The narrative in Yechezkel continues,¹ 40:6. “And he measured the threshold of the gateway,” i.e., the width of the doorposts that cover the thickness of the wall. “It was one measuring rod wide and the [other] threshold was one measuring rod wide.” “And he measured the width of the entrance to the gateway; it was 10 cubits.”²11.

footnotes: ¹ Yechezkel ² Ibid.:

The narrative continues:³15. V’al pnei HaShaar HaEisun…chamishim amah. Rashi explains that the words v’al pnei mean “and the height”. Thus, the verse should be translated as, “And the height of the Entrance Gate was 50 cubits.” He states: “From the fact that the other gateways mentioned in the narrative were 50 cubits high, I derived that the words al pnei here refer to a height of 50 cubits.” Rashi also interprets the term al as referring to height in I Melachim 7:6, וְאוּלָם עַל פְּנֵיהֶם, which he understands as meaning, “He made a high vestibule above the entire building.”

footnotes: ³ Ibid.:

Concerning the height of this gateway, Radak writes:⁴ 40:15. I am amazed at [Rashi’s] interpretation, for nowhere in the narrative is a measure for the height of the gateways mentioned. Similarly, in the Second Beis HaMikdash, there was no gateway that was 50 cubits high. All of the gateways were 10 cubits wide and 20 cubits high, except for the gateway to the Ulam (the Entrance Hall),⁵ 2:3. which was 40 cubits high. [Moreover,] where [in Scripture] is the term orech used to refer to height?⁶ 40:36, Rashi interprets the words orech chamishim amah as referring to a height of 50 cubits. Orech always refers to one of the coordinates of area. The term govah, by contrast, refers to height or depth.

footnotes: ⁴ In his commentary to Yechezkel ⁵ Middos ⁶ Further in the narrative, in his commentary to Yechezkel

The fact that the measure of the pillars used in the Beis HaMikdash built by King Shlomoh is referred to as komah in the book of *Melachim,*⁷ 7:15. but as orech in Divrei HaYamim⁸ 3:15. does not contradict the above. In Divrei HaYamim, the pillars were measured as they lay on the ground [before being erected in the building]. Therefore, they are described by the term orech, “length.” [In contrast, in Melachim,] the pillars are described as they stood, therefore, the term komah, “stature,” is used.

footnotes: ⁷ I Melachim ⁸ II Divrei HaYamim

Rashi’s interpretation can be explained as follows: Rashi interprets the first words of the verse, al pnei, as meaning “the height of”. Thus, the verse is discussing height, and the term orech must similarly mean height. Why does Rashi interpret al pnei as “the height of”? Pnei is derived from the word panim, which is often translated as “face” or “surface.” Since a person’s face is part of the upper portion of his body, Rashi understood that this verse is referring to height.

Alternatively, the word pnei can be derived from the term pinah, “corner.” Thus the prophet Tzephania⁹ 1:16. speaks of pinos hagevohos, which Radak interprets as meaning, “the high towers.” In his *Shorashim,*¹⁰ Radak justifies his interpretation by explaining that towers are built with tall stones.

footnotes: ⁹ Tzephania ¹⁰ Sefer HaShorashim, shoresh pen.

Based on Radak’s explanation that orech refers to length, the recurring statement that the orech of the structure’s different elements was 50 cubits¹¹ 40:25, 29, 33, 36. can be explained as follows: As I understand it, the height of all the structures was measured when they were lying on the ground.¹² is reconciling Radak’s interpretation with that of Rashi. Ultimately, both commentaries are discussing the height of the structures. Radak uses the term “length,” however, because the height of the structures were measured when they were lying on the ground, as Tosafos Yom Tov proceeds to explain. Thus, when explaining the statement that the angel speaking to Yechez­kel held “a linen cord in his hand and a measuring rod,”¹³ 40:3. Radak comments that the cord was used to measure large measures of length on the ground.

footnotes: ¹¹ Yechezkel ¹² With this paragraph, Tosafos Yom Tov ¹³ Yechezkel

We interpret that verse as meaning that the angel held the cord in his hand so that he could easily take accurate measures of the objects’ heights. It would have been much more difficult to measure objects that were more than one measuring rod high when the objects were upright, and might have required the angel to measure them several times. The angel would have to mark the place where the measure ended so that he could place the measuring rod there, and measure it again, repeating the process several times. Measuring the structures with the cord avoided this repetitive process. True, an angel was speaking to Yechezkel, and Yechezkel was witnessing a vision from above; there was no actual physical measuring done. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that the vision reflected the most practical way of measuring the structures. Therefore the cord was very long so that it could be used to measure even the highest structures at one time. Afterwards, the cord was laid on the ground and its length was measured with the measuring rod. Measuring the length of the cord on the ground is a far easier process than measuring an object’s height.

If this explanation does not sufficiently explain why the term “length” is used to describe a measurement of height, we can still accept Rashi’s explanation despite the textual anomaly. There was certainly a deep, hidden reason why the text was written this way, for there is neither a small nor a large element in this awesome vision that does not have an underlying reason of untold depth.

Nevertheless, there is still a question regarding Rashi’s interpretation. Rashi writes that all the gateways in the narrative were this height, yet the text does not support this statement.

Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel justifies the questions raised by Radak, but ultimately agrees that Rashi’s interpretation is more compatible with the simple meaning of the text.

It was taught:¹⁴ 2:3. “All the gateways had gates except the gateway to the Ulam.”

footnotes: ¹⁴ Middos