“Then he returned me in the direction of the outer gate of the Sanctuary which faces the east.”1Yechezkel 44:1. This verse refers to the gate of Sanctuary which was before the Holy of Holies. The narrative continues, describing the wicket entrance next to this gate, “It was closed. God said to me, ‘This gate shall be closed. It will not be opened. Man shall not enter through it, because God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it. It has been closed.’ ”2Ibid.:1-2. Our Sages understood this verse as referring to the wicket entrance at the southern side of the gate to the Sanctuary. Thus, the Mishnah states in both Tractate Tamid3See Tamid 3:7. and Tractate Middos:4See Middos 4:2. “The Great Gate5I.e., the gate to the Sanctuary. had two wicket entrances [at its sides], one in the south and one in the north. No one ever entered the one in the south. The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it: ‘This gate shall be closed.’ ” In his commentary, Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura states that the mishnah is referring to two small entrances that were slightly removed from the gate.
2
וְכָתַב הרי"א ז"ל (יחזקאל מד, ג) עַל מִשְׁנָה זוֹ, וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ: וְהָיָה דַּעְתָּם שֶׁזֶּה מַה שֶּׁרָאָה פֹּה הַנָּבִיא הָיָה מִמַּה שֶּׁנַּעֲשָׂה בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי. וְאֵין דַּעְתִּי סוֹבֵל זֶהאהנה דעת האברבנאל וכן דעת הרד”ק והמלבי”ם, דדרשת חז”ל בזה אינו בדרך הפשט. שפשט הכתוב מדבר אך ורק בבית שלישי, ומדבר בשער הגדול של ההיכל, שאחרי שיבא בו הכבוד ישאר סגור לעולם. והוא לסימן. והודיע שאין שכינה זזה משם לעולם, ולא כמו שהיה בבית ראשון ושני. ומההוכחה לזה הקשה האברבנאל שלא יתכן שכתוב מדבר בבית שני. וכדלהלן. ויש להעיר לפי שיטתם, שישאר פתח ההיכל סגור לעולם איך יהיו יכולים להקריב קרבנו? הרי ידוע ההלכה וכן נפסק ברמב”ם (מעה”ק פ”ה ה”ה) וז”ל: שלמים ששחטן קודם שיפתחו דלתות ההיכל פסולין שנאמר פתח אהל מועד - בזמן שפתוח, אפילו היו דלתותיו מוגפות הרי זה כנעול. אבל הפרוכת שעליו אינה פוסלת, עכ”ל. וצ”ע., כִּי הִנֵּה בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי לֹא בָּא הַכָּבוֹדבבבית ראשון מצינו (מל”א ח, י – יא). “ויהי בצאת הכהנים מן הקדש והענן מלא את בית ה’, ולא יכלו הכהנים לעמד לשרת מפני הענן כי מלא כבוד ה’ את בית ה’”. אבל בבית שני לא מצינו שבא כבוד כמ”ש חז”ל (יומא כא:) חמשה דברים שחסרו בבית שני ואחד מהם שלא שרתה שכינה. דֶּרֶךְ שַׁעַר הַקָּדִים. וְאִם זֶה לֹא נִתְקַיֵּם שָׁם אָז אֵיךְ נֹאמַר שֶׁנִּתְקַיֵּם "הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה ... כִּי ה' אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ", מְחֻיָּב הוּא שֶׁנֹּאמַר שֶׁסְּגִירַת הַשַּׁעַר הָיָה אַחַר בּוֹא הַכָּבוֹד לַבַּיִת, עכ"ל.
Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel comments on this mishnah:6Abarbanel, Yechezkel 44:3. [The Sages’] conception was that the prophet’s vision here was identical with [the structure] that was made in the Second Beis HaMikdash. My mind cannot accept this. In the Second Beis HaMikdash, [God’s] Glory did not enter via the eastern gate.7I.e., with regard to the First Beis HaMikdash, it is written (I Melachim 8:10-11): “And it came to pass, when the kohanim departed from the Sanctuary, the cloud filled the House of God and the kohanim could not stand to minister because of the cloud; for the glory of God filled the House of God.” In the Second Beis HaMikdash, by contrast, there was not such a manifestation of Divine Glory, for as our Sages said (Yoma 21b), the Divine presence did not rest in the Second Beis HaMikdash. If that [prophecy] was not yet fulfilled, how can it be said, “This gate shall be closed… because God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it”? The implication is that the closing of the gate will come after [God’s] Glory enters the House.
