1

Method By Which Jewish Temple Could Have Been Laid Out By Robert Kerson 3/10/2014 People have been speculating about a large exposed piece of bedrock at the center of the

Muslim Dome of the Rock building, a major mystery for centuries-- what was the relationship of

the rock and specifically the center of the rock and hence, the center of the building, to the site of

the destroyed Jewish temple building? Incorporated in the location and size of the rock and its

overlaying octagonal building, is evidence for this solution.

The rock also holds the solution of other mysteries concerning the Jewish temple, by using

nothing more than a piece of string: where was the 500 Cubit square in relation to the temple;

how was the square first laid out; where did the 187 and 135 Cubit dimensions of the Inner

courtyard come from; where were two peripheral building zones and a sacred barrier; where

were a number of gates and inner structures of temple located; what was the hole in the rock in

the roof of the cave; and what if anything, was located at the spot marking the exact center of the

present Muslim building? I have discovered a possible technique used in first laying out the

ancient temples onto a 500 Cubit square. I will show how present structures prove the design.

Especially the location of the hole in the ceiling of the cave proves the temple site. I will show

how two walls of the inner platform were derived from the Jewish temple and how they pinpoint

key temple locations. Even the Muslim building of today holds keys for locating the Jewish

temple of yesterday. I will show major evidence for the location of the temple, some of which

can be considered archeological agreements with Talmudic dimensional statements.

Jews believe the dimensions, locations and designs of the temple were given by God. If God is

in geometry and is in mathematics, then this is the detailing of that geometry and of this

mathematics.

I will show how a single (also the effects of multiples) large triangle, used as a measuring cord,

laid out either in part or completely, of a specific size and placed on specific points on the ground

starting from two natural caves and one hill scarp, could have been used to lay out the entire

ancient sacred temple court areas described in the Talmud. I will draw the Talmudic dimensions

of the temple into the design laid out by this triangle and almost miraculously the temple

emerges into a scaled drawing upon which I will then insert known structures such as the inner

platform, the cisterns and channels, stairs, walls, gates, and building of the Dome of the Rock

and Dome of the Chain onto this drawing and we can see where the temple and other structures

once existed on the current landscape. I have made the triangle on a large scaled paper drawing,

and onto a small photo copy of an accurate figure of the Temple Mount, to show the correctness

of my technique.

The only instruments needed to lay out the temple by this method would have been a rope of a

specific length, divided into equal specific divisions and a method for laying out right angles and

a number of people to hold the cord taunt in the shape of a triangle and then into the shape of a

square.

First some background: Herod’s Temple stood on the summit of the Temple Mount within the

500C square which fronted on the Kidron Valley. (All of the land under the square is on the

mount and does not include any fosse or valley. This fact must have made the site favorable for a

500 Cubit square.) The entire square Herod’s temple was a ‘T” shaped structure 100 Cubit wide

built within the western part of a 187 (E to W) by 135 (S to N) Cubit Inner Courtyard (The

Azarah). A large central room called the Heickal was 20 Cubits wide, so that the center line of

the building was 10 ( C )ubits from the northern and southern edges of the room. The Debir was

a 20C square area west of the Heickal. A 1C space separated the two rooms. A stone about two

inches high was at the center of this room on which the Ark of the Covenant once was placed.

The main building was 70C wide, with two 15C extended rooms measured on an axis from

2

north to south at the eastern end, part of the Ulam, a fore room east of the Heickal, making the

entire width 100C. On each side of the Ulam, the distance was 17.5C to the northern and

southern edges of the Azarah. The entire north- south distance was 17.5C+100C+17.5C or 135C.

The distance from the eastern end of the Ulam to the center of the Azarah was the same 17.5C

distance measured from both the northern and southern edges of the Ulam to the respective edges

of the Azarah. (187C/2 is the east- west axis line ( CL) midpoint of 93.5C. Measuring from the

eastern edge of the Azarah, we get 11C+11C+32C+22C+17.5C or 93.5C)1.

An outer zone called the Cheil marked the boundary between two differing areas of sanctity.

This Cheil was 10C beyond the innermost rectangular sacred areas of the Temple. It was divided

into an inner 6C band which may or may not have had steps (each of the twelve steps were 0.5C

wide for a total width of 6C.), and another 4C band which was flat ground. Here at the edge of

the Cheil was a dividing fence marked the Soreg which gentiles could not go past2. A 33.5C zone

for buildings must have existed between the Cheil and the Inner courtyard (not recorded in the

ancient literature but the existence of buildings are recorded and this length is detected by my

technique) forming a third higher area of sanctity. None but a king descended from King David

could sit in the area of the Azarah or in this zone of buildings (135C+33.5C+33.5C), but they

could sit within the area of the Cheil which was of a lesser sanctity.

Another 135 Cubit square courtyard was built east of the Azarah Courtyard. Both courtyards

were within a 500 Cubit square area. Four 40C square courtyards were built inside the corners of

the 135 Cubit square (I can also show these courtyards outside the large square and suspect the

former as being correct. I can also show a distinct smaller 30 by 40C rectangle covering part of

the same ground). The ancient portico called “Solomon’s Porch”, was built along the eastern

edge of the 500 C square. A great 32C altar had to be constructed on the exact same ground as

David’s original one presumably built on a threshing floor near the summit of the hillside3. The

first altar was built on a squared 28C base which was enlarged after the Jews returned from

Babylon, by adding 4C onto its southern and western sides making an enlarged square altar of

32C.

The entire 28C altar was within the territory of the tribe of Benjamin4, but with the enlarging of

the altar, the new 32C one had encroached 1C of its southeast corner within the territory of the

tribe of Judah since the actual border between these tribes run though the temple area and made a

south to east right angle at this location. The base had a notch of 1C located here, to allow the

entire altar to be within the territory of Benjamin only (the northern and western edges of the

base was 32C and the eastern and southern edges were 31C). The border ran eastward through

the Court of the Woman as shown in Figs. 6, 6a.

The altar and a large ramp 16C wide leading up to the altar from the south measured 62C (32C

altar and a 32C ramp overlapping the altar made the ramp 30C). The exact center of the Azarah

was at a point 67.5C (135/2) on a north-south line, and 93.5C (187/2) on an east-west line.

(Discussed later)

(See Fig. 1) The greatest area was south of the Inner Courtyard, the area east was smaller, the

area north even smaller, and the smallest area was to the west5.

1 See note 2 for more details

2 Rabbi Leibel Reznick,, The Holy Temple Revisited,( Jason Aronson Inc., 1990), 81 3 See note 27 for more details

4 See note 28 for a discussion

5 See note 1 for detailed description.

3

Fig. 1

4

Fig. 2

5

(See Fig. 2) Firstly, a long line was drawn along a line passing over a natural cave (this cave is

the only known cistern like opening existing under the temple building site, all other cisterns are

outside the building.) at a right angle eastward of the scarp line by the hill’s summit. This altar

may have been at a right angle to the natural scarp summit of the hilltop a short distance to the

west of the summit. (The altar may in fact have been located and orientated at a later time but the

biblical account highlights the threshing floor and not the cave.)6 This line became the temple’s

east–west center axis line (CL).

The natural western scarp of the rock makes a slight bend labeled point (L). A railing preserves

the bend exactly. The bedrock protrudes at this bend. This bend in the rock marked and still

preserves the center or axis line of the temple. (Finger like grooves are located on the rock here).

This line is tangent to the hole in the ceiling of the natural cave under the rock.

Secondly, a cord 2000 Cubits long (this description describes a single long cord but the actual

layout could have been done in sections using a smaller cord.) would have been divided into 32

parts marked with paint or cloth strips. This full length cord would be used to lay out the 500 C

square. Each part or segment would then be 2000/32 or 62.5C long. The number ‘32' as Cubits is

the post exile altar length. Note that both the altar (32C2) and the “Mountain of the House”

(500C2) were squares.

These distances were significant lengths since 2000C was the distance marking the outside of

the camp and also the distance one can walk on a holy day, and 62C was reused as the length of

the altar and ramp. This 2000C outer circumference square was the “Mountain of the House”

mentioned in the Talmud as being the sacred space on which the temple and its courts were

placed. Each 62.5C segment will be labeled x, thus 5x is 5 times 62.5C or 312.5C and 8x is 8

times 62.5 or 500C etc.

6 See note 14 for detailed description.

6

Fig. 3

7

(See Fig. 3) Thirdly, to create and locate on the Temple Mount site this square, a unique

isosceles 72°, 72°, 36° triangle, whose sides are 8:8:57 gives the ratio of 1.6 (from 8/5) which

will form perfect pentacles and pentagons (see Fig. 10) was laid out whose short side 5x

(312.5C) was to be along the edge of the hill overlooking the Kidron Valley parallel to the scarp

on the summit mentioned previously. This triangle could have been made by removing 11

segments (8x +3x) from the 32 segmented cord. This would yield a cord of 21x or segments, a

length of 1312.5C (32x-11x). The number ‘11' then became an important number in the design as

many courts were 11C in width or double 11C (22C) in width. (If one was to count one 500C

wall of 8x and take the additional 3x length, one would find one gate located exactly on or close

to the side of the 3x positions: the point opposite Wilson’s Arch– the probable Kaponius Gate

location on the western edge (see Figs. 6,). Note that 8x+ 3x again gives 11x8. Also note that this

would have been where wood was carried through the Soreg, then the Cheil, and on into the

Azarah by way of a nearby gate (part of Wilson’s Arch) to bring in wood since this was where

the SW corner of the sacred area was located. Wood would not have been carried far in this

design. (See Fig.1N also Figs. 6, 6a, for all details of this paper since it is a large scaled drawing.

Thus even gates were laid out using this system of segmented cord lengths.

The surveyors of the 500C square laid an east- west line across a natural cave to the east of the

summit which also crossed the natural western summit scarp at a point marked by a bend in the

rock (point L), and measured eastward exactly 10C– what was to become the center line distance

of the temple’s 20C Debir and Heickal width. This spot is labeled ‘I’ in Fig. 3. The southern

long line of the isosceles triangle, a cord 8x (500C long), was placed at the point 6x (3/4 the

cord’s length) precisely at I9. The short side of the triangle was laid parallel to the natural scarp

(this would make a right angle to the summit of the Mount of Olives). Another way of looking at

this is that triangle is 72°, 72°, 36°. The angle between the axis line and the triangle line is 18°

(36/2). Laying out 18° at I would create a short sided triangle line parallel to the natural scarp.

The northeastern corner of this triangle, is a point labeled A. (Or they laid the E-W axis line

grazing the northern edge of King David’s altar built on a thrashing floor.)

Now the cord was unfolded to its full length where A was taken as the northeastern corner of

the 500C square. The eastern edge of the triangle was extended southward 3x segments for a

total of 8x segments (5x+3x is 8x) or 500C. A 500 Cubit square could be laid out clockwise

making the northeast corner point A, then making a right angle along the line along the top of the

Kidron Valley, marking off a 500 Cubit line to the southeast corner, then another right angle and

marking off another 500 Cubits to the southwest corner, then another right angle and marking off

another 500 Cubits line to the northwest corner, then another right angle and marking off another

500 Cubit line back to the starting point A the northeast corner.

The big square altar built upon this square was purified by sprinkling blood on the Day of

Atonement starting from the southeast corner to the northeast corner and then to the northwest

corner. These corners and their connecting lines first purified the line from the southeast corner

to the northeast corner as in the triangle then the line from the northeast corner to the northwest

corner. Both lines utilize the northeast corner which was the site of the actual head corner (rosh

Pinah) described all the biblical texts except for Psalm 118 (detailed elsewhere in this paper.)

The line from the northeast corner to the northwest corner of the square was a segment of a very

7 See note 23 for details concerning this triangle.

8 See note 4 for more discussions concerning 11C. 9 See note 29 for more discussion.

8

important line involving the head corner (rosh pinah) of psalm 118 (detailed in my paper found

here--Proof of Jerusalem Temple’s Location In The Church Of The Holy Sepulchre )

This is the square discovered by Leen Ritmeyer10

(The northern edge of the Ritmeyer square is

in line with Golgotha Rock in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Discussions of this and other

details are beyond the scope of this article, but can be found in my book, Sacred Stones Sacred

Stories Vol.1). All lines such as the axis line, would be parallel to the edges of the 8x (500C)

square. (The length of this cubit is 52.5 cm which is the same length as 1 Royal Egyptian Cubit.

1 Khet =100 Cubits. River Measure = 20000 Cubits. (See wikipedia-- ancient units of

measurement. Also if 1 Cubit was 7 Palms, then 500 C was 500*7 or 3500 Palms, and if 1 Palm

was 4 Fingers, then 500 C was 3500 Palms * 4 or 14000 Fingers. 500C can be stated in any

combination of Cubits, Palms, and Fingers which was an ancient Egyptian method of

measuring.)

The northern edge of the current inner platform is the northern edge of the 500C Ritmeyer

Square, first laid out by the golden triangle cord shown in Fig. 3.

(See Fig. 4) Four mirrored pairs of eight triangles can be created from each of the four corners

of the great square. The angle bisector of these isosceles triangles would be at the halfway point

of each triangle’s short side (5x/2 or 2.5x which is 312.5/2 or 156.25 Cubits) positions from each

corner of the square. Four locations would be the overlap positions of two of these right angled

bisectors (labeled aa, bb, cc, dd.).

(See Fig. 5a) Next the square could be divided in half north- south and east -west. The east-west

center line of the square OVP was created (4x or 250C where V marks the exact center of 500

Cubit Squire)11

. The North- South midline (MVN 4x or 250C,) became the eastern edge of this

Inner Courtyard called the Azarah12

. They measured from here 3x (187.5 or 187C if the

remainder is discarded) to get the east-west length of the Azarah (the western edge is 7x from the

line AF). (The fraction was discarded to not have fractional distances such as 11.5 Cubit courts.)

Then the east-west length of the Azarah would have been 0.5C, a short distance east of the 3x

north-south line measured from the north-south midline of the square.

(See Figs. 6, 6a, and others marked D) Now I will place the Talmudic description of the temple,

the locations of the Dome of the Chain and the Dome of the Rock, cisterns and other features on

the resulting drawing. Let us examine the features starting in NE corner. A small natural cave

became the center of an ‘H’ shaped cistern (See Fig. D1). The location of this cave became the

controlling factor for a semi sacred outer zone called the Cheil. The size, shape, and location of

this cistern allowed a 10C (or 11C) band to be drawn called Cheil. The NE corner of this cistern

became the NE corner of the Cheil. (The SE corner of this same “H” shaped cistern became a

point on one of the diagonal lines of the great square.)

The 10C Cheil was subdivided into a 6C band which may or may not have had steps (it appears

only the western side and the western portion of the southern side had steps because the height of

the ground necessitated steps here), and a 4C band of flat ground all around.

This cistern was the only cistern oriented to the square. This fact, and the fact that the ceiling

was bedrock can only mean great difficulty must have been encountered getting the size and

orientation exactly under the Cheil and its NE corner. Water stored in this cistern, was stored

under the Cheil. Today the Cheil is gone but the original cistern bears witness to its previous

location.

The northern and eastern sides of the Cheil fixed its first surveying of the size and location.

There are descriptions of the Cheil being only on the eastern side. This was one of the sides first

laid out.

10

(Leen Ritmeyer, The Quest; (Carta Jerusalem; 2006), 232.

11 See note 12 for more detail.

12 See note 4 for more detail.

9

A known small natural cave ( Below the Temple Mount in Jerusalem; Shimon Gibson, David

Jacobson, BAR international Series 637; 1996; p.119) existed on the Temple Mount which was

enlarged into an artificial cistern of a specific size and shape. A line from this cave laid out

parallel to the created eastern edge of the square, (also this line would have been parallel to the

western scarp near the hill’s summit), would intersect the line of one mirrored triangle

A’B’C’ at point Q13

. The distance from the north-south center line (MVN) to point Q rounds off

to 135 Cubits. Likewise, from point Q the central axis line of the temple, the distance was 67.5C

which when doubled gave a distance north- south of 135C (67.5C +67.5C = 135C). These two

measurements from point Q would create a square courtyard of 135C which became the area of

the Court of the Women east of the north- south midline of the 500C square, and the rectangular

Azarah Court from the previously determined 187C west- east distance and the 135C north-south

distance west of the north- south midline of the 500C square.

The northern edge of this line was a short distance south of the 2x line measured south from the

northern edge of the square. (This explains why the Azarah was 187 by 135 Cubits and how this

size was first calculated, and where this courtyard was laid out possessed of no other

dimensions.)

(See Fig. 5b) The distance from the angle bisector of this triangle to the northern edge of the

Azarah is 30C. This would allow a rectangle 30C by (-?-) to exist at this spot. Ezekiel 46:21-22

speaks about four open courts measuring 30C by 40C. Later this same area had four courts 40C

by 40C occupying the same ground14

.

(See Fig. D2 ) A large cistern which was south of the Northern gate allowing entry into the

Court of the Women. This cistern was between the two northern 40C little courtyards. It western

end protruded just under the eastern edge of the inner platform.

(See Fig. D3) Moving westward there are two cisterns cut in bedrock ceilings whose drain

openings were cut within the 10C zone between the Soreg and the Cheil. Since the ceiling was

bedrock, the opening must be in their original location, dug within the 10C band between the

Soreg and the Cheil. When the cistern was dug, this 10C zone was known. The drain opening on

the western cistern was placed at the 4x location of one triangle. (Also note in Figs. 6, 6a the 1x

in the area near the S.W. corner of the Cheil on the triangle A`B`C` ). These two cisterns were

directly north of the Court of the Lepers15

. Water stored here must have been used by this court.

(See Fig. D4) Next is a very large rectangular cistern which may have been used as a

passageway leading from the northern unused Tadi Gate to the eastern half of the Heickal. The

center line of this cistern was in a direct line with the eastern half end of the Heickal (Holy

Place). The southwestern corner was in a direct line with point (I) and the Double Gate to the

south. This corner was at the northern edge of the Azarah, and its western edge of was at the 6x

mark on the line AB of the triangle. At some later time, this passage could have been converted

into a cistern. Two wellheads (or drain holes) ran along the southern edge of the Cheil. This

would have put the water running into the cistern from the Cheil and open to the sky for I

surmise the Rinsing Chamber was just to the south. This cistern was definitely used at some time

as a water cistern dug directly under part of or wholly under the Rinsing Chamber where

sacrificial animal intestines were washed– an act requiring much water.

(See Fig. D5) Next is a large complex of cisterns with a divided chamber dug under the Cheil,

and a deep cistern dug just beyond the Soreg, a boundary located 10C past the Cheil. This

complex must have been part of the Hearth Chamber.

13 Every triangle has its mirror image. If one triangle creates a pentacle, then its mirrored image

creates a pentacle in mirror image. The resulting figure is a 10 pointed star. This was a common Jewish motif.

14

See note 23 and note 23a-b 15

See note 25 for more discussion.

