The Desert Tabernacle

Applied Pentateuch (TriboElectric Series)

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Fri, 10 May 2013 17:25:00 +0000

I would like to give you an example on how you can actually verify some of the Laws outlined in the Pentateuch. In fact, the topic I'm going to talk today is most likely familiar to everyone who reads my blog. I'm talking about TriboElectric effect, or namely when two materials with different electrostatic potential are rubbed (or put together) against one another, which of'course produces static electricity.

Verses of Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11 describe this effect. Let's take a look:

‎11 ‏לֹ֤א תִלְבַּשׁ֙ שַֽׁעַטְנֵ֔ז צֶ֥מֶר וּפִשְׁתִּ֖ים יַחְדָּֽו׃ ס
11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.

The word שעטנז "shatnets" here means a combination of the materials with the different electrostatic potential, which of'course results in a very unpleasant spark and jolt. I'm more that sure that all who read this have been shocked before. So if you ever wondered why - this is your answer. And so you can see that these Laws are still in effect very much ;)

Of'course, text does not speak about wool and linen. The words "צמר" (tsemer) and "פשתים" (fishtim) refer most likely to "positive" and "negative" charge potential. So, in my opinion, it is improper to translate it as "wool" and "linen". Text is most certainly not that primitive. In fact, I can't even find the right words here. I think English may not have an equivalent of these words. But I would need to look into this further.

Check out this table. You will find it informative. It will also show you that many modern (synthetic) materials also belong in either of these categories, so the more science advances, the harder it will be to figure out which one is which, and what can be mixed together and what can't be.

The "Urim" And The "Thummim"

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 08 May 2013 15:23:00 +0000

Last, but very important detail of the High Priest Garments that I have not covered so far is the so-called the "Urim" and the "Thummim". This is one of the most complex and enigmatic verses of the description, and it is directly related to the terminology used to describe the Corner Boards of the Tent of the Tabernacle.

Let's take a look (Exodus 28:30):

‎30 ‏וְנָתַתָּ֞ אֶל־חֹ֣שֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּ֗ט אֶת־הָאוּרִים֙ וְאֶת־הַתֻּמִּ֔ים וְהָיוּ֙ עַל־לֵ֣ב אַהֲרֹ֔ן בְּבֹא֖וֹ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהוָ֑ה וְנָשָׂ֣א אַ֠הֲרֹן אֶת־מִשְׁפַּ֨ט בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֧ל עַל־לִבּ֛וֹ לִפְנֵ֥י יְהוָ֖ה תָּמִֽיד׃ ס

30 And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgment the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron's heart, when he goeth in before the LORD: and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before the LORD continually.

You can always start with the Wikipedia article here. And see my NIP here. Then, you might want to check out the rest of the verses that speak about Urim and Thummim, namely Leviticus 8:8, Numbers 27:21, Deuteronomy 33:8.

Now, the first clue we can get from the verse of Exodus 26:24 (description of the corner boards). There is "תמים"(Thumim) instead of "התמים" (the Thumim). The word "Thumim" thus can be translated as perfect, flawless, twinned, coupled, perfect, complete, e.t.c. Still unclear, but at least we defined one word out of two.

The "Urim" however, is a more difficult matter, because it can mean both "the lights" and also figuratively "exaltion". I think the clue may lie in the verse of Ezra 2:63 or Nehemiah 7:65, where it implies that "Urim" and "Thummim" were, perhaps, a figurative attributes of the High Priest, namely "exaltation" and "perfection".

So, at this time, I would like to propose the following translation of the above verse of Exodus 28:30

"And you give to the breastplate of judgment the Exaltion and the Perfection; and they are upon Aaron's heart, when he goeth in before the LORD: and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before the LORD continually."

What do you think?

The Fathomless Ark

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:20:00 +0000

Here is an interesting question: How did Noah ("rest") managed to save living creatures of the earth in a seemingly tiny Ark?

The answer to this question lies, in my opinion, in the verses of the text.

Let's take a look at Genesis 6:19-20:

‎19 ‏וּמִכָּל־הָ֠חַי מִֽכָּל־בָּשָׂ֞ר שְׁנַ֧יִם מִכֹּ֛ל תָּבִ֥יא אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֖ה לְהַחֲיֹ֣ת אִתָּ֑ךְ זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה יִֽהְיֽוּ׃

‎20 ‏מֵהָע֣וֹף לְמִינֵ֗הוּ וּמִן־הַבְּהֵמָה֙ לְמִינָ֔הּ מִכֹּ֛ל רֶ֥מֶשׂ הָֽאֲדָמָ֖ה לְמִינֵ֑הוּ שְׁנַ֧יִם מִכֹּ֛ל יָבֹ֥אוּ אֵלֶ֖יךָ לְהַֽחֲיֽוֹת׃

19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

As you can see, even from this verse we can extract useful information. Take a look at the words "בשר" (basar) and "רמש" (remes). This means that only "flesh" was preserved, all "non-flesh" creatures (i.e. spiders, cockroaches, e.t.c) were not considered "flesh" and "moving animal" and thus were not included in the Ark. Only birds and animals (both clean and unclean) were included in the Ark. Sea animals were not included for obvious reasons. So how many were there?

The list of unclean birds and animals can be found in Leviticus 11. A rough count gives the following numbers:

1) Clean Animals - Goats, Cows, Sheep (7 each) = 7x3=21

2) Unclean Animals - Camel, Coney, Hare and Swine (2 each) = 4x2=8

3) Clean Birds - Chicken, Quails (7 each) = 2x7=14

4) Unclean Birds - Eagle, Ossifrage, Ospray, Vulture, Kite, Raven, Owl, Night-hawk, Cuckoo, and the Hawk, Little Owl, Cormorant, Great Owl, Swan, Pelican, Gier Eagle, Stork, Heron, Lapwing, and the Bat. (2 each) = 20x2=40

5) Clean Swarmers (?) - Locust, Bald Locust, Beetle and the Grasshopper (7 each) = 4x7=28

6) Unclean Swarmers - Weasel, Mouse,Tortoise, Ferret, Chameleon, Lizard, Snail and Mole (2 each) = 8x2=16

So Total of 127 living creatures were in the Ark, this is not conting Noah and his family. And since the Ark was 300x50x30 cubits (Genesis 6:15), in my opinion it was plenty to house all of these creatures and food supplies without any discomfort.

