You are on page 1of 109

Method By Which Jewish Temple In Jerusalem Could Have Been Laid Out

By Robert Kerson
3/10/2014
There is a singular place chosen by a secret ground measuring technique for sacred sites prophets
talked about. Here people have been speculating about a large exposed piece of bedrock at the
center of the Muslim Dome of the Rock building, a major mystery for centuries-- what was the
relationship of the rock and specifically the center of the rock and hence, the center of the
building, to the site of the destroyed Jewish temple building? Incorporated in the location and
size of the rock and its overlaying octagonal building, is evidence for this solution.
The rock also holds the solution of other mysteries concerning the Jewish temple, by using
nothing more than a piece of string: where was the 500 Cubit square in relation to the temple;
how was the square first laid out; where did the 187 and 135 Cubit dimensions of the Inner
courtyard come from; where were two peripheral building zones and a sacred barrier; where
were a number of gates and inner structures of temple located; what was the hole in the rock in
the roof of the cave; and what if anything, was located at the spot marking the exact center of the
present Muslim building? I have discovered a possible technique used in first laying out the
ancient temples onto a 500 Cubit square. I will show how present structures prove the design.
Especially the location of the hole in the ceiling of the cave proves the temple site. I will show
how two walls of the inner platform were derived from the Jewish temple and how they pinpoint
key temple locations. Even the Muslim building of today holds keys for locating the Jewish
temple of yesterday. I will show major evidence for the location of the temple, some of which
can be considered archeological agreements with Talmudic dimensional statements.
Jews believe the dimensions, locations and designs of the temple were given by God. If God is
in geometry and is in mathematics, then this is the detailing of that geometry and of this
mathematics.
I will show how a single (also the effects of multiples) large triangle, used as a measuring cord,
laid out either in part or completely, of a specific size and placed on specific points on the ground
starting from two natural caves and one hill scarp, could have been used to lay out the entire
ancient sacred temple court areas described in the Talmud. I will draw the Talmudic dimensions
of the temple into the design laid out by this triangle and almost miraculously the temple
emerges into a scaled drawing upon which I will then insert known structures such as the inner
platform, the cisterns and channels, stairs, walls, gates, and building of the Dome of the Rock
and Dome of the Chain onto this drawing and we can see where the temple and other structures
once existed on the current landscape. I have made the triangle on a large scaled paper drawing,
and onto a small photo copy of an accurate figure of the Temple Mount, to show the correctness
of my technique.
The only instruments needed to lay out the temple by this method would have been a rope of a
specific length, divided into equal specific divisions and a method for laying out right angles and
a number of people to hold the cord taunt in the shape of a triangle and then into the shape of a
square.
A small number of disagreeing theories have attempted to answer the question of the temples
location. A characteristic of all these theories is that they do not take into account various
discoveries such as the evidence for the location of the 500 Cubit square on which the entire
sacred complex was built. This paper does take this area into consideration.
First some background: Herods Temple stood on the summit of the Temple Mount within the
500C square which fronted on the Kidron Valley. (All of the land under the square is on the
mount and does not include any fosse or valley. This fact must have made the site favorable for a
500 Cubit square.) The entire square Herods temple was a T shaped structure 100 Cubit wide
built within the western part of a 187 (E to W) by 135 (S to N) Cubit Inner Courtyard (The
1

Azarah). A large central room called the Heickal was 20 Cubits wide, so that the center line of
the building was 10 ( C )ubits from the northern and southern edges of the room. The Debir was
a 20C square area west of the Heickal. A 1C space separated the two rooms. A stone about two
inches high was at the center of this room on which the Ark of the Covenant once was placed.
The main building was 70C wide, with two 15C extended rooms measured on an axis from
north to south at the eastern end, part of the Ulam, a fore room east of the Heickal, making the
entire width 100C. On each side of the Ulam, the distance was 17.5C to the northern and
southern edges of the Azarah. The entire north- south distance was 17.5C+100C+17.5C or 135C.
The distance from the eastern end of the Ulam to the center of the Azarah was the same 17.5C
distance measured from both the northern and southern edges of the Ulam to the respective edges
of the Azarah. (187C/2 is the east- west axis line ( CL) midpoint of 93.5C. Measuring from the
eastern edge of the Azarah, we get 11C+11C+32C+22C+17.5C or 93.5C)1.
An outer zone called the Cheil marked the boundary between two differing areas of sanctity.
This Cheil was 10C beyond the innermost rectangular sacred areas of the Temple. It was divided
into an inner 6C band which may or may not have had steps (each of the twelve steps were 0.5C
wide for a total width of 6C.), and another 4C band which was flat ground. Here at the edge of
the Cheil was a dividing fence marked the Soreg which gentiles could not go past2. A 33.5C zone
for buildings must have existed between the Cheil and the Inner courtyard (not recorded in the
ancient literature but the existence of buildings are recorded and this length is detected by my
technique) forming a third higher area of sanctity. None but a king descended from King David
could sit in the area of the Azarah or in this zone of buildings (135C+33.5C+33.5C), but they
could sit within the area of the Cheil which was of a lesser sanctity.
Another 135 Cubit square courtyard was built east of the Azarah Courtyard. Both courtyards
were within a 500 Cubit square area. Four 40C square courtyards were built inside the corners of
the 135 Cubit square (I can also show these courtyards outside the large square and suspect the
former as being correct. I can also show a distinct smaller 30 by 40C rectangle covering part of
the same ground). The ancient portico called Solomons Porch, was built along the eastern
edge of the 500 C square. A great 32C altar had to be constructed on the exact same ground as
Davids original one presumably built on a threshing floor near the summit of the hillside3. The
first altar was built on a squared 28C base which was enlarged after the Jews returned from
Babylon, by adding 4C onto its southern and western sides making an enlarged square altar of
32C.
The entire 28C altar was within the territory of the tribe of Benjamin4, but with the enlarging of
the altar, the new 32C one had encroached 1C of its southeast corner within the territory of the
tribe of Judah since the actual border between these tribes run though the temple area and made a
south to east right angle at this location. The base had a notch of 1C located here, to allow the
entire altar to be within the territory of Benjamin only (the northern and western edges of the
base was 32C and the eastern and southern edges were 31C). The border ran eastward through
the Court of the Woman as shown in Figs. 6, 6a.
The altar and a large ramp 16C wide leading up to the altar from the south measured 62C (32C
altar and a 32C ramp overlapping the altar made the ramp 30C). The exact center of the Azarah
was at a point 67.5C (135/2) on a north-south line, and 93.5C (187/2) on an east-west line.
(Discussed later)
(See Fig. 1) The greatest area was south of the Inner Courtyard, the area east was smaller, the

1
See note 2 for more details
2 Rabbi Leibel Reznick,, The Holy Temple Revisited,( Jason Aronson Inc., 1990), 81
3
See note 27 for more details
4
See note 28 for a discussion
2

area north even smaller, and the smallest area was to the west5.

Fig. 1

5
3

See note 1 for detailed description.

Fig. 2

(See Fig. 2) Firstly, a long line was drawn along a line passing over a natural cave (this cave is
the only known cistern like opening existing under the temple building site, all other cisterns are
outside the building.) at a right angle eastward of the scarp line by the hills summit. This altar
5

may have been at a right angle to the natural scarp summit of the hilltop a short distance to the
west of the summit. (The altar may in fact have been located and orientated at a later time but the
biblical account highlights the threshing floor and not the cave.)6 This line became the temples
eastwest center axis line (CL).
The natural western scarp of the rock makes a slight bend labeled point (L). A railing preserves
the bend exactly. The bedrock protrudes at this bend. This bend in the rock marked and still
preserves the center or axis line of the temple. (Finger like grooves are located on the rock here).
This line is tangent to the hole in the ceiling of the natural cave under the rock.
Secondly, a cord 2000 Cubits long (this description describes a single long cord but the actual
layout could have been done in sections using a smaller cord.) would have been divided into 32
parts marked with paint or cloth strips. This full length cord would be used to lay out the 500 C
square. Each part or segment would then be 2000/32 or 62.5C long. The number 32' as Cubits is
the post exile altar length. Note that both the altar (32C2) and the Mountain of the House
(500C2) were squares.
These distances were significant lengths since 2000C was the distance marking the outside of
the camp and also the distance one can walk on a holy day, and 62C was reused as the length of
the altar and ramp. This 2000C outer circumference square was the Mountain of the House
mentioned in the Talmud as being the sacred space on which the temple and its courts were
placed. Each 62.5C segment will be labeled x, thus 5x is 5 times 62.5C or 312.5C and 8x is 8
times 62.5 or 500C etc.