In resolution: We must precisely analyze the words of the mishnah, “The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it.” The mishnah does not conclude: “And so it will be in the Future,” as it does in the mishnah which discusses the unroofed courtyards.8See Middos 2:5. With this choice of wording, the Sages prevent the question raised by Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel from arising. Were the mishnah to have said, “And so it will be in the Future,” thus equating the wicket entrances in the two Batei HaMikdash, the question could have arisen: How can one say they were similar? In the Future Beis HaMikdash, the wicket will be closed after God’s Glory enters, while in the Second Beis HaMikdash, His Glory had not yet entered. For that reason, the mishnah states, “The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it,” i.e., in this instance, the wicket was closed in anticipation of the fulfillment of the prophecy to Yechezkel. Thus, the intent is not that the situation will be the same in both Batei HaMikdash, because the motivating rationale is different in each instance. Although the wicket will be closed in both Batei HaMikdah, the reason it will be closed is not the same.
This concept is intimated by the fact that in both Tractates Middos and Tamid, the mishnah does not only quote the verse’s conclusion, “It has been closed.” Instead, the mishnah also quotes the beginning of the verse, “This gate shall be closed.” Seemingly, the verse is redundant. However, the first clause uses the future tense, while the last clause uses the past tense. This implies that the gate was already closed, before this future time. The use of the past tense can apply to Yechezkel’s vision, even though the Second Beis HaMikdash had not yet been built, because Yechezkel recorded his prophecy after having been shown the vision of the Future Beis HaMikdash. When the mishnah says, “The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it,” the mishnah is referring to this final clause, “it has been closed,” which refers to the Second Beis HaMikdash. By contrast, the rationale given by the verse, “God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it,” does not apply to the closing of the wicket in the Second Beis HaMikdash, but to its closing in the Future Beis HaMikdash. Thus, the question raised by Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel does not apply.
The rationale that the southern wicket was closed in the era of the Second Beis HaMikdash in anticipation of God’s Glory entering in the Future is alluded to in the above verse: “This gate shall be closed.” The future tense refers to the Ultimate Future, “because God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it.” “It has been closed,” in expectation of that future time. The wicket’s being closed was a sign to those who returning from exile to look to the future, knowing that ultimately, God’s Glory would enter through this gate, and that He would cause His presence to dwell in His Beis HaMikdash.
The passage continues, stating:9Yechezkel 44:3. “The nasi will sit within it to partake of food in God’s presence.” Here, the term nasi, literally, “the uplifted one,” refers to the kohen gadol, the High Priest. Since the kohen gadol is more prestigious than the other kohanim, he would not usually eat together with the other kohanim in the various chambers. Instead, he would partake of his portion of the sacrificial offerings while sitting in the entranceway of this wicket.
"וַיָּשֶׁב אֹתִי דֶּרֶךְ שַׁעַר הַמִּקְדָּשׁ הַחִיצוֹן הַפֹּנֶה קָדִים" שֶׁהוּא שַׁעַר הַהֵיכָל הַחִיצוֹן לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים, "וְהוּא סָגוּר". "וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי ה', הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה, לֹא יִפָּתֵחַ. וְאִישׁ לֹא יָבֹא בוֹ, כִּי ה' אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ, וְהָיָה סָגוּר" (יחזקאל מד, א-ב). רַבּוֹתֵינוּ הֶעֱמִידוּ הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה בַּפִּשְׁפָּשׁ הַדְּרוֹמִי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לְשַׁעַר הַהֵיכָל, וְכָךְ שָׁנִינוּ בְּתָמִיד (פ"ג מ"ז) וּבְמִדּוֹת (פ"ד מ"ב): שְׁנֵי פִּשְׁפָּשִׁין הָיוּ לוֹ לַשַּׁעַר הַגָּדוֹל אֶחָד בַּדָּרוֹם וְאֶחָד בַּצָּפוֹן, שֶׁבַּדָּרוֹם לֹא נִכְנַס בּוֹ אָדָם מֵעוֹלָם, וְעָלָיו מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל "הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה [וְכוּ' וְהָיָה סָגוּר]". וּפֵרֵשׁ הרע"ב ז"ל שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁנֵי פְּתָחִים קְטַנִּים רְחוֹקִים קְצָת מִן הַשַּׁעַר.