In other words, it is my opinion that the text only specifies Order or Class of the living creatures, not Family or Genus. This is why it was possible to repopulate the earth with the same diversity of the animals as there were before. I guess these particular animals carry enough genetic information to allow mutation into other animals over time. Same goes for birds - you get the idea!

What do you think?

Moses's Divorce?

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Fri, 05 Apr 2013 15:44:00 +0000

This issue is something that I came across when I was translating my Samaritan Pentateuch. Let's take a look see complete variants here):

Exodus 18:2

‎2 ‏וַיִּקַּ֗ח יִתְרוֹ֙ חֹתֵ֣ן מֹשֶׁ֔ה אֶת־צִפֹּרָ֖ה אֵ֣שֶׁת מֹשֶׁ֑ה אַחַ֖ר שִׁלּוּחֶֽיהָ׃
2 Then Jethro, Moses' father in law, took Zipporah, Moses' wife, after he had sent her back,

Here, a rare word (שלוחיה / shilucheyha) is used, which may mean "send her back", yet at the same time it can also mean "her divorces". Either way, this word is only used in a sense of divorce between husband and wife. Good examples can be found in Isaiah 50:1 and Jeremiah 3:8.

We know from Exodus 2:21 that Moses had a wife in Midian that bore him two sons. We also know that she went to Egypt with him (Exodus 4:20). We also know that she and her sons did not leave Egypt with the rest of the Hebrew during the Exodus (Exodus 18:5).

This means, that Moses had to divorce his wife either to protect her and her sons and also because she was Midian (Numbers 25:17-18).

Thus, we now know that Moses was not officially married roughly from the time of Exodus from Egypt until the events of Numbers 12:1, from which we learn that he finally remarried some time during the desert journey. And thus, Moses only had 1 wife (at a time), total of two.

What Did Moses Do?

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:47:00 +0000

This is just an example of many questions that can be answered by comparative analysis of the text of the Pentateuch.

Let's take a look at verses of Exodus 2:11-14 (also see my NIP here for SP and DSS variants, very interesting ones too):

11 ‏וַיְהִ֣י׀ בַּיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵ֗ם וַיִּגְדַּ֤ל מֹשֶׁה֙ וַיֵּצֵ֣א אֶל־אֶחָ֔יו וַיַּ֖רְא בְּסִבְלֹתָ֑ם וַיַּרְא֙ אִ֣ישׁ מִצְרִ֔י מַכֶּ֥ה אִישׁ־עִבְרִ֖י מֵאֶחָֽיו׃

‎12 ‏וַיִּ֤פֶן כֹּה֙ וָכֹ֔ה וַיַּ֖רְא כִּ֣י אֵ֣ין אִ֑ישׁ וַיַּךְ֙ אֶת־הַמִּצְרִ֔י וַֽיִּטְמְנֵ֖הוּ בַּחֽוֹל׃

‎13 ‏וַיֵּצֵא֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשֵּׁנִ֔י וְהִנֵּ֛ה שְׁנֵֽי־אֲנָשִׁ֥ים עִבְרִ֖ים נִצִּ֑ים וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ לָֽרָשָׁ֔ע לָ֥מָּה תַכֶּ֖ה רֵעֶֽךָ׃

‎14 ‏וַ֠יֹּאמֶר מִ֣י שָֽׂמְךָ֞ לְאִ֨ישׁ שַׂ֤ר וְשֹׁפֵט֙ עָלֵ֔ינוּ הַלְהָרְגֵ֙נִי֙ אַתָּ֣ה אֹמֵ֔ר כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר הָרַ֖גְתָּ אֶת־הַמִּצְרִ֑י וַיִּירָ֤א מֹשֶׁה֙ וַיֹּאמַ֔ר אָכֵ֖ן נוֹדַ֥ע הַדָּבָֽר׃

11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.

12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.

13 And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?

14 And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known.

So was Moses a murderer? As far as I can tell - only by proxy at best. As you can see KJV translation above in verse 12 says "slew" but in reality the Hebrew text says "smite". Thus, it seems that Moses most likely "knocked out" the Egyptian and "hid or "burried him in the sand" (for God to decide his fate). As we well know from the following verses, Egyptian died, but not because of Moses but because of the sand. He was still alive before he was "hid" or "buried".

What do you think?

Samaritan Tabernacle Drawings Article

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 01:30:00 +0000

Here is a very similar article that I've published in this post. It is called "Samaritan Tabernacle Drawings" by Reinhard Pummer. It has finally become available online here or you can read a backup copy here.

Here is an abstract:

"Drawings of the Israelite tent sanctuary, the Tabernacle, and its implements are the main expression of representional art among the Samaritans. They are based on the descriptions in Exodus and are expressions of central tenets of the Samaritan faith—belief in the special status of Moses, in the Tabernacle as the only legitimate sanctuary in the history of Israel, and in the end times for which the restoration of the Tabernacle is expected. The paper is an attempt to probe the question of the age of the Samaritan tradition of depicting the Tabernacle in different media.

Archaeological excavations have revealed synagogue mosaics and clay lamps from the Byzantine period that represent various elements of this artistic tradition. However, the main specimens date from the early sixteenth to the early twentieth century. It is these representations, executed on metal, cloth, parchment and paper, which are the focus of this article. The discussion is based on an examination of all extant and publicly accessible samples (see the Inventory at the end of this article).