Fig. 3

6
6

See note 14 for detailed description.

(See Fig. 3) Thirdly, to create and locate on the Temple Mount site this square, a unique
isosceles 71.790043, 71.790043 triangle, whose sides are 5:8:87 gives the ratio of 1.6 (from
8/5) which is close to forming perfect pentacles and pentagons. ( 8/5=1.6 but 8.09/5= 1.618 the
golden ratio of phi. In a golden triangle we get 71.999609, and 71.999609. The numbers 5
and 8 are also part of Fibonacci Sequence 8/5= 1.6 and also these numbers have significance
with the pentagram of the planet Venus).
A 3:4:5 triangle also has key numbers in the Fibonacci Sequence since the first number (3) and
the last number (5) when added together equals 8. Again, the numbers 5 and 8 are related.
(see Fig. 10) was laid out whose short side 5x (312.5C) was to be along the edge of the hill
overlooking the Kidron Valley parallel to the scarp on the summit mentioned previously. This
triangle could have been made by removing 11 segments (8x +3x) from the 32 segmented cord.
This would yield a cord of 21x or segments, a length of 1312.5C (32x-11x). The number 11'
then became an important number in the design as many courts were 11C in width or double 11C
(22C) in width. (If one was to count one 500C wall of 8x and take the additional 3x length, one
would find one gate located exactly on or close to the side of the 3x positions: the point opposite
Wilsons Arch the probable Kaponius Gate location on the western edge (see Figs. 6,). Note
that 8x+ 3x again gives 11x8. Also note that this would have been where wood was carried
through the Soreg, then the Cheil, and on into the Azarah by way of a nearby gate (part of
Wilsons Arch) to bring in wood since this was where the SW corner of the sacred area was
located. Wood would not have been carried far in this design. (See Fig.1N also Figs. 6, 6a, for all
details of this paper since it is a large scaled drawing. Thus even gates were laid out using this
system of segmented cord lengths.
The surveyors of the 500C square laid an east- west line across a natural cave to the east of the
summit which also crossed the natural western summit scarp at a point marked by a bend in the
rock (point L), and measured eastward exactly 10C what was to become the center line distance
of the temples 20C Debir and Heickal width. This spot is labeled I in Fig. 3. The southern
long line of the isosceles triangle, a cord 8x (500C long), was placed at half the halfway point of
the cord and apex of this triangle (half way between 4x and 8x is 2x or 6x) 6x is 3/4 the cords
length) precisely at I9. The short side of the triangle was laid parallel to the natural scarp (this
would make a right angle to the summit of the Mount of Olives). Another way of looking at this
is that triangle is 72, 72, 36. The angle between the axis line and the triangle line is 18 (36/2).
Laying out 18 at I would create a short sided triangle line parallel to the natural scarp. The
northeastern corner of this triangle, is a point labeled A. (Or they laid the E-W axis line grazing
the northern edge of King Davids altar built on a thrashing floor.)
Now the cord was unfolded to its full length where A was taken as the northeastern corner of
the 500C square. The eastern edge of the triangle was extended southward 3x segments for a
total of 8x segments (5x+3x is 8x) or 500C. A 500 Cubit square could be laid out clockwise
making the northeast corner point A, then making a right angle along the line along the top of the
Kidron Valley, marking off a 500 Cubit line to the southeast corner, then another right angle and
marking off another 500 Cubits to the southwest corner, then another right angle and marking off
another 500 Cubits line to the northwest corner, then another right angle and marking off another
500 Cubit line back to the starting point A the northeast corner.
The big square altar built upon this square was purified by sprinkling blood on the Day of
Atonement starting from the southeast corner to the northeast corner and then to the northwest
corner. These corners and their connecting lines first purified the line from the southeast corner
7

See note 23 for details concerning this triangle.


8 See note 4 for more discussions concerning 11C.
See note 29 for more discussion.

to the northeast corner as in the triangle then the line from the northeast corner to the northwest
corner. Both lines utilize the northeast corner which was the site of the actual head corner (rosh
Pinah) described all the biblical texts except for Psalm 118 (detailed elsewhere in this paper.)
The line from the northeast corner to the northwest corner of the square was a segment of a very
important line involving the head corner (rosh pinah) of psalm 118 (detailed in my paper found
here proof of Jerusalem temples Location In The Church of The Holy Sepulchre different
stone also described in this paper. )
This is the square discovered by Leen Ritmeyer10 (The northern edge of the Ritmeyer square is
in line with Golgotha Rock in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Discussions of this and other
details are beyond the scope of this article, but can be found in my book, Sacred Stones Sacred
Stories Vol.1). All lines such as the axis line, would be parallel to the edges of the 8x (500C)
square. (The length of this cubit is 52.5 cm which is the same length as 1 Royal Egyptian Cubit.
1 Khet =100 Cubits. River Measure = 20000 Cubits. (See wikipedia-- ancient units of
measurement. Also if 1 Cubit was 7 Palms, then 500 C was 500*7 or 3500 Palms, and if 1 Palm
was 4 Fingers, then 500 C was 3500 Palms * 4 or 14000 Fingers. 500C can be stated in any
combination of Cubits, Palms, and Fingers which was an ancient Egyptian method of
measuring.)
The northern edge of the current inner platform is the northern edge of the 500C Ritmeyer
Square, first laid out by the Golden Gate triangle cord shown in Fig. 3.
(See Fig. 4) Four mirrored pairs of eight triangles can be created from each of the four corners
of the great square. The angle bisector of these isosceles triangles would be at the halfway point
of each triangles short side (5x/2 or 2.5x which is 312.5/2 or 156.25 Cubits) positions from each
corner of the square. Four locations would be the overlap positions of two of these right angled
bisectors (labeled aa, bb, cc, dd.).
(See Fig. 5a) Next the square could be divided in half north- south and east -west. The east-west
center line of the square OVP was created (4x or 250C where V marks the exact center of 500
Cubit Squire)11. The North- South midline (MVN 4x or 250C,) became the eastern edge of this
Inner Courtyard called the Azarah12. They measured from here 3x (187.5 or 187C if the
remainder is discarded) to get the east-west length of the Azarah (the western edge is 7x from the
line AF). (The fraction was discarded to not have fractional distances such as 11.5 Cubit courts.)
Then the east-west length of the Azarah would have been 0.5C, a short distance east of the 3x
north-south line measured from the north-south midline of the square.
(See Figs. 6, 6a, and others marked D) Now I will place the Talmudic description of the temple,
the locations of the Dome of the Chain and the Dome of the Rock, cisterns and other features on
the resulting drawing. Let us examine the features starting in NE corner. A small natural cave
became the center of an H shaped cistern (See Fig. D1). The location of this cave became the
controlling factor for a semi sacred outer zone called the Cheil. The size, shape, and location of
this cistern allowed a 10C (or 11C) band to be drawn called Cheil. The NE corner of this cistern
became the NE corner of the Cheil. (The SE corner of this same H shaped cistern became a
point on one of the diagonal lines of the great square.)
The 10C Cheil was subdivided into a 6C band which may or may not have had steps (it appears
only the western side and the western portion of the southern side had steps because the height of
the ground necessitated steps here), and a 4C band of flat ground all around.
This cistern was the only cistern oriented to the square. This fact, and the fact that the ceiling
was bedrock can only mean great difficulty must have been encountered getting the size and
orientation exactly under the Cheil and its NE corner. Water stored in this cistern, was stored
10

(Leen Ritmeyer, The Quest; (Carta Jerusalem; 2006), 232.