10

(See Fig. D6) Next comes an anomaly in the surface of the inner platform. This anomaly is a

major piece of archeological evidence for my locating the temple as seen in Figs. 6, 6a. For here

is essentially a hole in the surface, were can be found a very ancient bedrock sloping to the west

presently covered by a Muslim building. It was at the NW corner of the Cheil. A steep and very

finely finished scarp along eastern edge of the hole is exactly the angle of the Cheil/Azarah seen

in Figs. 6a, and 6d. This is the only scarp of the correct angle for the Cheil’s/Azarah’s western

side. (The actual western edge of the Azarah would have been here 0.5C east of the 3x string

location (187.5C) seen in Figs. 6, 6a).

The sloping surface is exactly within the 6C zone of the Cheil which may have had a

staircase16

. I shall now quote from a book concerning this cistern17

. The author of this quote is

Conder [C 1872, 165 = /pef Archives, WS/10/2] On the rough rocks there are marks as though of

the remains of steps, or of masonry, fitted against the wall. The interest of this discovery is very

great, and no doubt it will form a new point in future theories on the temple.” We also read,” that

a 15th

century scholar wrote: On the west side of the Dome of the Rock are rocks said to be of the

time of David. It is evident that they are naturel rocks, rooted in the ground, and never removed.”

The gentiles made the Soreg to have 13 openings into the Cheil’s sacred areas. This could

have been one of these 13 openings on the western side of the Azarah.

An interesting side note is that only one Muslim staircase still overlays an original Cheil

staircase, and that is the staircase to the west of the Dome of the Rock. Simple inspection of Fig.

6 shows this has to be true if these figures are correct.

Warren’s Gate converted at a later time into a cistern was used by Jews as a synagogue since it

was considered to be the closest point on the Western Wall to the Debir. My location for the

Debir puts this gate just to the south of this room and slightly closer from Leen Ritmeyer’s

placement. The gigantic stone called the master coarse is between the southern end of the Azarah

including the center line and the row of southern chambers. If a storeroom were to be behind the

Western Wall it would be in line with these chambers.

Next we have arrived at the southern edge of the inner platform. This southern edge of the

Cheil was here as you can see my measurements of Figs. 6, 6a. Note, here are two Muslim

staircases just outside the original temple Cheil and Soreg. (We have three sides of the inner

platform accounted for.) An interesting fact which may or may not have any significance is the

fact the half way point between the 250C line of the 500C square labeled MVN in Fig. 6, and the

southern Soreg is currently the location of one wide staircase leading up to the inner platform

between the Al-aksa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. This was one of the first stairways built

on the platform.

(See Fig. D7) A cistern having a number of well openings was part of the Golah Chamber. Note

the wellhead in the Azarah. It was just north of the Golah Chamber by the SW corner of the

ramp18

. Water from this well must have been used to wash to altar and ramp. This cistern has a

long section with an unusual orientation. A few other features also possess this orientation of 9°

north of west. Examining Figs. 6, 6a reveals the angle of this cistern is exactly orientation of the

line BC of the triangle ABC. In fact, this cistern is a short distance south of this line. I contend

the cistern and other features were all deliberately meant to be parallel to the line of triangle

ABC or one of similar triangle lines seen in Fig. 4. These features are all within the 500C square.

A number of features north of the 500C square are all parallel to the line AB of the triangle ABC,

or one of similar triangle lines seen in Fig. 4. These lines are all 9° south of west.

This is a major piece of evidence the design was laid out using triangle ABC since this cistern is

16 See note 22 for more details concerning this rock.

17 Shimon Gibson and David M. Jacobson , Below the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, (BAR

international Series 637, 1996) no page numbers

18 See note 11 for more details.

11

an archaeological feature with an orientation that cannot be explained accept by this finding.

The SE corner of the inner platform which has the aforementioned cistern emerging from here,

would have been very close the southern line of the Cheil in line with the Triple Gate. As

mentioned elsewhere, this line from the Triple Gate pointed to the Chamber of Oil just to the

Note how this cistern was designed to curve around the S.E. corner of the inner platform which

suggests the corner was in place as the time the cistern was built.

The cistern located here has the floor well below the level of the platform. At about 15 meters

it is the lowest of any large cistern19

. (see note 24 for a discussion)

(See Fig. 9) Part of a paving (or wall) was seen when a trench was cut. This paving is exactly at

point G, the 3x location on the triangle. The paving matches the location of the paving midway

between the Courts of Oil Storage, and Court of the Nazerite.

(See Fig. D8) Two more cisterns were close to the Chamber of Wormy Wood Storage. An

ancient legend mentions a cistern associated with this chamber where a priest fell into a hole

under this chamber where the Ark was once hidden during the Babylonian invasion centauries

previously.

The altar was 28C square but was enlarged 4C on its western and southern sides making it 32C

square. (Note in Figs. 6, 6a the line BC of triangle ABC defines the 28C SE corner of the altar.

The distance from the axis line to this point was 28C. This helped define the square base of the

original 28C altar.) This increased size allowed the SW corner to cover a drain, but it also had

four other consequences:

The temple was wholly within the territory of Benjamin, as the border line ran south of the

Jebusite city, according to the Book of Joshua but at some later time, the border ran close to the

site of the altar. The border between the tribes of Benjamin and Judah made a right angle 3C

from the SE corner of the 28C altar. The altar was totally within the territory of Benjamin20

.

When the altar was extended 4C on the south side, it engulfed 1C on its foundation past the

border into the territory of Judah. To keep the altar wholly within Benjamin, a 1C square was cut

out of the foundation, making the base 31C on its southern and eastern side, and 32C on its

northern and western21

.

The border ran eastward though the Courts of the Lepers and Wormy Wood Storage, and

southward through Chamber of Hewn Stones. If the border ran through this room, the eastern

part would have been in the territory of Judah, making the room a long rectangle, and the

western part would have been in the territory of Benjamin. If the border ran through the western

wall of the chamber, then the entire room would have been in the territory of Judah, and the

Golah Chamber to the west would have been in the territory of Benjamin. If the border ran

through the Chamber of Hewn Stone, neither tribe could claim full ownership of the Sanhedren’s

(the supreme religious authority) building. Each of the two tribes near the city of Jerusalem

would have been at the border line running through the Sanhedren’s most important location.

(The border ran southwestward to Regolim Spring, and then to the Valley of Hennom, and

eastward it ran over the Mount of Olives then to maalay adummim.)

Another consequence of this extension was that the distance of the western edge of the altar to

the front of the temple was now 22C, symmetrically the same distance from the eastern edge of

the Azarah to the eastern edge of the altar.

A third consequence very hidden and important can be seen in figs. 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b. The 500C

square can have two diagonal lines meeting at point V. Any point on these lines have a distinct

relationship: the distance from a specific point on a diagonal have two sets of right angles of

19

Gibson and Jacobson, no page numbers

20

See Note 29 for discussion. 21

See appendix 1

12

equal lengths. (All distances at the intersection of the two diagonals are equal to each other. See

Fig.7b) The 28C altar fell short of a diagonal line, but the addition of 4C westward and

southward placed the altar’s NW and SE corners (at the right angle border between Benjamin

and Judah) exactly on the diagonal, hence the equalities held true22

. Thus the border curved along

a diagonal of the 500C square. As a consequence of the border making this right angle bend

along this diagonal line, the area allotting to the territory of Judah within the 500C square is the

shape of a smaller square occupying the SE corner of the 500C square. (This territory of Judah

square is larger than the square delineated by points (OVNF), which is 1/4 the size of the whole

500C square (see Figs. 6, 6a, and Note 14b)23

.

The border between Benjamin and Judah appears to have been located within the wall

separating the Golah Chamber in Benjamin from the Chamber of Hewn Stones in Judah. As it is

written: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah” Gen. 49:10. Benjamin went into exile along

with Judah. When they returned, they both rebuilt the Golah Chamber.

The fourth consequence seen in Figs. 6, 6a is that the intersection of the temple’s axis line and

this diagonal line defines exactly the NW corner of the enlarged 32C altar.

Centuries later, when the Dome of the Rock was built, the northern and eastern doors were

exactly on the same diagonal, hence they also have the equality phenomenon. Ironically the

Muslim building possesses a similar relationship to the Jewish altar on the same Talmudic 500C

square of the Jewish temple. (If a previous Christian or pagan building existed on the same site

as the Dome of the Rock, this earlier structure would have had their northern and eastern doors

possessing the equality phenomenon.)

Since the building’s size and location are both dependent on the size and location of the Rock,

this centering of two doors is the direct consequence of this Rock (or the geometry of note 6).

Remember the four overlapping locations24

discussed previously concerning Fig. 5? These

locations are all on the two diagonal lines of the 500C square. (Remember, the preceding

paragraph about the third consequence? All of these twelve overlapping locations have the

equalities mentioned.) They also created an inner square 3x or 187.5C on a side which is 0.5C

larger then 187C– a dimension of the Azarah. The two northern locations have the N.E. location

(bb) falling on the western wall of the Court of Wormy Wood storage, and the NW location (aa)

falls on the western wall of the northern Ulam’s clean knife room. Note they are both on western

walls of structures. (The angle bisector of one of the triangles making location (aa) passes

through point (hole)– the center of the Azarah and the current site of the hole in the rock.)

Another really amazing fact is this: When we measure where on the one diagonal line running

though the Dome of the Rock and altar, the lengths of the lines running toward the periphery of

the 500 C square, making right angles are the lengths of the triangle's ratio of 8/5, we find this

point is just to the southeast of the eastern door of the Dome of the Rock (point U), and just to

the north of the temple’s original axis line. (This point is in the small space between the temple’s

axis and the Dome of the Rock’s E-W axis lines. It is also on a 500C diagonal line between the

eastern door of the Rock building and the NW corner of the altar. ) The Golden Ratio is also

nearby. It is astounding that the eastern door of the Muslim building is close to the triangle's ratio

of 1.6 on the Jewish temple’s sacred square! (See Fig. 6c and note 8) This is another example of

the building incorporating the Golden Ratio25

.

22 See note 5 for more on the subject of 4C altar.

23 See note 19 for more details.

24 See note 20 for important discussion on these triangles.

25 Another example of this ratio is on the triangle ABC, the 5x distance on line from C to B reaches

a point on the altar. Since the distance C to B is 8x, then this distance is 8x/5x is the ratio measuring to the location

of the altar. Similarly, if we measure from B to C, the 5x distance reaches point G the exposed wide wall in a

Muslim ditch. (See Fig. 6)

13

Another fact seen is that the two axis lines of the Dome of the Rock, centered on the rock,

meet this diagonal line at two doors. Near the eastern door was the Golden Ratio point26

.

An earlier Roman temple might have existed on the Summit of the Rock shaped like a square,

or rectangle, with features on the side of these two doors, but this is very speculative. A possible

statue of the emperor could have existed at the center of the Debir facing west. There are vague

legends placing a flying horse tied up somewhere in the vicinity of the building’s western door.

The armor of a great Muslim general was once placed in the western side of the rock.

Another structure of great importance is the Dome of the Chain, located east of the Dome of

the Rock. This was the center of Herod’s Temple Mount additions, the area between the altar and

the sacrificial slaughter site.

The name preserves two Jewish temple associations of this place. Firstly, the site north of the

altar was where lots were chosen for the fate of two goats on the Day of Atonement– a day of

judgment. One goat, the scapegoat had a thread tied to its horns. The Muslim legends concerning

the spot involve the idea of ‘judgment’ at the end of days when a chain stretching from this dome

to heaven would be grasped by the righteous. The idea of a ‘thread’ could morph into the idea of

a ‘chain’.

The second association of judgment concerns the judgment of women professing innocence

from adultery (The Sotah). The women stood by an open northern small gateway (by the main

center line gate called Nekanor’s Gate), near the Court of the Lepers to receive dust taken from

the floor of the Heickal, just to the north of the Heickal’s doorway, north of the center line (The

site now is on The Rock to the east of point J in Figs. 6, 6a.) Everything north of the center line:

the open northern gate, the chosen lot site, the northern doorpost, the Table of Showbread was

along this lineup where the Dome of the Chain was to be built at the center of Herod’s Temple

Mount.

Also, the women may have had her breasts bound in a rope. The concept of a ‘rope’ could

easily become the concept of ‘a chain’. The area just north of the 8C space was an area of rings.

What is a chain but a rope of interconnected rings? Hence, the Muslim name retains a vestige of

Jewish remembrance of this site by important area of sacrifice north of the altar.

Later, you will read about the Sotah location or stone in the floor of Heickal. You will see this

location (point J) was in line with the Dome of the Chain to the east. Thus the name of the little

dome again has a connection with the center of the rock and the ancient Jewish ritual of the

Sotah.

The Dome of the Chain at the center of Herod’s Temple Mount is north of Herod’s southern

outer wall. Both Double and Triple Gates in the southern wall are symmetrically placed around

this center point on the wall so that these gates were symmetrically placed on this Sotah stone.

(See Fig. 7) I will now discuss one of the most important proofs of the temple’s location: what

if anything was at the exact center of the Azarah? The center was 187/2 or 93.5C on the east-

west center line, and 135/2 or 67.5C on the north-south center line.

(See Fig. 8 ) Simple inspection of the design shows this spot was on the center line of the

building on the threshold Herod’s temple (between the two doorpost and under the lintel, and

within the Ulam of Solomon’s) exactly 17.5C west of the eastern edge of the Herod’s Ulam– the

same distance on each side of the Herodian measured to the northern and southern edges of the

Azarah. (17.5C= 100C+ 17.5C =135C. The full measurement starting at the eastern edge of the

Azarah at the 250C NS midline progressing westward is: 11C+ 11C +32C +22C + {within the

Ulam} 17.5C = 93.5C27

.

26 See notes 5 and 7 for more details.

27 See note 2 for more details.

14

What if anything is located at this spot28

? This spot is over the cave in the rock where a hole

exists to this day. The rock which once occupied this hole was at the center of the area this string

layout system created the center of a 187 by 135 C rectangle within the 500C rectangular square.

The Azarah was believed to be land at the center of the world. (This hole in the rock location

was the same spot the Bordeaux Pilgrim wrote about decades later) Then logically the center of

the Azarah was believed to be at the exact center of the world29

.

The center of the world could have been the point people faced when praying. This point on

the temple site (on the temple’s threshold and not the center of the Holy of Holies), would then

have been the first “qibblah” direction for prayer of Mohammed influenced by an ancient Jewish

memory of the Azarah’s center point. The second “qibblah” direction for prayer of Mohammed

was changed to became the exact center of the Kabba (when you face the kabba, you face the

center and not any corner of the building). Both qibblahs mark center of courtyards. The first

qibblah was the center of the Jewish Azarah courtyard, and the second qibblah was the center of

the courtyard which has the square portion of the Kabba .in its center. This low walled structure

was originally open to the sky.

A round plug of rock was cut out of the ceiling. This plug or some portion of rock was moved

55.5C west along the central axis to the floor at the center of the Diber (Holy of Holies).

(Moving this rock has precedence in Muslim times as a piece of the rock is under a small domed

building to the north and is also in a case on the western edge of the Rock.) Here bedrock

slopped downward. The Debir was built on an artificial foundation having a number of arches

built to prevent contamination with any underlying tombs. The height of the foundation was

about 6C here. Either the round 3 fingerbreadth rock was placed on the floor or the floor was cut

out a sufficient depth to allow 3 fingerbreath surface to protrude above the pavement. The size of

the rock was sufficient to act as a base for the Ark of the Covenant or a base for the fire pan of

the High Priest, and the shape matched the shape of the Horizon. The stone was either placed

under the ark or near it. Note the description is not of a large stone as the current rock is but of a

small stone set on the ground30

.

Then the hole in the rock was where the Foundation Stone or Drinking Stone (Even Shteah)

once was. It was a rock placed next to or under the Ark of the Covenant. Note the Talmudic

description is not of a large piece of bedrock as the current rock is, but of small rock a few

centimeters high. It must have been moved from the exact center of the Azarah to a spot west of

center, but still within the Azarah area. The concept of the world’s center now was shifted to the

Debir where the Even Shtiah was moved. The rock was stone broken from bedrock. The level of

bedrock was the same level as the floor of the Debir, only the Even Shiteah was 3 fingerbreadths

higher.

The theory sand covered the floor of the Debir and 3 fingerbreaths was exposed is nonsense,

because this assumes sand about 2 inches high would have remained in place for several

millennia. Imagine the dirt, dust, and dried blood covering a floor that was never cleaned in a

room which had to be scrupulously cleaned having spotless walls and a filthy floor! The Veil had

to be cleaned as well. To be cleaned the veil had to be taken down and then replaced. Imagine

doing this for centuries with the breeze created every time the veil is hauled up and down

blowing the sand out into the Heickal.

Also the rock was originally under the Ulam, threshold and eastern part of the Heickal. The

center of the Debir with its Even Shiteah would have been near the western door of the Dome of

the Rock. The building’s size, which reflects the size and location of the Rock fixes the location

28

The center of the Azarah was in line with the Eastern Gate (Nakanor), Northern Gate (Taddi), Southern Gate

(double), with no Western Gate.

29 See notes 3 and 10 for more details. 30

See Fig. 10N for view of Herod’s temple showing hole in rock having a secondary plug marked 5 in figure.

15

of the doors on the outside of the structure.

If the center of the Azarah was where a well like hole existed in the rock over a cave, and if the

hole was under the center line of the temple then when the Messiah comes, these ancient

descriptions are possible: 1. Water could flow out from the threshold, (Ezekiel 47:1). 2. Water from a primordial sea under Eden under the cave at the center of the world could flow

out from under this cave. (An ancient legend does state this). 3. This primordial water flowing out of the cave could flow out of a well like opening in the ceiling

of the cave– the same water flowing from under the temple’s threshold Ezeikiel 47:1-2 also has hidden illusions to two major lines in Figs. 6, 6a. If we substitute two streams of water and make them two lines, we get Figs. 6, 6a.31. The biblical account seems to be describing a vision of the temple’s axis line from Solomon’s to Herod’s and its intersecting triangle at point I. The prophet seems to have some knowledge of this.

4. Also Joel 4:18.

There is circumstantial evidence knowledge of the temple’s location was vaguely known

several hundred years after the destruction. The evidence concerns the “Bordeaux Pilgrim” who

visited the Temple Mount several centuries after the destruction. He wrote Jews (priests) were

allowed on one day of the year to pour oil on a pierced rock on the Temple Mount. How was this

possible if these Jews were not to step on the area under the Debir? If the rock was under the

Debir, it was possible to violate the sacred space, but if the rock and specifically the hole in the

rock was the location of Temple’s threshold, there would have been no possibility of violating

the sacred space. If any remembrance existed that the pierced rock was under the eastern end of

the building, the act of approaching from the east and stepping on the rock would not have been

a problem. Also, the western wall of the Debir was the last part of the building seen. The time

interval form the removal of this wall and the statement of the Bordeaux Pilgrim was only a few

hundred years, reinforcing the possibility the Jews had a vague remembrance of the Debir

location.

