The Mishkan (tabernacle): did it have a hidden human form?

Various writers have attempted finding a human figure in the Mishkan (tabernacle) built by Moses when the people received the Law at Sinai. Christians think they see Jesus in its furnishings and Jews a kabalistic Adam Kadmon in its floor plan.Is there a hidden human figure in it? Yes and No. What the floor plan reveals, rather, is half a man. An argument for the full figure of a man – no matter what some writers claim – cannot be convincingly made from its furnishings  or floor plan. Only by examining the structure in retrospect – from the viewpoint of Solomon’s temple – can such a figure perhaps be seen, and even then it is only a partial one. There is no complete Mishkan Man there, too many body parts missing. No eyes, hands, pelvis, legs, etc.

Priestly Cells and Silver Sockets

The Mishkan had only two main rooms instead of three, the Holy of Holies and Holy Place. No Porch. Its two rooms were half the size of the Temple’s and one third its height. Everything in it was portable, including its foundation which was made of 100 silver ‘sockets’ and 5 bronze ones. The sockets were heavy metallic blocks with holes which held the Mishkan’s frame, i.e. its walls, upright (Fig. D). It is the sockets’ layout, figures A, B, and C, that reveals a partial man.

The layout of the silver sockets is given in Exodus 26:19 - 36, and that of the bronze ones and their number (5) in v. 37. The number of silver sockets (100) is in 38:27. In 26:31 - 33 the curtain or veil which separated Holy of Holies from the Holy Place is mentioned (see v. 33) and we are told that this special curtain (paroket, meaning separatrix, the feminine of separator) was suspended by four goldplated pillars (i.e., posts or beams of acacia wood) which were inserted into four sockets of silver. These four sockets form the shoulders of Mishkan Man, figure C, above. But note this: there was no silver inside Holy of Holies or Holy Place of the Temple, only goldplated or solid gold objects were permitted in these two rooms which had goldplated walls.

However, silver appears to be inside the Temple’s Holy Place when the priestly cells are arranged to form the arms and shoulders of Temple Man, and this is a clear indicator that the cells, some of which were store rooms, correspond to the silver sockets of the Mishkan, which itself had no cells at all. The cells also formed Temple Man’s turban.The 100 silver sockets of the Mishkan and the 90 silver plated cells of the Temple relate to the ages of Abraham and Sarah when they had Isaac, but silver by itself relates to the priesthood and the sacrifices.

The Sexual Symbolism of the Temple

For certain, Solomon’s temple displays sexual symbolism in quite specific ways, but not in the manner Bible scholars imagine. According to them, the twelve oxen which supported the enormous Sea of Bronze were fertility bulls, and the two bronze pillars, Jacob and Boaz, were phalli (male sex organs). They have been saying this for decades, and while they are partially right – there is sexual symbolism involved – they are also wrong in major ways.

It might be asked, why would the Temple involve sex? – and the short answer is 1) because it displays a definite Edenic theme in its decorations and architecture and 2) Eden itself was a place of fertility, displaying the Creator’s powers to produce all types of life in abundance and 3) the land of Israel, ‘the Promised Land,’ is biblically presented as a new Eden, and finally and most important of all, 4) the Divine plan for mankind’s spiritual redemption is portrayed through the human birthing process. And since creating children involves sex, the Temple depicts human sexuality.

I do not intend explaining the above points, they are meant only as a broad answer, although I do have specifics in mind.The four deal with the question of why, Let us see how this is so. Forget notions of fertility rites and sacred prostitutes in pagan temples. The Temple design (see Ezk. 43:10, 11) includes human procreation, true, but as an analogy of redemption instigated by teshuvah, which means repentance and return. It is a clever and covert analogy in stone whose revelation was reserved for our time, I believe.

A Biblical Puzzle

Temple students have known for ages that there are some features of the Temple’s description that appear contradictory or at least puzzling, and perhaps the most well known of these concerns the height of the Porch (ulam): was it 30 or 120 cubits high? To appreciate this puzzle and how it relates to the Temple’s symbolism, compare the two temples at the right. The First is King Solomon’s (circa 950 BC), and the Second (circa 20 BC – AD 70) is King Herod’s. Herod was an Idumean (Edomite) and a descendant of slaves, not Jewish by blood.