“Then he returned me in the direction of the outer gate of the Sanctuary which faces the east.”1Yechezkel 44:1. This verse refers to the gate of Sanctuary which was before the Holy of Holies. The narrative continues, describing the wicket entrance next to this gate, “It was closed. God said to me, ‘This gate shall be closed. It will not be opened. Man shall not enter through it, because God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it. It has been closed.’ ”2Ibid.:1-2. Our Sages understood this verse as referring to the wicket entrance at the southern side of the gate to the Sanctuary. Thus, the Mishnah states in both Tractate Tamid3See Tamid 3:7. and Tractate Middos:4See Middos 4:2. “The Great Gate5I.e., the gate to the Sanctuary. had two wicket entrances [at its sides], one in the south and one in the north. No one ever entered the one in the south. The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it: ‘This gate shall be closed.’ ” In his commentary, Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura states that the mishnah is referring to two small entrances that were slightly removed from the gate.
וְכָתַב הרי"א ז"ל (יחזקאל מד, ג) עַל מִשְׁנָה זוֹ, וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ: וְהָיָה דַּעְתָּם שֶׁזֶּה מַה שֶּׁרָאָה פֹּה הַנָּבִיא הָיָה מִמַּה שֶּׁנַּעֲשָׂה בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי. וְאֵין דַּעְתִּי סוֹבֵל זֶהאהנה דעת האברבנאל וכן דעת הרד”ק והמלבי”ם, דדרשת חז”ל בזה אינו בדרך הפשט. שפשט הכתוב מדבר אך ורק בבית שלישי, ומדבר בשער הגדול של ההיכל, שאחרי שיבא בו הכבוד ישאר סגור לעולם. והוא לסימן. והודיע שאין שכינה זזה משם לעולם, ולא כמו שהיה בבית ראשון ושני. ומההוכחה לזה הקשה האברבנאל שלא יתכן שכתוב מדבר בבית שני. וכדלהלן. ויש להעיר לפי שיטתם, שישאר פתח ההיכל סגור לעולם איך יהיו יכולים להקריב קרבנו? הרי ידוע ההלכה וכן נפסק ברמב”ם (מעה”ק פ”ה ה”ה) וז”ל: שלמים ששחטן קודם שיפתחו דלתות ההיכל פסולין שנאמר פתח אהל מועד - בזמן שפתוח, אפילו היו דלתותיו מוגפות הרי זה כנעול. אבל הפרוכת שעליו אינה פוסלת, עכ”ל. וצ”ע., כִּי הִנֵּה בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי לֹא בָּא הַכָּבוֹדבבבית ראשון מצינו (מל”א ח, י – יא). “ויהי בצאת הכהנים מן הקדש והענן מלא את בית ה’, ולא יכלו הכהנים לעמד לשרת מפני הענן כי מלא כבוד ה’ את בית ה’”. אבל בבית שני לא מצינו שבא כבוד כמ”ש חז”ל (יומא כא:) חמשה דברים שחסרו בבית שני ואחד מהם שלא שרתה שכינה. דֶּרֶךְ שַׁעַר הַקָּדִים. וְאִם זֶה לֹא נִתְקַיֵּם שָׁם אָז אֵיךְ נֹאמַר שֶׁנִּתְקַיֵּם "הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה ... כִּי ה' אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ", מְחֻיָּב הוּא שֶׁנֹּאמַר שֶׁסְּגִירַת הַשַּׁעַר הָיָה אַחַר בּוֹא הַכָּבוֹד לַבַּיִת, עכ"ל.
Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel comments on this mishnah:6Abarbanel, Yechezkel 44:3. [The Sages’] conception was that the prophet’s vision here was identical with [the structure] that was made in the Second Beis HaMikdash. My mind cannot accept this. In the Second Beis HaMikdash, [God’s] Glory did not enter via the eastern gate.7I.e., with regard to the First Beis HaMikdash, it is written (I Melachim 8:10-11): “And it came to pass, when the kohanim departed from the Sanctuary, the cloud filled the House of God and the kohanim could not stand to minister because of the cloud; for the glory of God filled the House of God.” In the Second Beis HaMikdash, by contrast, there was not such a manifestation of Divine Glory, for as our Sages said (Yoma 21b), the Divine presence did not rest in the Second Beis HaMikdash. If that [prophecy] was not yet fulfilled, how can it be said, “This gate shall be closed… because God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it”? The implication is that the closing of the gate will come after [God’s] Glory enters the House.
