Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 5-7

Hook

At first glance, the laws governing the construction and sanctity of the Temple Mount appear to be a matter of ancient civil engineering and historical geography. Yet, beneath the surface of these meticulous measurements lies a startling metaphysical paradox: the physical structure of the Temple was engineered to stand on empty space, floating on a series of structural voids to insulate it from the decay of the physical world.

How can a permanent, eternal home for the Divine Presence be built on hollow ground? Why is the holiness of a pile of ruins on Mount Moriah considered indestructible, while the agricultural sanctity of the rest of the Land of Israel is subject to the vicissitudes of human history and military conquest?

---

Context

To understand the genius of Maimonides (the Rambam) in compiling Hilchot Beit HaBechirah (The Laws of the Chosen Temple) in his magnum opus, the Mishneh Torah, we must look at the historical and literary landscape of the late twelfth century. Writing in Egypt after the destruction of Jerusalem by successive Crusader and Muslim conquests, the Rambam was physically distant from a Temple Mount that lay in ruins, dominated by non-Jewish structures.

Yet, he did not treat the Temple as a historical relic of the past or a utopian fantasy reserved for the end of days. Instead, he codified its laws with the same rigor, precision, and practical authority as the laws of daily prayer or dietary restrictions.

By synthesizing disparate and often conflicting texts from the Mishnah (primarily Tractates Middot, Tamid, and Kelim), the Babylonian Talmud (Tractates Zevachim, Yoma, and Shevuot), the Jerusalem Talmud, and early midrashic sources, the Rambam constructed a seamless, unified blueprint.

He was the first to systematically organize these architectural and ritual laws into a normative legal code. In doing so, he made a radical theological statement: the Temple is not merely a physical building that existed in a specific era; it is a permanent legal reality, an eternal spiritual coordinate that remains fully active and binding on the Jewish consciousness, even when the mount is barren and the sanctuary is in ruins.

---

Text Snapshot

The following passage from Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 5-7 serves as our textual anchor:

5:1 Mount Moriah, the Temple Mount, measured 500 cubits by 500 cubits. It was surrounded by a wall... The earth beneath it was hollowed out to prevent contracting ritual impurity due to Tumat Ohel. Arches above arches were built underneath for support. It was entirely covered, one colonnade inside another...

6:14 Why do I say that the original consecration sanctified the Temple and Jerusalem for eternity, while in regard to the consecration of the remainder of Eretz Yisrael, in the context of the Sabbatical year, tithes, and other similar agricultural laws, the original consecration did not sanctify it for eternity? Because the sanctity of the Temple and Jerusalem stems from the Shechinah, and the Shechinah can never be nullified...

7:1 There is a positive commandment to hold the Temple in awe, as Leviticus 19:30 states: "And you shall revere my Sanctuary." ...

---

Close Reading

To fully appreciate the depth of the Rambam's architectural and halakhic design, we must perform a close reading of the text, unpacking its structural composition, key terminology, and underlying legal tensions.

Insight 1: The Architecture of Separation — Arches, Voids, and the Geometry of Purity

In Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 5:1, the Rambam describes a fascinating engineering requirement for the Temple Mount:

"The earth beneath it was hollowed out to prevent contracting ritual impurity due to Tumat Ohel. Arches above arches were built underneath [for support]."

To understand the mechanics of this law, we must look to the Hebrew commentary of Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz on this halachah:

וְכֵיפִין עַל גַּבֵּי כֵּיפִין הָיוּ בְּנוּיוֹת מִתַּחְתָּיו וכו׳ . הר הבית היה עומד על גבי שתי קומות של כיפות שהיו בנויות כך ששני רגלי הכיפות בקומה העליונה עומדים על גג הכיפות שבקומה התחתונה. באופן זה בכל מקום היה חלל שהפסיק וחצץ בין טומאה בקרקע להר הבית

"And arches upon arches were built underneath it, etc. The Temple Mount stood on top of two levels of arches that were built so that the two legs of the arches in the upper story stood on the roof of the arches in the lower story. In this manner, in every place, there was a void that separated and partitioned between impurity in the ground and the Temple Mount."