Note that the Second Temple has a much wider front than the First, making its rooftop appear like an inverted letter T. This is because two chambers of knives were added to the Porch’s interior, one chamber on left and another on the right,This turned the Second Temple into Ariel, the “lion of God,” wide at the front, narrow at the back, so Jewish sources say. The two temples were about the same size, it seems, except for their height. Here and at other points the Second Temple deviated significantly from the inspired architectural plan given King David and passed on to his son Solomon. The interior of Solomon’s temple was only 30 cubits high, Herod’s 30-40, but with a 90 cubit Porch, a huge difference. But from the exterior Solomon’s may have been 40 cubits tall (the Bible does not give exterior measures) and Herod’s 40-50 with an 100 cubit Porch. Why this large difference in height between the two temples? – and is there any biblical authority for it?

King Herod’s 100 Cubit Porch

In a book whose title or author I no longer recall, except that it was written by a Jewish woman, it is said or implied that Herod set out to outdo Solomon. The First Temple was too short, he would build a taller one, and the biblical justi-fication for it was II Chr. 3:4 where a height of 120 cubits is given for the Porch. This verse has given scholars head-aches because it cannot be easily reconciled with I Kgs 6:2 where height of the holy “house” (Holy of Holies and Holy Place combined) is recorded as 30 cubits. While it is true that the height of the Porch (ulam) is never specifically given, an 120-cubit height for any room is nowhere recorded either in the Book of I Kings. Only II Chronicles 3:4 (probably written by Ezra the prophet) contains this odd measurement. Here is how scholars treat it:

1) The verse is simply ignored – the most popular way of “explaining” Bible difficulties!
2) The chronicler was exaggerating the Porch’s height in order to inflate the Jewish national ego.
3) Some scribal error occurred. A scribe intended writing 20 cubits but wrote 120 instead.
4) Maybe the Porch was truly 120 cubits high, after all.

The first two points do not merit any commentary. As for point three, most Bibles, whether distributed by Jewish or Christian publishing houses, retain the Masoretic text with its 120 cubit height for the Porch. However, not too long ago the New International Version broke with this practice and now gives the height as 20 cubits. Its footnote informs us that some Syriac and Septuagint manuscripts contain this smaller number. This, of course, would make the Porch shorter than the remainder of the Temple building. Pertaining to the last point (4), various scholars dismiss an 120 cubit Porch saying that a.) the Porch is nowhere called a tower, but ulam, which is always translated as porch, portico, hall or vestibule, and b.) a Porch this high would probably be unsafe in a strong wind because of its narrow base. But Herod avoided this problem by adding 30 cubits of height (dead space) to the rest of the building, thus bracing the 90 cubit Porch. Is point three (3) adopted by the NIV Bible the most logical one, then? I think not.

Drawing at right: Herod raised a whole new temple and added 60 cubits of mostly dead space to the Porch’s 30 cubit tall interior. But outside the Porch was 100 cubits high: 30+60+10= 100 (the 10 includes 4 cubits for a parapet wall on the roof and 6 more for the foundation). In this manner Herod dwarfed Solomon’s Temple, but he did not necessarily build a better one.

Solving the Puzzle Drawing at left: this shows what Solomon’s temple would look like with a height of 30 cubits (I Kgs 6:2) and a Porch of 120 (II Chr, 3:4), not very visually appealing. No ancient or modern architect would want to claim such a miscreation, the Porch is four times the height of the building! Herod did not outdo Solomon with a taller building, however, because in constructing it, the Temple’s hidden and Divinely inspired anthropomorphic elements were erased. Jacob and Adam , the High Priest, or the Metallic Messiah cannot be found in Herod’s uninspired architectural mani-pulations. Bigger is not always better and this is one example. Yet, amazingly, the rabbis of his time – and even today – seemed to admire the Second Temple more than the First!

The solution concerning height lies in the Temple’s symbolism of fertility. And to portray this fertility it was created as a miniature Garden of Eden, while at the same time depicting key events in Israel’s history.

In this way the Temple had a universal aspect (Eden) and also a particular one (Israel). It was constructed on Jewish soil, yet it was to be a “house of prayer for all nations” (Isa. 56:7). Even Jesus recognizes this universal theme in Mark 11:17. And in Isa. 2:2-4 the prophet links the house of God (the Temple) with the name Jacob and a reference to all nations.

