Chapter 4 of Divrei HaYamim II continues the description of the construction of the Beit HaMikdash, moving from the building itself to the vessels: the copper altar, the cast Molten Sea resting upon twelve oxen, the lavers, the menorot, the tables, the courtyards, and the smaller utensils. Most of these details parallel what is recounted in Sefer Melachim, and it is precisely in the differences between the two books that the core explanations of the Malbim, Radak, and the commentary attributed to Rashi lie. Let us follow the order of the verses.
וַיַּעַשׂ מִזְבַּח נְחֹשֶׁת עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה אׇרְכּוֹ וְעֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה רׇחְבּוֹ וְעֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת קוֹמָתוֹ׃ - And he made a copper altar, twenty cubits in its length, twenty cubits in its width, and ten cubits in its height.
Metzudat David explains: this was actually a stone altar, built in place of the copper altar made by Moshe in the wilderness. This phenomenon recurs in many places - the outer altar of the Beit HaMikdash is referred to as "the copper altar" even though it had long ceased to be copper, being made of stone instead. In the Mishkan there was a copper altar, and on that account the original name remained attached to it even after its material changed. Thus, when the verse calls it "a copper altar" here, its intention is that it served as a replacement for the copper altar of Moshe's day.
The Malbim notes that this entire construction is not mentioned at all in Sefer Melachim. In the view of Rabbi Yose in Masechet Zevachim, Shlomo did not make this altar until the time of the dedication, when Moshe's copper altar was found to be too small to contain all the offerings - and only when there was no other choice, and it was impossible to sacrifice upon Moshe's small altar, did he build a stone altar in its stead. However, from the straightforward reading of the verses here, the Malbim explains, it aligns with Rabbi Yehudah's opinion there: that what is stated in Melachim, "On that day the king sanctified the interior of the courtyard," is meant literally, and Shlomo's altar already existed from the outset. According to this, because they needed to offer so many sacrifices and the altar's surface was insufficient, the king sanctified the courtyard floor so they could sacrifice there as well. Under Rabbi Yose's view, the Malbim concedes, the verses here are difficult to reconcile.
And as for what is written, "twenty cubits in its length" - was the altar not thirty-two cubits by thirty-two cubits? The answer depends on where it is measured. When measured from base to base, it measures thirty-two cubits. But the altar had a base (yesod) and a ledge (sovev), and as it ascended it stepped inward and contracted, such that measuring the top section - the rooftop of the altar - yields twenty cubits by twenty cubits. Here, the verse is measuring the actual area upon which the offerings were brought.
וַיַּעַשׂ אֶת הַיָּם מוּצָק עֶשֶׂר בָּאַמָּה מִשְּׂפָתוֹ אֶל שְׂפָתוֹ עָגוֹל סָבִיב וְחָמֵשׁ בָּאַמָּה קוֹמָתוֹ וְקָו שְׁלֹשִׁים בָּאַמָּה יָסֹב אֹתוֹ סָבִיב׃ - And he made the molten sea, ten cubits from brim to brim, circular all around, five cubits in its height, and a line of thirty cubits encircled it all around.
What was "the Sea"? Metzudat David explains: a large basin made in the semblance of a sea, containing water. "Molten" (mutzak) - that it was cast as a single solid piece, not beaten out with a hammer and not assembled from joined parts. Today, anyone wishing to construct such a vessel would take sheets of metal, curve them, and weld them together to form a giant basin. In those days such techniques did not exist, so they cast the entire basin in one massive pour. "From brim to brim, circular" - from one rim straight across to the opposite rim, it was completely round. "And a line of thirty cubits encircled it" - a line refers to a measuring cord, and when one came to measure its circumference, it measured thirty cubits.
The Malbim notes that here Ezra transcribes what we have already learned in Sefer Melachim, except that instead of the "wild gourds" (peka'im) mentioned there, it writes "oxen" (bakarim) here, and instead of "two thousand bat" it writes "three thousand bat" - and we will soon see how Chazal reconcile this. Its diameter was ten cubits and its circumference thirty, which matches the dictum of Chazal: whatever has a circumference of three handbreadths has a diameter of one handbreadth. In reality this is an approximation, since there is the ratio of pi, and it was not written this way without reason. There is a wonderful allusion here: once it is written "ve-kav" (וקו) and once "ve-kaveh" (וקוה) - the keri and ketiv - and the ratio between them produces the value of pi with remarkable precision. We elaborated on this in Sefer Melachim, and whoever wishes may consult that discussion.