Also here were Jews at a later time who attended the Dome of the Rock building. If they were

priests, who never went near the western door of the building, they would not have violated the

sacred space.

More circumstantial evidence can be concerning the temple location from a ‘Muslim source’. A

very old part of the Al Aksa Mosque is called because of a vague remembrance of the Jewish

temple’s and altar’s location “Zachariah’s Tomb”. This small room may preserve memory of the

death of a priest named Zachariah in either the old or New Testament. This priest was slain

between the Ulam of the temple building and the altar. If we look at the area directly north of this

room, we would reach the area between the Ulam and the altar seen in Figs. 6, 6a.

(See Fig. 9) The inner platform’s N.E. corner, Z occupies a very special spot: it is on the E-W

running line marking the northern edge of the 500 Cubit square exactly 3x from the N.E. corner

at A (187.5C the Jewish court’s E-W length). (This also marks a corner of one triangle in Fig. 4)

A right angle taken from Z reaches point G, and if we measure along the eastern edge of the

platform, from Z, we would reach K at the top of the Muslim staircase in front of the Dome of

the Rock putting K on the building’s midline axis. From Figs. 6, 6a you can see this location is

between the two square western 40C courtyards. Other Muslim features are at critical Jewish

locations such as the distance G to W, the top of the southern staircase going up to the building,

is 3x or 187.5C, the same distance G to J.

Note the mirrored image of triangle ABC labeled A’B’C’ having a point in mirror image to

point I, labeled I’ on the center axis line between the two 40C eastern courts. There may have

31 See note 18 for more details

16

been something here, such as an underground room for storage, or a lower court in the Court of

the Women. Also note in Figs. 6, 6a how parallel lines of these two triangles touch two corners of

the two eastern courts. This shows the court’s position matched these triangle locations.

A paving (or wall) seen in a recently dug trench east of the inner platform is exactly in the area

between the two southern 40C courts. This could be part of the paving of the Court of the

Women. The paving is exactly at the 3X point on the ABC triangle.

Also note the present Muslim staircase is in the center of the Court of the Women at point K.

(See Fig. 10) We have seen the 8:5 triangle which can be divided 2x,3x, 3x. Alternately it can be

divided 3x, 2x, 3x. In the later, a pentacle is formed whose points are 3x (187C), the length of the

Inner Courtyard, and an outer pentagon whose sides are 5x (312C), the base of the isosceles

triangle and an inner pentagon whose sides are 2x (125C), the distance from B to I. Thus we

have an octagon in the Dome of the Rock, and hidden pentacles and pentagons ( of which the

five pointed star was a common motif in Herod`s temple) in the hidden ratio of 8:5– a ratio by

which the Jewish temple was first laid out. The point 5x from C falls on the altar. The point 6x is

I where the axis line crosses the triangle.

The midpoint of the southern wall passes through the Mikvah building to the east of the Double

Gate Another example of a midpoint of an edge is given below32

.

(See Fig. 11) The eastern edge of the inner platform is at a peculiar angle. Why was this wall

constructed at this angle? (See my book, Sacred Stones Sacred Stories vol. 2 for another

explanation not given here. ) Remember th

e Azarah measured 187C (which is .5C less then 3x). The northeast corner of the platform is

exactly on the 3x location Z measured from point A, along the northern edge of the 500C square.

The builders found location 6x along this edge, which is 6x-3x or 187.5C from point 6x, and

measured exactly 187.0C on an even longer measuring cord. The excess cord making a right

angle to the 3x location Z would be on a diagonal line. This diagonal is exactly the line and

location of the eastern inner platform.

By extending this line southward to where it meets the Cheil, we get the entire eastern edge of

the ‘inner platform. (This is also the same distance 5x, measured along the northern edge of the

platform.)

Identical lines of 135C, 135.5C, 187C, and 187.5C can also be laid out as right angles on this

edge measuring to the Temple’s Axis.

Point T would have been a spot close to where the High Priest stood in front of the Even

Shiteah on the central axis line when he entered the room on the Day of Atonement to purify the

Ark etc33

.

The angle of this wall is 95° from true north. This is a major moon rise standstill position at

Passover.

I believe the above system was used to lay out a possibly very low and short wall segment as a

temple feature not described in the ancient writing. It would have appeared as a diagonal wall

whose top was the level of the Court of the Priests. A large center section was open and

encompassed the Court of the Women. Two very ancient cisterns north and south of this court (in

Figs. 6, 6a they were two cisterns north of the Court of the Lepers) could have been behind this

wall.

These two dated ancient cisterns offer a very strong evidence for the existence of this wall

being a temple feature: they have bedrock ceilings, whose height is very close to the present

surface of the platform. This implies the current height of the ceiling is still possessing the

original height when the cistern was dug. (If the height was extended upward, I would expect the

ceiling would have been destroyed and a new ceiling made of masonry and bricks added.) If the

32 A discussion of the rock’s size and shape is in appendix note 6

33 See note 15 for more detailed discussion.

17

height of these ceilings is close to the height of the platform, then the level of the ground over

these cisterns must be close to the level of the ground when the cisterns were dug in temple

times. A wall east of these cisterns would then be reasonable. Since the height of the ground here

matches the height of the ground within the Court of the Priests, it also is reasonable to assume

this area of the platform was leveled when the Court of the Priests existed in the temple.

When the temple was destroyed, the wall remained and someone either Romans, or Muslims

destroyed the Court of the Women and had this center section filled in. Muslims have kept this

wall and the angle of this wall preserved and clearly visible to this day. A few original Herodian

stones still exist possibly in situ in the northeast part of the wall within the area shown in Fig. 11.

This can be archaeological evidence for the existence of a Herodian wall here. The fact the wall’s

angle and location can be arrived at from points 3x, and 6x (also 6x was the important distance

for locating point I) infers the system of dividing 500C into 8 parts as detailed in this text,

strengthens the argument for this being the system used to lay out the temple as shown in Figs. 6,

6a. It also infers this wall was a very ancient feature predating the Muslim era. These are very

strong evidences to support my theories.

The existence of a Herodian wall here, explains why this very oddly angled wall remains a

feature today34

. It had mathematical and geometrical properties that some builder put into stone.

Mathematical and geometrical properties of the highest importance for the temple– it made use

of the length of width of the Azarah and measured to the innermost sacred areas of the temple–

the center of the Azarah, and the Debir.

Remember the cistern whose western end was just under the line of this wall mentioned

previously? This cistern fit exactly within the space between the two northern 40C little square

courtyards. It western end is very close to where we would expect the cistern to terminate if it

were designed to go no farther than any wall located above. The small error of this cistern

tunneling under the present inner platform eastern wall may be do to tunneling error, since the

workmen had to dig and measure the cistern without modern equipment. Most likely they used a

piece of string of proper length laid out underground as they dug westward. The height of the

ceiling in this cistern is lower than the previous two cisterns to the west. In profile, this again

confirms the level of the ground over this cistern would have been lower than the level of the

ground to the west of the wall. This cistern may be another piece of evidence for the existence of

a temple feature wall at this spot and of this ground being at a lower elevation east of this wall.

The existence of such a wall is not in any description of the temple, but can be envisioned as a

wall at the northern and southern portions with an open space in between. The two western

courts of oil and Lepers would then be set against the rock face on two sides and each court

would have had two openings.

Near the southeastern corner of the inner platform, bedrock or ancient stones can be seen.

These would have been remnants of the Cheil (see Figs. 6, 6a). The wall terminates at its

southern end at the ancient temple Cheil which must have existed in ruined form, at the time

Muslims repaired and defined the southern end of this diagonal wall.

The surface of the inner platform appears to be the Court of the Priests level. A number of stairs

no longer exist. The ground was leveled with only the rock protruding above the ground. The

altar had to be in contact with the bedrock of the Earth. Any representation of the altar not

touching bedrock must be in error.

Also, the Court of Israel could not be made of hewn paving stones (see Leviticus 26:1) since

the assembled congregation could not prostrate themselves on a hewn stone paving. The bedrock

under the Court of the Priests would have been just high enough to be the foundation of the Altar

but the bedrock under the Court of Israel would have been just low enough to not have exposed

bedrock. This court would then have been built up with a flooring of sand or bedrock. There is

34

See Note 26 concerning this wall.

18

no mention of this written in the Talmud, but my temple location and the bedrock level at the

Court of the Priests and Court of Israel would just allow the flooring of the Court of Israel to be

either sand or bedrock. The current level of the bedrock under the altar and under the Court of

Israel are at the right levels.

I found that if one was to measure from the Chamber of Hewn Stones (a chamber near the

altar) the place called Aceldama (Field of Blood) at the eastern end of the Valley of Hinnom

through which the border between Benjamin and Judah passed was located was just beyond the

2000C distance. Any tombs located nearby would be beyond 2000C from this chamber. The

possible tomb complex of the High Priestly family Annas and a nearby leper’s tomb does exist in

this vicinity which would mean these tombs were located at a spot that was just outside the camp

distance of 2000C, using the same cubit measurement used in designing the 500C square, having

somewhere within the Chamber of Hewn Stones as the center point.

Another fact is that my placement of the temple, the eastern wall of the Dome of the Rock is

located where the space between the altar and the Ulam existed. This space had a fourth row of

paving stones next to the altar. On this stone sacrificial blood was stirred by a priest on the Day

of Atonement. Hence the wall would be over where this paving stone would have been.

I find it very ironic that I can make these statements about two researchers on the temple

location, Drs. Leen Ritmeyer and David M. Jacobson: The locations of the Holy of Holies and

altar proposed by Jacobson are very close to mine shown in Figs. 6, 6a, but I am showing them

by using the 500C square proposed by Ritmeyer35

! And my methodology for placing the temple

close to (but by no means exactly) at the same location as Dr. Jacobson positively does not use

any of his arguments in my placement.

Dr. Leen Ritmayer has discovered a depression on the surface of the rock and flat areas

matching the size and location of the Debir with a depression matching the Ark of the Covenant

and a foundation trench the size of Solomon’s Temple.

This article shows that the rock was east of the Debir. I can show these marks could have been

made by using string stretched over the rock attached to the 4 piers of the building. It is possible

to date these cuttings.

They are:

1. The creation of Ritmeyer’s Ark depression and flat areas being features cut in the middle ages

using strings stretched from the piers around the Rock most likely the work of Knights Templars.

The description of the temple location written in the sixteenth century by Tosafot Yom Tov

matches the temple location using the post Muslim building stretched strings.

2. The use of measuring cords in laying out Hezekiah’s Tunnel. This use of cords laid on the

surface of the ground can explain the serpentine path from two ends meeting at a single location.

3. The use of measuring cords in laying out The Herodian. The location of the kings tomb is

precisely at the spot dictated by this system of laying out these cords and was not a random

choice.

4. Use of measuring cords in the construction of St. Peter’s tomb, and Constantine’s Basilica at

the Vatican. )

I will now come to one of the most important of discussions of this paper. From Figs. 6, 6a it is

apparent the rock under the Dome of the Rock as well as the actual building was under the Ulam,

the eastern part of the Heickal, a small portion of the adjacent southern side rooms and a larger

portion of the adjacent northern side rooms.

(See Fig. 12) This the exact placing of my deduced location of the Ulam, and Heickal of

Solomon’s Temple overlaid then traced over an accurate drawing of the rock. Fig. 13 is the exact

placing of my deduced location of the Ulam, and Heickal of Herod’s Temple overlaid then traced

in a similar fashion. Note the hole in the rock is within the Ulam of Solomon’s Temple, but

35 See note 16 for more details.

19

within the engulfing wider Herod’s threshold,. Notice that the eastern lowest edge of the rock

was about at the outer edge of the Ulam in Solomon’s Temple. Likewise, the southern edge of the

rock is at Solomon’s Ulam and Heickal.

Notice points I and L discussed at the beginning of this paper. Now notice point J the center of

the rock, the dome and the center of the octagonal building. The highest point of the rock’s

surface is westward nearby. Here, a trapezoidal depression is cut into the surface of the rock.

Here the dome was first laid out in a circle around a point in this depression. The depression is

larger then would be needed to find the center of the rock.

In the days of the Tent of Meeting, a test of bitter water was performed which required a priest

to obtain dust or dirt from the floor of the tent and offer it to a women pleading not guilty to

adultery ( Sotah test). In the days of the temple after using the tent, the dust/dirt was obtained by

a priest who opened a 1C square stone from the floor, who then could take this dust/dirt from off

the bedrock located nearby and to the right of the doorway within the Heickal (the Holy main

room of the temple). Once the priest entered the room he turned to the right to get the dirt nearby.

I have marked the area immediately to the right of the doorways in both Solomon’s and Herod’s

temple in both figures 12 and 13 as hatched areas. Nearby is a shallow depression at the center of

the rock and point J. A consequence of this being the center of the rock is that the rock is shifted

to the north – hence more of the side rooms on the north (or right side of the buildings) are

underlain by the rock. This area is about 6-7 Cubits north of the temple’s main axis line. If the

doorway was 10C, then the center line would be 5C from each doorpost. The area in question

was a cubit or two northward past the doorpost, hence about 6-7 cubits north of the axis line.

This is exactly were J can be seen even today in the trapezoidal depression.

Note that here the bedrock is very high and not flat (the entire rock is sloping from west to east

and is not flat) being near the actual summit of the rock. I propose this is major evidence that the

1C square floor stone was located within same portion of the hatched area drawn in Figs. 12, 13,

and that the rock and octagonal building currently are centered on the Sotah location. The

Yachin Column was in line with the Sotah location (See Fig. 12).

The highest part of the natural hill was the site where stood the eastern part of the Heickial –the

House of the Lord. The rock was shaped so that when the Romans built their temple on the site

of the Jewish temple, the Sotah stone location of the rock (or the area just to the east) became the

center of the rock. This would have been one of two conspicuous locations on the rock’s surface.

Possibly a statue of either an emperor was erected here and another statue of another emperor

was erected on the Even Shiteah farther to the west.

The rock was never mentioned in the ancient writings because the rock had no importance other

than being the bedrock under the temple. The Romans may have taken the old Sotah bedrock and

may have shaped the surrounding bedrock into a more circular design. Figs. 18, 19 show my

concept of what may have happened. They may have taken the Sotah bedrock and drew a circle,

the radius of the distance from here (point J), to the original opening into the cave by a hollow

wall. (At one time a slanting column existed from the rock to a nearby point. This was done

because of the legend that the rock needed to be anchored down to prevent it from following

Mohammad upward into heaven. This spot was near the site of the Boaz Column36

and may be

preserving a distant memory of this feature of Solomon’s Temple.) This line passes over the hole

in the rock which would have been under the Ulam of Solomon’s Temple and under the threshold

of Herod’s.

They then flattened the entire area outside the circle which created the raised hilltop we see

today. They would have then placed a Roman temple over this rock. They may have had some

notion the rock was sacred ground like the core of Kufu’s Pyramid in Egypt being primeval

ground. A statue of a god or the emperor may have been placed at this center point. (They

36

See appendix 2 for very important evidence of temple’s location.

20

seemed to have found the Sotah spot more important then the actual site of the Debir. )

The emperor Constantine removed this Roman temple and found the exposed rock. When

Constantine built the Anastasias rotunda within the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, he used the

same radius as the rock in the destroyed Roman temple. This emperor destroyed two temples:

one on the temple mount (possibly to Jupiter), and the other (temple of Venus) on the site of the

Anastasias rotunda of the Church with both structures having the same radii.

The Muslims cleared the rock on the temple site, and found it the same size as the rotunda to

the west. They constructed the present octagonal structure over the rock of a suitable size. This

explains why the radii are so similar without having Muslims cutting the “holy” rock to make it

fit the same size as the Christian buildings rotunda. This also explains the perfect fit not being a

remarkable coincidence.

Fig. 14 shows my concept of the vertical section of the temple running thorough the Sotah

stone at the time of Solomon’s Temple. Fig. 15 shows the same section at the time of Herod’s.

Fig. 16 shows my concept of the vertical section of the temple running along the temple’s center

axis line at the time of Solomon’s Temple, while Fig. 17 shows the same at the time of Herod’s

Temple. (Fig. 17b is the same as Fig.17 but showing bedrock over a larger area.)

I believe an artificial foundation was constructed west of the rock underlying the bulk of the

Heickal and the Debir containing honeycombed with open spaces to prevent contamination with

any possible underlying tombs. This foundation was higher in Solomon’s temple then in Herod’s.

In Herod’s, the floor of the Heickal and Debir were level. The natural bedrock under the Debir

began the slope downward. This artificial foundation’s height in Herod’s temple, which was part

of the entire temple foundation, allowed the Debir to be raised to the correct level (2439' 8"), –

6C high– just below the highest level of the rock (2440'), and still higher in Solomon’s. These

foundations were overlain with boards and gold under the Heickal section and bare under the

Debir.

There is an implication the Debir was raised above the floor of the Heickal, but this appears to

not be the case. The reasons for this implication is that a 6C rise must be accounted for with no

description of any stairs or a ramp up to Solomon’s Temple, and the height of the ceiling of the

Debir is less then the height of the ceiling in the Heickal. But the 6C rise is on the rock surface.

I believe the front of the temple was constructed on the slight incline of the rock surface. The

columns and walls had to be fitted on the slight slopping ground which was not impossible for

ancient constructions. The ceiling height simply may have been different in the two sections.

Some time after Solomon, a reconstruction built another artificial foundation containing open

vaulted spaces to the east, covering most of the rock under the Heickal and the Ulam. This buried

most of the rock with only the highest western surface uncovered. The floor level in the hatched

area of Figs. 12, 13 was just below the paving level of the Heickal, hence a floor stone 1C square

was designed which could be lifted by an attached iron ring.

Now a flight of stairs was needed to the east of the Ulam to raise up 6C. This eliminated the

sloping rock floor under the Ulam and Heickal and leveled them.

When Solomon’s Temple existed, the bedrock under the Heickal had to be close to the surface

to obtain Sotah dirt. Having a priest go down a ladder or rope would have not been an acceptable

substitute for the tent ritual. The stone with an iron ring had to be several cubits wide to allow a

well feed adult priest to go down a hole. But a 1C square stone would be too small for a priest to

squeeze down through (a small boy could do it as with the 1C Shis Drain but this was an adult).

The reason the stone was 1C square and not several cubits square was the fact the stone had to be

light and small enough to be lifted by a single priest. All indications are that the stone when

lifted, allowed the priest to touch with his hands the surface of the bedrock. The stone had a

single ring, for one priest to lift. If the stone needed more than one priest to lift, then the stone

would have had more than one ring attached which is not stated in the Talmud.

Major objections to the theory the rock was the site of the Debir, was:

21

1. The base of the altar could not rest on bedrock because the bedrock was far below

2. To obtain Sotah dirt, the priest would have needed to go down a ladder through a very small

opening. Only if the bedrock was under the Heickal would these objections be overcome. (A

golden tablet was placed on the outside wall of the temple’s Ulam with the torah injuction of the

Sotah ritual.)

