Yoma 16a (טז.) — the Talmud in English

southern

eastern —

this was the chamber in which they would prepare the leḥem ha-panim.

northeastern —

in it the House of the Hasmoneans concealed the altar stones that the Greek kings had rendered unfit,

because they had profaned them by offering upon the altar a sacrifice to idolatry.

northwestern —

in it

there was, in its floor, an opening through which they would

descend to the ritual immersion chamber.

It follows that this Mishna in tractate Middot, which states that the Chamber of the Lambs was in the southwestern corner of the Chamber of the Hearth, contradicts the Mishna in tractate Tamid, which places it in the northwestern corner of the Chamber of the Hearth.

Rav Huna said: Who is the tanna

of tractate

Middot

? It is Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

Whereas a different tanna taught tractate Tamid.

The proof that Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov is the tanna who taught tractate Middot is as follows::

As we learned

in it [2:5]:

The Women's Courtyard was one hundred and thirty-five

cubits

long by one hundred and thirty-five

cubits wide.

And there were four chambers in its four corners,

its corners.

And what purposes did they serve?

a.

Southeastern —

this was the Chamber of the Nazirites,

where nazirites would cook their peace-offerings,

since they had to give the cooked foreleg of their ram of peace-offerings to the priests, and therefore had to cook the rest of the ram in a sacred place.

And

also

the nazirites would shave

there

their hair and cast

it

beneath the pot

in which they cooked the meat of their ram of peace-offerings.

b.

Northeastern —

this was the Chamber of the Wood Storehouse, where priests who had bodily defects

and were unfit for Temple service

would stand and “worm-check”

inspect

the wood, as any piece of wood in which there was a worm was unfit for use on the altar,

because a worm is something unfit to be burned upon the altar.

c.

Northwestern —

this was the Chamber of the Lepers,

where those afflicted with leprosy would immerse a second time, after they had already immersed outside, in preparation for bringing their thumbs and toes into the Israelites' Courtyard through the Nicanor Gate.

d.

Southwestern —

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov said: I have forgotten

for what purpose

it was used,

this chamber

.

Abba Shaul says: In it they would place wine

for libations

and oil

for the candelabrum and meal-offerings.

And it was called the Chamber of the House of Shemenya.

Thus, the tanna who taught tractate Middot was Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, whom the Mishna cites as saying that he had forgotten the purpose of this chamber; and it is implied that he taught the remaining mishnayot up to this point.

It is also reasonable to say

that we can prove that the anonymous Mishna in tractate Middot follows the opinion

of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

And this is the proof:

As we learned [

in tractate Middot, chapter 2, Mishna 4]:

All the walls that were there,

on the Temple Mount,

were very high,

far above twenty cubits [since the openings of the gates of the Temple Courtyard themselves were twenty cubits high, and the wall above the opening of the surrounding wall was built above them].

Except for the eastern wall,

which was lower.

Because

the priest who burned the red heifer

would

stand at the

summit of

the Mount of Olives, and align himself so as to see opposite the opening of the Sanctuary at the time of the sprinkling of the blood.

As it is written: “And he shall sprinkle toward the front of the Tent of Meeting.” If the eastern wall were as high as the other walls, it would conceal the opening of the Tent of Meeting from the eyes of the priest who sprinkled the blood of the red heifer.

The Gemara proves, by calculating the height of the Sanctuary's opening, that this Mishna was taught specifically in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov. For only according to his view does the eastern wall of the Temple Mount conceal the opening of the Sanctuary from the priest standing on the Mount of Olives, and therefore it was necessary to lower the eastern wall.

And this is the calculation:

And we learned [

there, Mishna 3]:

All the openings that were there were twenty cubits high and ten cubits wide.

And we learned [

in that same Mishna]:

Inside it,

within the area of the Temple Mount, east of the Courtyard and adjacent to it, at a distance of ten cubits from the wall of the Courtyard, was a fence called

“the Soreg” [

because it was made of wooden boards interwoven diagonally with one another].

And we learned [

there]:

Inside it,

inside the Soreg, between it and the wall of the Courtyard, was an area called

the Ḥeil.

The width of the Ḥeil was

ten cubits.

And there were twelve steps there,

in the Ḥeil, opposite the opening in the wall of the Women's Courtyard.

The height

of each

step [

riser] was

half a cubit, and its tread

the width of the step, was

half a cubit.