וּדְמוּת בְּקָרִים תַּחַת לוֹ סָבִיב סָבִיב סוֹבְבִים אֹתוֹ עֶשֶׂר בָּאַמָּה מַקִּיפִים אֶת הַיָּם סָבִיב שְׁנַיִם טוּרִים הַבָּקָר יְצוּקִים בְּמֻצַקְתּוֹ׃ - And the likeness of oxen was under it all around, encircling it, ten per cubit, surrounding the sea all around; the oxen were two rows, cast in its casting.
"And the likeness of oxen was under it" - beneath its rim, all around, there was the likeness of oxen. Or, according to Radak's explanation, "under it" refers to the Sea itself: not directly underneath it, but along its vertical wall the figures of oxen were fashioned. And these oxen are the "peka'im" mentioned in Sefer Melachim. Peka'im means an egg-like shape, as "bei'in" are eggs. Thus, their bodies were rounded like eggs while their faces were the faces of oxen. Through this, the contradiction is resolved: at times they are called oxen and at times eggs - their body was shaped like an egg, and their face was like that of an ox.
"Ten cubits encompassed the Sea round about" - Chazal say that the height of the Sea was five cubits; the lower three cubits were square, and the upper two cubits were circular. The oxen were positioned around the lower three cubits, where the Sea was square. Therefore it says "ten cubits" - ten cubits on each side, so that the perimeter of the Sea at its square base was forty cubits: ten cubits of length and ten of width on each side. This was true of its lower part, which was square, whereas only the top two cubits were round. "Cast when it was cast" (yetjukim be-mutzakto) - Radak explains that the oxen were cast together with the Sea as a single piece. Do not think that they were attached later; rather, the entire structure was cast all at once.
עוֹמֵד עַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר בָּקָר שְׁלֹשָׁה פֹנִים צָפוֹנָה וּשְׁלוֹשָׁה פֹנִים יָמָּה וּשְׁלֹשָׁה פֹּנִים נֶגְבָּה וּשְׁלֹשָׁה פֹּנִים מִזְרָחָה וְהַיָּם עֲלֵיהֶם מִלְמָעְלָה וְכׇל אֲחֹרֵיהֶם בָּיְתָה׃ - It stood upon twelve oxen: three looking toward the north, three looking toward the west, three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east; and the Sea was set above upon them, and all their hind parts were inward.
Pay attention to the grammatical rule we have mentioned several times: when following an open syllable ending in an ehevi letter (Alef, Hei, Vav, Yud), a Begadkefat letter loses its dagesh. "Sheloshah" ends in a Hei, and when it is joined closely to the word that follows, the dagesh drops from the letter Pei. Hence we have "sheloshah fonim tzafonah" (with a soft Phe), and similarly "u-sheloshah fonim yamah". However, in "u-sheloshah, ponim negbah", there is a disjunctive accent (ta'am mafsik) separating the words. Because they are not read in close succession, the dagesh does not drop. Likewise, the word "u-sheloshah" before "ponim mizrachah" carries a kadma, which is a disjunctive accent, and therefore "ponim" retains its dagesh.
As for the matter itself: Radak proves from here as well that the Sea was square at the bottom, for Scripture enumerates four cardinal directions, with three oxen facing each direction. With a circular vessel it is difficult to designate distinct sides, since it has no defined corners or faces, but with a square structure one can readily speak of facing this way or that. This confirms the statement of Chazal that the bottom portion of the Sea was square. "And all their hind parts were inward" - the hindquarters of the oxen faced inward: the hindquarters of those on the north faced those on the south, and those on the east faced those on the west. Thus, whichever side you approached, you would see oxen looking out toward you - three on each side, twelve in total.