See note 12 for more detail.
See note 4 for more detail.

11
12
9

under the Cheil. Today the Cheil is gone but the original cistern bears witness to its previous
location.
The northern and eastern sides of the Cheil fixed its first surveying of the size and location.
There are descriptions of the Cheil being only on the eastern side. This was one of the sides first
laid out.
A known small natural cave ( Below the Temple Mount in Jerusalem; Shimon Gibson, David
Jacobson, BAR international Series 637; 1996; p.119) existed on the Temple Mount which was
enlarged into an artificial cistern of a specific size and shape. A line from this cave laid out
parallel to the created eastern edge of the square, (also this line would have been parallel to the
western scarp near the hills summit), would intersect the line of one mirrored triangle
ABC at point Q13. The distance from the north-south center line (MVN) to point Q rounds off
to 135 Cubits. Likewise, from point Q the central axis line of the temple, the distance was 67.5C
which when doubled gave a distance north- south of 135C (67.5C +67.5C = 135C). These two
measurements from point Q would create a square courtyard of 135C which became the area of
the Court of the Women east of the north- south midline of the 500C square, and the rectangular
Azarah Court from the previously determined 187C west- east distance and the 135C north-south
distance west of the north- south midline of the 500C square.
The northern edge of this line was a short distance south of the 2x line measured south from the
northern edge of the square. (This explains why the Azarah was 187 by 135 Cubits and how this
size was first calculated, and where this courtyard was laid out possessed of no other
dimensions.)
(See Fig. 5b) The distance from the angle bisector of this triangle to the northern edge of the
Azarah is 30C. This would allow a rectangle 30C by (-?-) to exist at this spot. Ezekiel 46:21-22
speaks about four open courts measuring 30C by 40C. Later this same area had four courts 40C
by 40C occupying the same ground14.
(See Fig. D2 ) A large cistern which was south of the Northern gate allowing entry into the
Court of the Women. This cistern was between the two northern 40C little courtyards. It western
end protruded just under the eastern edge of the inner platform.
(See Fig. D3) Moving westward there are two cisterns cut in bedrock ceilings whose drain
openings were cut within the 10C zone between the Soreg and the Cheil. Since the ceiling was
bedrock, the opening must be in their original location, dug within the 10C band between the
Soreg and the Cheil. When the cistern was dug, this 10C zone was known. The drain opening on
the western cistern was placed at the 4x location of one triangle. (Also note in Figs. 6, 6a the 1x
in the area near the S.W. corner of the Cheil on the triangle A`B`C` ). These two cisterns were
directly north of the Court of the Lepers15. Water stored here must have been used by this court.
(See Fig. D4) Next is a very large rectangular cistern which may have been used as a
passageway leading from the northern unused Tadi Gate to the eastern half of the Heickal. The
center line of this cistern was in a direct line with the eastern half end of the Heickal (Holy
Place). The southwestern corner was in a direct line with point (I) and the Double Gate to the
south. This corner was at the northern edge of the Azarah, and its western edge of was at the 6x
mark on the line AB of the triangle. At some later time, this passage could have been converted
into a cistern. Two wellheads (or drain holes) ran along the southern edge of the Cheil. This
would have put the water running into the cistern from the Cheil and open to the sky for I
surmise the Rinsing Chamber was just to the south. This cistern was definitely used at some time
13
Every triangle has its mirror image. If one triangle creates a pentacle, then its mirrored image
creates a pentacle in mirror image. The resulting figure is a 10 pointed star. This was a common Jewish motif.
14

15

10

See note 23 and note 23a-b

See note 25 for more discussion.

as a water cistern dug directly under part of or wholly under the Rinsing Chamber where
sacrificial animal intestines were washed an act requiring much water.
(See Fig. D5) Next is a large complex of cisterns with a divided chamber dug under the Cheil,
and a deep cistern dug just beyond the Soreg, a boundary located 10C past the Cheil. This
complex must have been part of the Hearth Chamber.
(See Fig. D6) Next comes an anomaly in the surface of the inner platform. This anomaly is a
major piece of archeological evidence for my locating the temple as seen in Figs. 6, 6a. For here
is essentially a hole in the surface, where can be found very ancient bedrock sloping to the west
presently covered by a Muslim building, the Dome of al- Khalili. It was at the NW corner of the
Cheil. A steep and very finely finished scarp along eastern edge of the hole is exactly the angle of
the Cheil/Azarah seen in Figs. 6a, and 6d. This is the only scarp of the correct angle for the
Cheils/Azarahs western side. (The actual western edge of the Azarah would have been here
0.5C east of the 3x string location (187.5C) seen in Figs. 6, 6a).
The sloping surface is exactly within the 6C zone of the Cheil which may have had a
staircase16. I shall now quote from a book concerning this cistern17. The author of this quote is
Conder [C 1872, 165 = /pef Archives, WS/10/2] On the rough rocks there are marks as though of
the remains of steps, or of masonry, fitted against the wall. The interest of this discovery is very
great, and no doubt it will form a new point in future theories on the temple. We also read, that
a 15th century scholar wrote: On the west side of the Dome of the Rock are rocks said to be of the
time of David. It is evident that they are naturel rocks, rooted in the ground, and never removed.
The gentiles made the Soreg to have 13 openings into the Cheils sacred areas. This could
have been one of these 13 openings on the western side of the Azarah.
An interesting side note is that only one Muslim staircase still overlays an original Cheil
staircase, and that is the staircase to the west of the Dome of the Rock. Simple inspection of Fig.
6 shows this has to be true if these figures are correct. The central axis line passes over the
singular newel post at the bottom left side of the staircase. This line passes through the outer
western wall a short distance north of the Muslim Ablution Gate which a niche of a late date can
be found. This staircase is off center and shifted to the south from the central axis line of the
Dome of the Rock. The staircase appears to be closer to the temples original central axis line
which was more to the south.
Warrens Gate converted at a later time into a cistern was used by Jews as a synagogue since it
was considered to be the closest point on the Western Wall to the Debir (but it actually was just
behind the rooms south of the Debir.) My location for the Debir puts this gate just to the south of
this room. Very old Muslim toilets were constructed here which is ironic and may or may not
have a Roman or Byzantine deliberate Origen. Gigantic stones called the master coarse is
between the southern part of the temple building the southern part of the Azarah and a short
distance in line with the southern chambers. If the coarse begins by the southern end of the Holy
of Holies, then measured on the western wall would reach past the southern edge of the Azarah.
If a storeroom were to be behind the Western Wall here it would be in line with the southern part
of the temple building, the southern part of the Azarah, and in line with a distance into these
southern chambers.
Next we have arrived at the southern edge of the inner platform. This southern edge of the
Cheil was here as you can see my measurements of Figs. 6, 6a. Note, here are two Muslim
staircases just outside the original temple Cheil and Soreg. (We have three sides of the inner
platform accounted for.) An interesting fact which may or may not have any significance is the
fact the half way point between the 250C line of the 500C square labeled MVN in Fig. 6, and the
16
17

See note 22 for more details concerning this rock.