This structure is designed to combat Tumat Ohel (tent impurity), a category of ritual impurity derived from Numbers 19:14. According to halakhah, when a corpse is buried in the earth, its impurity (Tuma) breaks through the ground and rises vertically upward to the heavens, contaminating anything directly above it.

However, a hollow space of at least one handbreadth (Tefach) acts as a barrier, trapping the impurity and preventing it from rising further, provided there is a solid ceiling above the void.

By building "arches above arches" (kefin al gabei kefin), the Sages ensured that no matter where a grave might be hidden deep in the mountain, there would always be an underground void separating the surface of the Temple Mount from the earth below. The legs of the upper arches rested on the crowns of the lower arches, meaning that any vertical column of potential impurity would inevitably hit an empty chamber and be contained.

This architectural detail reveals a profound conceptual truth about the Rambam's view of holiness (Kedusha). True holiness does not tolerate latent, hidden forces of decay.

The physical Temple Mount is not merely built on a high mountain; it is structurally insulated, floating on a series of engineered voids that cut off its connection to the mortality and impurity of the subterranean world. The Temple is a realm of absolute life, entirely separated from the domain of death.

Furthermore, the Rambam notes:

"It was entirely covered, one colonnade inside another."

Steinsaltz clarifies the Hebrew terminology here:

וְכֻלּוֹ הָיָה מְקוֹרֶה . כל היקף הר הבית. סְטָיו לִפְנִים מִסְּטָיו . שדרת עמודים כפולה שעליה היה מונח הקירוי.

"'And it was entirely covered' — the entire perimeter of the Temple Mount. 'One colonnade inside another' (setav lifnim mi'setav) — a double row of columns upon which the roof was placed."

As Rashi notes in Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 13a, this roof was designed to protect pilgrims from the elements. Yet, in the Rambam's formulation, this is not merely a practical accommodation; it is an essential feature of the Temple Mount's layout.

The double colonnade (setav) defines the perimeter, transforming the open mountain into an indoor sanctuary. This architectural framing signals to those who enter that they have crossed a threshold from the wild, unmeasured public domain into a highly structured, sheltered space of Divine intimacy.

Insight 2: The Semiotics of Space — The Chamber of the Hearth and the Boundaries of Sanctity

In Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 5:10, the Rambam introduces us to the Chamber of the Hearth (Beit HaMoked), a massive domed structure on the northern side of the Temple Courtyard (Azarah). This building serves as a fascinating study in the negotiation of legal boundaries:

"It contained two entrances: one to the Temple Courtyard and one to the chayl. There were four chambers inside it. Two were consecrated and two were not. Marking posts separated the consecrated from those which were not consecrated."

Let us examine the Steinsaltz commentary on these specific chambers:

שְׁתַּיִם קֹדֶשׁ . שתי הלשכות הדרומיות שפנו לכיוון העזרה היו קדושות בקדושת העזרה. וְרָאשֵׁי פְּסִיפָסִין . מחיצה קטנה מנוקבת מקנים או מעץ או מאבנים.

"'Two were holy' — the two southern chambers that turned toward the direction of the Courtyard were consecrated with the sanctity of the Courtyard. 'And marking posts' (rashei pesifasin) — a small partitioned divider made of reeds, wood, or stones."

The Chamber of the Hearth was a liminal space, physically unified under a single dome but legally split down the middle. The southern half, opening into the Azarah, possessed the strict sanctity of the Courtyard.

In this area, priests could eat the most sacred offerings (Kodshei Kodashim), but they were strictly forbidden to sit, as sitting in the Courtyard is a privilege reserved solely for kings of the Davidic dynasty Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 25a.

The northern half, opening into the less sacred rampart (Chayl), was unconsecrated. Here, the priests, exhausted from their intense service, could sit, rest, and sleep on stone protrusions built into the walls.