Therefore it should be no surprise that Adam’s “deep sleep” while Eve was being created (Gen. 2:21, 22) corresponds to Jacob’s sleep at Bethel. Jacob is the “Adam” of the Jews. Adam was a father of the world, Jacob the father of the Israelites. Jacob was fleeing his brother’s wrath when he left for Mesopotamia, but he also had a second motive: to find a wife and start a family. And in the dream, the Lord assures him that he will have descendants whose number will be like the “dust of the earth,” (28:14). In similar manner, Adam is given a wife so that he could be “fruitful and multi-
ply, fill the earth” (1:28). Consequently for both men – one in the Garden and the other at Bethel – their sleep is associated with their wives and raising a family, ‘building a house’. Adam builds the world; Jacob, national Israel, which is part of the world too. And all of this involves fertility, so we might say both men were super-fathers.

Yet there is a spiritual aspect to it all, which is namely this: they were to produce children in God’s “image and likeness,” which means his inward character, having his attributes. Otherwise the world and/or Israel becomes corrupt and unredeemable, even by the Law.

The Solution and its Meaning The 120 cubit Porch is the male genital organ, here symbolizing procreation. The Temple’s entrance, which had no doors, is the woman’s birth canal. Temple Man’s genitalia is androgynous depicting both genders. The figure of 120 signifies Jacob’s 12 tribes enlarged (10 x 12 = 120). The whole Temple displays the human birth process as an analogy to spiritual redemption, which itself signifies being renewed or reborn.

But the birth process is somewhat reversed: one’s sins are atoned for at the Altar, his spirit is united with God’s at the Bronze Sea (this is conception or devekut, union with, or cleaving to God), then as one passes through the Porch he or she is born into – not out of – Temple Man’s body.

But lay Israelites never entered the Temple. In-stead, the Levite priests portrayed this process for them. In this way each Israelite signified their be-coming a kingdom of priests, Ex. 19:6. This topic is related to the ‘sin offering,’ korban chatet for atonement, but I cannot use space explain it here; the details are explained and illustrated with graphics in my unfinished manuscript. Hence, the 120 cubits symbolize Israel’s priestly birthing and increase, but the 30 cubits are quite literal and apply to the height of the whole building, Porch included.

The Sexual Symbolism of Jachin and Boaz

While the twin bronze pillars named Jachin and Boaz are not phallic symbols as some Bible scholars have claimed for decades, they do play a sexual role according to the symbolism of the Temple. Also, according to their description in I Kgs. 7:15-22 they were not “fire altars,” as claimed in some Christian sources. Therefore, we may put aside this age-old notion made popular by Robert Smith and W.F. Albright. Maybe the pillars’ glossy capitals did catch the “first glint of the Jerusalem sunrise” but they still were not cressets, fire altars, or giant torches lighting up the night, nor were their bowl shaped capitals ever filled with burning oil. The pillars, rather, portrayed two trees or plants.

The drawing at left: Jachin and Boaz depicted two identical large plants. The plant was a hybrid creation whose capital symbolized a giant water lily and its shaft or stem, the trunk of a palm tree. The lily had a metallic netting or network upon which were suspended decorative pomegranates (7:20, 42). Some sources say that the Hebrew wording implies two bowls for each pillar (Tanach, Stone Edition, p.818). If so, the lower bowl was inverted, representing the drooping leaves of a palm tree, but the top bowl which is a lily cup was upright, as shown at left. The lily was the love flower of the Ancient Near East and in this instance symbolizes God’s love for David and Solomon, the two kings who had the most to do with founding and establishing Israel as a kingdom and planning for and constructing the Temple. David means “beloved” and Solomon’s second name Jedidiah (II Sam. 12:24, 25) “beloved of God.” Palm trees depict peace and prosperity, the mark of King Solomon’s reign.

But if the lily cup symbolizes love, exactly how does this make Jachin and Boaz sex symbols? Observe above (Temple Man lying down) that the Porch is the male organ and that the capitals seem attached to it. Furthermore, they are high up on his legs. What else can the capitals be except his gonads or testes! This why they had a netting or network (I kgs 7:41) and pomegranates wrapped around them. The netting is the rough, textured skin of the scrotum, while the pomegranates copious seeds depict male sperm. Surely this signifies national Israel enlarged, something yet to transpire in the Messianic Age ahead of us when she becomes exceedingly fertile ‘like the Garden of Eden,’ Ezekiel 36:35.