אָמְנָם נְדַקְדֵּק בִּלְשׁוֹן הַמִּשְׁנָה הַזֹּאת שֶׁאָמְרָה 'וְעָלָיו מְפֹרָשׁגוכפי מה שרבינו מפרש לקמן בעניננו, כוונת המשנה במלת “ועליו” שעל שער (הפשפש הדרומי) זה ממש מפורש בכתוב. שכיון שהכבוד עתיד לבא בו לעתיד על כן “יהיה” סגור אחר ביאתו “והיה” סגור לפני ביאתו כלומר בבית שני. עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר' וְכוּ'. וְלֹא אָמְרָה הַמִּשְׁנָה: וְכֵן הוּא עָתִיד לִהְיוֹת, כַּלָּשׁוֹן שֶׁאָמְרָה (פ"ב מ"ה) גַּבֵּי חֲצֵרוֹת קְטֻרוֹת. אֶלָּא שֶׁבְּזֶה הַלָּשׁוֹן כִּוְּנָה לִדְחוֹת קֻשְׁיוֹת הרי"א דְּלֹא תַּקְשֶׁה כְּלָל. דְּאִלּוּ אָמְרָה 'וְכֵן הוּא עָתִיד לִהְיוֹת', שֶׁהָיְתָה הַמִּשְׁנָה מַשְׁוָה שְׁתֵּי הַבָּתִּים בִּשְׁנֵי הַפִּשְׁפָּשִׁים, הָיְתָה הַקֻּשְׁיָא הַזֹּאת עוֹלָה עַל לִבֵּנוּ דְּהֵיאַךְ יֶהֱווּ שָׁוִים? דְּאִלּוּ הָתָם הַסְּגִירָה לְאַחַר שֶׁבָּא הַכָּבוֹד דֶּרֶךְ שָׁם כַּכָּתוּב, וְאִלּוּ הָכָא עֲדַיִן הַכָּבוֹד לֹא בָּא, וְלָמָּה יִהְיֶה סָגוּר? לְכָךְ אָמְרָה 'וְעָלָיו מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל' - כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁבְּכָאן סָגוּר. 'וְעָלָיו מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל' כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר, לֹא שֶׁיִּשְׁתַּוֶּה שֶׁכֵּן יִהְיֶה לֶעָתִיד, שֶׁאֵין הָעִנְיָנִים שָׁוִים. שֶׁעִם הֱיוֹת שֶׁהַבִּנְיָנִים יִהְיוּ שָׁוִים בִּסְגִירַת הַשַּׁעַר, אֲבָל אֵין עִנְיַן סְגִירָה זוֹ כְּעִנְיַן סְגִירָה זוֹ.
In resolution: We must precisely analyze the words of the mishnah, “The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it.” The mishnah does not conclude: “And so it will be in the Future,” as it does in the mishnah which discusses the unroofed courtyards.8See Middos 2:5. With this choice of wording, the Sages prevent the question raised by Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel from arising. Were the mishnah to have said, “And so it will be in the Future,” thus equating the wicket entrances in the two Batei HaMikdash, the question could have arisen: How can one say they were similar? In the Future Beis HaMikdash, the wicket will be closed after God’s Glory enters, while in the Second Beis HaMikdash, His Glory had not yet entered. For that reason, the mishnah states, “The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it,” i.e., in this instance, the wicket was closed in anticipation of the fulfillment of the prophecy to Yechezkel. Thus, the intent is not that the situation will be the same in both Batei HaMikdash, because the motivating rationale is different in each instance. Although the wicket will be closed in both Batei HaMikdah, the reason it will be closed is not the same.
וְזֶה מַה שֶּׁהֵבִיאָה הַמִּשְׁנָה בִּשְׁנֵי הַמְּקוֹמוֹת, בְּתָמִיד וּבְמִדּוֹת, כָּל הַכָּתוּב, "וְהָיָה סָגוּר" דְּסֵיפֵיהּ דִּקְרָא, נַמִּי. דְּלִכְאוֹרָה הוּא כָּפוּל בַּכָּתוּב גַּם כֵּן, שֶׁכְּבָר הִתְחִיל הַכָּתוּב וְאָמַר "סָגוּר יִהְיֶה", אֶלָּא דְּרֵישֵׁיהּ דִּקְרָא "סָגוּר יִהְיֶה" בֶּעָתִיד מִשְׁתָּעִי, וְסֵיפֵיהּ דִּקְרָא "וְהָיָה סָגוּר" בֶּעָבָר קָאָמַר, כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁכְּבָר הָיָה סָגוּר קֹדֶם זֶה הֶעָתִיד. דְּאַף עַל גַּב דַּעֲדַיִן לֹא הָיָה בַּיִת שֵׁנִי בִּזְמַן יְחֶזְקֵאל, עִם כָּל זֶה קְרָאוֹ עָבָר אַחֲרֵי שֶׁמַּרְאֶה שֶׁלּוֹ בֶּעָתִיד נִתְרָאֶה אֵלָיו. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁכִּוְּנָה הַמִּשְׁנָה בְּאָמְרָהּ וְעָלָיו מְפֹרָשׁ עַל יְדֵי יְחֶזְקֵאל כוּ', וְהַיְנוּ בְּסֵיפֵיהּ דִּקְרָא "וְהָיָה סָגוּר". וְהִנֵּה הַטַּעַם שֶׁל "כִּי ה' אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא בוֹ", לֹא קָאֵי אַסְּגִירַת פִּשְׁפַּשׁ בַּיִת שֵׁנִי דִּכְתִיב בָּתְרֵיהּ, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא כְּלָל הָא דְּהִקְשָׁה הרי"א.