A great chronological and artistic gap separates the representations on the mosaics and oil lamps of the Byzantine period from the drawings of modern times. No continuous line exists between the two groups. The parchment in Moscow that allegedly dates from 32 A.H., i.e., 652/653 C.E., must be assigned to a much later period.

There are obvious similarities of the Samaritan drawings with Jewish representations of the Tabernacle/Temple, yet it is impossible to identify a time or place where cross-fertilization may have taken place.

At the present state of our knowledge, therefore, neither the mosaics from the Byzantine period nor the similarities with Jewish representations enable us to determine the time at which the Samaritan tradition of making Tabernacle drawings may have originated. It is probable, though, that the tradition had its beginnings well before the oldest extant samples from the early sixteenth century."

Have a happy Passover!

You shall not cook a kid in the milk of its mother

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 13 Mar 2013 21:34:00 +0000

I originally wanted to create a separate blog where I would express my thoughts about subjects that are not directly related to the Tabernacle. However, after a lot of thinking I have realized that it would be beneficial to post it here, as the Tabernacle covers almost all subjects in the Pentateuch, and is, in a way, a microcosm of the creation. Therefore, I have created a separate label called "My Torah Thoughts" where you can read my thoughts on these subjects. Posts will not follow any particular order, as this way I can write with an inspiration instead of mundanely going from verse to verse.

In my first post I would like to discuss the issue of "milk and meat" as it is presented in verses of Exodus 23:19, Exodus 34:26, Deuteronomy 14:21. I'm sure you have heard about this issue. If not you can read this wikipedia article here.

First and foremost, I would like to say that it most certainly NOT forbidden to eat meat and milk together, as in Genesis 18:7-8. Abraham was a prophet so he most certainly was aware of the laws of clean foods (kashrut) and three mortals whom he had feed also were messengers of God so they were also aware of what can be eaten and what could not be eaten, and thus if they ate milk and meat together we can come to the conclusion that eating meat and milk is not forbidden.

However, verses dealing with the issue of meat and milk are still obscure, so I would like to direct your attention to the article called “A Young Goat in Its Mother’s Milk”? Understanding an Ancient Prohibition by Stefan Schorch, published in Vetus Testamentum Journal, Volume 60, Issue 1, pages 116 – 130. You can read the original here (or here) (or backup copy - here). Here is what he writes:

"The passage אמו בחלב גדי תבשל לא should be understood as “you shall not cook (for eating purposes) a sucking kid”. This is not only the meaning of the passage in the Covenant Code (Exod 23:19) and in the so-called “Privilegrecht” (Exod 34:26), but it was the way as well in which this passage was understood by the authors of Deuteronomy (Deut 14:21). Amos 6:4 seems to contain an early reference to the prohibition of the sucking kid."

I do not agree completely with this statement or this article, because it is not very coherent and the logic is not very sound. However, this article is the best that I've seen so far that discusses the issue more or less without a bias, as well as the comprehensiveness of this article.

After taking this article in the consideration, and after checking my Normalized Interlinear Pentateuch, I can safely say that Exodus 23:19 (also see it my NIP), Exodus 34:26 (also see it my NIP), Deuteronomy 14:21 (also see it my NIP) are pretty much identical between MT and SP and there are no surviving DSS fragments for any of these verses. Except of'course Exodus 23:19, where in SP it adds "כי עשה זאת כזבח שכח ועברה היא לאלהי יעקב" which roughly translates "that one doing this as sacrifice forgets and enrages God of Jacob".

So, my opinion on the matter is that the prohibition must refer to what is described in Exodus 22:29-30. In other words, it is not acceptable to bring the kid boiled in its mother's milk as a firstborn sacrifice (or any sacrifice for that matter), until the kid reaches at least 8 days of age.

I think this is as close as I can come to understand these passages at the moment.

Interactive Panorama of The Holy Place of The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:32:00 +0000

This is basically the same panoramic view of the Holy Place of the Tabernacle, video of which I have posted in my previous post. However, this is an interactive version that would allow you to see every single detail of the Holy Place of the Tent of The Tabernacle.

Enjoy!

Inside The Holy Place of The Tent of The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:22:00 +0000

It's been a while since I have created any 3D videos of the Tabernacle. So here is the new one for your enjoyment.

This video shows the Holy Place of the Tent of The Tabernacle (the place where Altar of Incense, Table of Shewbread and the Golden lamp-stand stood.). This is a full color rendering of the 360 degrees panoramic view of the room, with all shadows, reflections and colors. This is also an up-to-scale rendering, which is why there are Aaron and his two sons are shown so that you can compare the dimensions of the room to an average human height.

Please note how gold plated walls reflections and how they have expanded the room. This video also includes all of the latest corrections that I have discussed in my previous posts. The camera is positionaed right in the middle of the Holy Place (10 cubits from eastern and 20 cubits from western walls of the tent).

Also, please note how the Ark of The Covenant can be seen when two side partition curtain of the Inner Curtain (Vail) were moved aside for the priests to enter the Holy of Holies (the room with the Ark).

The video below is best viewed in full HD, or you can even try 3D mode for different experience.

I hope you like it. Enjoy!

Did The Levites Wear Shoes Inside The Tabernacle?

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 14 Jan 2013 17:07:00 +0000

This question was raised in this post, and since it is such a good question I wanted to dedicate a separate post to it, as well as to elaborate a little bit more about what I think.

As you can see from this image, Aaron and his sons (Eleazar and Ithamar) shown as wearing shoes.