וְעׇבְיוֹ טֶפַח וּשְׂפָתוֹ כְּמַעֲשֵׂה שְׂפַת כּוֹס פֶּרַח שׁוֹשַׁנָּה מַחֲזִיק בַּתִּים שְׁלֹשֶׁת אֲלָפִים יָכִיל׃ - And its thickness was a handbreadth, and its brim was wrought like the brim of a cup, like the petal of a lily; it held three thousand baths.
"And its thickness was a handbreadth" - the base and walls were a full tefach (handbreadth) thick. This meant an immense weight. Imagine having to transport such a colossal vessel from the foundry where it was cast all the way to the Beit HaMikdash - a formidable logistical feat, especially since a cast metal piece of such size could easily crack on the way. Yet they succeeded, bringing the Sea safely to the Beit HaMikdash.
"And its brim was wrought like the brim of a cup" - the thickness of a handbreadth applied to the walls and base, but at the very top edge it was fashioned like a drinking cup. Just as a cup is not thick at the lip but tapers to become delicate, so too the rim of the Sea was thin and flared, which enhanced its beauty. And upon the rim, the design of a lily blossom was engraved.
Here Chazal address a difficulty: this verse states that it "held three thousand baths," whereas in the Book of Kings (Melachim) it says that it held two thousand baths - a third less. Which was it? Chazal explain: two thousand baths in liquid measure, and three thousand in dry measure. For any container can be heaped with dry goods by a third more than its capacity for liquid. Anyone who has seen spices displayed in bulk at a shop has seen them piled high into a mound above the rim of the container, holding an additional third beyond the brim. With liquid, however, that is impossible; once it reaches the brim, it spills over. Thus, "three thousand" refers to dry measure, while "two thousand" refers to liquid measure.
וַיַּעַשׂ כִּיּוֹרִים עֲשָׂרָה וַיִּתֵּן חֲמִשָּׁה מִיָּמִין וַחֲמִשָּׁה מִשְּׂמֹאול לְרׇחְצָה בָהֶם אֶת מַעֲשֵׂה הָעוֹלָה יָדִיחוּ בָם וְהַיָּם לְרׇחְצָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בּוֹ׃ - He also made ten lavers, and put five on the right and five on the left, to wash in them; the parts of the burnt offering were rinsed in them, and the Sea was for the kohanim to wash in.
The word kiyorim (lavers), explains the Metzudat Tzion, refers to a type of vat equipped with spouts that empty water - that is, a basin with spigots that discharge water from it. Shlomo made ten lavers in addition to the Laver made by Moshe: five to the right of Moshe's Laver and five to its left. And so too with the Menorot: five to the right of Moshe's Menorah and five to its left. And so too with the tables: five to the right of Moshe's Shulchan and five to its left. This means that if the Menorah is in the south, all the Menorot were in the south; and if the Shulchan is in the north, all ten tables were in the north, five to the right and five to the left. He did not alter the designated locations, but merely added to them. Moreover, these lavers stood upon wheels, so that they could be moved from place to place.
Our Sages disagreed on this: some say that they kindled only Moshe's Menorah, and arranged the Lechem HaPanim (Showbread) only on Moshe's Shulchan, as it says, "the golden Menorah and its lamps to burn every evening" - in the singular, indicating one Menorah that they kindled, while the other Menorot were for beauty. Another opinion holds that they kindled all of them, as it says, "the Menorot and their lamps to burn according to the ordinance" - in the plural, showing that they kindled all the Menorot. According to this view, they also arranged the Showbread on all the tables, not just on Moshe's Shulchan. The Radak writes that this indeed appears to be the case, that they kindled and arranged upon all of them. Each side reconciles the opposing verse: the verse that speaks of "the golden Menorah" in the singular comes to teach that they also kindled Moshe's Menorah - lest one say, "Now that we have made ten Menorot, Moshe's Menorah is no longer needed," just as we built a new altar and no longer used Moshe's copper altar. Therefore, scripture used the singular to teach that they also kindled Moshe's Menorah and also used Moshe's Shulchan, but in truth they used all ten Menorot and all ten tables.
