follows: Rashi interprets the first words of the verse, al pnei, as meaning “the height of”. Thus, the verse is discussing height, and the term orech must similarly mean height. Why does Rashi interpret al pnei as “the height of”? Pnei is derived from the word panim, which is often translated as “face” or “surface.” Since a person’s face is part of the upper portion of his body, Rashi understood that this verse is referring to height.
אוֹ יִתָּכֵן הֱיוֹתוֹ מִלְּשׁוֹן פִּנָּה, כְּמוֹ הַפִּנּוֹת הַגְּבֹהוֹת בִּצְפַנְיָה (א, טז). וּפֵרֵשׁ הָרַדַ"ק שֶׁהֵם הַמִּגְדָּלִים, וּבְשָׁרָשָׁיוג בספר השרשים להרד”ק (שרש פנה) כתב שפנה היינו זוית. וכתב שם וז”ל: ולפי שחוזק הבית הפנות אמר על המגדלים החזקים פנות: על הערים הבצורות ועל הפנות הגבוהות (צפניה א, טו). ולפי שפנות הבית מן האבנים הגדולות כנה האנשים הגדולים והאצילים בפנות: גשו הלום כל פנות העם (שמ”א יד לח), ויתיצבו פנות כל העם (שופטים כ ב) עכ”ל. כָּתַב הַטַּעַם שֶׁבַּפִּנּוֹת בּוֹנִין הָאֲבָנִים הַגְּבוֹהוֹת.
Alternatively, the word pnei can be derived from the term pinah, “corner.” Thus the prophet Tzephania9Tzephania 1:16. speaks of pinos hagevohos, which Radak interprets as meaning, “the high towers.” In his Shorashim,10Sefer HaShorashim, shoresh pen. Radak justifies his interpretation by explaining that towers are built with tall stones.
וּמַה שֶּׁאָמַר הַכָּתוּב בְּכֻלָּן אָרְכּוֹ חֲמִשִּׁים אַמָּה (מ, כה כט לג לו), וַהֲרֵי הָאֹרֶךְ הוּא מִדַּת הַשֶּׁטַח כְּדִבְרֵי הָרַדַ"ק, אֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁלְּכָךְ אָמַר אָרְכּוֹ לְפִי שֶׁהַמְּדִידָה שֶׁל הַגֹּבַהּ הָיְתָה נִמְדֶּדֶת בְּשֶׁטַח הָאָרֶץ. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁהָיָה "פְּתִיל פִּשְׁתִּים בְּיָדוֹ וּקְנֵה הַמִּדָּה" (מ, ג) וּפֵרֵשׁ הָרַדַ"ק שֶׁבַּפְּתִיל מָדַד מִדָּה מְרֻבָּה בַּקַּרְקַע.
Based on Radak’s explanation that orech refers to length, the recurring statement that the orech of the structure’s different elements was 50 cubits11Yechezkel 40:25, 29, 33, 36. can be explained as follows: As I understand it, the height of all the structures was measured when they were lying on the ground.12With this paragraph, Tosafos Yom Tov is reconciling Radak’s interpretation with that of Rashi. Ultimately, both commentaries are discussing the height of the structures. Radak uses the term “length,” however, because the height of the structures were measured when they were lying on the ground, as Tosafos Yom Tov proceeds to explain. Thus, when explaining the statement that the angel speaking to Yechezkel held “a linen cord in his hand and a measuring rod,”13Yechezkel 40:3. Radak comments that the cord was used to measure large measures of length on the ground.
וַאֲנַחְנוּ נֹאמַר שֶׁהַפְּתִיל הָיָה בְּיָּדוֹ, שֶׁיִּמְדֹּד [בּוֹ] גֹּבַהּ כָּל דָּבָר וְדָבָר בְּפַעַם אַחַת. לֹא שֶׁיִּצְטָרֵךְ לִמְדֹּד פְּעָמִים רַבּוֹת בַּקָּנֶה הַדָּבָר הַגָּבוֹהַּ יוֹתֵר מִקָּנֶה אֶחָד, לְפִי שֶׁהוּא טֹרַח רַב, כִּי יִצְטָרֵךְ בְּכָל פַּעַם לִרְשֹׁם מָקוֹם שֶׁכָּלָה שָׁם מִדָּתוֹ לְהָשִׂים עָלָיו הַקָּנֶה, וְלִמְדֹּד מִמֶּנּוּ וּלְהַלָּן. וְאַף כִּי הָיָה מַלְאָךְ הַדּוֹבֵר בּוֹ, וְהַכֹּל בְּמַרְאֶה וּבְחִידָה, לֹא בְּחוּשׁ וּבְמִדָּה, עִם כָּל זֶה בְּוַדַּאי הֶרְאָהוּ בְּאֹפֶן הַיּוֹתֵר נָאוֹת וּמִתְקַבֵּל וּמִתְקָרֵב אֶל הַמּוּחָשׁ. וְהָיָה הַפְּתִיל אָרֹךְ מְאֹד לִמְדֹּד בּוֹ בְּפַעַם אַחַת הַמִּדָּה הַיּוֹתֵר גָּבוֹהַּ שֶׁבַּבִּנְיָן. וּלְאַחַר שֶׁשִּׁעֵר בַּפְּתִיל שִׁעוּר הַגֹּבַהּ, הִשְׁכִּיב הַחֶבֶל אָרְצָה וּמָדַד בִּקְנֵה הַמִּדָּה כַּמָּה קָנִים הוּא גָּבוֹהַּ, וּבִמְדִידָה עַל הָאָרֶץ נָקֵל לְמָדְדוֹ בִּקְנֵה הַמִּדָּה מֵהַמְּדִידָה שֶׁבַּגֹּבַהּ, כַּמְּפֹרָשׁ.