Shimon Gibson and David M. Jacobson , Below the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, (BAR
international Series 637, 1996) no page numbers

11

southern Soreg is currently the location of one wide staircase leading up to the inner platform
between the Al-aksa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. This was one of the first stairways built
on the platform.
(See Fig. D7) A cistern having a number of well openings was part of the Golah Chamber.
Note the wellhead in the Azarah. It was just north of the Golah Chamber by the SW corner of the
ramp18. Water from this well must have been used to wash to altar and ramp. This cistern has a
long section with an unusual orientation. A few other features also possess this orientation of 9
north of west. Examining Figs. 6, 6a reveals the angle of this cistern is exactly orientation of the
line BC of the triangle ABC. In fact, this cistern is a short distance south of two triangles similar
to two triangles seen in Fig.4. I contend the cistern and other features were all deliberately meant
to be parallel to the line of triangle ABC or one of similar triangle lines seen in Fig. 4. These
features are all within the 500C square. A number of features north of the 500C square are all
parallel to the line AB of the triangle ABC, or one of similar triangle lines seen in Fig. 4. These
lines are all 9 south of west.
This is a major piece of evidence the design was laid out using triangle ABC since this cistern is
an archaeological feature with an orientation that cannot be explained accept by this finding.
The SE corner of the inner platform which has the aforementioned cistern emerging from here,
would have been very close the southern line of the Cheil in line with the Triple Gate. As
mentioned elsewhere, this line from the Triple Gate pointed to the Chamber of Oil just to the
Note how this cistern was designed to curve around the S.E. corner of the inner platform which
suggests the corner was in place as the time the cistern was built.
The cistern located here has the floor well below the level of the platform. At about 15 meters
it is the lowest of any large cistern19. (see note 24 for a discussion)
(See Fig. 9) Part of a paving (or wall) was seen when a trench was cut. This paving is exactly at
point G, the 3x location on the triangle. The paving matches the location of the paving midway
between the Courts of Oil Storage, and Court of the Nazerite.
(See Fig. D8) Two more cisterns were close to the Chamber of Wormy Wood Storage. An
ancient legend mentions a cistern associated with this chamber where a priest fell into a hole
under this chamber where the Ark was once hidden during the Babylonian invasion centauries
previously.
The altar was 28C square but was enlarged 4C on its western and southern sides making it 32C
square. (Note in Figs. 6, 6a the line BC of triangle ABC defines the 28C SE corner of the altar.
The distance from the axis line to this point was 28C. This helped define the square base of the
original 28C altar.) This increased size allowed the SW corner to cover a drain, but it also had
four other consequences:
The temple was wholly within the territory of Benjamin, as the border line ran south of the
Jebusite city, according to the Book of Joshua but at some later time, the border ran close to the
site of the altar. The border between the tribes of Benjamin and Judah made a right angle 3C
from the SE corner of the 28C altar. The altar was totally within the territory of Benjamin20.
When the altar was extended 4C on the south side, it engulfed 1C on its foundation past the
border into the territory of Judah. To keep the altar wholly within Benjamin, a 1C square was cut
out of the foundation, making the base 31C on its southern and eastern side, and 32C on its
northern and western21.
The border ran eastward though the Courts of the Lepers and Wormy Wood Storage, and

19
20
21

18
See note 11 for more details.
Gibson and Jacobson, no page numbers
See Note 29 for discussion.
See appendix 1

12

southward through Chamber of Hewn Stones. If the border ran through this room, the eastern
part would have been in the territory of Judah, making the room a long rectangle, and the
western part would have been in the territory of Benjamin. If the border ran through the western
wall of the chamber, then the entire room would have been in the territory of Judah, and the
Golah Chamber to the west would have been in the territory of Benjamin. If the border ran
through the Chamber of Hewn Stone, neither tribe could claim full ownership of the Sanhedrens
(the supreme religious authority) building. Each of the two tribes near the city of Jerusalem
would have been at the border line running through the Sanhedrens most important location.
(The border ran southwestward to Regolim Spring, and then to the Valley of Hennom, and
eastward it ran over the Mount of Olives then to maalay adummim.)
Another consequence of this extension was that the distance of the western edge of the altar to
the front of the temple was now 22C, symmetrically the same distance from the eastern edge of
the Azarah to the eastern edge of the altar.
A third consequence very hidden and important can be seen in figs. 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b. The 500C
square can have two diagonal lines meeting at point V. Any point on these lines have a distinct
relationship: the distance from a specific point on a diagonal have two sets of right angles of
equal lengths. (All distances at the intersection of the two diagonals are equal to each other. See
Fig.7b) The 28C altar fell short of a diagonal line, but the addition of 4C westward and
southward placed the altars NW and SE corners (at the right angle border between Benjamin
and Judah) exactly on the diagonal, hence the equalities held true22. Thus the border curved along
a diagonal of the 500C square. As a consequence of the border making this right angle bend
along this diagonal line, the area allotting to the territory of Judah within the 500C square is the
shape of a smaller square occupying the SE corner of the 500C square. (This territory of Judah
square is larger than the square delineated by points (OVNF), which is 1/4 the size of the whole
500C square (see Figs. 6, 6a, and Note 14b)23.
The border between Benjamin and Judah appears to have been located within the wall
separating the Golah Chamber in Benjamin from the Chamber of Hewn Stones in Judah. As it is
written: The scepter shall not depart from Judah Gen. 49:10. Benjamin went into exile along
with Judah. When they returned, they both rebuilt the Golah Chamber.
The fourth consequence seen in Figs. 6, 6a is that the intersection of the temples axis line and
this diagonal line defines exactly the NW corner of the enlarged 32C altar.
Centuries later, when the Dome of the Rock was built, the northern and eastern doors were
exactly on the same diagonal, hence they also have the equality phenomenon. Ironically the
Muslim building possesses a similar relationship to the Jewish altar on the same Talmudic 500C
square of the Jewish temple. (If a previous Christian or pagan building existed on the same site
as the Dome of the Rock, this earlier structure would have had their northern and eastern doors
possessing the equality phenomenon.)
Since the buildings size and location are both dependent on the size and location of the Rock,
this centering of two doors is the direct consequence of this Rock (or the geometry of note 6).
Remember the four overlapping locations24 discussed previously concerning Fig. 5? These
locations are all on the two diagonal lines of the 500C square. (Remember, the preceding
paragraph about the third consequence? All of these twelve overlapping locations have the
equalities mentioned.) They also created an inner square 3x or 187.5C on a side which is 0.5C
larger then 187C a dimension of the Azarah. The two northern locations have the N.E. location
(bb) falling on the western wall of the Court of Wormy Wood storage, and the NW location (aa)
falls on the western wall of the northern Ulams clean knife room. Note they are both on western
22
23
24
13

See note 5 for more on the subject of 4C altar.


See note 19 for more details.
See note 20 for important discussion on these triangles.

walls of structures. (The angle bisector of one of the triangles making location (aa) passes
through point (hole) the center of the Azarah and the current site of the hole in the rock.)
Another really amazing fact is this: When we measure where on the one diagonal line running
though the Dome of the Rock and altar, the lengths of the lines running toward the periphery of
the 500 C square, making right angles are the lengths of the triangle's ratio of 8/5, we find this
point is just to the southeast of the eastern door of the Dome of the Rock (point U), and just to
the north of the temples original axis line. (This point is in the small space between the temples
axis and the Dome of the Rocks E-W axis lines. It is also on a 500C diagonal line between the
eastern door of the Rock building and the NW corner of the altar. ) The Golden Ratio is also
nearby. It is astounding that the eastern door of the Muslim building is close to the triangle's ratio
of 1.6 on the Jewish temples sacred square! (See Fig. 6c and note 8) This is another example of
the building incorporating the Golden Ratio25.
Another fact seen is that the two axis lines of the Dome of the Rock, centered on the rock,
meet this diagonal line at two doors. Near the eastern door was the Golden Ratio point26.
An earlier Roman temple might have existed on the Summit of the Rock shaped like a square,
or rectangle, with features on the side of these two doors, but this is very speculative. A possible
statue of the emperor could have existed at the center of the Debir facing west. There are vague
legends placing a flying horse tied up somewhere in the vicinity of the buildings western door.
The armor of a great Muslim general was once placed in the western side of the rock.
Another structure of great importance is the Dome of the Chain, located east of the Dome of
the Rock. This was the center of Herods Temple Mount additions, the area between the altar and
the sacrificial slaughter site.
The name preserves two Jewish temple associations of this place. Firstly, the site north of the
altar was where lots were chosen for the fate of two goats on the Day of Atonement a day of
judgment. One goat, the scapegoat had a thread tied to its horns. The Muslim legends concerning
the spot involve the idea of judgment at the end of days when a chain stretching from this dome
to heaven would be grasped by the righteous. The idea of a thread could morph into the idea of
a chain.
The second association of judgment concerns the judgment of women professing innocence
from adultery (The Sotah). The women stood by an open northern small gateway (by the main
center line gate called Nekanors Gate), near the Court of the Lepers to receive dust taken from
the floor of the Heickal, just to the north of the Heickals doorway, north of the center line (The
site now is on The Rock to the east of point J in Figs. 6, 6a.) Everything north of the center line:
the open northern gate, the chosen lot site, the northern doorpost, the Table of Showbread was
along this lineup where the Dome of the Chain was to be built at the center of Herods Temple
Mount.
Also, the women may have had her breasts bound in a rope. The concept of a rope could
easily become the concept of a chain. The area just north of the 8C space was an area of rings.
What is a chain but a rope of interconnected rings? Hence, the Muslim name retains a vestige of
Jewish remembrance of this site by important area of sacrifice north of the altar.
Later, you will read about the Sotah location or stone in the floor of Heickal. You will see this
location (point J) was in line with the Dome of the Chain to the east. Thus the name of the little
dome again has a connection with the center of the rock and the ancient Jewish ritual of the
Sotah.
25
Another example of this ratio is on the triangle ABC, the 5x distance on line from C to B reaches
a point on the altar. Since the distance C to B is 8x, then this distance is 8x/5x is the ratio measuring to the location
of the altar. Similarly, if we measure from B to C, the 5x distance reaches point G the exposed wide wall in a
Muslim ditch. (See Fig. 6)
26
See notes 5 and 7 for more details.
14