And what was done in the lavers? "To wash in them; they would rinse in them that which pertained to the burnt-offering." The Radak offers two explanations. First: "To wash in them" refers to the parts of the burnt-offering - the innards and the shins of the olah had to be rinsed, and this was performed in the lavers. Second: a conjunction is implied here, so "to wash in them" refers to the Kohanim who would wash in them, as though it were written, "and they would rinse in them that which pertained to the burnt-offering" - meaning that they likewise rinsed the parts of the olah in them. According to the first explanation, it refers to a single function, whereas according to the second, it refers to two distinct functions.
The Sea was for the immersion of the Kohanim, as the Radak explains. The Yerushalmi raises a difficulty: Immersion? But the Sea was a vessel, and immersion is invalid in vessels! It is of no avail for a person to immerse inside a vessel; one must immerse in an excavation in the ground, in a mikveh, and not in vessels. How, then, could the Kohanim immerse in a vessel?
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi answered: An aqueduct was drawn to it from Ein Eitam, and the feet of the oxen were open like pomegranates - beneath the ground - and the water rose up through the hollow legs of the oxen. Thus, the Sea was connected to the ground. The disqualification of water in a vessel applies when it is detached from the earth; but water connected via a spring beneath it is considered connected to the ground. And so it was in fact: Ein Eitam was at a higher elevation, as we learned in Masechet Yoma, and by the principle of communicating vessels, the water flowed on its own all the way to the Beit HaMikdash and rose wherever needed - even to the immersion chamber on the roof of one of the chambers on the southern side. So too with the Sea: at its base there was an aperture leading into the backs of the oxen, and from there through their legs the water connected to the ground. A subterranean water delivery system - not actual enclosed pipes, so as not to contract tumah - entered the oxen's legs and ascended to their backs and into the Sea. Consequently, there was a continuous connection to water from the ground, and under such conditions there is no impediment to immersing in the Sea of Shlomo. The principle that one may not immerse in vessels is a rabbinic decree, lest people bring drawn water in vessels; therefore, one may not immerse in vessels, nor even atop vessels - as we learned in Masechet Mikvaot, that one may not immerse even upon vessels standing inside a mikveh. One who wishes may explore this further in the shiurim on Mishnayot Mikvaot.
וַיַּעַשׂ אֶת מְנֹרוֹת הַזָּהָב עֶשֶׂר כְּמִשְׁפָּטָם וַיִּתֵּן בַּהֵיכָל חָמֵשׁ מִיָּמִין וְחָמֵשׁ מִשְּׂמֹאול׃ - And he made the ten golden Menorot according to their ordinance, and placed them in the Heichal, five on the right and five on the left.
The Malbim notes: Here scripture comes to clarify what was stated in Melachim, "and the table and the Menorot" - namely, that there were five on the right and five on the left, and similarly with the tables. The tables were in the north, and the Menorot were in the south.
וַיַּעַשׂ שֻׁלְחָנוֹת עֲשָׂרָה וַיַּנַּח בַּהֵיכָל חֲמִשָּׁה מִיָּמִין וַחֲמִשָּׁה מִשְּׂמֹאול וַיַּעַשׂ מִזְרְקֵי זָהָב מֵאָה׃ - And he made ten tables and placed them in the Heichal, five on the right and five on the left; and he made one hundred golden basins.
The Radak notes that the golden basins were not used for the tables, but rather to sprinkle the blood upon the altar; why then were they listed together with the tables? Because they too were made of gold, like the tables. The mizrak is the vessel in which the sacrificial blood is received and dashed against the altar, and it is named mizrak after this act of throwing or sprinkling (zerikah) - having nothing to do with a syringe, which is what the word means in modern Hebrew. It was a kind of bowl in which the blood was received, and this vessel had no flat base - so that they could not set it down, lest the blood coagulate and the mitzvah of sprinkling it be nullified. Its bottom was rounded, and when there was a delay, the Kohen would continuously stir the blood, agitating it so that it would not congeal.
וַיַּעַשׂ חֲצַר הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהָעֲזָרָה הַגְּדוֹלָה וּדְלָתוֹת לָעֲזָרָה וְדַלְתוֹתֵיהֶם צִפָּה נְחֹשֶׁת׃ - And he made the court of the priests and the great courtyard, and doors for the courtyard, and he overlaid their doors with copper.