How did the priests prevent themselves from accidentally stepping across this invisible halakhic boundary while carrying sacred meat or seeking a place to sit? The Rambam tells us they used rashei pesifasin—marking posts or a low lattice divider.

This demonstrates that in the world of the Temple, boundaries are not merely abstract legal theories; they must be physically materialized. The rashei pesifasin acted as a semiotic warning system, a physical line drawn in the stone that translated invisible metaphysical states of holiness into tangible human geography.

Steinsaltz further identifies the function of the individual chambers within the Beit HaMoked:

לִשְׁכַּת הַטְּלָאִים . בה היו טלאים מבוקרים ממום לצורך הקרבת התמיד. לִשְׁכַּת עוֹשֵׂי לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים . בה הכינו את לחם הפנים. בָּהּ גָּנְזוּ בֵּית חַשְׁמוֹנַאי אַבְנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁשִּׁקְּצוּם מַלְכֵי יָוָן . מלכי יוון הקריבו על המזבח לעבודה זרה, וכשניצחו החשמונאים וטיהרו את המקדש, טמנו את אבני המזבח.

"'The Chamber of the Lambs' — where lambs inspected for blemishes for the daily sacrifice were kept. 'The Chamber of the Bakers of the Showbread' — where they prepared the showbread. 'In it, the Hasmoneans entombed the stones of the Altar defiled by the Greek kings' — the Greek kings offered sacrifices to idols upon the Altar, and when the Hasmoneans triumphed and purified the Temple, they hid the stones of the Altar."

The presence of these four chambers within a single building encapsulates the entire history and daily rhythm of the Temple. In the southwestern Chamber of the Lambs, we see the meticulous daily preparation for the Tamid (continual) offering. In the southeastern Chamber of the Showbread, we see the weekly cycle of bread renewal.

But it is the northeastern chamber, where the defiled stones of the Altar were entombed by the Hasmoneans, that carries the deepest historical and emotional resonance.

When the Maccabees liberated the Temple, they faced a complex halakhic dilemma: the stones of the Altar had been used for pagan worship, rendering them unfit for the service of God, yet they had once been consecrated and could not simply be discarded or put to mundane use Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 52b.

By entombing these stones within the Chamber of the Hearth, the Hasmoneans did not erase the trauma of defilement; instead, they integrated it into the very architecture of the Temple. The Beit HaMoked became a living museum of Jewish resilience, where the memory of desecration and the triumph of purification coexisted side-by-side with the daily sacrificial service.

Insight 3: Spatial Ascension and the Incline of Holiness

In Chapter 6, the Rambam shifts our attention from the horizontal layout of the Temple to its vertical dimension:

"The entire Temple complex was not built on flat ground, but rather on the incline of Mount Moriah." Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:1

The Temple was designed as a series of terraces, a physical staircase of ascending holiness. The Rambam details the precise measurements of this climb:

1. From the Chayl to the Women's Courtyard: 12 steps (6 cubits of elevation) Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:1
2. From the Women's Courtyard to the Israelites' Courtyard: 15 steps (7.5 cubits of elevation) Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:2
3. From the Israelites' Courtyard to the Priestly Courtyard: 1 step of 1 cubit and a platform of 3 steps of 0.5 cubits (2.5 cubits of elevation) Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:3
4. From the Priestly Courtyard to the Entrance Hall (Ulam): 12 steps (6 cubits of elevation) Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:4

In total, the floor of the Temple building was situated 22 cubits (approximately 33 to 44 feet, depending on the measurement of a cubit) higher than the Eastern Gate of the Temple Mount.

This deliberate verticality served a profound phenomenological purpose. A pilgrim entering the Temple Mount did not simply walk toward a destination; they climbed toward it. Each transition to a higher level of ritual sanctity was accompanied by the physical exertion of climbing steps.

This physical ascent mirrored the spiritual work of internal elevation. The fifteen steps leading from the Women's Courtyard to the Israelites' Courtyard corresponded to the fifteen Shirei HaMa'alot (Songs of Ascents) in Psalms 120-134, which the Levites sang as they stood on these very steps during the water libation festival on Sukkot Mishnah Sukkah 5:4.