The Dome of the Chain at the center of Herods Temple Mount is north of Herods southern
outer wall. Both Double and Triple Gates in the southern wall are symmetrically placed around
this center point on the wall so that these gates were symmetrically placed on this Sotah stone.
(See Fig. 7) I will now discuss one of the most important proofs of the temples location: what
if anything was at the exact center of the Azarah? The center was 187/2 or 93.5C on the eastwest center line, and 135/2 or 67.5C on the north-south center line.
(See Fig. 8 ) Simple inspection of the design shows this spot was on the center line of the
building on the threshold Herods temple (between the two doorpost and under the lintel, and
within the Ulam of Solomons) exactly 17.5C west of the eastern edge of the Herods Ulam the
same distance on each side of the Herodian measured to the northern and southern edges of the
Azarah. (17.5C= 100C+ 17.5C =135C. The full measurement starting at the eastern edge of the
Azarah at the 250C NS midline progressing westward is: 11C+ 11C +32C +22C + {within the
Ulam} 17.5C = 93.5C27.
What if anything is located at this spot28? This spot is over the cave in the rock where a hole
exists to this day. The rock which once occupied this hole was at the center of the area this string
layout system created the center of a 187 by 135 C rectangle within the 500C rectangular square.
The Azarah was believed to be land at the center of the world. (This hole in the rock location
was the same spot the Bordeaux Pilgrim wrote about decades later) Then logically the center of
the Azarah was believed to be at the exact center of the world29.
The center of the world could have been the point people faced when praying. This point on
the temple site (on the temples threshold and not the center of the Holy of Holies), would then
have been the first qibblah direction for prayer of Mohammed influenced by an ancient Jewish
memory of the Azarahs center point. The second qibblah direction for prayer of Mohammed
was changed to became the exact center of the Kabba (when you face the kabba, you face the
center and not any corner of the building). Both qibblahs mark center of courtyards. The first
qibblah was the center of the Jewish Azarah courtyard, and the second qibblah was the center of
the courtyard which has the square portion of the Kabba .in its center. This low walled structure
was originally open to the sky.
A round plug of rock was cut out of the ceiling. This plug or some portion of rock was moved
55.5C west along the central axis to the floor at the center of the Diber (Holy of Holies).
(Moving this rock has precedence since a Muslim legend stated that a piece of the rock under a
small domed building to the north was part of the larger rock under the Dome of the Rock
building. Although this rock may be protruding bedrock, the legend preserves memory of rock
being moved at an earlier time. Also in a case on the western edge of the Rock is a fragment of
the larger rock.) Here bedrock slopped downward. The Debir was built on an artificial
foundation having a number of arches built to prevent contamination with any underlying tombs.
The height of the foundation was about 6C here. Either the round 3 fingerbreadth rock was
placed on the floor or the floor was cut out a sufficient depth to allow 3 finger breath surface to
protrude above the pavement. The size of the rock was sufficient to act as a base for the Ark of
the Covenant or a base for the fire pan of the High Priest, and the shape matched the shape of the
Horizon. The stone was either placed under the ark or near it. Note the description is not of a
large stone as the current rock is but of a small stone set on the ground30.
Then the hole in the rock was where the Foundation Stone or Drinking Stone (Even Shiteah)
27
28

30

See note 2 for more details.

The center of the Azarah was in line with the Eastern Gate (Nakanor), Northern Gate (Taddi), Southern Gate
(double), with no Western Gate.
29
See notes 3 and 10 for more details.
See Fig. 10N for view of Herods temple showing hole in rock having a secondary plug marked 5 in figure.

15

once was. It was a rock placed next to or under the Ark of the Covenant. Note the Talmudic
description is not of a large piece of bedrock as the current rock is, but of small rock a few
centimeters high. It must have been moved from the exact center of the Azarah to a spot west of
center, but still within the Azarah area. The concept of the worlds center now was shifted to the
Debir where the Even Shtiah was moved. The rock was stone broken from bedrock. The level of
bedrock was the same level as the floor of the Debir, only the Even Shiteah was 3 finger breadths
higher.
The Even Shitiah was of a size, that the Ark and at a later time a fire pan could fit upon it. The
rock under the dome, is larger than the whole Debir room with outside room to spare. A
depression on the rock surface is not the description given in the Talmud. The description is that
the Even Shitiah was above the floor level.
What was the most important ground of the temple? Surly it was not the ground under the
Debir or the ground under the Altar. It was the exact center of the Azarah as from here, all
structures in the Azarah and around it can be located, referenced and measured. If the bedrock at
the center was cut out and moved, it still was the Even Shittiah rock.
Like the legendary primeval ground within the great pyramid at Gaza, the rock was considered
the center of the earth being the center of the Azarah, with the exact center moved to the center
of the Debir.
The theory sand covered the floor of the Debir and 3 finger breaths was exposed is nonsense,
because this assumes sand about 2 inches high would have remained in place for several
millennia. Imagine the dirt, dust, and dried blood covering a floor that was never cleaned in a
room which had to be scrupulously cleaned having spotless walls and a filthy floor! The Veil had
to be cleaned as well. To be cleaned the veil had to be taken down and then replaced. Imagine
doing this for centuries with the breeze created every time the veil is hauled up and down
blowing the sand out into the Heickal.
Also the rock was originally under the Ulam, threshold and eastern part of the Heickal. The
center of the Debir with its Even Shiteah would have been near the western door of the Dome of
the Rock. The buildings size, which reflects the size and location of the Rock fixes the location
of the doors on the outside of the structure.
If the center of the Azarah was where a well like hole existed in the rock over a cave, and if the
hole was under the center line of the temple then when the Messiah comes, these ancient
descriptions are possible:
1. Water could flow out from the threshold, (Ezekiel 47:1).
2. Water from a primordial sea under Eden under the cave at the center of the world could flow
out from under this cave. (An ancient legend does state this).
3. This primordial water flowing out of the cave could flow out of a well like opening in the ceiling
of the cave the same water flowing from under the temples threshold Ezeikiel 47:1-2 also has
hidden illusions to two major lines in Figs. 6, 6a. If we substitute two streams of water and make
them two lines, we get Figs. 6, 6a.31. The biblical account seems to be describing a vision of the
temples axis line from Solomons to Herods and its intersecting triangle at point I. The prophet
seems to have some knowledge of this.
4. Also Joel 4:18.