But as you might have noticed from the text of the Pentateuch, in the description of the Priestly Garments in Exodus 28 and Exodus 39, there are absolutely no details about any kind of special footwear for the priests. This, in my opinion, provides us with two possibilities:

The text of the Pentateuch as we have it to day is missing this part of the description; similar to description of the transportation of the Tabernacle Laver, which is not present in traditional Masoretic Text but only in the Samaritan Pentateuch.
There are invisible clues, somewhere in the text that need to be found in order to definitively say if the priests wore any footwear or not.

If it is the matter of the first case, then we have no other choice but to wait until some other complete version of the Pentateuch surfaces which will provide us with the exact details of the footwear for the priests. In this case there is not much that can be done to resolve this question.

However, there are some clues in the text that I would like to present to you below, which in my opinion can be used as a good starting point for the research of the answer to this question.

There are two clues that I'm aware so far that may help to answer this question:

In Exodus 3:5 Moses is asked to remove his shoes because he appeared to have been standing in the presence of God and on the Holy Ground. As you remember, the Tabernacle also "housed" the presence of God and in a way it was also a Holy Ground. So as you can see, this clue is in favor of the priests walking barefoot either within the confinements of the entire Tabernacle, or at least within the confinements of the Tent of the Tabernacle.
On the other hand, Exodus 30:18-21 tells us explicitly, that the priest were to wash their hands and feet so that they would not die when they are either going into the Tent of the Tabernacle or when they are serving by the Altar of Burnt Offering. So, as you can see, this clue provides us with completely opposite picture, which does not put any emphasis on the footwear, but only requires libation of the hands and feet.
The text of Deuteronomy 8:15 tells us that the desert where the Hebrews traveled and abode for 40 years was very harsh and dangerous, which implies that it was not nice, beach like, sandy desert, but rather very rocky terrain with dust and rough ground. This suggest that walking barefoot in such conditions would be rather very painful and uncomfortable for the priests, even if the Tabernacle area was cleaned up beforehand. And even in the sandy desert, it is still not very comfortable to walk barefoot as the sand would constrain the walking. Not to mention that any desert gets very cold at night, especially during the winter season and if the priests were to walk barefoot they would most certainly would get ill and cold.

Thus, my current opinion on this matter is that the priests most certainly wore some kind of footwear (shoes, or whatever was most convenient for them. Just like I show on this and my other images of the priests:

However, it is possible that either they had a separate pairs of shoes when which they would put on when they were dressing for the service (Exodus 28:42-43 or Leviticus 16:3-4), or they wore the same footwear that they would wear outside the Tabernacle. However, as its been pointed out in Exodus 30:18-21, they still would have to wash their feet and hands before entering the Tent or coming close to the Altar of Burnt Offering.

And once again, just like I pointed out above, it is also quite possible that all of the versions of the Pentateuch that we have today were simply edited and the part about special footwear for the priests has been lost. This is why it is always important to examine all available manuscripts and not just the traditional ones.

My Axioms and My Methods

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:53:00 +0000

I just wanted to provide you with an outline of my axioms and methods that I use in my work. I think it should help you better understand the approach I use to come to conclusions that are being presented on this blog. This should also be a good summary of methods for those who never studied the Pentateuch critically.

My general axioms are as follows:

God exists.
There is only ONE God. (I reject a concept of trinity or similar concepts)
There is only ONE TRUE Law of God - the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible). I do not accept all other books of the Tanakh as divine. I do not accept so-called Jewish "oral law" (aka Talmud) or Christian New Testament as divine. I consider only the Pentateuch the only true word of God that is eternal and can never be(or will be) changed.
For my Jewish readers, I do believe in the Oral Law, but I absolutely believe that it must be literaly ORAL (transmitted oraly), because it is very hard to argue with (or against) dead people.
I consider all three available witnesses (MT, SP and DSS) as a valid sources of the Pentateuch, even though I lean toward the Samaritan Pentateuch more as it seems to be more harmonized and provides important details about the Tabernacle not found in the traditional Masoretic Text.
I also consider other secondary sources of the Pentateuch, such as Targums (translations). For example Septuagint provides a very interesting insight into which text (MT or SP) was used to compile traditional texts and translation as we have them today.
I assume that the original language of the Pentateuch consisted only of 22 letter, not 27 as in Masoretic tradition (see this post), and I also reject the Masoretic system of vowels.
I reject all traditional ways of the division of the text (aka perek symbols) and punctuation marks in translations, as they sometimes corrupt the meaning of the original text.
Even though I use traditional Masoretic pronunciation of the words of the Pentateuch, I do reject them as there are many different ones and it is hard to say which one is the original one.
I use modern critical analysis methods to analyze the text, and I absolutely reject the rabbinical methods of analysis of the text (aka Talmudic logic).
I read the text primarily in its original languages, however I do also rely on the translations of the Pentateuch in different languages to help me to extract the meaning of the text.
I use modern technology (aka computer analysis) to analyse the text. I use software such as ISA, BibleWorks and Accordance to help extract the meaning of the text. I also use custom designed SQL databases to process and analyse the text of the Pentateuch.
Pentateuch takes precedence over any and all the works that were created or will be created. This goes for everything presented on this blog as well. If it will be ever be found that my work contradicts the Pentateuch, my work shall be disregarded in favor of the Pentateuch.

Now to my methods of analyzing the text of the Pentateuch; the methods that were used in all posts on this blog. I usually use comparative critical analysis of the text, with cross-referencing of the verses.

Here is the example of the Pentateuch-only analysis. I use only first five books (the Pentateuch) to analyze the text. I intentionally disregard the rest of the books of the Tanakh.