The architecture of the Temple was engineered to ensure that the human body and the human soul climbed in perfect unison.

Insight 4: The Eternity of Sanctuary vs. the Mutability of Land

In Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:14-16, the Rambam addresses one of the most critical legal questions in the entire Mishneh Torah: why does the holiness of Jerusalem and the Temple remain forever, while the holiness of the rest of the Land of Israel was nullified when the Jews were exiled to Babylon?

To resolve this, the Rambam introduces a brilliant distinction between two mechanisms of consecration: Conquest (Kibbush) versus Divine Presence (Shechinah).

The agricultural sanctity of the Land of Israel (Kedushat HaAretz)—which triggers the obligations of the Sabbatical year (Shemitah), tithes (Ma'asrot), and fruit of the fourth year (Neta Reva'i)—was initially established through Joshua's military conquest. The Rambam argues that a sanctity created by human military force is inherently vulnerable to superior human military force.

When Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judea and exiled the Jewish people, the original conquest was legally undone. The land lost its formal status as Eretz Yisrael under Torah law, and the agricultural obligations were suspended until Ezra returned and re-consecrated the land, not through conquest, but through peaceful settlement and possession (Chazzakah).

In contrast, the holiness of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount (Kedushat HaMikdash) was never dependent on military conquest. Its sanctity was established by the building of the Temple and the unique, permanent dwelling of the Shechinah (Divine Presence) on Mount Moriah, as Solomon declared during the dedication of the First Temple:

"I have built a house of habitation for You, and a place for Your dwelling forever." II Chronicles 6:2

Because the Shechinah is an eternal, divine reality, it can never be nullified by human action. The Roman legions could smash the stones of the Temple and plow the city into fields, but they could not touch the Shechinah.

As the Sages famously derived from Leviticus 26:31 ("I will lay waste to your Sanctuaries"):

"Even though they have been devastated, their sanctity remains." Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 28a

This distinction carries immense halakhic consequences. Because the sanctity of the Temple Mount is eternal, the laws governing the space remain fully active today.

We can technically offer sacrifices on the mount today even without a rebuilt Temple building, provided we have a kosher Altar and can identify its exact coordinates, as the returning exiles did in the days of Ezra Ezra 3:2.

Conversely, because the holiness is still active, the severe prohibition against entering the inner areas of the Temple Mount while in a state of ritual impurity (Tumat Met) remains fully in force, carrying the penalty of Karet (spiritual excision).

Insight 5: The Phenomenology of Awe — "Mora Mikdash" and the Body in Space

In Chapter 7, the Rambam transitions from the structural layout of the Temple to the human behavior required within its boundaries. The root of all these laws is the positive commandment of Mora Mikdash (Reverence for the Sanctuary):

"There is a positive commandment to hold the Temple in awe, as Leviticus 19:30 states: 'And you shall revere my Sanctuary.'" Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 7:1

The Rambam immediately refines this commandment with a crucial theological caveat:

"Nevertheless, it is not the [physical building of] the Temple which must be held in awe, but rather, He who commanded that it be revered."

This warning is designed to prevent the Jewish people from falling into a form of architectural idolatry, or fetishizing the physical stones of the Temple. The building is not a god; it is a vessel, a physical conduit designed to facilitate a relationship with the Transcendent.

The awe we feel when standing on Mount Moriah must be directed upward, through the architecture, to the Creator.

How is this internal state of awe translated into physical, bodily discipline? The Rambam codifies a series of strict behavioral prohibitions for anyone entering the Temple Mount:

1. No entering with a staff (which suggests one is on a mundane, business-oriented journey).
2. No entering with sandals on one's feet (which mimics the command to Moses at the burning bush in Exodus 3:5 and Joshua in Joshua 5:15).
3. No entering with dust on one's feet or money wrapped in a kerchief.
4. No spitting anywhere on the mount.
5. No using the Temple Mount as a shortcut (kappandaria) Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 7:2.