There is circumstantial evidence knowledge of the temples location was vaguely known
several hundred years after the destruction. The evidence concerns the Bordeaux Pilgrim who
visited the Temple Mount several centuries after the destruction. He wrote Jews (priests) were
allowed on one day of the year to pour oil on a pierced rock on the Temple Mount. How was this
possible if these Jews were not to step on the area under the Debir? If the rock was under the
31
16

See note 18 for more details

Debir, it was possible to violate the sacred space, but if the rock and specifically the hole in the
rock was the location of Temples threshold, there would have been no possibility of violating
the sacred space. If any remembrance existed that the pierced rock was under the eastern end of
the building, the act of approaching from the east and stepping on the rock would not have been
a problem. Also, the western wall of the Debir was the last part of the building seen. The time
interval form the removal of this wall and the statement of the Bordeaux Pilgrim was only a few
hundred years, reinforcing the possibility the Jews had a vague remembrance of the Debir
location.
Also here were Jews at a later time who attended the Dome of the Rock building. If they were
priests, who never went near the western door of the building, they would not have violated the
sacred space.
More circumstantial evidence concerning the temple location from a Muslim source. A very
old part of the Al Aksa Mosque is called because of a vague remembrance of the Jewish temples
and altars location Zachariahs Tomb. This small room may preserve memory of the death of a
priest named Zachariah in either the old or New Testament. This priest was slain between the
Ulam of the temple building and the altar. If we look at the area directly north of this room, we
would reach the area between the Ulam and the altar seen in Figs. 6, 6a.
Why do we have the idea that the big rock in the center of the dome was the Even Shiteah in the
center of the Debir ? Because it is a big rock that must be very important having a building
centered on it which would allow for ambulation around it similar to the ambulation around the
Kaaba in Mecca. This rock is also the summit of high ground. The Talmud and other writings
gives the impression that the summit was the site of the Debir (I am showing that a part of the
temple was on the summit, which need not be the western part.) because the Even Shiteah in the
Debir is described as being higher than the floor level.
If Jews had the knowledge that descendants of the temple priesthood could walk on the big
rock and stay within the buildings north, east, and south sides without standing on the area
which was originally the Debir, but this knowledge today is lost, than it must be because it
would be easy to forget that the actual Even Shiteah was not a big rock at the summit, but a tiny
rock big enough to hold a childs tricycle and not an adults bike, and of a size you could trip
over if you stubbed your toe on it.
(See Fig. 9) The inner platforms N.E. corner, Z occupies a very special spot: it is on the E-W
running line marking the northern edge of the 500 Cubit square exactly 3x from the N.E. corner
at A (187.5C the Jewish courts E-W length). (This also marks a corner of one triangle in Fig. 4)
A right angle taken from Z reaches point G, and if we measure along the eastern edge of the
platform, from Z, we would reach K at the top of the Muslim staircase in front of the Dome of
the Rock putting K on the buildings midline axis. From Figs. 6, 6a you can see this location is
between the two square western 40C courtyards. Other Muslim features are at critical Jewish
locations such as the distance G to W, the top of the southern staircase going up to the building,
is 3x or 187.5C, the same distance G to J.
Note the mirrored image of triangle ABC labeled ABC having a point in mirror image to
point I, labeled I on the center axis line between the two 40C eastern courts. There may have
been something here, such as an underground room for storage, or a lower court in the Court of
the Women. Also note in Figs. 6, 6a how parallel lines of these two triangles touch two corners of
the two eastern courts. This shows the courts position matched these triangle locations.
A paving (or wall) seen in a recently dug trench east of the inner platform is exactly in the area
between the two southern 40C courts. This could be part of the paving of the Court of the
Women. The paving is exactly at the 3X point on the ABC triangle.
Also note the present Muslim staircase is in the center of the Court of the Women at point K.
(See Fig. 10) We have seen the 8:5 triangle which can be divided 2x,3x, 3x. Alternately it can be
divided 3x, 2x, 3x. In the later, a pentacle is formed whose points are 3x (187C), the length of the
17

Inner Courtyard, and an outer pentagon whose sides are 5x (312C), the base of the isosceles
triangle and an inner pentagon whose sides are 2x (125C), the distance from B to I. Thus we
have an octagon in the Dome of the Rock, and hidden pentacles and pentagons ( of which the
five pointed star was a common motif in Herod`s temple) in the hidden ratio of 8:5 a ratio by
which the Jewish temple was first laid out. The point 5x from C falls on the altar. The point 6x is
I where the axis line crosses the triangle.
The 8:8:5 triangle was sacred to the goddess Venus and was sacred in the Babylonian religion
(Vance Tiede told me this.)
The midpoint of the southern wall passes through the Mikvah building to the east of the Double
Gate Another example of a midpoint of an edge is given below32.
(See Fig. 11) The eastern edge of the inner platform is at a peculiar angle. Why was this wall
constructed at this angle? (See my book, Sacred Stones Sacred Stories vol. 2 for another
explanation not given here. ) Remember th
e Azarah measured 187C (which is 0.5C less then 3x). The northeast corner of the platform is
exactly on the 3x location Z measured from point A, along the northern edge of the 500C square.
The builders found location 6x along this edge, which is 6x-3x or 187.5C from point 6x, and
measured exactly 187.0C on an even longer measuring cord. The excess cord making a right
angle to the 3x location Z would be on a diagonal line. This diagonal is exactly the line and
location of the eastern inner platform.
By extending this line southward to where it meets the Cheil, we get the entire eastern edge of
the inner platform. (This is also the same distance 5x, measured along the northern edge of the
platform.)
Identical lines of 135C, 135.5C, 187C, and 187.5C can also be laid out as right angles on this
edge measuring to the Temples Axis.
Point T would have been a spot close to where the High Priest stood in front of the Even
Shiteah on the central axis line when he entered the room on the Day of Atonement to purify the
Ark etc33.
The angle of this wall is 95 from true north. This is a major moon rise standstill position at
Passover.
I believe the above system was used to lay out a possibly very low and short wall segment as a
temple feature not described in the ancient writing. It would have appeared as a diagonal wall
whose top was the level of the Court of the Priests. A large center section was open and
encompassed the Court of the Women. Two very ancient cisterns north and south of this court (in
Figs. 6, 6a they were two cisterns north of the Court of the Lepers) could have been behind this
wall.
These two dated ancient cisterns offer a very strong evidence for the existence of this wall
being a temple feature: they have bedrock ceilings, whose height is very close to the present
surface of the platform. This implies the current height of the ceiling is still possessing the
original height when the cistern was dug. (If the height was extended upward, I would expect the
ceiling would have been destroyed and a new ceiling made of masonry and bricks added.) If the
height of these ceilings is close to the height of the platform, then the level of the ground over
these cisterns must be close to the level of the ground when the cisterns were dug in temple
times. A wall east of these cisterns would then be reasonable. Since the height of the ground here
matches the height of the ground within the Court of the Priests, it also is reasonable to assume
this area of the platform was leveled when the Court of the Priests existed in the temple.
When the temple was destroyed, the wall remained and someone either Romans, or Muslims
destroyed the Court of the Women and had this center section filled in. Muslims have kept this
32
33
18

A discussion of the rocks size and shape is in appendix note 6


See note 15 for more detailed discussion.

