It is generally thought that there were no ^N-indows in the dchir, and 1 K 8",, has been advanced to prove this. The difficulty of having windows between the uppermost roof of the cham- bers and the ceiling of the deblr is pointed out. But this difficulty is not insuperable, for, assuming the chambers, between them, to reach a height of 15 cubits, there would still be a space above of several cubits for the windows. If, however, the windows of the house looked immediately ujion those of the chambers, the difficulty in question disappears. . , , „ i,-
Doors.— Both. Mkdl and diUr had doors.* We are not told what size they were, but in Ezekiel s temple they were 10 and 6 cubits broad respoc- tively.i How high they were is not said. 1 he hekal door was square./c while that of the dcijir •was pentagonal. X The door of the hekal was
.|^^l^, lit. 'a perforated Bpace," '» bole,' from S^IJ-'to pierce or perforate.' .
,3 D'SES, lit 'shut.' The Arabic word for such window* U thtiiibdk.
y D'cpv'— prob. pass. ptcp. of denom. verb. There i» no need to alter' the vowels as Benzingcr does, reading D'?iJ^ 'beams.'
» D'cr^— fluch as could be seen through ; of. I'P^f'n 'to look at from an eminence.'
,0-l?eN,Ut.'shut.' C2KlS",Dn6».
. ■ Jetovah has said that he would dwell in the thick dark- ness ' Cf Ps 18" ' He made darkness his hiding-place, his pavilion round about him ; darkness of waters, thick clouds of the skies.'
81K631M. <Ezk41«-.
«1 K «33, reading, as LXX, Vulg., Then., and Ben*., nijlf niyzi ' beams made into a square.'
A It is better so to understand n'O'cq In 1 K 6»l. Oes. (Tha. 1 42 fl), Keil, Bahr, Then., and liott. take the numerals in 1 K 6»i- S3 to denote some fraction of either the width of the wall— Oes Keil, and B.ihr— or of the entrance wall (J.imbs, posts), as Then, and Bottchcr. But no writer would choose this way of expressing this idea. It ta far better, with the Rabbis, Stade (ZATWm. p. 148), and Benzinger, to understand the words as above.
made of cypress wood, its posts being of olive wood. The door of the d'Mr was of olive w-ood. Both doors were divided into two liorizontal halves j but the two leaves thus formed were in the case of the hekal door further divided vertically, eacli into two folds, which were joined by hinges. It was not therefore needful to open the whole leal in order to enter the hekal.
Tlie dihir door bad two leaves only without the subdivisions, because it was not opened and shut as was the outer door, but was always kept open according to Keil,a though lie says the veil kept the interior hidden. See, however, below, ami also Veil. ,
Ezekiel's temple had the same construction for the Mkcd and dilnr doors, viz. that which seems to have obtained for the htkcd door alone in Solomon's temple. /3 This is the more atrikmg.
F18. 4.— AK KOVPTIAN TOLDlNa DOOE, SHOWISO VERTIOAI. DrTI8I0».»
as the idea of sanctity is more .^trktly recognized in Ezekiels temple. Not at all improbably the inner door of Solomon's temple was constructed exactly like the other, though this is not stated owing to an oversight of the writer. Upon both doors were carved cherubim, palm trees and open flowers ;« but there is no reliable evidence that the walls had such figures on them (see W alls ).
In 2 Ch S" it is said there was a veil before the door of the
d»ir.S>rresponding to that of the tobernacle.. In Zendv babeis temple there was such a veil,; and "' "" 'Di'^^.h ,B L-ave rise to the veil of the Ubemaole.and caused the ChroniLlL-r to transfer it to the first temple ; but Kings says nothing about I though Thenius. approvef by Riehn,., b^f^ '"e word .n.« 1 K 621 by arbitrarily altenng a verj- dirt.cult text , the tej? '»• however, probably an interpolation, as Stade,« -Now.,, and othera ho^d! •The veil ias an invention of the time when the sacred hwl to be more rigidly separated from the pro ane. It waj qSle%i1b"°ntroduci into the pre-exilic temp e afur Solo, mons time, Uiough of that we know nothing defimtely..
The. qold covering of Solomon's temple. —The following parts of the temple are said to have been overlaid with gold: (1) the walls of the dehr;\ (2) the walls of the hekal ; /i (3) the floor of the whole house ;► (4) the altar before ^^e deblr [but the support for this-1 K G-'^O-is not to be found in the XX.X, and it shows otherwise strong marks of being an interpolation, lar better wii Stade « and Benzinger omit the clause. With it goes the puzzle of knowing what is meant by the ' altar belonging to the diOir.' Ue 9* speaks of an
; Se'r JTd^w'aM have held that the two leaves of the WW door were diWded horiwntally only. But the epithet D' , , ;-- •going around each other '-supports the first view ; which H that .Tetended by Thenius, KeU Komm.), and B™?"?^^^
J 1 K t-Ti S5 I Ex 2831lr-. { see vwfc
,7/irB21627«. eZATWillp.U^.
Je" ^rcA. IL 81. . See Veil, and <•( jABUUiaou
i 1 K bS) ^ 1 K C2if- II 2 Ch 8«-