Where Was the Beis Hamikdash on Har Habayis? (part 2)

    There are four opinions where on Har Habayis the Beis Hamikdash was, they are:
1)dome of the rock is where the Kodesh Hakodoshim was.
2)dome of the rock is the place of the mizbeach.
3)Beis Hamikdash was in the south part of Har Habayis, in the empty space between the mosques.
4)Beis Hamikdash was in northern part of Har Habayis.
    Each opinion can be sub-divided into a few opinions, arguing exactly the five-hundred amah square was, and the size of an amah. 
     
​  (For a good summary of most of the opinions, as well as the problems with each one, see אוצר ירושלים והמקדש by Encyclopedia Talmudis, pages 325-345, and the diagrams in the back.)    
     

1) The Dome of the Rock is the Place of the Kodesh Hakodoshim

This opinion holds that the rock in the dome of the rock is the Even Hashesiyah. This Opinion is found in many places, going back to the time of the Geonim, for example R' Binyamin from Toledo, R' Pesachyah from Regensburg, and the Radvaz (in שאלות ותשובות חלק ב', תשובה תרצ"א). This opinion itself is now divided in two, arguing whether Hurdus also expanded to the west, or only to the north and south. 
     
    R' Zalman Menachem Koren's opinion: ​R' Zalman Menachem Koren (חצרות בית ה', ירושלים תשל"ז) holds that Hurdus only expanded to the north and south, not to the west. He calculated an amah to be 57.4 centimeters. He says based on the Yerushalmi  (Eiruvin 5:1) that the Beis Hamikdash was perfectly aligned with true east-west-north-south. He also holds that the Cheil had walls, and it is the platform that is now on Har Habayis. He also holds that the Ezras Nashim was not perfectly square, but the north wall was shorter than the south wall. 
​   The problem with his opinion is, that the Ezras Nashim is not square, and the Antonia fortress is very big, but Yosifun (War of the Jews 5:5) writes that it was like a tower.     

R' Zalman Menachem Koren's opinion

• Binyamin Mazar and Leen Ritmeyer's opinion: Binyamin Mazar and Leen Ritmeyer (The Quest: Revealing the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Jerusalem 2006) hold that Hurdus also expanded Har Habayis to the west.
• They hold that the original square Har Habayis went from the point where the east wall of Har Habayis turns a little, and that by the northeast corner was a tower, that went until the north seam. ​(A seam is where you can see that the wall was extended, with old stones and newer stones next to each other, but not connected. In the east wall of Har Habayis, there are two seams, one thirty-two meters away from south corner, and the other one 119.5 meters from north corner of wall.)
• They say that the north wall of Har Habayis was where the north wall of the platform is, and the northwest corner of Har Habayis is the bottom step in the staircase there. 
• According to them, the Akra, the fortress from where the Greeks would attack the Yidden, was connected to the south wall of Har Habayis, and the Chashmonaim extended Har Habayis in the south over that area, until the southern seam.
• They hold that an amah is 52.5 centimeters. 
• They also say that Sha'ar Harachamim is Sha'ar Shushan. 

​     The problems with this opinion are, that Yerushalmi says that the Beis Hamikdash was perfectly aligned with east-west-north-south, and according to them it wasn't, and that Sha'ar Shushan was directly in front of Sha'ar Nicanor, and according to them it wasn't.    

Leen Ritmeyer's opinion

2)The Dome of the Rock is Where the Mizbeach Was

This opinion holds that the rock is the place of the mizbeach. It is held by Rabbi Shlomo Goren (הר הבית (משיב מלחמה, ד') ירושלים תשס"ה)

• He says that the cave under the rock is the shis, the place where the Nesachim poured on the Mizbeach went. 
• He holds that the wall of the Beis Hamikdash was on the same angle as east wall of Har Habayis.
• He says an amah is 58 centimeters.
• He says Hurdus only extended Har Habayis to the north and south.