wall and the angle of this wall preserved and clearly visible to this day. A few original Herodian
stones still exist possibly in situ in the northeast part of the wall within the area shown in Fig. 11.
This can be archaeological evidence for the existence of a Herodian wall here. The fact the walls
angle and location can be arrived at from points 3x, and 6x (also 6x was the important distance
for locating point I) infers the system of dividing 500C into 8 parts as detailed in this text,
strengthens the argument for this being the system used to lay out the temple as shown in Figs. 6,
6a. It also infers this wall was a very ancient feature predating the Muslim era. These are very
strong evidences to support my theories.
The existence of a Herodian wall here, explains why this very oddly angled wall remains a
feature today34. It had mathematical and geometrical properties that some builder put into stone.
Mathematical and geometrical properties of the highest importance for the temple it made use
of the length of width of the Azarah and measured to the innermost sacred areas of the temple
the center of the Azarah, and the Debir.
Remember the cistern whose western end was just under the line of this wall mentioned
previously? This cistern fit exactly within the space between the two northern 40C little square
courtyards. It western end is very close to where we would expect the cistern to terminate if it
were designed to go no farther than any wall located above. The small error of this cistern
tunneling under the present inner platform eastern wall may be do to tunneling error, since the
workmen had to dig and measure the cistern without modern equipment. Most likely they used a
piece of string of proper length laid out underground as they dug westward. The height of the
ceiling in this cistern is lower than the previous two cisterns to the west. In profile, this again
confirms the level of the ground over this cistern would have been lower than the level of the
ground to the west of the wall. This cistern may be another piece of evidence for the existence of
a temple feature wall at this spot and of this ground being at a lower elevation east of this wall.
The existence of such a wall is not in any description of the temple, but can be envisioned as a
wall at the northern and southern portions with an open space in between. The two western
courts of oil and Lepers would then be set against the rock face on two sides and each court
would have had two openings.
Near the southeastern corner of the inner platform, bedrock or ancient stones can be seen.
These would have been remnants of the Cheil (see Figs. 6, 6a). The wall terminates at its
southern end at the ancient temple Cheil which must have existed in ruined form, at the time
Muslims repaired and defined the southern end of this diagonal wall.
The surface of the inner platform appears to be the Court of the Priests level. A number of stairs
no longer exist. The ground was leveled with only the rock protruding above the ground. The
altar had to be in contact with the bedrock of the Earth. Any representation of the altar not
touching bedrock must be in error.
Also, the Court of Israel could not be made of hewn paving stones (see Leviticus 26:1) since
the assembled congregation could not prostrate themselves on a hewn stone paving. The bedrock
under the Court of the Priests would have been just high enough to be the foundation of the Altar
but the bedrock under the Court of Israel would have been just low enough to not have exposed
bedrock. This court would then have been built up with a flooring of sand or bedrock. There is
no mention of this written in the Talmud, but my temple location and the bedrock level at the
Court of the Priests and Court of Israel would just allow the flooring of the Court of Israel to be
either sand or bedrock. The current level of the bedrock under the altar and under the Court of
Israel are at the right levels.
I found that if one was to measure from the Chamber of Hewn Stones (a chamber near the
altar) the place called Aceldama (Field of Blood) at the eastern end of the Valley of Hinnom
through which the border between Benjamin and Judah passed was located was just beyond the
34

See Note 26 concerning this wall.

19

2000C distance. Any tombs located nearby would be beyond 2000C from this chamber. The
possible tomb complex of the High Priestly family Annas and a nearby lepers tomb does exist in
this vicinity which would mean these tombs were located at a spot that was just outside the camp
distance of 2000C, using the same cubit measurement used in designing the 500C square, having
somewhere within the Chamber of Hewn Stones as the center point.
Another fact is that my placement of the temple, the eastern wall of the Dome of the Rock is
located where the space between the altar and the Ulam existed. This space had a fourth row of
paving stones next to the altar. On this stone sacrificial blood was stirred by a priest on the Day
of Atonement. Hence the wall would be over where this paving stone would have been.
I find it very ironic that I can make these statements about two researchers on the temple
location, Drs. Leen Ritmeyer and David M. Jacobson: The locations of the Holy of Holies and
altar proposed by Jacobson are very close to mine shown in Figs. 6, 6a, but I am showing them
by using the 500C square proposed by Ritmeyer35! And my methodology for placing the temple
close to (but by no means exactly) at the same location as Dr. Jacobson positively does not use
any of his arguments in my placement.
Dr. Leen Ritmayer has discovered a depression on the surface of the rock and flat areas
matching the size and location of the Debir with a depression matching the Ark of the Covenant
and a foundation trench the size of Solomons Temple.
This article shows that the rock was east of the Debir. I can show these marks could have been
made by using string stretched over the rock attached to the 4 piers of the building. It is possible
to date these cuttings.
They are:
1. The creation of Ritmeyers Ark depression and flat areas being features cut in the middle ages
using strings stretched from the piers around the Rock most likely the work of Knights Templars.
The description of the temple location written in the sixteenth century by Tosafot Yom Tov
matches the temple location using the post Muslim building stretched strings.
2. The use of measuring cords in laying out Hezekiahs Tunnel. This use of cords laid on the
surface of the ground can explain the serpentine path from two ends meeting at a single location.
3. The use of measuring cords in laying out The Herodian. The location of the kings tomb is
precisely at the spot dictated by this system of laying out these cords and was not a random
choice.
4. Use of measuring cords in the construction of St. Peters tomb, and Constantines Basilica at
the Vatican. )
I will now come to one of the most important of discussions of this paper. From Figs. 6, 6a it is
apparent the rock under the Dome of the Rock as well as the actual building was under the Ulam,
the eastern part of the Heickal, a small portion of the adjacent southern side rooms and a larger
portion of the adjacent northern side rooms.
(See Fig. 12) This the exact placing of my deduced location of the Ulam, and Heickal of
Solomons Temple overlaid then traced over an accurate drawing of the rock. Fig. 13 is the exact
placing of my deduced location of the Ulam, and Heickal of Herods Temple overlaid then traced
in a similar fashion. Note the hole in the rock is within the Ulam of Solomons Temple, but
within the engulfing wider Herods threshold,. Notice that the eastern lowest edge of the rock
was about at the outer edge of the Ulam in Solomons Temple. Likewise, the southern edge of the
rock is at Solomons Ulam and Heickal.
Notice points I and L discussed at the beginning of this paper. Now notice point J the center of
the rock, the dome and the center of the octagonal building. The highest point of the rocks
surface is westward nearby. Here, a trapezoidal depression is cut into the surface of the rock.
Here the dome was first laid out in a circle around a point in this depression. The depression is
35
20

See note 16 for more details.

larger than would be needed to find the center of the rock.


In the days of the Tent of Meeting, a test of bitter water was performed which required a priest
to obtain dust or dirt from the floor of the tent and offer it to a women pleading not guilty to
adultery ( Sotah test). In the days of the temple after using the tent, the dust/dirt was obtained by
a priest who opened a 1C square stone from the floor, who then could take this dust/dirt from off
the bedrock located nearby and to the right of the doorway within the Heickal (the Holy main
room of the temple). Once the priest entered the room he turned to the right to get the dirt nearby.
I have marked the area immediately to the right of the doorways in both Solomons and Herods
temple in both figures 12 and 13 as hatched areas. Nearby is a shallow depression at the center of
the rock and point J. A consequence of this being the center of the rock is that the rock is shifted
to the north hence more of the side rooms on the north (or right side of the buildings) are
underlain by the rock. This area is about 6-7 Cubits north of the temples main axis line. If the
doorway was 10C, then the center line would be 5C from each doorpost. The area in question
was a cubit or two northward past the doorpost, hence about 6-7 cubits north of the axis line.
This is exactly were J can be seen even today in the trapezoidal depression.
Note that here the bedrock is very high and not flat (the entire rock is sloping from west to east
and is not flat) being near the actual summit of the rock. I propose this is major evidence that the
1C square floor stone was located within same portion of the hatched area drawn in Figs. 12, 13,
and that the rock and octagonal building currently are centered on the Sotah location. The
Yachin Column was in line with the Sotah location (See Fig. 12).
The highest part of the natural hill was the site where stood the eastern part of the Heickial the
House of the Lord. The rock was shaped so that when the Romans built their temple on the site
of the Jewish temple, the Sotah stone location of the rock (or the area just to the east) became the
center of the rock. This would have been one of two conspicuous locations on the rocks surface.
Possibly a statue of either an emperor was erected here and another statue of another emperor
was erected on the Even Shiteah farther to the west.
The rock was never mentioned in the ancient writings because the rock had no importance other
than being the bedrock under the temple. The Romans may have taken the old Sotah bedrock and
may have shaped the surrounding bedrock into a more circular design. Figs. 18, 19 show my
concept of what may have happened. They may have taken the Sotah bedrock and drew a circle,
the radius of the distance from here (point J), to the original opening into the cave by a hollow
wall. (At one time a slanting column existed from the rock to a nearby point. This was done
because of the legend that the rock needed to be anchored down to prevent it from following
Mohammad upward into heaven. This spot was near the site of the Boaz Column36 and may be
preserving a distant memory of this feature of Solomons Temple.) This line passes over the hole
in the rock which would have been under the Ulam of Solomons Temple and under the threshold
of Herods.
They then flattened the entire area outside the circle which created the raised hilltop we see
today. They would have then placed a Roman temple over this rock. They may have had some
notion the rock was sacred ground like the core of Kufus Pyramid in Egypt being primeval
ground. A statue of a god or the emperor may have been placed at this center point. (They
seemed to have found the Sotah spot more important then the actual site of the Debir. )
The emperor Constantine removed this Roman temple and found the exposed rock. When
Constantine built the Anastasias rotunda within the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, he used the
same radius as the rock in the destroyed Roman temple. This emperor destroyed two temples:
one on the temple mount (possibly to Jupiter), and the other (temple of Venus) on the site of the
Anastasias rotunda of the Church with both structures having the same radii.
The Muslims cleared the rock on the temple site, and found it the same size as the rotunda to
36