In Genesis 1:5 the word "בקר" (bqr) is used, which is usually translated as "morning". This translation also appears in the verses of Gen 1:8, Gen 1:13, Gen 1:19, e.t.c. However, the following word also appears in Gen 18:7, Ex 29:1, Lev 4:3, e.t.c, where it is translated as "calf" or a "bullock". In Numbers 7:3, Num 7:17, Num 7:29, Num 7:88, e.t.c this same word is translated as "oxen". The Masoretic tradition tries to solve this problem via the use of the vowels (and vowel marks), which in this case would read "בֹקֶר" (voker) in Gen 1:8, "בָּקָר" (bakar) in Gen 18:7, and "בְּקַר" (bekar) in Numbers 7:88, even though the consonants are exactly the same, and each of the verses requires the same meaning of this word. However, in the original text given to us by God there was no vowels, thus the question arises about the exact meaning of the word "בקר" and the original meaning all the verses listed above. In particular we must find the mutual meaning between the traditional translations of the word "בקר" as "morning" and "calf" and "oxen". This produces two possibilities: either the text in some of the verses has a defective spelling, or we must find the mutual meaning for the word ""בקר" for all of the aforementioned verses. For example, we can translate "בקר" (bqr) as "young" or "rising" which will more or less satisfy all of the verses listed. However in this case, I do not think there is a sutable equivalent in English language for this particular word. But in either case, as you can see, my method allows to highlight these hidden problems within the text of the Pentateuch.

Here is the example of the mixed analysis (Pentateuch + rest of the Tanakh). Keep in mind that in this case you have to keep in mind that the rest of the Tanakh has a different composition and literary structure than the Pentateuch. However, the benefits of this method is that it allows sometimes to extract the meaning of the word, which would not be otherwise possible with the Pentateuch-only method above.

In the story of the "Molten Calf" (Exodus 32), the Hebrew word עגל is used, which is usually translated as "the calf". This does not raise any problems, as in Leviticus 9:2 and Leviticus 9:8 translation of the word עגל as "the calf" fits relatively well with the overall meaning of the text. However, in the Book of Kings (1 Kings 7:23, 7:31, 7:35 and 10:19) translating the word עגל as "the calf" obviously would not make any sense as it is hard to imagine that, for example, in 1 Kings 7:23 the text would imply that the lip of the Molten Sea was "calf" instead of "round".

The Masoretic tradition tries to solve this problem via the use of the vowels (and vowel marks), which in this case would read in Exodus 32:4 עֵגֶל (egel) (calf) as opposed to, say, 1 Kings 7:23 where it is read as עָגֹל (agol) (round); even though the consonants are exactly the same, and each of the verses requires different meaning of this word.

However, in the original text given to us by God there was no vowels, thus the question arises about the exact meaning of the word עגל and the original meaning all the verses listed above. Did the Hebrews build a "Molten Calf" or a "Molten Circle" ?

The last method, involves using other approaches to identify the meaning of the words of the Pentateuch. For example, I used mathematics to reveal the meaning of the word המקצעת (hamiktso'ot) (Exodus 26:24) and translated it as "round bendings" instead of traditional "corners". See my Corner Boards article for detailed explanation.
Or, I used the reconstruction of the Layout of the Tabernacle to identify the word פרכת (parochet) (Exodus 26:31 as a plural form, instead of the traditional singular form. See my posts here and here for the detailed explanation.
Or, I used geometry and algebra to extract the correct dimensions of the courtyard of the Tabernacle. See my article here for detailed explanation.
In other words, this third approach uses natural and humanitarian sciences to extract the meaning of the text of the Pentateuch.

I hope that now you would be able to utilize this knowledge and these approaches to analyze the text the same way I do. Enjoy!

A Little Bit About The Promised Land

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Fri, 21 Dec 2012 00:53:00 +0000

There is no such thing in the Pentateuch as "the Land of Israel". There is only The Land of Canaan (literally - Humiliated Land or the Land of Humiliated-ones; i.e Ex 13:11). This is a very important fact that few people are aware of due to misinterpretation of the original Hebrew text and partly due to the rabbinic tradition and the existence of the so-called "state of Israel".

The reason why the Promised Land is not called "the Land of Israel" is outlined in the Pentateuch, particularly in the book of Deuteronomy (i.e Deut 7:1). The Pentateuch describes that this was the land that was specifically given to the seven nations: Hittites (lit. the terrorizing-ones), Girgashites (lit. the enraged-ones), Amorites (lit. the boasting-ones), Canaanites (lit. humiliated-ones, in whose "honor" the land was named), Perizzites (lit. villagers), Hivites (lit. encampers) and Jebusites (lit. trodden-ones), the nations (or people) that according to Deut 7:6-8 and Lev 18:24-28 were very numerous yet very very sinful. They were specifically put there by God to sort of "protect" the land from the Hebrews if they would not observe the Laws of the Pentateuch and if they would not want to live by the Laws of the Pentateuch (i.e Leviticus 18:3-4 and Deut 28:63). Creation of the State of Israel effectively restored all of these 7 Canaanite nations, who now pretty much occupy the promised land.

This is why it is very important to understand that the only way there can be peace and prosperity in the Land of Canaan is if the Hebrews (which includes the Jews - descendants of the Hebrew tribe of Judah) would live by the Pentateuch. Not by some form of democracy or some man-made constitution, not by rabbinical or any other form of Judaism, not by the Oral Tradition aka Talmud, but ONLY by the Pentateuch and nothing else. After all, the word "Hebrews" means "the ones that crossed over (to God)", which means that these are the people who have chosen to serve God, do good and not evil, and live according to the Pentateuch. Because only such good and righteous people (Hebrews) who live by the highest and strictest morals and values (the Pentateuch) can conquer and subdue the land that God Himself has called humiliated (Canaan). Only then God will grant His blessings and protection to the Hebrews, and peace will spread throughout the Land. Besides, the only claim that Hebrews (which also includes the Jews) have over the Land of Canaan is the Pentateuch, but ONLY on a strict condition that they will observe and live by all the Laws outlined in the Pentateuch, and Pentateuch alone.