These physical restrictions force a radical shift in the pilgrim's self-awareness. To remove one's shoes is to strip away the protective, artificial barrier between the human body and the raw earth.

It forces the pilgrim to walk slowly, mindfully, feeling the cold, holy stone of the mountain beneath their bare feet. It strips away the armor of wealth (money) and travel (staff, dusty shoes), reducing the human being to a state of primal vulnerability before their Creator.

Furthermore, the Rambam notes the law of exiting the Temple:

"Anyone who has completed his service [in the Temple and desires] to leave, should not [turn around and] leave with his back to the Temple. Rather, he should walk backwards slightly and [then], walk slowly, and [turn] to his side until leaving..." Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 7:4

This physical discipline is a profound expression of respect. To turn one's back on the Sanctuary is to signal that one is moving on, leaving the Divine Presence behind.

By walking backward or sidestepping, the priest or pilgrim maintains visual and physical alignment with the Holy of Holies, acknowledging that even as they return to the mundane world, their heart and mind remain anchored in the sacred center.

---

Two Angles

To deepen our understanding of this text, let us contrast two classic readings of the Rambam's position on the eternal sanctity of the Temple Mount: the ontological-essentialist view of the Rambam himself, and the historical-conditional critique of the Ra'avad (Rabbi Abraham ben David of Posquières).

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                      THE ETERNAL SANCTITY DEBATE                       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                                                        |
|  [RAMBAM: Ontological-Essentialist]                                    |
|  "The Shechinah can never be nullified."                               |
|  * Sanctity is intrinsic and indestructible.                           |
|  * Survives physical destruction; Altar can function in ruins.         |
|  * Entrance today carries the penalty of Karet (spiritual excision).   |
|                                                                        |
|                                   vs.                                  |
|                                                                        |
|  [RA'AVAD: Historical-Conditional]                                     |
|  "The first consecration did not sanctify for eternity."               |
|  * Sanctity is contingent on the physical presence of the Temple.      |
|  * Destruction of the walls suspended the active status of holiness.   |
|  * Entrance today is forbidden, but does not incur Karet.              |
|                                                                        |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Angle 1: Maimonides' Ontological-Essentialist View

For the Rambam, the holiness of the Temple Mount is an indestructible, ontological reality. Once Solomon built the Temple and the Shechinah descended upon the Holy of Holies, the metaphysical fabric of that specific geographic space was permanently altered.

The physical destruction of the stone walls by the Babylonians or Romans was an external, superficial event; it had absolutely no effect on the underlying spiritual reality of the site.

Therefore, the Rambam rules that the space remains fully consecrated "for that time and for eternity" (kidesha l'sha'atah u'kidesha l'atid lavo).

The practical consequence of this view is unyielding: even today, when the Temple is in ruins, the laws of the Temple Courtyard are fully active. A person who enters the site of the Courtyard while ritually impure through contact with a corpse (Tumat Met) violates a Torah prohibition and incurs the severe penalty of Karet (spiritual excision).

Angle 2: The Ra'avad's Historical-Conditional Critique

The Ra'avad, in his famous gloss (Hasagot) on Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:16, launches a sharp, brilliant attack on the Rambam’s position:

א"א [אמר אברהם] ... סברת עצמו היא זו ולא ידעתי מאיזה מקום הפיק אותה ... לפיכך הנכנס עתה שם אין בו כרת

"Says Abraham: This is his own opinion, and I do not know from where he derived it... Therefore, one who enters there now [the Temple site in its destroyed state] does not incur the penalty of Karet."

The Ra'avad argues that the sanctity of the Temple was fundamentally conditional, tied to the physical existence of the sanctuary and the active presence of the Jewish people living in their land. When the Temple was destroyed and the nation was exiled, the original holiness of the site was suspended or nullified.

According to the Ra'avad, Ezra's second consecration only sanctified the agricultural land of Israel, but he did not—and could not—permanently sanctify the Temple Mount for a future era of exile. The ultimate, eternal sanctity of the Temple will only be established in the Messianic era, when the Third Temple is built by Divine glory.

While the Ra'avad agrees that it is rabbinically forbidden to enter the Temple Mount today out of respect, he maintains that the ontological category of Torah-level holiness is currently dormant, and therefore, one who enters does not incur the biblical penalty of Karet.

---

Practice Implication

How does this complex blueprint of ancient architecture, spatial ascension, and eternal sanctity shape our daily practice and decision-making today?

The Alignment of the Body in Daily Life

We find a direct, daily application of this spatial consciousness in the laws of sleeping and bodily conduct codified by the Rambam in Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 7:9:

"At all times, a person may not defecate or sleep [with his body positioned] between the east and the west... Rather, we should always defecate and sleep [with our bodies] to the north and south."

This remarkable halachah, which is brought down as normative practice in the Shulchan Aruch Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 3:6, forces us to align our most private, mundane, and animalistic bodily functions with the geographic axis of the Temple. Because the Holy of Holies was situated at the western end of the Temple complex, facing east, the East-West axis is treated as a line of direct exposure to the Divine Presence.

By deliberately positioning our beds and arranging our private spaces so that our bodies lie along a North-South axis, we construct our homes in deference to the Temple.

It ensures that even in the dark of night, in the privacy of our bedrooms, our physical bodies are aligned in a posture of quiet reverence toward the eternal center of the Jewish world.

The Synagogue as "Mikdash Me'at"

Furthermore, this blueprint directly shapes how we interact with our local synagogues and houses of study, which the Sages designated as a Mikdash Me'at—a miniature sanctuary Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 29a.

The laws of Mora Mikdash (reverence for the Temple) serve as the direct legal source for the behavioral codes of the modern synagogue.

When we step into a synagogue, the physical disciplines of the Temple Mount are activated in miniature:

• We are forbidden to use a synagogue as a shortcut (kappandaria) to get from one street to another Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 151:5.
• We are required to enter with dignity, dressed in a manner that reflects standing before a King.
• When we conclude our silent prayers (the Amidah), we do not simply turn around and walk away; instead, we take three steps backward, mimicking the sidestepping departure of the priests from the Temple Courtyard Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 123:1.

The physical discipline of the Temple becomes the mental and spiritual discipline of daily Jewish life, turning every local synagogue into a training ground for the ultimate climb up Mount Moriah.

---

Chevruta Mini

Now it is your turn to step into the study hall. Grab a partner, pull up the texts, and wrestle with these two deep questions that surface the profound trade-offs within the Rambam's design:

Question 1: The Ethics of Conquest vs. Cultivation

In Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 6:16, the Rambam notes that the first sanctity of the Land of Israel was nullified because it was established through military conquest (Kibbush), whereas the second sanctity established by Ezra survived because it was achieved through peaceful possession and settlement (Chazzakah).

• The Prompt: What does this legal distinction tell us about the Torah's ultimate view of ownership and holiness? If military conquest is inherently unstable and temporary, while peaceful settlement and cultivation yield eternal legal standing, how should this shape our understanding of Jewish historical claims and our relationship to the land today?

Question 2: The Paradox of Materializing the Transcendent

In Mishneh Torah, The Chosen Temple 7:1, the Rambam warns that we must not revere the physical building of the Temple itself, but rather the God who commanded its reverence. Yet, in Chapter 5 and 6, he spends pages detailing the exact physical measurements, the gold plating of the doors, the stone steps, and the architectural boundaries.

• The Prompt: How do we navigate the tension between the necessity of physical, aesthetic beauty in worship and the constant danger of idolatrously fetishizing the physical vessel? If the building is merely a medium, why does the Torah care so deeply about the precise cubits, the specific metals, and the exact height of the steps?

---

Takeaway

The Temple is not a relic of the past, but an eternal coordinate; its holiness is preserved not in crumbling stones, but in the enduring presence of the Shechinah and the physical discipline of our daily lives.