We interpret that verse as meaning that the angel held the cord in his hand so that he could easily take accurate measures of the objects’ heights. It would have been much more difficult to measure objects that were more than one measuring rod high when the objects were upright, and might have required the angel to measure them several times. The angel would have to mark the place where the measure ended so that he could place the measuring rod there, and measure it again, repeating the process several times. Measuring the structures with the cord avoided this repetitive process. True, an angel was speaking to Yechezkel, and Yechezkel was witnessing a vision from above; there was no actual physical measuring done. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that the vision reflected the most practical way of measuring the structures. Therefore the cord was very long so that it could be used to measure even the highest structures at one time. Afterwards, the cord was laid on the ground and its length was measured with the measuring rod. Measuring the length of the cord on the ground is a far easier process than measuring an object’s height.
וְאַף אִם זֶה הַטַּעַם לֹא יַסְפִּיק, וְלֹא יַכְרִיחַ לִהְיוֹת הַמְּדִידָה שֶׁבַּגֹּבַהּ בְּשִׁטְחִית, עִם כָּל זֶה נוּכַל לוֹמַר שֶׁהָיְתָה כָּךְ שִׁטְחִית כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ, וְהָיָה זֶה לְשׁוּם סִבָּה נֶעֱלֶמֶת וְטַעַם נִסְתָּר, אַחַר כִּי כֵן כָּל הַמַּרְאֶה הַנּוֹרָא הַהוּא, בִּלְתִּי סָפֵק אֵין בּוֹ דָּבָר קָטָן אוֹ גָּדוֹל מִבְּלִי טַעַם עָמֹק עָמֹק מִי יִמְצָאֶנּוּ, וְשֶׁלְּפִיכָךְ אָמַר הַכָּתוּב מִדַּת הַגֹּבַהּ בְּשֵׁם אֹרֶךְ, לְפִי שֶׁהָיְתָה הַמְּדִידָה שִׁטְחִית.
If this explanation does not sufficiently explain why the term “length” is used to describe a measurement of height, we can still accept Rashi’s explanation despite the textual anomaly. There was certainly a deep, hidden reason why the text was written this way, for there is neither a small nor a large element in this awesome vision that does not have an underlying reason of untold depth.
אָמְנָם נִשְׁאָר עַל רַשִׁ"י ז"ל הַתְּמִיָּה בְּמַה שֶּׁכָּתַב גֹּבַהּ שְׁאָר הַשְּׁעָרִים שֶׁבָּעִנְיָן כוּ', וְלֹא נִמְצָא שֶׁכֵּן הוּא בְּכָל הָעִנְיָן.
Nevertheless, there is still a question regarding Rashi’s interpretation. Rashi writes that all the gateways in the narrative were this height, yet the text does not support this statement.
וְהָרִי"א ז"ל (יחזקאל מ, טו) עִם שֶׁהוֹכִיחַ כְּקֻשְׁיּוֹת הָרַדַ"ק, עִם כָּל זֶה כָּתַב שֶׁמַּה שֶּׁפֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ"י הוּא יוֹתֵר נָכוֹן בְּעֵינָיו כְּפִי מִלּוֹת הַכָּתוּב.
Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel justifies the questions raised by Radak, but ultimately agrees that Rashi’s interpretation is more compatible with the simple meaning of the text.
וּתְנַן (פ"ב מ"ג) שֶׁלְּכָל הַשְּׁעָרִים דְּלָתוֹת חוּץ מִשֶּׁל אוּלָם.
It was taught:14Middos 2:3. “All the gateways had gates except the gateway to the Ulam.”