You may be asking yourself what does it have to do with the Tabernacle? The answer is simple. According to the Pentateuch, Numbers 18:20-24, Numbers 18:31, e.t.c, the Levites were to serve at The Tabernacle forever. In other words, The Tabernacle, as I have pointed out this many times before, was the only permanent and acceptable sanctuary of God and His presence, even though from an architectural perspective the Tabernacle was a mobile and temporary structure (location-wise). The Tabernacle must be restored, the Levitical priesthood must be restored and the Levites must serve there forever as it was outlined in the Pentateuch. They could, perhaps, also serve in the Temple as well, but their primary abode must be in the Tabernacle - a movable and mobile sanctuary of God's presence.

This is why it is important to understand that The Tabernacle needs to be present in the Land of Canaan, the Levitical service needs to be restored, as this is one of the major requirements for the fulfillment of the God's commandments outlined in the Pentateuch.

There Was No Such Thing as The Sacrifices in The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 22:42:00 +0000

One important point that I have not really made so far was that there were no sacrifices in the Tabernacle. Yes, this is right. The idea that any animal was "sacrificed" on the Altar of Burnt Offering is simply a colloquial mistranslation and misunderstanding of the original Hebrew text.

All animals killings at the Tabernacle site bore strictly practical and specific purpose, thus making it a glorified animal slaughter rather than the "sacrifice" (in the proper understanding of this word). So the proper translation of the word "זבח" (zevach) should be something along the lines of "offering" or "slaughter", rather than "sacrifice" as, the word sacrifice usually implies complete "waste" of the victim in favor of some God.

However, in the case of the Pentateuch and the Tabernacle, the "sacrifices" were purely ritualistic as most of the edible meat of the animal would go to the Levites (i.e Numbers 18). In fact, there is an explicit reference in the Pentateuch when the animal was burnt without any practical purpose, which produced anger from Moses (Leviticus 10:16-20).

Even in the explicit cases, where the animal was indeed completely burnt (i.e Red Heifer, Numbers 19:5-6), it was still done for practical purposes. In this case, its ashes were utilized to produce what I believe to be either soap or a soapy water, as animal ashes are rich in fat and can be easily used to produce soap (Numbers 19:9)

So as you can see, the Tabernacle and its practices bore practical and specific purposes. Nothing was wasted and nothing was done in vain, as compared to other religions, especially the pagan ones. Everything in the Tabernacle, in this case the "sacrifices" were done primarily to feed the Levites as a reward for their services at the Tabernacle and for the congregation of the Hebrews.

And last, but not least, I would like to again to point out that there was no ramp leading to the Altar of Burnt Offerings in the Tabernacle. As you can see from the image below, the Altar was 3 cubit high in total (this includes the Copper Grate), which was the perfect height to operate the Altar.

Yet Another Online Samaritan Pentateuch

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:30:00 +0000

Archive.org came through with yet another beautiful and online Samaritan Pentateuch (Samaritan Torah) with varias lectiones (variant readings). This is an 1872 Pentateuchus Samaritanus edition by Julius Heinrich Petermann, which appears to be written in the modern Samaritan Hebrew.

Its most definitely not an easy read as it is not written in modern Hebrew script, but by utilizing this table below of this wikipedia table you should still be able to enjoy this great book.

Enjoy!

Video Lecture Series

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:50:00 +0000

I've gotten tired of posting on my blog as it seems to be useless and unproductive for me at the moment, so I've decided to explore a slightly different approach. I've decided to create a video lecture series that will cover both the Tabernacle topics as well as the Pentateuch as presented both on my blog here and on my Interlinear Pentateuch web site.

So here it is:

A brief introduction about me and the series that I want to do:

A video about God and Belief in existence of God vs. Believing God. You can also read my earlier article here.

A video about the Pentateuch and its importance. A supplement article can be read here.

And the last video so far is about the Tabernacle and its importance. See this article for more information here.

I hope you will enjoy these videos. Please also dont forget to subscribe to my YouTube channel and my blog as it really helps.

Enjoy!

The Day of the Blast (Yom Terua)

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:15:00 +0000

Today is the Day of the Blast (Yom Terua) (Numbers 29:1) or Memorial of the Blast (Leviticus 24:23).

Today we remember the day that God spoke to Hebrews at Mt. Sinai, at which time among other things, the sound (not blast though) of the Horn (Shofar) (not trumpet) was heard(Exodus 19:16). However, today we are commanded to use the Trumpets (not Horn/Shofar) to make a Blast (not Sound) to honor this day(Numbers 10:10).

As a note, it seems that the actual Horn/ Shofar (as in organic musical instrument) would be used only once every 50 years (once every Jubilee ), whereas during all other times the Trumpets (a metallic musical instrument) would've been used. (Leviticus 25:8-10)

Also, the Jewish tradition calls this day a "new year"/"rosh hashana". This is incorrect, as the text of Exodus 23:16 and Exodus 34:22 states, that today is a revolution (or turning point) of the year. After all, this is the 1st day of the 7th month of the Hebrew calendar (the middle of the year), not the 1st day of the first month.

In fact, the Pentateuch explicitly states that the New Year begins 14 days prior to Passover, in the month of Aviv (see Exodus 12:2).

Also, it is worthy to point out that the exact term "rosh hashana" does not occur anywhere in the text. The text, in Exodus 12:2 uses the term "rosh hodesh"/"first or head month". However, in the same verse there is a word "hashana", so in a way it is possible to call the 1st of Aviv a "new year" or rather - "first year". Perhaps such terminology of the text is due to the fact that the word "rosh" is properly translated as the "head" or "first", so to translate it as "new" would not be very accurate.

The only explanation to the Jewish tradition, is this time of the year is indeed the beginning of the new agricultural year, so it seems that this is how this term ("rosh hashana"), over time, replaced the actual commandments and terminology of the Pentateuch. And this is very sad.

Other than that, this day is an astronomically significant event - an Autumn Equinox (Southern Equinox).