The foundation of the temple was 6 Cubits thick, but it appears to have been very thin at the

high bedrock Sotah location currently under the Dome of the Rock. No reconstruction of the

temple has ever considered this rock to be under the threshold and eastern part of the Heickal

room. If Josephus wrote the temple was built on the highest part of the mount, he would be

describing this location since the eastern part of the Heickal (the eastern part of the Holy Place)

was the temple building.

Fig. 16b- 17b shows the vertical cut along the axis lines through Solomon’s and Herod’s

temples. Note the hole on the axis with its removed plug of rock, the rock taken from the exact

center of the Azarah, was removed and placed in the center of Debir to the west. The rock would

have been a number a feet thick. The entire rock or a portion thereof would have been inserted in

the floor of the Debir, so that the level of the highest part of the bedrock (2440') was at the same

level as the inset rock. This level may have been 3 finger breadths higher then the level of the

floor. It also was possible there was no 3 finger breadth difference in the floor level: the stone

was set in the floor to rise 3 finger breaths above the floor level. It was to set a place for the ark,

but set low to the ground so that the ark was close to the ground as it was in the days when the

tabernacle existed.

This design had two areas at the 2440' level: a step across the Heickal floor and a round stone

in the center of the Debir. The actual Even Shiteah was moved into the Debir, but this line could

have been a source of confusion as it was at the natural scarp of bedrock (the natural bedrock

under the Debir also would have been a down sloping scarp).

The round stone would have been like a footstool or the base under a throne. It would have been

the designated spot to set The Ark. A firepan could have been placed upon it when The Ark was

missing.

The shape of the stone taken from its round hole in the bedrock to the east was the shape of a

well. This well had associations with the primeval flood waters as stated previously. The word

Sheteah could mean ‘drink’ – an association with water and wells. Thus Even Shiteah could

mean “drinking stone”.

In Solomon’s Temple the height of the Heickal’s ceiling was 10C higher then the Debir’s

ceiling. If the flooring of both spaces were level, then the wall above the Debir was 10C, with a

folding removable wooden partition between them occupying the lower third of the wall. A 1C

wide space marked the division between the two spaces. In Herod’s temple this was the space

between two curtains (Parochet).

The Heronian triangle of 13:12:5 is interesting. Fig. 20 shows that the hypotenuse of this

triangle passes exactly over the northwest corner of the Azarah (point w). The other very

interesting point is that two 8x:8x:5x triangles intersects the hypotenuse of th13:12:5 triangle

exactly on the other diagonal of the 500 Cubit square (point d ). These four lines intersect exactly

of the northern wall of the 40 Cubit Court of Oil which was the southwestern of the 40 cubit

courtyards within the Court of the Women. This four line intersection ( two lines from two

8x:8x:5x triangles, the diagonal line connecting two 40C courts, and the hypotenuse of the

13x:12x:5x triangle) appears to be most significant as the probability this is purely coincidental

is very slight. Also notice point (bbb). Here three lines intersect-- the two sides of two 8x:8x:5x

triangles, and the diagonal line connecting two 40C courts.

Another right triangle whose sides are 5:5 (5x:5x) works similarly as the previous one. This

triangle overlaps the previous two 5x locations seen in Figs. 6a, 21). This equilateral triangle is

important in the formation of a square. The hypotenuse of this triangle (which is a little over 7x

22

long) intersects just to the right of the previously described point bb (see Fig. 21) on the western

wall of Court of Wormy Wood. Here also is another instance of the same diagonal line of the 500

cubit square (the line passing over the northern wall of the Court of Oil) all meeting at a single

point on a wall of two tiny 40 Cubit courts-- one in the southwest and the other in the northeast.

Here again the intersections of several lines at this point on a similar wall appears to be most

significant as the probability this is purely coincidental is very slight.

Fig. 22 shows a similar intersection of triangles. Note how two 8:8:5 triangles and one

diagonal intersects at point labeled 1. This point falls within the area of the great layered altar of

the Azarah. Point labeled 2 is on one of the diagonal lines of the 500 Cubit square. This is where

the small 1 Cubit square at the border of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah was located (see figs.

6, 6a, and Fig. note5) Point 3 was near the other side of the square, at the old 28 Cubit SE corner

of the altar. Point labeled I’ within the Court of the Women is the mirror image of point I (of

Figs. 6, 6a) at the 6x location of the triangle A’, B’, C’. Point Q is the same point in Fig. 6. Point

4 is on a cistern very likely associated with the Court of the Lepers in the Court of the Women.

This point is at the intersection of the triangle A’, B’ C’ and the half way line of the 500 Cubit

which is 4x or 250 Cubits running from north to south and also labeled M to V where V is the

center of the great square. This line passes through point labeled R which would be the location

of Necanor’s Gate at the eastern edge of the Azarah.

Where could the idea for laying out sacred space by using a triangle come from? It is possible

the idea come from ancient Egypt. What has the shapes of equilateral triangles within a square?

The Pyramids. Another similarity is the square points to the four compass points, just as the

square base lines of the large pyramids point to the four compass points. The differences are that

the temple triangles are not the same angle as any pyramids (see. Note 23 for details concerning

angle of this triangle. ), and these triangles are not centered on the square. The age of the

pyramids are far older then the age of the square, but at the time the square was being laid out,

pyramids would have been in existence.

A number of other theories exist which all attempt to located the site of the Jewish temples.

All theories have shortcomings but a number of alternate locations cannot explain how the altar

would have been in contact with the bedrock if bedrock was not high ground at the altar’s

location, nor how the Sotah bedrock could also have not been at a high ground location. My

theory has one fact no other theory can explain: where did the various dimensions of the temple

come from? Where did the 135 Cubit square of the Court of the Women to the east and the 135

Cubit (north to south) dimension and the 187 Cubit dimension (east to west) of the Azarah to the

west come from? Why was the altar 32C square after adding 4C on the western and southern

sides, and not 34 Cubits or 30 Cubits square? What determined the location of the Soreg? Why

was the Court of Israel 11 Cubits wide etc.? This article does explain these and a host of other

major dimensions which no other theory can.

Why There Are Two Locations For The Ark Of The Covenant Fig. 1N shows the placement of the temple (shown in red), according to my survey system, over

the rock (shown in green) and the Muslim building (shown in black) surrounding it. three

features stand out: the rock occupies the ground under the eastern part of the Heickall, the wall

and offices just to the north of this great room, and the center of the debir was once on the site of

the current western door of the Dome of the Rock. The outer ring of this building is were the veil

of the temple once was located. Other features are listed in the accompanying description.

23

Fig. 1N

24

1. Hole in rock.

2. temple axis line

3. True site of center Debir (Holy of Holies) on western door of building

4. Site of Veil

5. Small western porch of building on site of western end of Debir (Holy of Holies).

9. Rain water storage in temple

11. Eastern Door of Muslim building

12. Extension of walls

18. Northern edge of rock

21. Western edge of rock.on site of Heickal and northern rooms.

23. Site of N.E. room in temple by two passage ways into Heickal and Ulam.

24. blocked portion of cave running under pier of building. Part of water system going to laver.

25. Southern edge of rock at southern edge of Heickal near one passage way into S.E. room.

26. S.W. corner of rock on site of southern part of Heickal.

27. High point on rock with a depression. Center of building. Site of Sotah dust and 1 Cubit

square stone in floor connected to an iron ring.

28. Point where temple axis line crosses western face of rock. Here the scarped face of the rock

bows outward.

29. Depression in rock on site of half the northern Heickal wall. .

Fig. 2N

.

25

1. Hole in rock

3. Center of Debir (Holy of Holies) on current site of door into Muslim building.

5. Western end of octagonal building circle on location of western end of Holy of Holies.

14. Construction of octagonal building matches point of wall of Heickal at the southern corner of

the veil.

15. Construction of octagonal building matches point on location in Ulam by open doorway.

27. Center of octagonal building on site of Sotah dust under 1 Cubit Square stone in floor with

iron ring attached.

80. Construction of octagonal building matches point in an office near northern corner of the

veil.

Fig. 2N above shows the relationship of the octagonal buildings creation (shown in green)

overlaying the temple (shown in red).Notice many points in green fall on important points in red.

A few are numbered such as 14 and 50 are close to the temple’s veil. Point 5 is at the back wall

of the Debir. The nearby temple wall just to the west, was the last wall standing. If so, then the

octagonal building fits neatly into the space just to the east of this wall.

26

Fig. 3N shows an important and difficult mystery to understand. The placement of the Debir is

shown in orange. To the east, another similar size square is centered around a depression in the

rock discussed else were (the Ritmeyer Debir location) shown in green. The green square is

drawn on the rock under the center of the building. There are three possibilities of what is

happening:

This paper gives all my arguments why the orange square is the correct location of the temple

rather than the green square. (The major points being that the altar had to be on bedrock which

would be the case if the temple Debir was at the orange location, and that the cistern shown in

Fig. 5N marked the N.W. corner of the Cheil which would be true only if the Debir was at the

orange location.)

The Ark was brought to Jerusalem and King David put the Ark in the place he prepared for it in

the center of a tent he also prepared. This tent was not the old tent of meeting but a new specially

constructed tent with the Ark placed in the exact center. ( 2 Sam.6:16-17) This tent must have

been double the size of the old tabernacle size of 10 Cubits—i.e. 20 Cubits square which was

also the length of the tent of meeting. The green square is exactly 20 Cubits square with the

depression in its center matching the size of the ark at point 28. Of when Solomon built the

temple using any part of the survey system discussed in this paper, the location of the Debir

would have been a short distance westward within the area of the orange square. The green

square would not have allowed the altar’s foundation to contact bedrock as the bedrock would

have been slightly below court level. Only at the farther westward orange square location could

the altar’s foundation just contact bedrock.so that the feet of barefoot priests would be in contact

with the earth Priests could not even walk on a perceived barrier of salt.) Also, the eastern part of

the Heickal had to be close to the floor level for the ritual of Sotah which could happen at the

orange square, but not at the green square location.

27

Fig. 3N

1. Hole in rock..

3. Site of Debir (Holy of Holies) marked by western door of octagonal building.

5. Location of western wall of Debir (Holy of Holies).

6. Location of northern wall of Debir (Holy of Holies).

7. Location of stair way within temple.

8. Location of southern wall of Debir (Holy of Holies).

11. Eastern door of octagonal building.

13. Location of wall of temple in line with green square.

14. Northern wall of green square.

15. Same point as 15 in next figure at corner of green square.

16. Western wall of green square.

17. Same as point 17 in next figure .on green square.

18. Point on wall of Ulam by a passage..

19. Location of wall by doorway into Heickal.

20. Location of southern wall of green square.

21. Sloping surface of rock at south eastern corner of Heickall.

28

22 Location of flat area by hole in rock within green square.

27. Sotah location at summit of rock.

29. Depression in center of green square.

Fig. 4N is a close up drawing of the rock shown in Fig. 3N.

A number of features on the rock face still hold evidence of the temple. The western face of the

rock is a scarp with a lip which may have once held timbers covered in gold plate. Point 23 may

have originally been the basement of a room to the north of the Heickal. Point 29 shows the

rectangular depression half way under the northern wall, and half way within the Heickal room.

This lends credence to the idea that the depression’s location was not randomly located within

the temple building. The northern edge of the rock also lines up with the long gone rooms of the

temple. Likewise, the figure shows the southern edge of the rock also lines up with the long gone

Heickal room and southern wall.

A number of important connections with water and ladders may be seen at the southern side of

the drawing.

Two very important considerations can be seen in the southern part of this picture. In the vicinity

of location 21 within the current cave a slanted pillar once existed. In the temple, at the roof of

the S. E. corner of the Heickal a ladder once ran from the roof into the upper room. It is

possible a long lost memory of a ladder once being at this location centuries earlier, was the

germinal idea for the installation of a slanted pillar by Muslims or Christians here.

Most important is that this area has a number of associations with water. Here is a well like

opening into a cave. The cave has a section which narrows out. We have biblical stories of a

stream starting at the Debir, growing wider, then exiting from the threshold on the south side of

the east front foundation (the altar was on the south side of the central axis. The water ran near

the altar—hence this river must have been running from under the south side of the foundation’s

eastern front.)

The Garden of Eden also has allusions to water with the primeval waters being under this cave

as discussed elsewhere in this paper. Note that the cave would have been close to the s.e corner

of the Heickal and the Ulam from where the water would have issued forth. Again, memory of

this location having associations with water could be the cause of these traditions up to the

present time.

Here also could have been found a cistern within the building by which rain water fed the

Laver. Notice have the presumed location of this cistern matches the resumed location of the

Laver, and also how the narrowing of the cave would have emptied into this laver. Even Ezekiel

may have a reference to this pipe in Ezekial 47:1. Also, the cistern seen in Fig. D7 holds a very

significant piece of evidence: The well head of this cistern—a presumed well of the Golah

chamber, and the presumed location of the Laver with this cave are all in a direct line.

29

Fig. 4N

1. Northern point on hole in rock by threshold of temple building marking the center of the

Azarah.

15. Slight curve in rock within N.W. office by wall.

17. Where an office crossed the rock.

18. Same wall by another office room.

19. Missing portion of door jam by Ulam.

21. Where temple center line exists rock in eastern part of Heickal.

23. Remains of a rock which was under a northern office on rock on which a Christian structure

called the Chapel of Jacob’s Dream was constructed in the middle ages..

24. A pier holding up the dome of the octagonal building, which was part of cave leading to

laver.

25. Southern edge of rock in line with a temple wall.

27. Sotah dust location at summit of rock. Current dome centered here.

28. Where center axis line of temple crosses western edge of rock.

30

29. Depression on rock surface, half inside Heickal and half under wall making the northern edge

of the Heickal room.

52 Where temple center axis line exited the low eastern rock face at the western end of the

Ulam.

Fig.5N shows a detail of Fig.4N. This is an enlarged view of the northern edge of the rock.

Notice how the overlaid temple (shown on brown) matches features of the rock’s surface.

Fig. 5N

15. Same as above figure.

21. Same as above figure.

23. Same as above figure.

50. Point were a wall exited western rock scarp.

60. Northern edge of rock by wall.

61. Northern edge of rock near a northern room.

62. Presumed curve in rock.

64. Bottom of depression divided in half and partly under wall.

65. Point on western scarp of rock where a northern office once existed.

31

Major Archeological Proof of The Location Of The Temple The following section describes what I believe are major proofs of the Temple’s location, with

archeological evidence and well as Talmudic references to back my claims.

Figs. 6, 6a, show a triangle in the upper left corner in the area the design shows was the N. W.

corner of the Cheil. This triangle is shown in detail below in Fig. 5N. The Cheil was divided into

two parts: a 6 Cubit inner zone which may have or may not have steps depending upon the

bedrock level, and a 4 Cubit outer zone which was flat. The outer edge of this 4 Cubit zone was

the Soreg—a boundary which had a number of entrances. (All Cubit measurements in this paper

are of the same Cubit 52.5 cm length).

This triangle can be seen on a slopping rock face under a Muslim building on the inner

Muslim platform, N.W. of the Dome of the Rock. This rock floor can be designated cistern 24 (or

36 depending upon different cistern numbering systems. The area of the rock surface goes

beyond the triangle which may be either a small scarp or a surface with a different patina (I

cannot get a photograph of this rock surface, so can only speculate as to its appearance.)

Point 2 is the corner of a scarp of very finely worked bedrock. This point I take to be the N.W.

corner of the sacred area outside of which would have been the Cheli. The distance from 2 to 3

is exactly 6 Cubits. The distance from 3 to 4 is exactly 4 Cubits. These measures adding up to

10 Cubits match the dimensions of the Cheil as stated in the Talmud and are presented as

archeological evidence for this area once being part of the Cheil. There is also evidence this 6

Cubit slopping rock once had steps now missing. The very fact this surface is slopping

downward from east to west shows this surface may have once had steps.

The slopping rock is steeper near the bottom than at the top. This could indicate that the rock

originally had steps with steeper risers near the bottom. (This sloping rock is more noticeable at

the northern side than at the southern side.) This would have been similar to step at Duchin steps

which were steeper at the bottom than at the top (from the bottom 1C +.5C +.5C +.5 C).

Another piece of archeological proof can be given when considering the temple’s veils.

There were three veils (curtains) in the temple: two between the Debir and the Heickal, and one

between the Heickal and the Ulam. If these veils became highly unclean, they were to be washed

outside the holy area and laid out on the Cheil to dry before nightfall.

These veils were made up of 72 separate woven sections each measuring 3.3333 Cubits square,

sown into 6 rectangles of 3 by 4 sections (see Fig. 6N). Another way of seeing this is a square of

3 by 3 sections with an additional row added (or 3 rows across by 4 rows down). The numbers 3,

4, 6, and 12 are all found in these sectional arrangements which were numbers associated with

the breastplate.

If you look at Fig. 5N notice how 12 sections consisting of 3 rows across by 4 rows down.

Also notice how the additional row would fit but at a slight angle. To the north of sloping rock is

a scarp with a wall behind. The space between the scarp (6) and a wall (9 to 10) filled with debris

to an unknown depth. Point 2 is a low corner of rock. Point 17 is a niche and a corner in the fine

wall face (1).

The distance from 2 to 19 is 6.66 Cubits. I believe this was the designated location for drying

a veil on the Cheil. (This was not the designated location for displaying a newly created veil

which was on the roof of a building, or a veil laid out in the sacred area. This location may never

have been used as the Sadducees did not consider this necessary.) The veil would have been

folded up, and carried to the Cheil, opened and allowed to dry. At sundown the veil would have

been folded up again and carried to the temple. The method of folding could have been added by

the northern scarp at point 6 and low wall at point 2. The method of folding could have been as

follows: (see Fig. 7N)

1. fold in half lengthwise.

32

2. fold in thirds.

The veil would have then looked like Fig. 8N. The entire veil of 72 squares (3.33 Cubit2) would

have been folded onto this space of six 3 by 4 squares each The top three squares could have fit

into a slightly different angle.

The folded veil could have been wrestled onto the Cheil by priest standing in the space

between points 6, 18, 9 and 10 and on any available space in Fig. 6N, then opened in reverse

order. First the veil would have been opened in half so that the mid line faced westward. Then

priests could have starting in the upper right hand corner, while standing barefoot on the veil,

move this corner on a diagonal as seen in Fig. 9N. The veil would have looked like a triangle

which mimics the curved shape on the rock face. The area covered would have been 3 by 4 in

small squares of the veil. A niche and corner at point 17 in Fig. 6N, would have marked the

diagonal opened veil, as shown in Fig. 9N.

The reason I suspect the veil would have been cleaned here, is partly because of the dimensions

of the rock surface matching dimensions of the Cheil and of the veil sections, partly because this

would have been in sunlight before sunset as it is on the western side of the Azarah, and also

because I believe the building where the veils were manufactured would have been located just

to the east of this location.