"The court of the priests" refers to the Priestly Courtyard (Ezrat Kohanim), and "the great courtyard" is the large courtyard where the people of Israel stood - the Courtyard of the Israelites (Ezrat Yisrael), and according to the simple meaning of the text, this also included the Women's Courtyard (Ezrat Nashim). And why is a courtyard called an azarah? Radak explains: because the people were helped (ne'ezarim) through their prayers there. This can be understood as referring to a spacious area that helped accommodate them when they were crowded. Metzudat David, however, explains: they were helped by Hashem when they prayed there - not merely a physical area of relief, but a place where they merited Divine help. These two explanations do not contradict one another; one can say that both are true.
וְאֶת הַיָּם נָתַן מִכֶּתֶף הַיְמָנִית קֵדְמָה מִמּוּל נֶגְבָּה׃ - And he set the Sea on the right side eastward, toward the south.
He positioned the Sea away from the eastern side, away from directly facing the entrance, shifting it toward the south of the Courtyard. Let us picture the layout: a person entering comes from the direction of the Mount of Olives, with his back to the Mount of Olives and facing west. To his right - the north - were the rings and the slaughtering area. To his left - the south - stood the ramp of the Altar. The Sea was shifted toward this side rather than set in the middle, since the center is the pathway through which one bypasses the Altar and walks straight toward the Ulam (the vestibule) and the Sanctuary. This is the meaning of "on the right side eastward, toward the south": for one entering, it was to his left, but for one looking out from the Holy of Holies, it was to his right, situated on the southern side. And why was it set back from the entrance? Because it is not dignified or fitting for kohanim to immerse directly opposite the entrance to the Ulam, as one who immerses does so without clothing; therefore, they moved the Sea to a more modest and discreet location.
וַיַּעַשׂ חוּרָם אֶת הַסִּירוֹת וְאֶת הַיָּעִים וְאֶת הַמִּזְרָקוֹת וַיְכַל חוּרָם לַעֲשׂוֹת אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לַמֶּלֶךְ שְׁלֹמֹה בְּבֵית הָאֱלֹהִים׃ - And Churam made the pots and the shovels and the basins; and Churam finished doing the work that he made for King Solomon in the House of God.
"The pots" (sirot), explains Metzudat Tzion, are a type of cooking pot, from the word sir, as it is written, "and the pots in the House of Hashem shall be holy." Do not confuse this term - in Biblical Hebrew, sirot means pots, not boats. In the Holy Tongue, sirim can also refer to thorns, as in "like the crackling of thorns (sirim) under a pot (sir), so is the laughter of the fool." "The shovels" (ya'im) are the scoops and shovels with which they would sweep and lift the ashes. Malbim, however, interprets that the sirot were hearths or stoves upon which they cooked.
Malbim adds: As he already explained in Sefer Melachim, there were two craftsmen here, a father and his son, and each engaged in a different craft. The first "And Churam made" and the second "and Churam finished" do not refer to the same person; the second one was the craftsman who also made the pillars. From where is this derived? From the principle that when a name appears twice in the very same verse, it does not refer to the same individual - for there would be no need to repeat the same person's name. Since Churam is mentioned twice, one refers to the father and the other to the son.
עַמּוּדִים שְׁנַיִם וְהַגֻּלּוֹת וְהַכֹּתָרוֹת עַל רֹאשׁ הָעַמּוּדִים שְׁתָּיִם וְהַשְּׂבָכוֹת שְׁתַּיִם לְכַסּוֹת אֶת שְׁתֵּי גֻּלּוֹת הַכֹּתָרוֹת אֲשֶׁר עַל רֹאשׁ הָעַמּוּדִים׃ - Two pillars, and the bowls and the capitals on top of the two pillars, and the two nettings to cover the two bowls of the capitals that were on top of the pillars.