  This opinion is also held by Leible Reznick (The Temple Revisited) except that he says an amah is 19 inches.      
​
The problems with this opinion are,

• That there is no space between the Cheil and the western portico, according to Rabbi Goren.
• The Shis was accessed from the top, not the side.
• The mizbeach is on top of  tunnels according to this, but it is not allowed to be (Rambam Hilchos Beis Habechirah 1:13). 
• The walls of the Beis Hamikdash are not aligned with east-west-north-south. 

Rabbi Shlomo Goren's opinion

3) The Southern Opinion

    This opinion holds that the Beis Hamikdash was in the empty space between the two mosques. This opinion was held by many people, like R' Michael Braur (אבן שתיה או אבן הטועים, ירושלים תר"ץ), Yosef Rofeh, Ge'alyah Kornfeld, Tuvia Sagiv, R' Sholom Dov Steinberg (בית המקדש השלישי, ירושלים תרנ"ג), and R' Dov Levononi(המקדש בירושלים, ירושלים תשס"ד-The Temple In Jerusalem), with some small differences between these opinions. One of the proofs for this opinion is the Kaftor VaFerach (perek Vav) who says Sha'ar Shushan is in the southern third of the east wall, which if you say he is talking about the east wall of Har Habayis, is right in front of the empty space. (But you can also say that he is talking about the east wall of Yerushalayim, in which case you don't have any proof.)
   
                                                             Tuvia Sagiv's opinion

• The dome of the rock is where the Antonia fortress was.
• The walls of Har Habayis were made by Hadrian when he made a temple for Jupiter there.  
• An amah is 44 centimeters. 
• Har Habayis was lower than how it is now, it was 720 meters above sea level. 

     
      The problems with this opinion are, 

• The Beis Hamikdash is not at the top of Har Hamoriyah, like it says in Chazal and Yosifun.
• He doesn't explain what the southern seam is from (R' Dov Levononi says that is where they started, and they went around and finished in the same place, but the question is, why are the stones on the sides of the seam different from each other, one side Herodian style stones, and on the other side older stones).  
• The space in between south wall and Azarah is less than between east wall and Azarah.
• There isn't enough space between Azarah and north wall of Har Habayis for the lishkos that were there and for people to walk through.
• Yosifun clearly says that Hurdus expanded Har Habayis! (War of the Jews 1:21 and 5:5)
• The Beis Hamikdash is not aligned with east-west-north-south.       

4) The Northern Opinion

This opinion holds that the Beis Hamikdash was to the north of the dome of the rock, and that Sha'ar Harachamim (which is in the eastern wall of Har Habayis, north of the dome of the rock) is Sha'ar Shushan. This opinion was held by R' Emanuel Chay Riki, (in Aderes Eliyahu, Kuntres Mei Niddah, perek lamed-vav,) who based how big an amah is, on this gate. There is also, lehavdil, non-Jews who held this opinion, like Melchior De Vogue.
    Asher Kaufman (The Temple Mount: where is the holy of holies, Jerusalem 2004) made a detailed description of the Har Habayis and Beis Hamikdash based on this opinion. According to him, the Kodesh Hakodoshim was where the dome of the spirits now stands, and the stone underneath it is the Even Hashesiyah. However, he holds that an amah is 43.7 centimeters, and that the Har Habayis and Beis Hamikdash are not square. He also holds that when the Tanna says Har Habayis is 500 amos by 500 amos, he means that it was 250,000 square amos, but not that it was a square 500 by 500, and that the the Beis Hamikdash is not included in this amount. 
​     The  big problem with his opinion is, that the Mishna says 500 long and 500 wide, and by Azarah 187 by 135, not how much square amos it was! (For more problems with his opinion, see אוצר ירושלים והמקדש, pages 338-339)  

Asher Kaufman's opinion.

   In the next post I will Im"h say a new way how it was, based on the Tavnis Heichal.