A Gospel detail may have had its origin in this veil cleaning procedure. Notice that the veil is

folded down its midline from top to bottom—the midst of the veil. Also notice that the western

edge would face west toward Golgotha. This may be the germinal idea for one of the three veils

ripping in half (Matthew 27:51).

There would have been no steps as seen in Fig. 10N. Remains of steps on the rock surface have

been seen as stated elsewhere in this paper. Steps would not have been needed since there were

no gates at the top of the steps here. The wall at 2 shows no one could mount the top of these

steps and into a gate into the sacred area. I believe there were no gates into the west wall leading

into the sacred area. There were no gates into the western end of the Azarah.

But there may have been a gate into the Azarah which was not an authorized gate- one of 13

unauthorized reworkings, or enlargements, done by pagan Greeks at the Soreg which lead into

the Cheil. This gate would have been to the south of the central axis line of the Jewish temple.

When the temple was destroyed, this pagan opening might have been used by Romans as a

gateway into any pagan temple building built on the site of the Jewish temple. This pagan temple

may have been approached from the west which its main staircase being the on old Cheil steps.

This may account for the fact that the central axis line of the Muslim steps behind the Dome of

the Rock is just south of the axis line of the building. If the Dome of the Rock is on the site of the

Jewish temple, then the fact the nearby staircase is off center of the building cause show the

original alignment of the Jewish temple. (Remains of this gateway as well as remains of original

Cheil steps could be under the present staircase. The current Muslim staircase is one of the

oldest constructed on to the inner platform.) Also, a gateway and steps located here is a major

affront to Jews because any entrance into a building fronting here would put pagan, Christian or

Muslim worshipper directly into the Jewish Debir (Holy of Holies).

33

Fig. 6N

1. Fine wall.

2. N.W. corner of sacred area. End of fine wall.

3. Point where distance measured from 2 is 6 Cubits. The western zone is 6 Cubits.

4. Point where rock cutting intersects end of western Cheil . 5. Point where rock cutting meet scarp.

6. Scarp on rock face.

8. Point where western Cheil intersects line of scarp.

9. Corner of two walls.

10. Another corner of two walls.

11. Part of rock cutting outside Cheil. 12. Point where ground flattens out. Is in line with point 18.

13. Point on sloping rock where veil would have overlaid the 6 Cubit zone.

34

14. N.W. corner of 6 Cubit zone of Cheil. 15. N.W corner of full 10 Cubit (6 Cubit +4 Cubit) Cheil. 16. Right angle.

17 Where niche is in fine wall. Also a corner is seen here. The wall’s height is high at this point.

18. N.W. corner of sloping rock.

19. Distance from 3 to 19 is 0.3 Cubits making the distance from 2 to 19 exactly 3.3 Cubits.

35

Fig. 7N

36

Fig. 8N

37

. Fig. 9N

38

Fig. 10N

Veil laid over steps. Area within the 6 Cubit zone of the northern Cheil had no steps.

39

Explaining The Eastern And Western Sides Of The Inner Platform The eastern and western sides of the inner platform are odd angles on the temple mount. I

can demonstrate that they could have been created by the same survey system used to design the

temple detailed in this paper. I also come to the conclusion that these two sides may have

originally been temple features within the area of the 500 Cubit square. They would have been

very discrete such as a row of stones on the pavements or fashioned as a low step across the

pavements. At a later time, these lines were deepened creating the current eastern and western

side of the inner platform we see today. Each side of the inner platform can be accounted for. The

northern edge was the northern edge of the 500 Cubit square. The southern edge of the platform

is very close to the southern side of the Cheil, but at a slightly different angle and slightly outside

the line of the Cheil. The terminus of the eastern and western ends of these lines would have

ended at the southern edge of the Cheil and never existed farther to the south. (Shown as dashed

lines in Fig. 10N)

The eastern wall begins at the point labeled 11, where the northern edge of the 500 Cubit square

measured 3x from point A ( the N.E. corner of the square). (If x = 62.5 Cubits then 3x is 187.5

Cubits. Where the east-west length of the Azarah is also 187 Cubits.) The remaining length of

the square is 5x since the total length of the line is 8x or 500 Cubits. At the southern edge of the

square, at the half way point of the southern edge, the point 4x we draw a line connecting these

two points. This is shown as a red line. The line south of the Cheil was excluded because this is

the excluded segment shown as a dashed red line. The solid red line is the current eastern edge of

the inner platform.

The western edge of the platform could have been worked out by the following method: The

northern edge of the square measured out 3x from point A—the NE. corner of the square. On the

southern edge of the square, measuring from the opposite diagonal SW corner of the square, they

measured out another 3x. (Again, we have 5x remaining). Measuring from point 11 on the

northern edge of the square, the same distance from here to the Cheil’s eastern end (from point

11 to point 14), we would reach point 1 (both lines measure 302.1 Cubit). We then create a right

angle (Point 7) to point 1 terminating at the 3x measure on the southern edge of the square.

(Point 1 is just to the east of the square’s N.W. (C’’) corner because the length of the line is fixed

as the same length of the solid and dashed red line to the east.)

A 5:4:3 right triangle is present in this figure. The distance from point 11 to C’’ is 5x. The distance from 11 to A is 3x. The right triangle formed would have a leg of 4x which makes a 5:4:3 right triangle which was a sacred triangle known since ancient times.

40

Fig. 10N 1. Point on northern edge of Cubit square where line from point 7 terminates making west wall. 2. Point on east wall were a right angle of 153 Cubit length (Azarah width) reaches hole in rock on temple axis line. (shown as a red line). 3. Center line of Muslim staircase terminating at Point I in Fig. 6a. 4. Point on east wall where a right angle of 187 Cubit length (Azarah length) reaches Debir center on temple axis line (shown as a black dashed line). 5. Point where two lines from ends of the 5x segment on northern edge square are equal length. (Shown as crosses.) This point is on the center axis line just to the east of the rock. 7. Right angle point making line up of the western wall of inner platform. 8. Ruined staircase half way between terminus of aqueduct and Cheil. 9. Terminus of aqueduct and two cisterns are here. 10. Northern edge of 500 Cubit square. 11. Point on Northern edge of 500 Cubit square measuring 3x from point A, leaving 5x remaining (since total length of line is 8x.)

41

12. Point where right angle from point 4 intersects center axis line at center of Debir. 13. Center axis line 14. Southern end of eastern inner platform where wall ended at Cheil. ((wall has marginal draughts showing stones may be in situ.)) A N.E. corner of 500 cubit Square C S.E corner of 500 cubit Square C’ S.W corner of 500 cubit Square C’’ N.W corner of 500 cubit Square Fig. 11N shows the eastern wall of the inner platform at three eras: the top view is when the

temple existed; the middle section shows the temple destroyed, and the bottom section shows the

Muslim repair and the subsequent erection of Dome of the Rock on the inner platform.

In the top view, east of the temple (9) I believe a diagonal wall existed within the area of the

500 Cubit square, north and south of Court of Lepers (6), and the Court of Wheat, wine, oil (8).

This wall started at the 3x (5x) location (1) on the northern edge of the square. This wall had a

space between these two courts within the Court of the Women centered on Nekaner’s Gate (7)

This would have made the two small courts opened only on two sides as shown.

The area had a number of cisterns (2,3, 4, 5) two of which whose lower part is cut into

bedrock, were high up on the wall (4,5) and one below the wall whose lower part also is cut into

bedrock (2). Cistern (3) is shown because it is an important landmark as it marks the N.E. corner

of the Cheil. Cisterns (4, 5) rests on bedrock i.e. bedrock must be behind the wall at this area of

the wall. This is a retaining wall backed by bedrock inferred by what we know of the nearby

cistern (4,5). Cistern (2) infers that the bedrock level here was below the wall. This cistern’s

western end is very close to the edge of the wall, suggesting that when this cistern was dug, the

diggers measured so that they stopped digging at the wall and did not intend to go past it. These

three cisterns are evidence that the wall existed at the time these cisterns were dug. One cistern

(4) is one of the oldest dated cisterns on the temple mount as discussed elsewhere in this paper.

This suggests a wall here was a very ancient feature. This wall would have divided the Court of

the Women into two parts: an eastern less sacred area, and a western more sacred area by

Nikanors’s Gate. I believe there is a Talmudic discussion about the sacredness of the curved steps

and the gate (7) itself of which this wall would have been a part.

The middle view shows the destroyed temple (13), the destroyed gate (7) and its adjacent

curved steps, and the space which would have been between the two little square courts (6,8)

seen in the top view.

Someone, after the temple’s destruction, either pagan Romans, or Muslims did a rebuilding of

the inner area by leveling this space (10) with fill, and extending the original wall by adding a

new section of wall across the space between the two temple courts and then adding a new

straight staircase outside the wall line, which is drawn in red. These steps are labeled 11. Point

(7) would be the location of the original 15 curved steps now buried within the inner platform.

The Dome of the Rock is shown labeled (14). The upper portion of the wall was repaired. A few

of the original temple stones making up this wall can still be seen just south of point (1). These

few stones have marginal drafts as is expected if the stones are in situ. The view from this area

today is one of the few locations very similar to what this area must have looked like in Herod’s

time.

The area west of the red wall and steps but not have bedrock, but have fill if my theory is

42

correct. Leen Ritmeyer would have bedrock under the steps at 11 in the form of buried curved

steps, while I put this location within space within the Court of the Women which had to be flat

ground. The bedrock has to end as shown in the top view, at the edge of the once Court of the

Lepers with fill to the south. This is the case. (I have pictures but the text is in Hebrew and I

could not get the entire article translated. I do see fill and no bedrock in the photos.)

The area behind the southern part of the wall could be either bedrock or fill.

The western edge of the inner platform seen in Fig. 10N also must have been a temple feature

running at an angle within the 500 Cubit square. It would have appeared as either a low rise step,

or a row of flag stones. There is no description of why this was done, but my argument for it

being a temple feature is that whoever laid it out, was an expert in the system of survey discussed

in this paper. (utilizing 3x making 187Cubits etc.) At some time after the destruction of the

temple, the ground level was lowered to create a new wall along this alignment creating the

western edge of the inner platform we see today.

Thus, a four walls of the inner platform can be accounted for: the northern edge was the

northern edge of the 500 Cubit har’h a biyet or the Ritmeyer Square, the eastern and eastern

wall and western wall both terminate at the southern edge of the Cheil and the southern edge

being at or very close to the actual line of the Cheil.

43

Fig. 11N See accompanying text.

44

1. Northern corner of platform’s Eastern wall intersecting northern edge of 500 Cubit square. 2. A cistern whose western end terminates under wall. 3. H shaped cistern at N.E. corner of Cheil. 4. Very ancient cistern high up on wall. Bottom cut into bedrock 5. cistern high up on wall. Bottom cut into bedrock. 6. N.W. Court of the Lepers in the Court of Women. 7. Nikanor’s Gate 8. S.W Court of Oil in the Court of Women. 9. Temple building 10. Destroyed area of Court of Women with the removal of courts 6 and 8. 11. Muslim steps on eastern wall of platform and Muslim reconstructed wall shown in red. . 12. Southern edge of inner platform on site of southern edge of temple’s Cheil. 13. Destroyed temple building. 14. Dome of the Rock The system of survey creating 8:8:5 triangles used to design the temple and its courts I can

demonstrate variations of this theme being used in a number of other locations around the middle

east. This helps strengthen the argument that the Jerusalem Temple was designed using this

method because Solomon’s temple was built by Tyre builders knowing Tyre building practices. I

believe this was lost knowledge used in designing some specific sacred temples and buildings.

The buildings I found might have used 8:8:5 triangles are:

1. Temple in Jerusalem

2. Israelite temple at Arad

3. Temple of Baal at Palmyra

4. Temple at Ein Dara

5. possible building at Ur.

Fig. 12N (See footnote.) These articles are on my blog: 1ofkersondiscoveries.wordpress.com and on my website:

sacredstonessacredstories.com.

All my work carries endorsements from ex- Senator Joe Lieberman, Chairman of the

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

45

Appendix:

note 1 -

Temple Mount Areas calculated

(see Fig. 1)

If the whole area is 500 Cubits, and if the eastern edge of the inner sacred court (the Azarah) was

located along the north-south center line of this square (250 Cubits from either parallel north-

south running edge of the square, then the following area dimensions are true.

Southern area: 187C * 239.5C = 44,786.5 C2 [where 187 is 3x- 0.5]

Eastern area: 135C * 250C = 33,450C2 [where 250 is 4x ]

Central area (Azarah): 187C * 135C = 25,245C2

[where 135 is 2x +10]

Northern area: 187C * 125.5C = 23,667C2 [where 125.5 is 2x +0.5]

Western area: 135C * 63C = 8,505C2 [where 63 is 1x +0.5 ]

Notice the pattern of the southern area being greater than the eastern area which is greater than

the central sacred area, which is greater than the northern area, which is greater than the small

western area which matches the Talmudic description or expressed mathematically:

[S]> [E]> [C]> [N]> [W]

Other descriptions dating from the middle ages, record linear distances, but the Talmud implies

areas and not linear lengths. Tosefot Yom Tov writing the in sixteenth century was describing a

temple location from the rock cuttings which I have detailed in the article entitled ‘Supposed

Site of Solomon’s Temple Solomon Never Knew.’

Notice other interesting set of geometric relationships caused by the lengths created in this

design. In each set of areas: [S] > [E] and [N] > [W], a difference is close to the basic length 1x

or 62.5C. Eastern area has one side of 250C and Southern area has one side of 187C. The

difference is [250C-187C] or 63C which is 0.5C from 62.5C. The northern area has one side of

125.5C and the western area has one side 63C. The difference is [125.5C - 63C] or 62.5C which

is exactly 1x– the base number seen in Figs. 6, 6a and 0.5C longer then the required width of the

altar.

If a measuring cord was used to lay out these lines, a hidden relationship would occur. The

lines in the southern-eastern pair would appear as a straight line as in a ruler, and the line in the

northern- western pair would appear as a right angle made by a groma surveyor measuring tool.

The design would have had two hidden builder’s (mason’s) tools represented if the four areas

around the Azarah were laid out with measuring cords.

Notice on the design of Figs. 6, 6a that the western edge of the Soreg is close to the western

edge of the 500C square. In fact, this is the Soreg edge closest to the corresponding square edge.

Josephus states the Soreg was close to the edge of the square. He could have had the western

edge of the Soreg in mind when he wrote this.

The distance from the southern, eastern, northern, and western Soreg or Cheil lines hold the

same relationships to the edges of the 500C square as the areas shown at the start of this section.

Thus you can see in Figs. 6, 6a that the southern edge of the Soreg or Cheil was the largest

distance from the southern edge of the square. The eastern edge of the Soreg or Cheil was a

smaller distance from the eastern edge of the square. The northern edge of the Soreg or Cheil was

a smaller distance from the northern edge of the square. The western edge of the Soreg or Cheil

was the smallest distance from western edge of the square. These facts again agree with Josephus

46

and the Talmud.

Also: Total area inside Cheil – 326C by 200C approximate

Area inside Cheil (including the 187C by 135C Azarah courtyard) --189C by 200C

approximate

Area inside Cheil (including the 135C by 135C Court of Women )– 138C by 200C approximate

All Measures are from the edge of the 500 Cubit square to the corresponding edge of the Azarah.

East North South West

My

measurements 250 Cubits 125.5 Cubits 239.5 Cubits 63 Cubits

Shiitai

HaGiborim 250 Cubits 100 Cubits 265 Cubits 63 Cubits

Tosafot Yom Tov 213 Cubits 115 Cubits 250 Cubits 100 Cubits

Note 2 -

(See Fig. Note2) -

The Azarah from east to west was as follows: for Herod’s Temple is composed of the following

dimensions:

1. - Court of Israel: 11C

2. - Court of priests: +11C

3. - altar +32C (original 28C+ post exile 4C)

4. - space from altar to Ulam: +22C

5. - Eastern part of Ulam to the center of Azarah at the hole in rock: + 17.5C

... Divided as follows :{ this is center of Azarah location which is 187C/2 or 93.5C. Note the

same distance on each side of Ulam from northern and southern edges of Azarah [17.5C

+100C+17.5C is 135C]}

- Ulam eastern wall thickness +5C

Space in Ulam +11C

Distance to center of Azarah eastern part of threshold under lentil stone between doorposts (the

doorway) at hole in rock +1.5C

Total: (5C+11C+1.5C or 17.5C)

6. - Distance past Center of Azarah the western part of threshold under lentil stone between

doorposts (the doorway) at hole in rock + 4.5C (making threshold-- the doorway-- 1.5C + 4.5C

or 6C)

7. - Width of Heickal: +40C (20C *2)

8. - Space of Veil: +1C

9. - Debir: +20C

10. - Offices and wall +17.0C (0.5C less then 17.5C )

11. - Space behind temple +11C

Total 187C

47

Solomon’s Temple would have had a smaller Ulam width since it was 10C. This would mean the

center of the Azarah was at the same 4.5C location, but was just to the east of the Solominic

threshold in the floor of the Ulam because Solomon’s Temple had a thinner threshold. Herod’s

temple engulfed the older threshold.

Note 3 -

It is very significant that the center of the Azarah was just to the east of Solomon’s threshold and

at the location of the Herod’s temple’s threshold (also between two doorposts, a lintel, and a

folding door). The threshold of the temple building had special religious significance to the

ancient world as it marked a special entrance and exit into the sacred space. Special acts were

committed over the threshold.

Note 4 -

The 500C square can be divided into two center lines forming four 250C sections. Each section

can be divided as follows:

187C + 52C + 11C = 250C

where: 187C = (135C + 52C)

then: (135C +52C) + 52C +11C = 250C

this shows the importance of 11C in temple measure. The easternmost 11C may have been the

width of Solomon’s Porch. The 11C western end of the Court of the Women was more holy then

the eastern remainder of this court. Also 62C the length of the altar and ramp is (52C +10C).

Also if we measured in Herod’s Temple along the center line 135C from the eastern edge of

the Azarah we would be 3C east of the Veil. This would have been the logical location of the

Altar of Incense. The math is: 11C (Court of Israel) +11C (Court of Priests) + 32C (altar) +22C

(space between altar and building) +17.5C (the Ulam plus 1.5c on the threshold) +4.5C (on the

threshold) + 37C(within the Heickal) = 135C where adding another 3C would reach the Veil

since 37C + 3C = 40C the length of the Heickal. Note: 1.5C +4.5C on the threshold shows the

threshold was 6C-- the width of the folding doors as stated in the Talmud. (See also note 21 for

another important discussion on the distance of 11C being in the design.

note 5 -

(See Figs. 6, 7, Note5 ) The altar was extended 4C on the western and southern sides. The

original sides of the altar were on the eastern and northern sides. Measuring westward 4C from

the N.E. corner along the central axis line, would have reached the point (F) marking the middle

of the line on the central axis which is the sum of 135C + 187C. The mathematics is:

135C +187C = 322C. Where the center is: 322C/2 = 161C

Then measuring from the eastern end of the Azarah toward the west we get: 135C + 11C+ 11C +

4C = 161C.