It follows that the Women's Courtyard was six cubits higher than the level of the Temple Mount.

And we further learned [there, Mishna 5]:

Fifteen steps ascended from within it,

the Women's Courtyard, to the Israelites' Courtyard [to the Nicanor Gate, through which one entered from the Women's Courtyard into the Israelites' Courtyard].

These steps are the same fifteen steps that

“descended from the Israelites' Courtyard,”

from the Nicanor Gate,

to the Women's Courtyard,

as explained in tractate Sukkah; the priests stood upon them during the water libation on the festival of Sukkot.

The height

of each

step

of the fifteen steps was

half a cubit.

And its tread,

the width of the step, was

half a cubit.

It follows that the Israelites' Courtyard was elevated seven and a half cubits above the Women's Courtyard, making it thirteen and a half cubits above the level of the Temple Mount.

And

further

we learned [

there, 3:6]:

Between the Hall and the Altar

there were

twenty-two cubits.

And there were twelve steps there,

by which one ascended from the Courtyard to the opening of the Hall.

The height

of each

step was half a cubit, and its tread was half a cubit.

It follows that the opening of the Sanctuary was six cubits higher than the Israelites' Courtyard, making it nineteen and a half cubits above the level of the Temple Mount.

According to this calculation, the priest standing on the Mount of Olives could see the floor of the Sanctuary's opening through the openings in the walls surrounding the Temple Mount and the Courtyards.

For the height of the open space of all the openings was twenty cubits, whereas the floor of the Sanctuary's opening was only nineteen and a half cubits above the level of the Temple Mount.

But according to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, which will be explained below, the floor of the Sanctuary's opening was another two and a half cubits higher, so that the priest could not see the opening of the Sanctuary through the open space of the gates. Therefore, according to his view, it was necessary to lower the eastern wall, so that the priest could see the opening of the Sanctuary above the wall.

For

and

further

we learned

in tractate Middot [2:6]:

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says:

The floor of the Courtyard was not level. Rather,

one step

additional

was there

in the Courtyard, and it served as a dividing line between the eleven cubits of the Israelites' Courtyard and the priests' Courtyard.

And

that step was

one

cubit

high

.

And a platform

was placed upon it,

upon which the priests stood to bless Israel.

The platform that stood upon that step extended across the entire width of the Courtyard,

and on it

there were

three steps, each half a cubit

high.

Behind the platform, in the priests' Courtyard, toward the Sanctuary, the floor of the Courtyard was elevated by two and a half cubits above the Israelites' Courtyard.

It follows that, according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov, the area of the priests' Courtyard was elevated two and a half cubits above the Israelites' Courtyard [one cubit for the step, plus three half-cubits for the steps of the platform].

We can now calculate the height of the floor of the Sanctuary's opening:

The Women's Courtyard was six cubits higher than the Temple Mount.

The Israelites' Courtyard was seven and a half cubits higher than the Women's Courtyard.

The priests' Courtyard was two and a half cubits higher than the Israelites' Courtyard.

The floor of the Sanctuary's opening was six cubits higher than the priests' Courtyard.

Altogether, the floor of the Sanctuary's opening was twenty-two cubits higher than the level of the Temple Mount.

It follows that the eastern wall, whose opening was twenty cubits high, with a wall built above it, prevented the priest from seeing from the Mount of Olives toward the floor of the Sanctuary's opening through the open space of the gate. Therefore, it was necessary to lower it, so that he could see the floor of the Sanctuary's opening above the wall.

Granted, if you say

that the Mishna in Middot, which states that the eastern wall must be lowered so that the priest could see the opening above it,

is Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov's opinion —

this is understandable, as the opening was concealed from him.

But if you say that it is the opinion of the Rabbis,

it

there is still half a cubit [

between nineteen and a half cubits and twenty cubits in the open space of the opening in the eastern wall of the Temple Mount],

through which

it would appear to the priest standing on the Mount of Olives

that the opening

of the Sanctuary was

within it,

through the opening.

Rather, can one not conclude from this:

tractate Tamid

follows the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov.

Rav Adda bar Ahava said: Whose opinion is this? —

It is Rabbi Yehuda's opinion.

They needed to lower the eastern wall because of the Altar, which blocked the line of sight, as will be explained.

As it was taught in a beraita, Rabbi Yehuda says:

The place of

the Altar

was centered and stood

exactly

in the middle of the Courtyard.

And it was thirty-two cubits

wide.