This holy day is the forth out of five annual Hebrew holy days - see this table for detailed explanation. As on all such days, there is a prohibition to doing any work - just like on Sabbath.

You can also check out my last year's post on the Silver Trumpets here.

Have a great Day of the Blast!

High Priest and His Sons Inside the Holy Place of The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 17:28:00 +0000

Let's now go back to the Holy Place of the Tabernacle:

This image shows High Priest (Aaron) and his sons (Eleazar and Ithamar) doing day-to-day activities in the Holy Place of the Tabernacle. This view is from the middle of the southern wall looking toward the east, toward the Outer Curtain (Entrance Curtain) of the Tabernacle.

High Priest Inside the Holy of Holies of The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:15:00 +0000

Let's take a look at what the Holy of Holies (the Ark room) of the Tabernacle looked like when the High Priest was inside. The High Priest would usually enter this room only once a year on the Day of Atonement and had to take special precautions as outlined in Leviticus 16.

Here is the Priest in the Holy Place of the Tabernacle:

As you can see from this next image, the two side Partitions (Parochet) could be moved towards the Inner Pillars to allow the Priest to enter into the Holy of Holies room:

As you can see from this next image, there were plenty of space for the Priest to come through:

Now, let's follow the Prist insode the Holy of Holies place. This is the view right from the left (south) side of the room:

Here is a view from a different angle, so that you can clearly see the reflections of the room:

And here is the view from the south-west corner of the Holy of Holies room looking back toward the Holy Place of the Tabernacle:

And this is the Holy of Holies place of the Tabernacle. Enjoy!

High Priest Inside the Holy Place of The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 19:36:00 +0000

I'm finishing up my review models, but meanwhile I wanted to give you a sneak peak of what you will be able to see.

The two images below are the new rendering of the Holy Place of the Tabernacle, with all latest changes incorporated into the rendering, and including the High Priest (Aaron) model in his garments. Please note that all of my models up-to-scale, so the renderings below are the most accurate reconstruction of this particular part of the Tabernacle.

And this image is made at a different angle so that you can clearly see reflections that could be seen via the gold-plated walls of the Tent of the Tabernacle.

Enjoy!

The Practical Importance of The Tabernacle

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:08:00 +0000

One other point that I did not make in my articles on the "Importance of the Tabernacle" is the practical importance of the Tabernacle.

For example, if you are an engineer or mathematician (such as myself) you would be very interested in the layout of the Tabernacle and in its structure. All cubits, measurements and positioning of the artifacts would be your thing as it is something that engineers and mathematicians study and do.

If you are a plumber, you would be interested in, say, copper artifacts of the Tabernacle. As, for example, the copper is used in modern plumbing systems to prevent bacterial infection.

If you are a tailor, the Priestly Garments would be your thing as in order to properly understand the description you have to have an experience in this field.

If you are carpenter, all wooden parts of the Tabernacle would be of interest to you as to properly understand the description you have to have experience and understanding of woodworking.

If you are a soldier, in the army, you would be interested in the Sin of Korach, as that would teach you that it is not permissible to drink while on duty.

Either way, no matter who you are and what you do for a living, the Tabernacle offers you something from your field of expertise that you yourself can be an expert at. And this is the best and the easiest way to get in touch with the divine.

What I'm currently working on

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:07:00 +0000

I'm sorry that I have not been posting lately, but I'm busy on preparing the following materials:

1) A Review on the Tabernacle. I wanted to create new hi-res renderings of the Tabernacle with all of the changes and insights that I've discussed during the last year and a half. This includes remodeled Ark of the Covenant (the Cherubim - swords), the Coverings of the Tabernacle, the Altar of Burnt Offering and other minor little things. Also, I wanted to create a few images that show my Priestly Garments models together with the Tabernacle, particularly the images that show the Priests inside the Tabernacle Tent, as I think this is really important and very inspiring.

Unfortunately, there one problem that prevents me from accomplishing that, namely:

2) The Tabernacle Layout. I'm trying to rework the layout of the Tabernacle to put all of its elements together so that I can have an exact and complete picture of the structure. In fact, if anyone who reads this blog can help I would really appreciate it.

For example, let's take my latest layout:

As you can see from this layout, the Western Wall of the Tabernacle is located 25 cubits from the curtains of the Courtyard, just like the Southern and Northern walls. However, this would mean that the First Covering of the Tabernacle would be covering western part of the framework of the Tent completely (10 cubits) in order to allow the Inner Pillars of the Tent to be located at 10 cubits from the western wall. However, the First Covering of the Tent was covering only 9 cubits of the Northern and Southern walls of the Tent, so most likely it had to be covering only 9 cubits of the Western wall as well (due to symmetry), which in turn would mean that the Inner Pillars would be located 11 cubits from the western wall, destroying 10x10x10 arrangement of the Holy of Holies room.

This problem needs to be resolved, in order to create complete and precise layout of the Tabernacle. And, like I said above, this is what I'm trying to figure out right now.

And once again, if you would like to help to solve this majestic riddle, I would be more than happy to hear your thoughts and solutions.

Review of the Altar of Burnt Offering - The Grate and The Ramp

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Wed, 13 Jun 2012 18:22:00 +0000

In this post I would like to review the Altar of Burnt Offering (Mizbeach). Particularly I would like to review the Copper Grate of the Altar and the issue of the Ramp of the Altar.