If we measure from corner to corner of the Soreg, the exact center of the sacred area (Azarah,

Court of Women, Cheil, Soreg) falls just to the east of point (F).

Note 7 -

A strange fact of the design seen in Fig. 5: The distance from the angular bisectors running

through points (aa) and (bb) to the northern edge of the two northern 40C courts within the

larger square Court of the Women, is the same distance from the center line of the 500C square

(OVP) to the northern edge of the two southern 40C courts within the larger square Court of the

48

Women. This distance is the same 30C mentioned previously concerning four 30C by 40C little

open court yards.

Note 8 -

Point U is in the small space between the temple’s axis and the Dome of the Rock’s axis lines. It

is also between the eastern door of the Dome of the Rock and the NW corner of the altar.

Note 9 -

(See Fig. Note9) A number of additional facts of an archeological nature corroborate the

hypothesis Figs. 6, 6a is the true representation of the temple’s location.

1. There are one to one correspondences between structures on the southern side outermost

Temple Mount and the southern side inner areas of the Temple Mount. These structures are in

approximately similar locations. They are from east to west— a non sacred area in the outer area

under the Royal Stoa, large storage rooms for wheat, wine, oil(22) used in temple sacrifices

(connected to the Triple Gate(1) ) corresponding with the very small space in the more sacred

inner area of the Court of the Women– the Court of wheat, wine, oil (5).

A very important fact which may be considered another “smoking gun” concerns the fact that

the Triple Gate is in a direct line with the S.E. corner of the inner platform (3). Looking at Figs.

6, 6a you will notice a line northward would reach the Court of Oil which is depicted a being a

short distance north of this corner. In other words, the Triple Gate with its connecting storerooms

was in a direct line with the Court of Wheat, wine, oil in the more sacred inner area to the north.

Dr. Ritmeyer who makes note of this alignment in the book The Quest, believes the gate was in

line with the Chamber of Hewn Stones, but there was never any association of this Sanhedren

chamber with this gate or with any storerooms. The Sanhedren (high court) was composed of

prominent members the tribes and not necessary of priests, whereas my alignment is truly an

alignment of the outer storerooms for oil, wine, and wheat with the inner distribution area for the

very same oil, wine, and wheat. Another point of contention is the fact my location of the altar

slightly to the west is on higher bedrock do to the hill being higher toward the west, allowing the

altar to be directly in contact with bedrock and not constructed on an artificial base which was a

serious and definite violation for the construction of the great altar. (One reason priests had to

ascend the altar barefoot as if they where in contact with bedrock at all times.)

Next we had in the outer non sacred area, a large public building (6), corresponding with a

location in the inner area by the Azarah, the very sacred Chamber of Hewn Stones (24). To the

west of this public building we had non sacred ritual washing places (8) (Mikvaot) corresponding

with the very sacred High Priest Mikvah and adjacent Water Gate (9) by the Azarah, a wellhead

by the Golah Chamber by the Azarah, also the line crosses the largest cistern called the great sea

(23) on the Temple Mount. Next we had the main southern Gate (12) (Double Gate), in the outer

area, corresponding with the Gate of the First Born (14) in the sacred area ( The Tadi Gate (17)

was very likely in line with this gate to the north. The large rectangle cistern (16) which I am

calling the Cistern used for the washing of intestines was also on this alignment.)

This one to one correspondence has an interesting significance: when the temple was built,

they matched the line of inner with the outer structures (storeroom, meeting room, mikvah, gate).

Although the line of inner structures are gone, the same outer lineup remains today. The position

of the outer lineup still is close to the position of the missing inner lineup.

2. A line from this right angle border point at the corner of the altar southward would have

intersected the large public building, thus showing a connection of the Chamber of Hewn Stones

with this building. A continuation of the border line in Figs. 6, 6a would intersect the Mikvah

building. Thus the border line would have gone through the Mikvah building.

49

3. I wish to state a very important fact: If ever a trench is cut on the eastern side of the Muslim

platform on the temple mount, which shows archaeological evidence for a curving staircase (15

curving steps would be the total number of steps, but even finding evidence of one curving step

would be enough) buried below the surface of the platform, this would be confirmation of the

location of the temple, since the Talmud describes curved steps leading up to Nikanor's Gate

from the Court of the Women. A curving step was a unique feature found nowhere else in the

temple. Since we have dimensions stated in the Talmud, we can reconstruct were many locations

were if we know the length of a Cubit.

If these stairs match the location of the calculated location for these stairs then this paper

has proven where the temple stood on the temple mount because this one calculated piece of

the puzzle is specific enough to confirm other parts of the puzzle such as the location of the

Azarah etc. My paper uses the same size cubit as Leen Ritmeyer's cubit measure.

Also L. Ritmeyer points out (Ritmeyer, L. (2006). The Quest, Carta Jerusalem, p. 354) and

also is apparent by looking at his drawings of the temple) that his placing of these curved steps in

the location shown in his book and various publications, coincides with the present straight

Muslim staircase (but at a slightly different angle) that if remains of any curved staircase were to

be found under the present Muslim staircase whenever this Muslim staircase might be excavated,

then this would be confirmatory evidence of his location (labeled 3). But the inverse also is true:

if no curved stairs or staircase is found under the Muslim staircase, then this may mean

Nakanor's Gate was never nearby and my location (labeled 2) could be possible.

50

Fig. note9

1. Triple Gate

51

2. Triple Gate tunnel

3. Current corner of inner platform which once was by Cheil.

4. A room south of Court wheat. Wine, oil.

5. Court of wheat, wine, oil

6. Outside the temple grounds, a building which may been used by the great Sanhedren.

7. The center of the 500 Cubit square designated point (V) in Figs. 6,6a.

8. Outside the temple grounds, Ritual washing place (Mikvah)

9. Water Gate/mikvah

10.Shis

11. Libation of wine or water on corner of altar.

12 Double Gate.

13. Double Gate tunnel

14. First Born Gate

15. point I in Figs. 3,6,6a.

16. Cistern 24

17. Taddi Gate

18. Firewood Gate

19. Wilson’s Arch and Gate

20. Area between Wilson’s Arch and Firewood Gate

21. Nekanor’s Gate

22. in outer court a storeroom for wheat, wine, oil

23. Largest cistern

24. Chamber of Hewn Stones

Note 10 –

The design has four centers: point (hole) at the northern edge of the hole in the rock is center of

Azarah– on the East– West center line of the temple at its threshold; point (F)– a point on the

same east- west axis line (CL ) 4C to the west of altar’s NE corner along its northern base – on

the East– West center line of the temple, marking the center of the innermost rectangular area

consisting of the Azarah and Court of the Women with its surrounding Cheil and Soreg; and

point (V)– the center of the 500C square at the eastern edge of the Azarah on the wall marking

the western edge of the Court of Oil. A door connecting the Court of Oil with the Court of Israel,

which was the easternmost part of the Azarah, may or may not have existed here. A door would

have been useful to allow oil, wine and wheat to be conveniently brought into the Azarah. (See

note 13 for more detail.)

In Fig. 4 the intersections of triangle bisectors making right angles are labeled aa, bb, cc, and

dd. Point aa was on the western wall of the Clean Knife Room of the Ulam. The point bb was

on the western wall of the Court of Wormy Wood. The center point labeled V was the center of

the 500 Cubit square and was on the western wall of the Court of Oil opening westward into the

Azarah.

A fourth center incorporating the enlarged Herodian portions of the Temple Mount, would be

where the Dome of the Chain now exists, the very center of which was the area just to the north

of the altar where lots were chosen for the two goats on the Day of Atonement, and the major site

for sacrifice on the northern side of the altar. This point was in the center line between the

Double and Triple Gates.

The manner of laying out Herod’s enlarged Temple Mount could have been in this manner:

1. It was first decided to enlarge the area so that the area just to the north of the altar would be

the newly made center of the quadrangle.

2. The distance from this center point eastward to the eastern wall existed and was fixed

52

unchanged.

3. The same previously determined distance of step 2 from this center point due westward would

fix a point on the new western wall. This would allow the center point to remain at the center.

4. The flat area making the foundation of the Antonia fortress (and possibly the pool to the east)

fixed a point due north on the line of the new northern wall.

5. The same previously determined distance of step 4 from this center point southward would fix

a point due south on the line of the new southern wall.

Now that four points were determined the walls would have to be laid out in the following

manner: the line of the eastern wall was fixed and could not be changed since this was the line of

the original 500C square. The line of the northern wall had to be 90° from the eastern wall. The

line of the western wall had to be 90° from the southern wall. Thus the four walls could be laid

out from two 90° angles from four fixed points.

The walls could also have been laid out using Cherubim measure fully detailed in Volume 1 of

my book Sacred Stones Sacred Stories.

Note 11 -

This wellhead was directly south of a feature used as a blood drain called the Shis, described as

a natural cave near the SW corner of the altar draining toward the east. Three close points

concerning water were within the territory of Benjamin: the wellhead, the Shis, and the Laver,

and two other water locations within Benjamin would also have been nearby: the Water Gate and

a Ritual Bath (Miqvah) for use by the High Priest.

If a line were to be drawn from the Shis to natural cave within the ‘H’ shaped cistern seen in

Figs. 6, 6a and this line were to be divided into four equal sections. Each of these sections would

fall on significant locations. One section would be on the northern edge of the 135C line inside

the western wall of the Court of Wormy Wood, the next section would be on the eastern edge of

the inner platform’ wall which was also on the eastern wall of the Court of the Lepers, and the

final section would be just to the south of the temple main axis line very close to the half way

line of the square MVN.

This same line crosses the temple’s axis exactly at the eastern end of the Azarah. This would

have been the center line of Nekanor’s Gate (21)– the main gate into the Azarah.

This may be significant because this line terminates at a small natural cave. The Shis was

described as being a natural cave. It was possible the Shis was an artificial hole which was

known to align with this natural cave. The probability a natural cave being exactly at the right

spot near the altar must be very low.

Note 12 -

The East– West center line of the 500C square passes though the following structures: The Court

of the Nazarines; the base of a large foundation unearthed in a trench labeled (G ) in Figs. 6, 6a,

; the Court of Oil all three within the Court of the Women; the center of the 500C square at point

(V) at the eastern edge of the Azarah courtyard; The lower part of the altar’s ramp; a distance of

5.5C south of the southern edge of the Temple’s Ulam; a possible unnamed or named the Upper

Benjamin Gate (see Jeremiah 20:2) on the western side of the Azarah. This gate like most gates

would have been in the tribe of Benjamin. Three gates where in the territory of Judah: The Triple

Gates in the ancestral and Herodian Southern walls, and a small double gate near the S.E. corner

in the Herodian Eastern Wall. It most definitely was not on the border of Benjamin and was not

on the highest point of the Temple Mount. Simple inspection shows this to be on the rock within

the Muslim octagonal building.

53

Note 13 -

A receipt chamber was located in the non- sacred part of the Hearth Building. Worshiper paid for

oil, wine, wheat and received a receipt token which was then brought to the Chamber of Oil to

collect the same. It appears in Figs. 6, 6a and also Fig. Note13, both locations were on or very

close to the 500C square’s diagonal line running through the temple building (also the Dome of

the Rock).

This same diagonal line passed through the altar. Again, the Receipt Chamber was where defiled

altar stones were stored. Thus four things were all located on this axis line: defiled altar stones

storage and the actual altar site, also Receipt Chamber and Chamber of Oil.

A third relationship would have existed along this diagonal line: If the priests slept in a building

on this line, which passes over the altar and the Court of Oil, they must have some function

involving the altar and this court. They do since both involve sacrifice. We know the sleeping

building was here because the Talmud states the Receipt Chamber and the storage of defiled altar

stones were both in the non sacred northern part of this large Hearth Chamber building (in Figs.

6, 6a the building was in and just outside the northwestern part of the rectangle near the diagonal

line.) The temple had two large buildings which extended outside the Cheil– the Hearth

Chamber on the northern side of the Azarah was on this particular diagonal line of the 500C

square. What of the other large building? This was the Chamber of Hewn Stones on the southern

side of the Azarah. Looking at Figs. 6, 6a you will notice the Chamber of Hewn Stones, in fact,

was built along the opposite diagonal line of the 500C square.

Note 14 -

A major consideration is whether the altar site was determined before or after the triangle was

laid out. If the latter, then the biblical account ( 1 chronicles 21:18 and 2 Samuel 24:18) for the

choosing of the altar site was a story created to give a non- geometry explanation to the God

given sacred site.

Four facts must be considered when examining Figs. 6, 6a: the SE corner of the original 28C

altar was precisely on the ABC triangle; the 500C square’s diagonal is near the SE corner; the

border between Benjamin and Judah is also close to this corner; and the addition of 4C on the

western and southern sides of the original 28C altar makes a perfect fit in the space between the

temple building and the eastern edge of the Azarah. Why was the altar so perfectly situated on

the Temple Mount to allow these four facts seen in Figs. 6, 6a if the altar site was determined by

a previously situated threshing floor before any triangular measures were taken to build the

temple and its courts?

The most likely explanation was the altar site was chosen at the time the triangle was being

surveyed to lay out the 500C square, courts, etc. A number of problems exist with the biblical

accounts such as the name of the threshing floor’s owner is different in the two biblical accounts,

the price and coinage paid for the land is completely different in the two versions. A major

problem with the biblical account is the gigantic 28C size enlarged to 32C of the altar and the

“wedding cake’ appearance of its many stepped tiers, (not shown in Figs. 6, 6a), and its very

unusual design. Most altars in the ancient world did not have priests walking around on its top

lighting piles of wood with fires and sacrifices burning on this top surface.

A close inspection of how the temple areas were laid out given in the opening paragraphs of this

paper, gives a plausible explanation for the locating of the altar exactly on the site shown in Figs.

6, 6a without any need for a “threshing Floor” in the explanation.

(See Fig. Note 14a) The following is a probable explanation of how the altar site and size was

determined. The altar could have meet three criteria after the triangle (ABC ) was laid out:

1. -- It had to be laid so that its eastern edge was fixed within the space defined by the temple

54

axis line marking its northern edge and its SE corner fixed by a point on the triangle’s line (CB).

2. – After the eastern edge (length) taken as a right angle from the temple’s east-west axis line,

the other sides of the altar had to be the same length so that the altar was a perfect square.

3. – The altar had to fit neatly in the space provided since the limiting factor was the line (CB).

It the altar was place too far eastward or westward, it would be encroaching within the Court of

Israel, the Ulam etc. The best fit was to have the eastern edge of the altar 22C from the eastern

edge of the Azarah. Then the length of the eastern side of the altar would fit exactly in a space of

28C. Enlarging the altar on two sides to 32C would still give a perfect fit in the space provided.

My analysis of the altar location explains how the altar could have fit perfectly in the space

provided.

2 Chornicles3:1 positively states that the temple building (the House of the Lord) was

constructed over a threshing floor bought by King David and not the altar was constructed over

this spot. But David had previously built an altar on the threshing floor. This cannot be the exact

same altar site as that altar was east of the temple building. There is a question as to whether the

altar or the temple building was the site of the threshing floor, or whether there was any

threshing floor used for either the temple building or the altar at all.

Also, we cannot be sure what was on the site before the temple was built. A pagan temple would

have been very likely and even a threshing floor somewhere is possible. The only important

landmarks which had to be up on the mount were a natural scarp, and two natural caves in the

rock to lay out the entire ancient most part of the temple which does not take into account the

need for any threshing floor.

But it still is possible the biblical account is correct: that firstly the altar existed on a threshing

floor and then the square was laid out by the method described in this article. But the major point

still holds true: that this geometry absolutely forbids the altar being built of any other dimensions

or at any other spot by being even a millimeter off.

It is said, where God caused Abraham to build an altar to sacrifice Isaac-- there is vision. Could

this vision be the amazing geometry from these natural features?

When was the square laid out? It might be a Solominic feature or a later feature dating from say

the time of King Hezekiah, or it may have been simply laid out at the time of Solomon’s temple,

and redone in stone at a later time.

Another consideration is the fact the bible discusses the border line between the tribes of

Benjamin and Judah in early texts such as the Book of Joshua which predate the building of

David’s altar on a threshing floor by many centuries. Why does the altar worked out by this

system of strings stretched across the ground, fit so perfectly on the border line? Why does the

ancient border line fall on the 500C square’s diagonal which allows the territory allotted to Judah

to be in the shape of a perfect square? (See Figs. 6, 6a) There is no mention in the bible of the

border making a right angle near any threshing floor. It does put the border running by the city of

Jerusalem (Jebus).

And here is another consideration: does the bible mention another threshing floor in any

location on this same border line? In fact it does. The Ark was at Kyiriot- Jaerim on a threshing

floor before being moved to Jerusalem. Here the Ark was on a threshing floor, and not an altar.

The ark was to be moved eventually when Solomon built the temple into the building just to the

west of this same altar site. Both towns on the Benjamin-Judah border where the actual border

line made a right angle exactly on the SE corner of the Jerusalem Altar base.

Why was a 1C2 notch cut out of the altar’s base? The answer – to place the entire altar within

the territory of Benjamin, has a major confirmation that the altar was exactly where I have placed

in Figs. 6, 6a. It also is a major confirmation of the date the border was set.

The original 28C2 altar was entirely within the territory of Benjamin. When the altar was

enlarged at the time of the return from the Babylonian Exile, for the reasons previously

mentioned, the exiles continued to keep the altar entirely within the territory of Benjamin. This

55

notch is major evidence they kept the practice of keeping the altar only within Benjamin. At the

time the notch was made after the exile, the existence of the right angle turn in the border near

the corner of the altar’s SE base was known and acknowledged as being at the correct spot.

Another major proof of the design is that the Chamber of Hewn Stones was placed here at the

border. No other location on the border line allowed access to both the Azarah and Cheil. (See

for yourself if you can find any other location on the border with access to both Azarah and

Cheil.) The Talmud actually states this chamber was accessible to both the Azarah and Cheil, but

it does not discuss the border line which had to be nearby since the border was near the altar in a

very small area of the Azarah Courtyard.

(See Fig. Note14b)

Note how the border line between Benjamin and Judah creates a square greater then the square

created from the center point of the 500C square (V). Thus we have four squares: the 1C square

making the notch in the S.E. corner of the altar, the square making the territory of Judah within

the 500C square, the smaller square being exactly 1/4 the area of the great 500C square, and

lastly, the actual 500C square.

Here is an important consideration: Any size Cubit or even the same size Cubit but a different

number such as 300 Cubits instead of 500 Cubits could make a square and still have the same

temple axis line. Point (I) would change, but the axis could still be the same. This means it would

be possible to have a smaller square around the same Solomonic temple, and a larger square built

at a later time.

Note 15 -

The angle and location of the inner platform’s eastern edge could have been laid out using the

following method. This method would create an absolutely unique edge which cannot be

duplicated by any other means. A fact is that the eastern edge had to be laid out using measuring

cords only after every one of these conditions were previously laid out. They are:

1. The northern end of the platform’s edge must be at the point 3x (point Z) measured along the

northern edge of the square measured from its NE corner point A.

2. A second point must be found to define the eastern edge. Such a point can exist. A right angle

line taken from the point 6x along the northern edge of the platform, having a length of 137C,

would create this second point. These two points create the eastern edge of the platform.

Note that three of the platform’s edges can be accounted for: the northern, eastern and southern

but not the western that I can determine.

Similar lines of the Azarah’s length and width, measured from this inner platform to the

temple’s actual axis have the following facts: 135 and 135.5C measures to the center of the

Azarah (where there currently is a hole in the rock) and to a point just to the east which would

have been where the axis line crossed a spot in the Ulam. Likewise 187 and 187.5C lines reached

points along the axis line (CL) within the eastern half of the Debir.

Note 16 -

Dr Ritmeyer wrote that the hole in the rock he believes was a vent cut in the Middle Ages37

.

Two problems with this theory: A hole was described by the Bordeaux Pilgrim centuries before.

That hole may not be the current hole, but how can you disprove it?

The second problem he has is the fact that I can show, in the proceeding paragraphs how his

500C square can locate the exact center of the Azarah courtyard when using descriptions given

37

Ritmeyer, 263

56

in the Talmud to be precisely at the location of that hole which suggests the hole was cut by

people who knew where the exact center of the innermost courtyard was and not a randomly cut

vent hole in the ceiling of a cave. The hole appears to be perfectly aligned on the temple’s center

axis line and on the spot marking the exact center of the Azarah courtyard.

Note 17-

Tradition has the temple building and altar laid out before the 500C square was laid out, but

this paper suggests the opposite: the square was surveyed out first from two natural caves and a

rock scarp, and then the square was subdivided into courts. The temple building and altar was

then fitted in the space provided.

A subtle proof for this argument was the creation of a 1C space between the main room of the

building and the Debir. This space prevented any part of the designated space to be diminished.

The area of the Heickal would be 40C and the Debir would be 20C with 1C of separation. The

design allowed for 1C to be added to separate the two spaces. The two spaces were not fixed but

would be tweaked.

The temple building, as with the altar, had to be fitted in the spaces provided. The following is

a possible order for such a fitting.

The temple building could not be set too far westward nor eastward lest it would not fit in the

available space. For example, the Debir could not be placed in the center of the Azarah, least the

building would be shifted eastward. The design only allowed the space to the east of the Hachkal

– the Ulam– to be at the center of the exact Azarah with the bulk of the building to the west.

The steps for the building’s placement could be thus:

1. Find center of Azarah.

2. Heickal placed 4.5C west of center (part of Ulam)

3. Then I was 7C and Western Scarp was 10C and 3C past this scarp was the center of and also

the eastern half of Heickal. (7C +10C +3C = 20C where 20C was the half way point in the length

of the 40C room i.e. 40C / 2 = 20C)

4. Adding another 20C brings us to the western end of the Heickal.

5. Adding 1C was the space of the Veil.

6. The next 20C was the Debir.

7. Remaining space was the rooms in back of the Debir and back wall.

8. The last 11C was the space in back of the building marking the western end of the Azarah.

Note 18 –

(See Figs. 6, 6a, and Fig. Note18)

The first stream is the temple’s axis line (CL) . The Talmud states a stream of water starts in the

Azarah and grows larger and flows from under the center of the threshold toward the valley on

the east. This exactly describes the west- east axis line. The stream divided and a branch flowed

out of the right side of the threshold. It flowed by the south side of the altar. The design does

branch at point I, and it does come out nearby on a side of the threshold. (The distance from

point I to point hole is 7C. See note 17) This line runs across the altar onto its south side. Note

the account states the stream came out of the right side of the threshold which differs from the

drawing showing the “left” side of the threshold. If the altar was truly on the right side this

stream, it would have been on the north side of the axis line, which by all accounts was not true.

The altar is drawn on the south side of the axis line, with the stream emerging form the left side

of the threshold and crossing to the south side of the altar.

57

This vision is not the existing temples. This vision implies some knowledge of the two lines,

and could indicate at the time Ezekiel saw this vision, Solomon’s or the rebuilt temple on the

same site, the altar site and the 500C square were known.

The next line Ezekiel 47:3 speaks about measuring lines and distance which is what these lines

are. Even the length of 1000C is hear as the triangle has two sides of 500C .

Note 19 –

Also a small square can be seen in Figs. 6, 6a and Fig. Note19. A square 23C2 whose NW

corner was the 1 C2 notch in the SE base of the altar (11C +11C +1C =23C). This square at the

NW corner of the tribe of Judah’s territory was a vertical angle to the NW corner of the 250C2

square FNVO. This right angle at the altar’s base is at the deepest intrusion of the border line

inside the Azarah.

Note 20 –

The triangles seen in Fig. 4 can create another design from the overlapping of two edges of two

different triangles. The resultant design is seen in Fig. Note20. There are 60 overlaps and 12

overlaps are on the diagonals of the 500C square. These 12 overlaps are drawn circled. They

form three squares: an outer, a middle, and an inner square labeled as shown. The inner square

forms an octagon (and pentacle). The inner circle of the Dome of the Rock, and hence, the size of

the rock under the dome is exactly the size of this octagon. The location of this octagon is

centered on the 500C square and not on the site of the actual Dome of the Rock which is toward

the northwest portion of this figure. Remember, this figure would be the actual 500C square

making the outermost four lines. Each triangle is 8x,8x,5x or 500C, 500C, 312.5C. The total

number of overlaps is 60+12 or 72 overlaps which was the number of days and the number of

translators working on the Septuagint Bible. This was also one number greater then the number

of members on the Great Sanhedren. This number is also the numbers of God’s name in

Kabbalah. Another relationship is that the 72 names all possess three letters. The twelve overlaps

form three rows—the same number as of the letters.

The design is centered around point (V) which was on the eastern edge of the Azarah (see Figs.

6, 6a and Fig. Note20). This point marks the center of three bands. This overlapping of bands is

reminiscent of the last illustration on my book Sacred Stones Sacred Stories vol. 2.

Some of the 12 points on the two diagonal overlapping triangles are on important temple

locations. If we would overlap figure Note20 with Figs. 6, 6a we would see how on the actual

temple site, these triangles would have been on important temple locations.

1. Falls on one of the outer four points where a diagonal crosses the northern edge of the

Azarah

2. Falls on one of the outer four points where a diagonal crosses the northern edge of the Court

of Wormy Wood in the Court of the Women.

3. Falls on where a point over the diagonal crossing the altar from one of the four middle four

points.

4. Falls on the southern wall of the Court of Oil from one of the four inner four points.

5. Falls on the northern wall of the Court of Oil from another one of the four inner points.

Thus 4 and 5 are both delineating the size of the court.

6. Falls on the inner platform’s eastern wall.

( See Fig. 4aNote20 for the following)

This figure shows how the temple’s axis center line passed through the eight triangles of

Fig.Note20. Note the perfect symmetry if the NS line making the eastern edge of the Azarah.

Note the intersection of two triangles meeting the center line at Nicanor’s Gate– the main

58

entrance into the Azarah. Also note the perfect symmetry around point V– the center of the 500C

square.

Note 21 –

In Figs. 6, 6a, the distance from the southern line of the Azarah to the half way line of the 500C

square (PVO) is 11C. The distance from this line to the southern edge of the Ulam is 6.5C. The

total distance from the southern line of the Azarah to the southern edge of the Ulam is 11C+6.5C

or 17.5C. We have seen a number of instances where the distance was 11C and also 17.5C.

This is a major piece of evidence the Azarah was where I have placed it in Figs. 6, 6a because

any shifting of the Azarah north or south would not allow this 11C distance to exist.

Note 22 -

(See Figs. 6, 6d, note22 for the following)

Note22 shows the vertical cross section of the sloping rock surface on the left side of the

figure. (It is a compilation from page 167 Below The Temple Mount In Jerusalem, Shimon

Gibson and David Jacobson, BAR international Series 637m 1996 and page 358-359 The Quest-

Revealing The Temple Mount In Jerusalem, Leen Ritmeyer, Carta Jerusalem, 2006.Figure 6d is

taken from the same Gibson figure where the eastern scarp is labeled “4") On the right side of

the figure is shown the corresponding vertical heights of the various temple structures. Note that

the floor of the chamber and rock are both at the same height as the Court of the Women (2419'

above sea level). Then the sloping surface of the rock, which may have once been steps as traces

of steps may be here, occupies the same vertical level as the 15 curved steps by Nakanor’s Gate

on the other side of the sacred area. The bottom of the scarp seen in Fig. 6d is within the same

level going from the Court of Israel to the Court of the Priests. This was a zone of four steps

making a total height of 2.5C. The lowest step was 1C, and each of the upper three were 0.5C

making a total height of 2.5C. The bottom of the scrap appears to be at the 1.5C level or the

lowest step plus the next one. The level here is 2427'. The scarp reaches the level of the Court of

the Priests at 2429' and continues upward through the height of the lowest seven of the twelve

0.5C steps which fronted the temple, to a height of 2435'. This corresponds to a height about

2.5C below the level of the temple’s foundation at 2439' 8" which was 6C above the Court of the

Priests. Thus the level of the ground and of this scarp is slightly below the level of the temple’s

foundation. The level of the paving stone (not bedrock. A proof given is in my book Sacred

Stones Sacred Stories Vol 1) under the Dome of the Tablets is also at this elevation.

Fig. Note22b shows how the vertical section of the various courts of the temple would have

looked with the scarp and rock abutting the western Azarah at the western Cheil.

59

Fig. note22

Note 23 -

Why was the triangle 8:8:5 and not some other ratio? This triangle, and hence the resulting

square comes from an object in the tabernacle’s description—the altar of sacrifice which stood in

the courtyard. This altar was 5 Cubits long by 5 Cubits wide, by 3 Cubits high. The triangle has

as one side the number 5, and the other two sides have the sum of 5+3 or 8. In Fig. 2 you can

actually see on the right (the east side of the square) the 5 on the triangle, and the 3 below

making the total of 8 parts of this side of the square. To make one side of the triangle they simply

added the length (5) of the altar with the height (3) of the altar giving it the number 8. Then they

made the other side of the triangle by adding the width (5) of the altar with the height (3) of the

altar to make another side of number 8. The third side was simply the length (5) or the width (5)

of the altar which was the number 5. You can also see this division of square into 8 parts, on the

north side of the square. This side is divided into 5x on the western part, and 3x on the eastern.

Here can be found actual archeological evidence as here is the existing inner platform’s northeast

corner. The distance from (A) to this corner is 3x and from here to the western edge of the square

is 5x, making a total of 8x. If 8x is 500C, then 3x is 187.5 C (this measure runs from east to

west.) Each x would then be 62.5C. These numbers are found in the Talmud, where the east-west

length of the Azarah was 187C, and the combined length of the altar and ramp was 62 C. (See

Fig. 11 for the above.)

The shape of the sacred inner area of the temple called the “Mountain of the House” was a

60

square here derived from the shape and dimensions of the square shaped altar. The altar was

central to the concept of the sacred area of the temple both figuratively and physically literally.

Note that the number 5 coming from the horizontal length and width of the ancient tabernacle

altar, was enlarged by a factor of 100 in the temple. Thus the “Mountain of the House” was 100

times larger than 5 Cubits square or 5 * 100 which was a horizontal 500 Cubits square. The

actual size of the triangle, and hence the actual size of the square, instead of being written as

8x:8x:5x where x= 62.5 Cubits, can be written with the tabernacle altar numbers as

(5+3)x:(5+3)x:5 instead.

If one triangle were to be folded lengthwise in half, then stood upright with the fold touching

one corner of the square, the triangle has the appearance of an altar horn. There can be a total of

eight such triangles touching the four corners of the square, which would create a very realistic

image of the four horns of the altar.

At Tel Arad the archeological remains of an Israelite altar was been found having the correct

shape and ratio of the 5C by 5C by 3C dimensions. Here again, I can show the same triangle and

square concept (see article on Arad).

Also the Egyptians knew about 5:4:3 right triangles. Looking at Figs. 6, 6a you will note the

east side of the square is composed of a 5x segment and a 3x segment, making the total size 8x

(5+3= 8). The half way locations of the square are all 4x (8x/2=4x). Thus all numbers of the

5:4:3 right triangle are present in the 8:8:5 triangles.

The ratio 8/5 is 1.6. Also the ratio of the numbers 5/3 is 1.67. The Golden Ratio is 1.62—a

number falling between the two extremes.

The use of this triangle may have had its origins in the layout of the earlier tabernacle court.

This court was a rectangle 50C wide by 100C long. Such a space is composed of two squares

50C on a side. The court was surrounded by 60 pillars having hangings to enclose the sacred

space. The interior of the space had a number of features symmetrically arranged on the long

axis. The temples at Jerusalem and Arad were asymmetrically arranged within squares. This

article demonstrates the asymmetrical nature of the main axis within the 500C square (see Figs.

6, 6a). But notice the Mosaic court can be considered two squares. Note also that the squares

were subdivided by the pillars on the northern, southern and either an eastern or a western side,

depending on which square is being considered. Each side would have been divided into 10 parts

on a side. This is similar to the division of the 500C square into 8 parts on a side.

The question is asked, why was a triangle used to locate the axis off center (asymmetrically)

within the square? It may because the designer wanted to allow more space on the southern side

of the square which required the temple axis to be shifted toward the north, but we can never

know for sure.

We can say for sure that a single 50C square was enlarged by a factor of 10 to create a 500C

square.

Even the altar of the temple may have within its design a possible basis in the triangle design.

Fig. 3 shows how sides of the triangle work inward which can create a step like pattern. The altar

of the temple was symmetrically arranged in steps, but the analogy is not perfect as the altar

steps were centered whereas any steps created by this triangle would be asymmetrically

arranged.

Note 23a-b -

I suspect the existing eastern wall of the Moslem Platform was a temple feature once running

at an angle through the Court of the Women. But no ancient description of the temple even

remotely describes such a feature. A few mysteries need to be explained: why is the N.E. corner

of the Moslem Platform exactly the distance of 3x [3*62.5 Cubits or 187.5 Cubits from the north

east corner of the 500 Cubit square] which would be a temple distance? Remember, 187.0 Cubits

61

was the length of the Azarah. Another mystery is that the peculiar orientation angle of the eastern

Moslem Platform resembles the orientation angle making the Tunnel of Hezekiah (see note 26)

which may reflect similar dates of construction. Finding Gigantic Herodian stones set in the

lowest levels of this eastern wall near the northeastern corner of this platform is also

suspicious38

. Fig. note 23a at the top shows four small open courtyards numbered 1 through 4

with each corner at the four corners of the 135 Cubit square Court of the Women. The western

courtyards 1 and 4 have the diagonal wall running through them. In this representation, the

ground to the north of courtyard 1 and south of courtyard 4 would have been higher than ground

level of these two courtyards within the larger Court of the Women making them enclosed at

least on two sides. Two cisterns partly within the Cheil and partly without would have been north

of courtyard 1 (The Court of Lepers), and a third cistern below the level of the Court of Women

would touched the wall at its western end. Water from the surrounding area would have filled

these cisterns which must have furnished water in some fashion to the Court of Lepers.

The point labeled (r) would have been the site of Nekanor’s Gate. The space to the east would

have had 15 convex or a concave stairs.

Courtyard 1 and 2 were 40 Cubits square, but could have been a rectangle 30 by 40 Cubits as

discussed elsewhere. Courtyards 3 and 4 had the same 30 by 40 Cubit rectangles along the line

of the 250 Cubit line (marked v) the 500 Cubit square as discussed elsewhere. Point (g) is the

location of a paving discovered recently.

The north eastern corner of the Moslem Platform (labeled 3x) on the northern edge of the

Ritmeyer Square, has the following relationship to courtyard 1: the distance from 3x to the inner

edge of the Cheil (point a) is the same from here to the inner edge of courtyard 1 (point b). The

wall ran from point labeled (3x) to point (labeled c) at the southern edge of the Cheil and Soreg.

Three cisterns run near courtyard 2 (Court of Wormy Wood Storage). One cistern had a corner

within this courtyard and would explain the ancient legend discussed in text concerning Fig. D8.

A very deep cistern ran south of courtyard 4 (Court of Oil) Most cisterns ran under the Cheil and

the area just outside this sacred area.

Fig. note23b at the bottom shows the same Court of Women but with the four little courtyards

outside the four corners instead of inside the four corners in the top illustration. This arrangement

opens up the space for larger crowds, but a number of problems occur making this arrangement

not as desirable and probably not on the site of an older area. Note the cistern spanning the space

between Courtyards 1 and 2. Here would have been a gate into the Court of Women. In Fig.

note23a this cistern would have been north of this gate and would have had access to more rain

water since walls would not have been close by.

Note 24- This cistern is very deep but there are three apertures near the low S.E. corner of the

Moslem Platform. The layout of the Court of the Women in Fig. Note 23a could allow a cistern

to be close to the surface since the Court of Oil Storage would not interfere, while the layout of

the Court of the Women in Fig. Note 23b would interfere since the Court of Oil storage would

necessitate the cistern to be very deeply placed.

Note 25 -

Leen Ritmeyer puts these cisterns in Court of Lepers but they are too deep for ritual baths nor

can they collect much rain water since this court was walled in and open to a small portion of the

sky. They lack stairs to enter. The cistern is roofed in bedrock so they cannot be truncated pools.

38

Leen Ritmeyer, 364

62

Note 26 -

The Moslem Platform’s eastern wall’s angle is similar to Line 1 in Hezekiah’s tunnel at the

southern end of the City of David which was a short distance south of the temple mount. I

suspect the angle here was a feature mimicking the angle of the tunnel. To learn about Line 1 and

its relationship to the tunnel, see my scribd article “How String laid out Hezekiah’s Tunnel”.

Note 27 -

The bible says David bought and built an altar on a threshing floor which later became the site

of the temple’s altar (1Kings 22:19, Gen. 50:10, 2 Sam 6:61), but there is an alternate statement

that David bought a threshing floor and later the temple building (and not the altar) was built

upon this site (2Chron. 3:1). This paper shows an association of the building with the summit of

the hill (the current rock under the dome). It must be noted that the procedure I used to lay out

the master drawing Fig. 6a, does not require the existence of any threshing floor. What was

needed was to take measurements from a few natural features such as rock scarps, and caves.

This paper discusses the border running close to the S.E. corner of the altar. (See text, note 5,

Fig. note5, Fig. 6, Fig. 6a, and Note 28) If the border ran near or on the old threshing floor any

statement placing the temple’s altar here would be creditable.

But 2Chron. 3:1 placed the actual temple building- The House- on the site of the threshing

floor. The building is described in detail until 2Chron. 5:1 when The House was finished. There

is no mention of the altar up until now and no mention that the temple altar was to be built on

any threshing floor. Only The House—the temple building was to be built on the threshing floor.