This concept is intimated by the fact that in both Tractates Middos and Tamid, the mishnah does not only quote the verse’s conclusion, “It has been closed.” Instead, the mishnah also quotes the beginning of the verse, “This gate shall be closed.” Seemingly, the verse is redundant. However, the first clause uses the future tense, while the last clause uses the past tense. This implies that the gate was already closed, before this future time. The use of the past tense can apply to Yechezkel’s vision, even though the Second Beis HaMikdash had not yet been built, because Yechezkel recorded his prophecy after having been shown the vision of the Future Beis HaMikdash. When the mishnah says, “The [prophet] Yechezkel speaks explicitly concerning it,” the mishnah is referring to this final clause, “it has been closed,” which refers to the Second Beis HaMikdash. By contrast, the rationale given by the verse, “God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it,” does not apply to the closing of the wicket in the Second Beis HaMikdash, but to its closing in the Future Beis HaMikdash. Thus, the question raised by Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel does not apply.
וְיֵשׁ לָתֵת טַעַם לִסְגִירַת פִּשְׁפַּשׁ בַּיִת שֵׁנִי, שֶׁהוּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁסּוֹף הַכָּבוֹד לָבֹא דֶּרֶךְ שָׁם. וְכֹה יֹאמַר הַכָּתוּב, "הַשַּׁעַר הַזֶּה סָגוּר יִהְיֶה" לֶעָתִיד "כִּי ה' ... וְהָיָה סָגוּר" בְּבַיִת שֵׁנִי גַּם כֵּן, אַחֲרֵי שֶׁאַחַר כָּךְ יָבֹא הַכָּבוֹד דֶּרֶךְ שָׁם, וְיִהְיֶה זֶה סִימָן אֶל עוֹלֵי הַגּוֹלָה כִּי עוֹד חָזוֹן לַמּוֹעֵד, וּבֹא יָבֹא כְּבוֹד ה' וְיַשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָתוֹ בְּבֵית מִקְדָּשׁוֹ.
The rationale that the southern wicket was closed in the era of the Second Beis HaMikdash in anticipation of God’s Glory entering in the Future is alluded to in the above verse: “This gate shall be closed.” The future tense refers to the Ultimate Future, “because God, the Lord of Israel, has entered it.” “It has been closed,” in expectation of that future time. The wicket’s being closed was a sign to those who returning from exile to look to the future, knowing that ultimately, God’s Glory would enter through this gate, and that He would cause His presence to dwell in His Beis HaMikdash.
אֶת הַנָּשִׂיא הוּא כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְעַיֵּן בְּסָמוּךְדבסימן הבא. שיש מפרשים שהנשיא הכוונה למלך.. אֵלָיו הוּא נוֹתֵן רְשׁוּת, לְפִי שֶׁנָּשִׂיא הוּא וְחָשׁוּב, וְאֵין דַּרְכּוֹ לֵישֵׁב וְלֶאֱכֹל עִם שְׁאָר הַכֹּהֲנִים בַּלְּשָׁכוֹת, "הוּא יֵשֶׁב בּוֹ לֶאֱכָול לֶחֶם" בְּתוֹךְ חֲלָלוֹ "לִפְנֵי ה' " (יחזקאל מד, ג).
The passage continues, stating:9Yechezkel 44:3. “The nasi will sit within it to partake of food in God’s presence.” Here, the term nasi, literally, “the uplifted one,” refers to the kohen gadol, the High Priest. Since the kohen gadol is more prestigious than the other kohanim, he would not usually eat together with the other kohanim in the various chambers. Instead, he would partake of his portion of the sacrificial offerings while sitting in the entranceway of this wicket.