Let's begin with the Ramp. Well, there was no Ramp. My research indicated with an absolute certainty that there was no such thing existing in the Tabernacle. The Ramp of the Altar of Burnt offering in the Tabernacle comes from the Jewish tradition of the late Second Temple period, which is foreign to the Hebrew tradition and has nothing to do with the actual Hebrew Tabernacle that I'm discussing in this blog. Therefore, this image of the Altar is ultimately incorrect:

Now, since there was no Ramp, it also means that the total height of the Altar of Burnt Offering (Grate+Altar) was not 5 cubits, but rather 3 cubits, just like the description of Exodus 27:1 says. This, in turn would make total height of the Grate of the Altar - 1.5 cubits as Exodus 27:5 tells us that the Grate was only reaching half way up the Altar. Therefore, the proper Grate of the Altar of Burnt Offering looked like so:

As you can see from the image above, the Grate is now 1.5 cubits in height, with the Rings for the Staves attached right by the top of the Grate at each of the 4 corners. Please see my previous posts on the Altar for comparison. But the shape of the Grate remained pretty much the same.

Now, if we will place the Altar on this new Grate, you should be able to notice right away how proper the setup looks. Namely the total height of the Altar (now being 3 cubits) corresponds well with an average human height and allows very convenient access to the Altar - right at the chest level, just like this image below shows:

And because of the fact that the Copper Rings of the Grate (Exodus 27:4) now properly located at the edges of the Grate, once the Altar is being transported the weight of the Altar is being distributed evenly and symmetrically. Right through the horizontal center plane of the Altar. Like so:

To sum up:

There was no Ramp of any kind leading to the Altar of Burnt Offering of the Tabernacle
The Copper Grate was 1.5 cubits tall, with the Copper Rings attached at the top of each of its 4 corners

I hope that now it is clear that it is extremely important to read the text of the Pentateuch without any bias whatsoever, as any traditional interpretations of the text will most certainly lead to mistakes like this one.

High Priest Garments - Final Review

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:14:00 +0000

Let's review all of the garments of the High Priest (Aaron) and his Sons. Let's begin with the High Priest garments:

And here is a diagram of all the garments that High Priest would wear. From left to right and from bottom to the top:

Linen Breeches (or Trousers) - the undergarment.
White Tunic
Blue Robe with the embroidered Trees and the Golden Bells on its bottom half
Ephod (The Vestment) with two "onyx" stones engraved with 12 names, embroidered in the golden fillings on its shoulders.
Breastplate of Judgement with the 12 stones engraved with 12 names, Golden Rings, Golden Chains, Golden Mounts and Blue Laces
Colored Embroidered Sash
Golden Frontlet with the engraving (קדש ליהוה) and with the Blue Lace to mount it on the head.
Linen Turban

Please note that traditional sources usually list 7 garments as these sources usually join either Golden Frontlet with the Turban or the Breastplate of Judgement with the Ephod.

Now, let's take a look at the garments of the Sons of the High Priest:

From left to right, from bottom to top:

Linen Breeches (or Trousers) - the undergarment.
White Tunic
Linen Sash
Linen Cap

High Priest Garments - Sizing of the Ephod (Vestment)

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:43:00 +0000

Since we are now done with the description of all the garments of the High Priest and his Sons, it is no time to add finishing touches to the result. One important aspect of the High Priest garments that I have not covered yet is the size and shape of the Ephod (Vestment).

If you remember, the resulting Ephod so far looked like so:

But the verses of Exodus 28:33-35 state that the Blue Robe that was worn right under the Ephod had Golden Bells that were to serve as special warning sings for the Priest when he was going in/around the Tabernacle. Like so:

Obviously, it is clear that the Ephod could not be covering these Bells as it would render them inoperable, muffling the sound or possibly even preventing them from making any. And since the Bells were located on the bottom portion of the Blue Robe, it is most logical that this part of the Robe was not covered by the Ephod at all. Like so:

Please also note that since the Ephod now would not be covering the bottom portion of the Blue Robe, it is also most likely that, for symmetry reasons, the Ephod also would not cover the parts of the High Priest hands (roughly from the elbow and to the end of each hand). Therefore, the Ephod most likely looked like a thick, woven T-Shirt, main purpose of which was to hold the Breastplate of Judgement and the two "onyx" stones. Also, the colored embroidered Sash was going over the Ephod but only because it would help to secure it upon the High Priest. Like so:

Please also note, that unlike the Sons of Aaron, the White Tunic that was worn under the Blue Robe was completely covered. At this point I do not see any reason why the White Tunic had to be visible at all, but as usual more research is needed to properly size each of these garments.

High Priest Garments - The Linen Breeches (Trousers)

noreply@blogger.com (Aleksandr Sigalov) — Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:56:00 +0000

Verses of Exodus 28:42-43 discusses the last garments for both the High Priest (Aaron) and his Sons - the linen breeches (or trousers) that all priests who were serving in the Tabernacle had to wear. Let's take a look:

42 ‏וַעֲשֵׂ֤ה לָהֶם֙ מִכְנְסֵי־בָ֔ד לְכַסּ֖וֹת בְּשַׂ֣ר עֶרְוָ֑ה מִמָּתְנַ֥יִם וְעַד־יְרֵכַ֖יִם יִהְיֽוּ׃

‎43 ‏וְהָיוּ֩ עַל־אַהֲרֹ֨ן וְעַל־בָּנָ֜יו בְּבֹאָ֣ם׀ אֶל־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֗ד א֣וֹ בְגִשְׁתָּ֤ם אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֙חַ֙ לְשָׁרֵ֣ת בַּקֹּ֔דֶשׁ וְלֹא־יִשְׂא֥וּ עָוֹ֖ן וָמֵ֑תוּ חֻקַּ֥ת עוֹלָ֛ם ל֖וֹ וּלְזַרְע֥וֹ אַחֲרָֽיו׃ ס

42 And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:

43 And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him.

Let's begin with this semi-naked image of the Aaron and his sons:

As Exodus 28:42 describes, all of them were to wear identical Breeches (or trousers) that were to cover their private parts from waist to the ankles. These Breeches were to be made of white linen. Like so:

And as the last verse of chapter 28 states, the High Priest and his Sons were to wear these Breeches so that during the service their nakedness would not be revealed and so that they would not die.