The altar is mentioned at 2Chron. 6:12, after the building is described. My temple layout puts the

eastern part of the Heickal, the threshold of the temple, and western part of the Ulam over the

fairly flat summit of the hill sacred rock under the Moslem Dome of the Rock building.

Threshing floors were built at or near the summit of high and fairly flat ground. By definition,

the Heickal was part of The House.

Of course if the altar and the temple building were worked out solely by my triangle method,

and the threshing floor connection was an attempt to justify the location without mentioning

triangles, then the contradiction of whether an altar or a building built on a threshing floor could

be explained as well.

Note 28-

The border between the tribes of Benjamin and Judah does not run over the temple mount

according to the Bible, but it is possible to reconcile the description of the border running

through a threshing floor at Kiriath-Jearim (the temple mount also is described as being on the

site of a threshing floor) in the Book of Joshua39

with statements in the Talmud which does place

the border on the temple mount (here were two threshing floors on the border line.) The border

according to this paper matches the Talmud’s description in parts instead of on the whole. (See

Figs. 6,6a, note5 for the following) I show the border running through the southern part of the

Court of the Women, while the Talmud implies the whole of the court was on one side of the

border. I show the border running through or on the wall between of the Chamber of Hewn

Stones, a part of the lineup of chambers on the south side of the Azarah. The Talmud puts the

border running the whole length of the chambers on the south side of the Azarah. The border ran

through part of the 500 Cubit square (The har ha’biyet). The entire building was in Benjamin.

39

Joshua 15:8-9, 18:16

63

The entire altar was in the territory of Benjamin40

.

A gate of the temple in Benjamin called the Upper or Benjamin Gate was supposed to be on

the border line at the highest point of the mount, but this is pure nonsense. The temple building is

described being on the summit of the mount which cannot be on a gate of a lower elevation. A

possible explanation for the discrepancy is that there were inside the territory of Benjamin an

upper Benjamin Gate at a higher elevation on the temple mount then a lower Benjamin Gate

further down the ridge in the City of David.

My design allows for, although not recorded, an Upper Judah Gate as well. Notice the Triple

Gate (The Eastern Huldah Gate) and its tunnel would have been within the territory of Judah and

the Double Gate (The Western Huldah Gate) and its tunnel would have been within the territory

of Benjamin. A gathering place such as a plaza must have existed in front of the old Double Gate

(an older gate before the Herodian extension was created.) The high Priest had the prophet

Jeremiah flogged and put in stocks before the Benjamin or upper Gate of the temple41

. If the

Benjamin Gate was synonymous with the Double Gate, and by either name was the main

entrance of the temple, it’s plaza would have been very crowded as this would have been the

temple’s most public of spaces. The location of these punishments would be today on or near the

tunnel of the Double Gate and not overlooking the Azarah. A gate on the western side of the

Azarah or a single gate on the southern side of the Azarah would have had very little traffic as

opposed to the main Double Gate entrance and exit from the temple site. And punishments had to

be in a very public spot. The book of Jeremiah then helps to reconcile a number of facts

concerning these gates and my design.

Another problem which may be solved is where was the well called en-regol located where

Solomon’s brother Adonijah was anointed king of Israel?42

This well was on the border line

between Benjamin and Judah43

. This paper has discovered a very important fact: If the border

ran close to the S.E. corner of the altar in the Azarah courtyard, then the border line

running south of the temple would fall very close to or even fall on the Spring of Gahon.

(See text, note 5, Fig. note5, Fig. 6, Fig. 6a, and Note 28 for diagrams of the border on the temple

site.) Also the Spring of Gahon run through the Siloam Channel (later through Hezekiah’s

Tunnel) to the Pool of Shiloah on the southwestern side of the ridge upon which the City of

David was located. The same waters of the spring at the northern end ran to the well pool at the

southern end. I believe the well called en- regol and the pool of Shiloah were synonymous.

Adonijah and Solomon were both anointed at the same water source, but Adonijah at the

southern pool site, and Solomon at the northern Spring of Gahon site44

.

The name en- regol implies a well of pilgrimage (well of legs) and implying the three

pilgrimage holidays one of which the Feast of Booths required water to be drawn from the Pool

of Shiloah (also called the Pool of Siloam) to be poured upon the temple altar. This water was

close to the city and temple so any noise of shouting and trumpets originating here would be

heard. Now the border line running through the temple mount can be explained if we consider

the Spring of Gahon was also on the border line but not recorded in the descriptions given in the

Book of Joshua which only records the border passing through the same water source at its

southern end and not its northern end. The border would have ran to the Spring of Gahon east of

the City of David, southward then crossed at the southern tip of the ridge to the en- regol pool.

This then would be south of the City of David, as stated in Joshua. If the southern end of the

ridge was called the Stone of Zoheleth or if such a stone was located here, then the pool would

40

See Gen. 49:27 which might refer to the altar. 41

See Jer. 20:2-12. 42

See 1Kings 1:9 43

See Joshua 15:8-9, 18:16 44

See 1Kings1:34

64

be next to the stone described as being near en- regol. If the stone was on the eastern side of the

Kidron Valley where the village of Silwan today is located, or where to the south Job’s Well is

located, the distances are both far from the city but still may preserve the name ‘Zoheleth’ being

on the other side of the Kidron Valley. En- regol then would have been on the northern edge of

the Valley of Hinnom (or ben Hennom) which again agrees with the Book of Joshua’s

description of the border.

The name of one of the four rivers coming out of the Garden of Eden was called Gahon45

—the

same name as this water source. Thus being anointed with water at the spring or in the pool, or

pouring water from this source onto the altar has the symbolism of Eden.

Note 29.-

Point I is 6x measured from C or 2x measured from B where the total length of the line is 8x.

Thus 6x= 375 Cubits and 2x = 125 Cubits. Then 375C+125C = 500 Cubits.

The widths of the Court of the Women and the Azarah are both 135 Cubits. This was exactly 10.0

Cubits more than the length of 2x (125 Cubits). (Stated mathematically: 2x+10 = 135 Cubits

where x= 62.5 Cubits )

Also the width of the Cheil was 10.0 Cubits. Thus numbers found in the width of the Cheil and

the important width of the two major inner courts, are widths hidden in the size of the 8:8:5 500

cubit triangle.

Point I hold another important measurement: from Point I to the beginning of the original 28

Cubit north west corner of the altar measured along the temple axis line (Point I is on this line,

and the northern edge the altar also is on this line), is the distance of 1x. The most important

point on the entire system of survey, is point I since it marks out the temple’s axis line by using

the main 8:8:5 triangle. From this the most important location, the altar’s position on the har

ha’biyet would have existed.

45

See Gen. 2:13

65

Fig. 4.

66

Fig. 5a.

67

Fig.5b

68

Fig. 6

69

Fig. 6a

70

Fig. 6c.

71

Fig. 6d

72

Fig. 7.

73

Fig. 8

74

Fig. 9.

75

Fig. 10.

76

Fig. 11

77

Fig. 12.

78

Fig. 13.

79

Figs. 14-15 cross sectional view drawn across highest point on rock. (see text for discussion)

(same numbering as in Fig. 16-17 below with this addition:

23. Iron ring connected to stone in floor for Sotah dust.)

80

Figs. 16-17 Cross sectional view along central axis line. (see text for discussion)

2. Ground begins to fall away toward the west.

7. Plug of rock missing from cave in rock, This was removed to become the ‘foundation Stone’

81

in center of Debir.

8. Cave in rock.

9. Top portion of rock at eastern part of Heickal. This eastern part of room had no floor boards.

10. Scarp on western edge of rock within eastern part of Heickal.

11. Notch in western edge of rock which once contained boards.

12. Wooden boards cover in gold at the eastern end of the Heickal (Holy Place).

14. Plug of rock removed from point 7 protruding 3 finger breadths above floor level.

15. An open space within foundation, to prevent contamination with any graves below.

16. Floor or Debir (Holy of Holies).

17. Floor of rooms behind Debir. Ground level is sloping down toward the west.

18. Sloping rock surface at eastern end of rock under Ulam in Solomon’s temple. Was under an

eastern foundation in Herod’s temple.

20. Steps in Herod’s temple leading up to Ulam.

21 Eastern foundation in Herod’s Temple under Ulam. Missing from Solomon’s Temple.

24. Bedrock under most of the Heickal and eastern end of Debir.

(Note- Height of (14), the Foundation Stone (Even Shitiah) is not drawn to scale but drawn

exaggerated since it was only 3 fingerbreadths high.)

Fig. 17b

82

1. Upper part of Ulam

2. Point where ground falls away.

3. Holy of Holies (Debir)

4. Room in back of Holy of Holies

5. Bedrock under Ulam and eastern part of Hechial. Currently the Rock in center of Building.

6. Doorway into Heickal. Threshold into temple building.

7. Current hole in rock which marked the center of the Azarah.

8. Cave in rock.

9. Eastern end of Heickal

10. Western edge of rock once holding floor boards. The eastern part of Heickal was bedrock.

11. Floor boards were fitted into western edge of rock.

12. Floor boards covered in gold in Heickal.

14. Even Shitiah in center of Holy of Holies taken from point 7.

15. spaces under Holy of Holies floor to prevent contact with possible tombs.

17. Foundation of building under western end.

18. Slopping rock once at eastern end of temple, now covered by a stepped approach.

20. Steps in Herod’s temple.

21. Lower part of Ulam.

22. Retaining wall on downslope under western end of temple.

25. Foundation on eastern side of temple before the Ulam.

26. The Heickal

(Note- Height of (14), the Foundation Stone (Even Shitiah) is not drawn to scale but drawn

exaggerated since it was only 3 fingerbreadths high.)

The figure below shows the temple structures overlaid on top of the existing bedrock. This figure

is made by making tow photo copies of page in and shifitng

83

Fig. 17C

1. Location of 15 steps in Court of Women.

2. Court of Israel floored in either bedrock or sand.

3. Court of Priests at top of 3 big steps.

4. Altar foundation on bedrock.

5. Ulam of temple partly on eastern slope of rock under current Dome of the Rock building.

6. Rock under threshold of temple and eastern part of Heickal (Holy Place).

7. Western part of Heickal.

8. Debir (Holy of Holies) near where bedrock begins to slope downwards toward the west.

84

Figs. 18-19

85

Fig. 20.

86

Fig. 21.

87

Fig. 22

88

Figs. D1/D2

89

Figs. D3-D4

90

Figs. D5-D6

91

Figs. D7-D8

92

Fig. Note2

93

Fig. Note5

94

Fig.note13

95

Fig. Note14b

96

Fig. Note20

97

Fig. note4a(note20)

98

Fig. note23a-note23b. Top is note23a- bottom is Fig. note23b

99

Fig. 1N

1. Gate (Barclay’s Gate) goes to point 2.

2.. Corner of 500 Cubit square

3. Gate ( Wilson’s Gate and arch) by southern edge of Cheil.

4 Southern edge of inner platform which once marked southern Cheil.

5 Gate (Warren’s Gate) terminates

.6. by S.W. corner of inne sacred area. Close to Wood storage chamber.

7.. Cave area inWestern Wall close to Holy of Holies

100

At the beginning of this paper, I discussed the creation of the 500 Cubit square (har ha biyt)

created either clockwise or counterclockwise. The description of the square created from point A

at the northeastern corner of the square is exactly the description of the blood sprinkling ritual

upon the square golden altar within the temple by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement.

(This was counterclockwise from the altar’s northeastern corner.) This can be more evidence the

big har ha biyt square and the small square altar was being consecrated from the same starting

corner. This line from northeastern to the northwestern corners of the square plays an important

part of the discussion in my paper ‘Proof of Jerusalem Temple’s Location In The Church Of The

Holy Sepulchre’.

How I found method for locating the Temple The method I used to deduce the system for working out the Jerusalem and Arad surveys did not

spring fully developed. There was a method involved. Here I give the method. (see figure

below)

On a drawing of the Temple Mount I placed the following: 1. I have Leen Ritmeyer’s Square drawn out (500 Cubits on a side)

2. Have my axis line drawn out. This I found many years previously as described in my book

Sacred Stones Sacred Stories vol. 1 3. I think what would happen if I drew a radius line from the northeastern corner of square (point A)

. Why this corner? I know the temple and the Dome of the Rock is on the western side of the

square. I must take the radius from the eastern side to get the arc of the curve to sweep through

the building.

4. Does nothing. I draw an equilateral triangle having two sides, the same length as the length of the

square’s sides. Only one equilateral triangle is possible to be drawn to meet these conditions with

the short side on the eastern edge of the square. I set up this triangle from point (A) .

5. I notice the drawn axis line intersects the southern long leg of the triangle exactly at the ¾ point

of the line {(B) to(C)}. I suspect I am on to something.

6. Now I wanted to divide the triangle into equal segments.

7. I divided the square into four equal areas.

8. I found the eastern side having the short leg of the triangle was slightly longer then the half way

mark on the eastern side of the square.

9. This length (x), was exactly ¼ the length of the southern half of the eastern side.

10. If the total length of the eastern side was 500 Cubits, then the half distance was 500/2 or 250

Cubits.

11. Then the length of each segment of (x) was 250C / 4 or 62.5 Cubits—the same length the Talmud

states was the length of the altar plus the length of the ramp, but ignoring the fraction of a cubit.

12. Then the total length of the short side of the triangle was 4x from the northern half, plus 1x from

the southern, making a total of 5x or 5* 62.5C = 312.5C.

13. The long sides of the triangle also divided perfectly into exactly 8 parts making a total of 8x or

8*62.5C = 500C.

14. Thus the triangle was 8:8:5 or 8x: 8x: 5x.

15. This ratio was 8/5 or 1.6 which was close to the Golden Ratio. I later learned this ratio may not

have been known by the ancient Egyptians, but the explanation of these numbers being in the

dimensions of the Tabernacle altar is what works to explain this particular ratio being used in this

design

101

16. On the northern side of the square we get 3x from point (A) to the NE corner of the inner

platform on an east—west line which is 3*62.5C or 187.5C. This means we get 5x from this

corner of the inner platform to the western edge of the square on an east—west line.

17. The Talmud states the east—west length of the Azarah inner courtyard was 187C the same

distance in the previous statement, but ignoring the fraction of a cubit. These numbers show

archeological evidence the inner platform still has dimensions recorded in the Talmud (although not

at the actual location of the Azarah).

18. If the line from (B) to (C) is 8x, then ¼ of this length is 2x from point (B) and 6x from point (C)

since 8x= 2x +6x.

102

103

I am Robert Kerson

I may be reached at:

rkerson@snet.net

My website is:

www.sacredstonessacredstories.com

My blog is:

http://www.1ofkersondiscoveries.wordpress.com

My youtube videos are at youtube.com. Search on the words <Robert Kerson> to find them.

My website, blog, and videos all have discussions on different topics including more details

concerning the Jerusalem temples.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix 1.

This is a quote from the appendix P. 173. A theological Commentary to the Midrash by Joseph

Neusner vol. 8

“but here the verse states: ‘and the border went up to the side of the Jebusite southward—the

same is Jerusalem (Josh. 15:8). “ This teaches that the chosen house was built in the property of

Benjamin”. Another statement says house was in Benjamin. An example: Benjamin did not sell

brother Joseph. R. Meir says ‘the chosen house was built in the property of Benjamin, and a

triangular section protruded there into the property of Judah.’ But I do not find any such triangle.

I do find that no part of the altar was in Judah. “ The scepter shall not depart from Judah (Gen.

39:10) [which refers to a point at which the property of Judah serves as the locus of government]

“ It refers to the Chamber of Hewn Stones [supreme court office] which was located in the

property of Judah. The entire chamber was in Judah, thus the border line between Judah and

Benjamin must have ran within the western wall of the Chamber of Hewn Stones.

The border line between the tribes could not have run along the line of the Azarah from west

to east, but across the Azarah from south to north to the S.E. corner of the altar’s foundation.

Appendix 2.

Here are very important pieces of evidence preserved in stories preserved about Julian the

Apostate that the temple was located on this site. The story tells about a pillar standing in water

found inside a quadrangular cave underneath the bedrock on the temple site. Such a quadrangular

cave does exist today under the Dome of the Rock. The cave did once have a leaning pillar

nearby. This pillar would have mimicked a ladder to the roof of the temple which would have

been close by this cave as discussed previously in this paper. But also, look at Figs. 12, 13, 3N

Note that the column of Boaz would have been located about where the entrance to the

current cave natural opening is. This is next to the current staircase into the cave by a feature

called the ‘Tongue of the Rock’. The story of a man entering this cave and finding a pillar

standing in water may have been a distant memory of the Boaz Column being near the current

opening into the cave.

The mention of water here likewise could have been a distant memory of water near this

104

location as detailed previously in the paper. Below is the actual quote:

. “Julian the Apostate attempts to rebuild the temple. When foundations were laid, a workman

found a cave underneath in bedrock. He entered and explored the cave. It was quadrangular in

shape. When he returned to the mouth of the cave, he discovered a pillar standing in water.”

Eccesiasticae Historicae, Nicephori Callisti, tome ii,lib. X, cap, xxxiii, and also in the

Patrologza Graeca, Migne, volume cxlvi, pages 542-3, and in the Epitome of the Ecclesiastical

History of Philostorgius. Quoted in masonicdictionary.com/enoch.html.

Appendix 3

A comparison of the Leen Ritmeyer temple location and mine.

My location can explain the following: (all of them discussed in this paper) He cannot explain

any of the following:

1. The exact location of the 500 Cubit square including any of its corners.

2. Dimensions, orientation of rectangular Azarah and also the square Court of the Women.

3. The anomaly of Cistern 24. Its location and possible remains of steps on its sloping surface.

4. The main orientation angle of cistern 5 and a number of other parallel and mirror imaged

features to this cistern can be explained.

5. Altar on bedrock.

6. Important distance of 11 Cubits can be explained by my system.

7. 1 Cubit2 notch in altar base being in line with Chamber of Hewn Stones.

8. A host of alignments involving water, columns, ladders, with ancient legends.

9. No bedrock near steps on east side of inner platform.

10. The angles of the eastern and western edges of the inner platform.

11. The location of the southern edge of the inner platform.

12. Location priestly tombs 2000 Cubits from presumed site Chamber of Hewn Stones.

(described by Leen Ritmeyer)

13. A number of sites utilizing the same basic survey system in their constructions: At Arad,

Palmyra, ein dora,

14. Hole in cave ceiling of rock.

15.

Both can explain the following:

1. Ancient cisterns circling inner courts

2. Rectangular Depression in rock

3. Location of 500 Cubit square in line with rock within Church of Holy Sepulchre (discussed in

paper concerning church).

4. Division of areas around Azarah.

5. Details on rock surface.

6.

Discrepancies drawn between his books:

1. Highest point is on center line of but is drawn at southern edge of

2. Altar is drawn on high terries on but is drawn below bedrock line of