"Two pillars" - these are Yachin and Boaz. "The bowls" (gulot), explains Metzudat Tzion, refers to the lower section of the capital, shaped like a bowl or basin, related to the word for a spring, as in "and a bowl (gulah) upon its top." "The nettings" (sevachot) are the upper section of the capital, formed like a mesh or lattice. This connects to what was noted earlier regarding the term devir: the pomegranates placed inside were positioned as if within an inner room, a devir, because the nettings enclosed them. The entire capital served as an ornament atop the pillars.
וְאֶת הָרִמּוֹנִים אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת לִשְׁתֵּי הַשְּׂבָכוֹת שְׁנַיִם טוּרִים רִמּוֹנִים לַשְּׂבָכָה הָאֶחָת לְכַסּוֹת אֶת שְׁתֵּי גֻּלּוֹת הַכֹּתָרוֹת אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָעַמּוּדִים׃ - And four hundred pomegranates for the two nettings, two rows of pomegranates for each netting, to cover the two bowls of the capitals that were on the pillars.
Earlier we saw, "he made a hundred pomegranates and put them on the chains," whereas here there are four hundred. Radak resolves this in two ways: either the hundred mentioned there refers to one row, and since there were four rows of pomegranates, together they totaled four hundred; or the pomegranates fixed to the chains were of one type, and the pomegranates fixed to the network were another type - the chain pomegranates were one hundred, and the network pomegranates were four hundred.
וְאֶת הַמְּכֹנוֹת עָשָׂה וְאֶת הַכִּיֹּרוֹת עָשָׂה עַל הַמְּכֹנוֹת׃ - And he made the bases, and he made the lavers upon the bases.
The mechonot (bases) were a kind of carriage, a stand and pedestal - related to the word al kano ("on its base"). Upon this base he placed the lavers, and the base was on wheels so that it could be moved from place to place. In Melachim it says, "And he made the ten bases," and there their craftsmanship is described in detail, as noted by the commentary attributed to Rashi; here, Ezra comes to inform you that the second Hiram made all of this.
אֶת הַיָּם אֶחָד וְאֶת הַבָּקָר שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר תַּחְתָּיו׃ - The one Sea, and the twelve oxen underneath it.
וְאֶת הַסִּירוֹת וְאֶת הַיָּעִים וְאֶת הַמִּזְלָגוֹת וְאֶת כׇּל כְּלֵיהֶם עָשָׂה חוּרָם אָבִיו לַמֶּלֶךְ שְׁלֹמֹה לְבֵית ה' נְחֹשֶׁת מָרוּק׃ - And the pots, the shovels, the forks, and all their vessels did Huram his master craftsman make for King Solomon for the House of Hashem, of burnished copper.
The pots, the shovels, the forks, and all their vessels were made by the father - the first Hiram - for the second Hiram was not skilled in copper work, only the father was (and Huram and Hiram are the same, as we have mentioned several times). "Burnished copper" - thoroughly cleaned, glowing and polished, like "and it shall be scoured (*umorak*) and rinsed in water." Metzudat Tzion explains: maruk means clear and bright, rubbed and polished until it literally gleams. And in Melachim it says memorat, from the phrase "if his head becomes bald (*yimaret*)" (smooth and bare), which conveys the same idea of shining and gleaming, and as the Targum renders it: polished copper.
Radak, however, explains differently: he does not distinguish between father and son, but instead explains "Huram his father made" as meaning "Huram made like his father" - that he made these vessels as good and beautiful as his father would have, for his father was renowned and famous for his craft, skilled in gold and silver. According to this, the comparative letter kaf is omitted here, similar to "A merry heart does good like medicine (*k'gehah*)" where gehah means k'gehah, and in several other places. According to his understanding, this refers solely to Hiram the son.
בְּכִכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן יְצָקָם הַמֶּלֶךְ בַּעֲבִי הָאֲדָמָה בֵּין סֻכּוֹת וּבֵין צְרֵדָתָה׃ - In the plain of the Jordan the king cast them, in the clay ground between Sukkot and Tzeredatah.
All of these - the pots, the shovels, the forks, the Sea, and all the vessels - he cast in the plain of the Jordan in the clay ground, between Sukkot and Tzeredatah. In Melachim, however, it is written "Tzartan." Which is the correct place? Tzeredah was Yeravam's hometown: "And Yeravam son of Nevat, an Ephraimite from Tzeredah, whose mother's name was Tzeruah, a widow." Chazal expounded all of this to his disgrace: a corpse defiles in a tent, and a leper (*metzora*) also defiles; therefore the verse called his mother "Tzeruah" - to hint at his defect and corruption, and similarly idol worship defiles, signifying the defilement of Yeravam. "A widow" - that he widowed Israel from their God, as if making Israel widowed from their God. "From Tzeredah" - for he restricted (*hetzer*) the Torah and did not expand it, restricting the religion of our God. Thus, the entire phrasing serves as a condemnation of Yeravam. Yet this is not the literal meaning of the text; the literal sense, as we have explained several times, is that place names change over time. Many years passed from the days of Solomon until the days of Ezra; in Solomon's time the place was called Tzartan, and later it was called Tzeredatah.
Radak explains "in the clay ground (*ba'avi ha'adamah*)" - in the thickness of the ground he cast them; he made smelting furnaces there inside the earth and cast in them. Yonatan translated "in the clay ground" as gargishta, and Radak explains that this is red clay, from which he made the crucibles to melt the metals. Others explain that right in the earth he carved molds in the shapes of the vessels he wished to make, poured the copper into them, and thus the vessel took the form shaped in the soil. Radak adds that Tzeredatah and Tzartan are linguistically close - the names are similar, and as mentioned, names evolved over time until the era of Ezra.
וַיַּעַשׂ שְׁלֹמֹה כׇּל הַכֵּלִים הָאֵלֶּה לָרֹב מְאֹד כִּי לֹא נֶחְקַר מִשְׁקַל הַנְּחֹשֶׁת׃ - And Solomon made all these vessels in great abundance, for the weight of the copper was not investigated.
The abundance was so immense that no investigation was made to determine the quantity.
וַיַּעַשׂ שְׁלֹמֹה אֵת כׇּל הַכֵּלִים אֲשֶׁר בֵּית הָאֱלֹהִים וְאֵת מִזְבַּח הַזָּהָב וְאֶת הַשֻּׁלְחָנוֹת וַעֲלֵיהֶם לֶחֶם הַפָּנִים׃ - And Solomon made all the vessels that were for the House of God, the golden altar, and the tables upon which was the Showbread.
"That were in the House of God" - meaning designated for the House of God. "And the tables upon which was the Showbread" - upon these tables they arranged the Showbread; it does not mean that Solomon himself made the Showbread, for Solomon was not a Kohen, and the Showbread was baked by the Kohanim. Moreover, even if he had made it, it would have been only once. Rather, it refers to the tables upon which they would subsequently place the Showbread.
וְאֶת הַמְּנֹרוֹת וְנֵרֹתֵיהֶם לְבַעֲרָם כַּמִּשְׁפָּט לִפְנֵי הַדְּבִיר זָהָב סָגוּר׃ - And the menorahs with their lamps, to kindle them according to the ordinance before the inner sanctuary, of pure gold.
The commentary attributed to Rashi makes a precise observation: Mentioning the lamps separately comes to refute the view of those commentators who maintain that the lamps were fashioned from the body of the Menorah itself and attached to it. For why does Scripture not mention the cups, the knobs, and the flowers separately? Because they are integral to the Menorah and are subsumed under its general name. If the verse mentions the lamps separately, it indicates that they were not part of its body, but rather separate items; since they were not joined to it, they constitute a distinct manufacture and required separate mention. Some explain that the lamps were indeed part of the Menorah, but were made of soft gold, allowing them to be tilted from side to side; with this, they resolve the difficulty without having to say that they were completely removable.
The Malbim notes: "And the tables" - in the Book of Kings only one table is mentioned, whereas here it mentions tables in the plural. Regarding "and upon them was the Showbread", we have seen a dispute in the Talmud as to whether the Showbread was arranged on all the tables or only on the Table of Moshe. According to the view that it was placed only on the Table of Moshe, the phrase "and upon them was the Showbread" means that it was fitting to place the Showbread upon them, not that they actually did so. Similarly, with regard to "to kindle them": if only Moshe's Menorah was kindled, the plural refers to the lamps - the lamps of that single Menorah - and not to all the menorahs. But according to the opinion that all the menorahs were lit, the matter is straightforward: "to kindle them" refers to all the menorahs, "and upon them was the Showbread" refers to all the tables, and the verse is understood according to its plain meaning.