Thanks for your interest in the Temple and this site! Many people do not know the most basic things about the Temple Mount, such as its location on Mt. Moriah where Abraham bound Isaac for sacrifice (Gen. 22:2), or that it was the place where Solomon eventually built the Temple, II Chr. 3:1. That very place is occupied to- day by the gold-domed mosque you see at the right. It is holy to Muslims because from here Mohammed ascended to heaven on a white stallion, it is said; and it has the respect of Christianity because of Jesus’ frequent visits there during the time of the Second Temple. Also, many Christians, like some Jews, believe that the Temple will be – must be – rebuilt and play a vital role in the arrival of the Messiah, although as almost anyone knows, Jews and Christians differ sharply about his identity.

My purpose here is to raise the awareness level of the Temple beyond the scant information provided by the general news media, because it appears that the Temple is coming, signaling the beginning of a new world order. One way of doing this is to discuss its symbolism and meaning in plain language without use of theological double-talk or pedantic phraseology.

If this message has interested you, it is likely to interest your friends, too. I encourage you to tell them about it.

What Others are Saying about this Web Site

Below are reactions to TEMPLE SECRETS. I get very few negative ones, such as one person saying I was a ‘fool’ for thinking Solomon and his temple ever existed, and another who said I was writing science fiction, "that’s all." The favorable ones below are identified only by the writer's initials.

A kabbalah oriented Israeli rabbi remarks,

You have done a momentous discovery about the human form of the Temple of Solomon. The question is, how come it was not done before? All of what you brought and the many Kabbalah interpretations point to it ... I know of related works, Schwaller de Lubicz did it for the temple at Luxor Egypt, and On Zayit did it for the tabernacle. But (at least for me) you are the first to make this point cogently.
Y.H., Jerusalem

An Israeli Jewish film and video producer,

(After reviewing Temple Secrets he compares it to Ezekiel's temple and says...) Are you aware of the similarity between the human body and the Third Temple, that is Ezekiel's Temple? It is astounding!
C.C.

A Jerusalem rabbi replies,

(I had asked the rabbi, ‘Concerning your views as to the cause of the Temple's destruction, how does this relate to the kabalistic view that the ... Temple depicts the form of a man and therefore [it follows] the destruction of that man? ’ I also asked him to view Temple Secrets before responding. His reply is directly below:)

Shalom Tony,
You will find it interesting that the Midrash says that God really should have taken His anger out on the Jewish people thus destroying them, but in His mercy, He chose to destroy the Temple, instead. As the place where God and man communicate, the Temple resembles the perfected man in more ways than one!

With blessings from Jerusalem,
S.S.

An Israeli rabbi has questions ...

Dear Tony,
Your work is so special. Who are you? Where are you? Do you know any of the folks here in Israel that I might know? Have you seen the commentaries of the Gaon of Vilna and the Malbim on the Mishkan? Shalom.
A.S.

A secular writer and editor remarks,

I have just checked your site out, and I am very impressed by its clear layout and correlation with de Lubicz' work ... Thanks for letting me know of your research.
A.B.

'Wonderful research,' Christian says,

I think you have very interesting information on King Solomon's Temple and I would love to check out a copy of your complete research paper. If this is in any way possible, please respond at this address. Thank you, and again congratulations on a wonderful piece of research.
D.J.

Christian wants more material,

I've just finished reading some of your work concerning the Metallic Messiah and I must say it was fascinating! I have believed and taught for some time that the Temple and Tabernacle were made after the model of the human body (or perhaps vice-versa), but your research make the picture crystal clear. Do you have more material available online?
C.H.B.

"Informative," says another Israeli Rabbi

I found your website very informative. I greatly appreciate your research on a most essential part of Judaism, the Temple of Solomon. I think you will be very interested to read the work of the Italian Kabbalist, Rabbi Moshe Hayym Luzzato on the same topic, namely the mystical antrpomorphism of the Temple. His book is called Mishkaney Elyon and a commentary by Rabbi Mordechay Shriqi of Jerusalem even takes the analysis further in terms of research. I hope you continue on your wonderful endeavor, best wishes,
Rabbi D.T.

Copyright © 2002 by Tony Badillo
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED