The Jewish Third Temple in Oarzazat Morocco (video)
In the Moroccan city of Oarzazat, a full-scale Third Temple has been built based on Jewish sources for the purpose of a movie that will be filmed there.
If it is a third temple then why is it built to look like some ancient construction and if it is a second temple reconstruction then it certainly doesn't look like a full-size version. That mizbeah for example looks kind of small, I couldn't see any leshakhot in the ezrat yisrael and the heikhal also looked kind of diminuative and certainly not blindingly white.
BTW shame that movies about ancient Israel are being filmed in Morocco. It should be a matter of national pride to get them filmed here in the real location.
Perhaps it is a Moroccan movie.. I saw somewhere that this city is Morocco's version of Hollywood - it is where they do all their movie production.
I wouldnt have expected them to get the details right. Though I thought at the end I saw some glimpses of religious jews - either they are tourists or maybe they were contracted to consult on the project.
That's an interesting question. According to some, the line about the ramp only applies to bamot. Reason being, the kohanim wore pants, so exposing themselves was not an issue. Ordinary people didn't wear pants back then but robes or kilts or things like that, so climbing steps could cause them to expose themselves. Therefore, steps were OK in places where there were kohanim (see below), but not elsewhere.
And, in fact, there are remains of mizbechot from the time of Yehoshua, the Shoftim, and Bayit Rishon (bamot) with ramps.
As to the places with kohanim:
1. The mizbeach in the mishkan was pretty small- they didn't need a ramp or steps. But some opinions say it was higher, perhaps davka so there would be a need for a ramp. See 3 below.
2. We don't know much about the first mikdash, but the fact that Yechezkel (who, remember, was before Bayit Sheni and perhaps thought he was describing Bayit Sheni) mentions steps likely means there were steps in the first.
3. There was a ramp in the second mikdash, at least toward the end. (Maybe there were steps or nothing before.) Perhaps this is because they read the pasuk as requiring a ramp everywhere (and maybe it does), which would also explain why some say the mishkan's was taller and had a ramp, and say the first mikdash had one too.
4. Some perushim explain Yechezkel's reference to "steps" as being to a ramp, again because they feel there always has to be a ramp. Yechezkel also says the steps/ramp are on the east, but these perushim move it to the east side of the south, probably because it was there in the second mikdash (and then probably because a ramp needs more room). If there were steps in the first, then they may have been in the south as well, which is more symmetrical.
Rafi: It does look like the second. But you wrote "third."
the video itself just says beit hamikdash, but an article I read (I know longer remember where it was) said third beit hamikdash, whixh was where I took the title from
Third temple or second temple reconstruction?
ReplyDeleteIf it is a third temple then why is it built to look like some ancient construction and if it is a second temple reconstruction then it certainly doesn't look like a full-size version. That mizbeah for example looks kind of small, I couldn't see any leshakhot in the ezrat yisrael and the heikhal also looked kind of diminuative and certainly not blindingly white.
BTW shame that movies about ancient Israel are being filmed in Morocco. It should be a matter of national pride to get them filmed here in the real location.
ReplyDeleteThe mizbeach has steps instead of a ramp. Tsk, tsk.
ReplyDeletePerhaps it is a Moroccan movie.. I saw somewhere that this city is Morocco's version of Hollywood - it is where they do all their movie production.
ReplyDeleteI wouldnt have expected them to get the details right. Though I thought at the end I saw some glimpses of religious jews - either they are tourists or maybe they were contracted to consult on the project.
Shaul, the mizbeach in the first mikdash had steps. Yechezkel says the mizbeach in the third mikdash will have steps. Look it up.
ReplyDeleteNachum. Only it's obvious that this is supposed to be some kind of second beit mikdash.
ReplyDeleteBTW here is a longer article (translated from French) with the background.
Nachum: I didn't know that, thanks.
ReplyDeleteWhat did they do with the last pasuk in Parshas Yisro: "ולא תעלה במעלות על מזבחי..."?
I did not know that either and also ask Shaul's question.
ReplyDeleteThat's an interesting question. According to some, the line about the ramp only applies to bamot. Reason being, the kohanim wore pants, so exposing themselves was not an issue. Ordinary people didn't wear pants back then but robes or kilts or things like that, so climbing steps could cause them to expose themselves. Therefore, steps were OK in places where there were kohanim (see below), but not elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteAnd, in fact, there are remains of mizbechot from the time of Yehoshua, the Shoftim, and Bayit Rishon (bamot) with ramps.
As to the places with kohanim:
1. The mizbeach in the mishkan was pretty small- they didn't need a ramp or steps. But some opinions say it was higher, perhaps davka so there would be a need for a ramp. See 3 below.
2. We don't know much about the first mikdash, but the fact that Yechezkel (who, remember, was before Bayit Sheni and perhaps thought he was describing Bayit Sheni) mentions steps likely means there were steps in the first.
3. There was a ramp in the second mikdash, at least toward the end. (Maybe there were steps or nothing before.) Perhaps this is because they read the pasuk as requiring a ramp everywhere (and maybe it does), which would also explain why some say the mishkan's was taller and had a ramp, and say the first mikdash had one too.
4. Some perushim explain Yechezkel's reference to "steps" as being to a ramp, again because they feel there always has to be a ramp. Yechezkel also says the steps/ramp are on the east, but these perushim move it to the east side of the south, probably because it was there in the second mikdash (and then probably because a ramp needs more room). If there were steps in the first, then they may have been in the south as well, which is more symmetrical.
Rafi: It does look like the second. But you wrote "third."
the video itself just says beit hamikdash, but an article I read (I know longer remember where it was) said third beit hamikdash, whixh was where I took the title from
ReplyDeleteaccording to this article in ynetnews, it is meant to be the third temple.. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4192877,00.html
ReplyDeleteit also says that is the site of the burial of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. isnt he buried in Meron?