וְהַפֶּרַח וְהַנֵּרוֹת וְהַמֶּלְקַחַיִם זָהָב הוּא מִכְלוֹת זָהָב׃ - And the flowers, and the lamps, and the tongs, were of gold; it was the purest gold.
"The flower," notes the commentary attributed to Rashi, corresponds to that flower which Moshe Rabbeinu added in Parashat Beha'alotcha - "unto its base, unto its flower" - which was not mentioned in Parashat Terumah, referring to the additional flower on the Menorah. "And the tongs" - with which they would raise the wicks out of the oil cups of the Menorah. "Mikhlot zahav" - refined and purified gold, fein in Old French (La'az), meaning superior and beautiful.
In Tractate Menachot, it is explained that this means it depleted all the gold Solomon possessed, because of the vast quantity of gold melted down to refine it and fulfill the requirement of "a menorah of pure gold." Chazal teach: Solomon made ten menorahs, and for each one he brought a thousand talents of gold, placed it into the smelting furnace a thousand times, and reduced it until only one talent of gold remained - out of a thousand talents, a single talent emerged. Even if this is understood as hyperbole, it certainly indicates that the gold underwent immense refinement, such that an enormous quantity was reduced to a far smaller amount. Thus it is called mikhlot zahav, as though he consumed (kila) his gold. The Radak offers another explanation: mikhlot zahav is related to kelei zahav (vessels of gold) - meaning that all the implements of the Menorah were made of gold. Others explain that mikhlot is like kelil zahav, entirely gold - in the sense of absolute perfection, the most refined gold possible.
וְהַמְזַמְּרוֹת וְהַמִּזְרָקוֹת וְהַכַּפּוֹת וְהַמַּחְתּוֹת זָהָב סָגוּר וּפֶתַח הַבַּיִת דַּלְתוֹתָיו הַפְּנִימִיּוֹת לְקֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים וְדַלְתֵי הַבַּיִת לַהֵיכָל זָהָב׃ - And the snuffers, the basins, the spoons, and the firepans were of pure gold; and the entrance of the House, its inner doors for the Holy of Holies, and the doors of the House for the Heichal, were of gold.
The doors were overlaid with gold. Radak explains that the doors themselves were made of wood, and what is described here as gold refers only to the overlay. Metzudat David explains that both the inner doors and the doors of the Heichal were entirely overlaid with gold. And regarding the phrase "and the entrance of the House, its inner doors" - the Malbim explains this in light of the parallel verse in Sefer Melachim which mentions "v'hapotot", meaning the openers, that is, the keys; and even the keys were fashioned from gold. With this, we conclude Chapter 4.
Chapter 4 lays before us the vessels of the Mikdash: the copper altar, which was constructed entirely of stone and whose name reflects the Altar of Moshe that preceded it; the molten sea resting upon twelve oxen, whose bottom was square and whose top was round, whose rim was like the brim of a cup, and whose waters were connected to the ground through the oxen's legs from the spring of Ein Eitam - which is why the Kohanim were able to immerse in it; the ten lavers, ten Menorahs, and ten tables that Shlomo added to those of Moshe, each in its designated place, five on the right and five on the left; the courtyards and doors overlaid with copper and gold; and the craftsmanship of Churam, the father and the son, cast in the thick clay of the Jordan plain. Throughout the chapter, we have seen how the Malbim, Radak, and the commentary attributed to Rashi reconcile the differences between Divrei HaYamim and Sefer Melachim - between "oxen" (b'karim) and "gourds" (p'ka'im), between two thousand bat and three thousand, between one hundred pomegranates and four hundred, and between the singular and plural forms concerning the Menorahs and the tables. And the chapter's conclusion with "michlot zahav" teaches the immense effort Shlomo invested in refining the gold, where a thousand kikar were reduced through smelting into a single kikar, so as to properly fulfill the requirement of "a Menorah of pure gold."