See appendix 2 for very important evidence of temples location.

21

the west. They constructed the present octagonal structure over the rock of a suitable size. This
explains why the radii are so similar without having Muslims cutting the holy rock to make it
fit the same size as the Christian buildings rotunda. This also explains the perfect fit not being a
remarkable coincidence.
Fig. 14 shows my concept of the vertical section of the temple running thorough the Sotah
stone at the time of Solomons Temple. Fig. 15 shows the same section at the time of Herods.
Fig. 16 shows my concept of the vertical section of the temple running along the temples center
axis line at the time of Solomons Temple, while Fig. 17 shows the same at the time of Herods
Temple. (Fig. 17b is the same as Fig.17 but showing bedrock over a larger area.)
I believe an artificial foundation was constructed west of the rock underlying the bulk of the
Heickal and the Debir containing honeycombed with open spaces to prevent contamination with
any possible underlying tombs. This foundation was higher in Solomons temple then in Herods.
In Herods, the floor of the Heickal and Debir were level. The natural bedrock under the Debir
began the slope downward. This artificial foundations height in Herods temple, which was part
of the entire temple foundation, allowed the Debir to be raised to the correct level (2439' 8"),
6C high just below the highest level of the rock (2440'), and still higher in Solomons. These
foundations were overlain with boards and gold under the Heickal section and bare under the
Debir.
There is an implication the Debir was raised above the floor of the Heickal, but this appears to
not be the case. The reasons for this implication is that a 6C rise must be accounted for with no
description of any stairs or a ramp up to Solomons Temple, and the height of the ceiling of the
Debir is less then the height of the ceiling in the Heickal. But the 6C rise is on the rock surface.
I believe the front of the temple was constructed on the slight incline of the rock surface. The
columns and walls had to be fitted on the slight slopping ground which was not impossible for
ancient constructions. The ceiling height simply may have been different in the two sections.
Some time after Solomon, a reconstruction built another artificial foundation containing open
vaulted spaces to the east, covering most of the rock under the Heickal and the Ulam. This buried
most of the rock with only the highest western surface uncovered. The floor level in the hatched
area of Figs. 12, 13 was just below the paving level of the Heickal, hence a floor stone 1C square
was designed which could be lifted by an attached iron ring.
Now a flight of stairs was needed to the east of the Ulam to raise up 6C. This eliminated the
sloping rock floor under the Ulam and Heickal and leveled them.
When Solomons Temple existed, the bedrock under the Heickal had to be close to the surface
to obtain Sotah dirt. Having a priest go down a ladder or rope would have not been an acceptable
substitute for the tent ritual. The stone with an iron ring had to be several cubits wide to allow a
well feed adult priest to go down a hole. But a 1C square stone would be too small for a priest to
squeeze down through (a small boy could do it as with the 1C Shis Drain but this was an adult).
The reason the stone was 1C square and not several cubits square was the fact the stone had to be
light and small enough to be lifted by a single priest. All indications are that the stone when
lifted, allowed the priest to touch with his hands the surface of the bedrock. The stone had a
single ring, for one priest to lift. If the stone needed more than one priest to lift, then the stone
would have had more than one ring attached which is not stated in the Talmud.
Major objections to the theory the rock was the site of the Debir, was:
1. The base of the altar could not rest on bedrock because the bedrock was far below
2. To obtain Sotah dirt, the priest would have needed to go down a ladder through a very small
opening. Only if the bedrock was under the Heickal would these objections be overcome. (A
golden tablet was placed on the outside wall of the temples Ulam with the torah injunction of
the Sotah ritual.)
The foundation of the temple was 6 Cubits thick, but it appears to have been very thin at the
high bedrock Sotah location currently under the Dome of the Rock. No reconstruction of the
22

temple has ever considered this rock to be under the threshold and eastern part of the Heickal
room. If Josephus wrote the temple was built on the highest part of the mount, he would be
describing this location since the eastern part of the Heickal (the eastern part of the Holy Place)
was the temple building.
Fig. 16b- 17b shows the vertical cut along the axis lines through Solomons and Herods
temples. Note the hole on the axis with its removed plug of rock, the rock taken from the exact
center of the Azarah, was removed and placed in the center of Debir to the west. The rock would
have been a number a feet thick. The entire rock or a portion thereof would have been inserted in
the floor of the Debir, so that the level of the highest part of the bedrock (2440') was at the same
level as the inset rock. This level may have been 3 finger breadths higher then the level of the
floor. It also was possible there was no 3 finger breadth difference in the floor level: the stone
was set in the floor to rise 3 finger breaths above the floor level. It was to set a place for the ark,
but set low to the ground so that the ark was close to the ground as it was in the days when the
tabernacle existed.
This design had two areas at the 2440' level: a step across the Heickal floor and a round stone
in the center of the Debir. The actual Even Shiteah was moved into the Debir, but this line could
have been a source of confusion as it was at the natural scarp of bedrock (the natural bedrock
under the Debir also would have been a down sloping scarp).
The round stone would have been like a footstool or the base under a throne. It would have been
the designated spot to set The Ark. A firepan could have been placed upon it when The Ark was
missing.
The shape of the stone taken from its round hole in the bedrock to the east was the shape of a
well. This well had associations with the primeval flood waters as stated previously. The word
Sheteah could mean drink an association with water and wells. Thus Even Shiteah could
mean drinking stone.
In Solomons Temple the height of the Heickals ceiling was 10C higher then the Debirs
ceiling. If the flooring of both spaces were level, then the wall above the Debir was 10C, with a
folding removable wooden partition between them occupying the lower third of the wall. A 1C
wide space marked the division between the two spaces. In Herods temple this was the space
between two curtains (Parochet).
The Heronian triangle of 13:12:5 is interesting. Fig. 20 shows that the hypotenuse of this
triangle passes exactly over the northwest corner of the Azarah (point w). The other very
interesting point is that two 8x:8x:5x triangles intersects the hypotenuse of th13:12:5 triangle
exactly on the other diagonal of the 500 Cubit square (point d ). These four lines intersect exactly
of the northern wall of the 40 Cubit Court of Oil which was the southwestern of the 40 cubit
courtyards within the Court of the Women. This four line intersection ( two lines from two
8x:8x:5x triangles, the diagonal line connecting two 40C courts, and the hypotenuse of the
13x:12x:5x triangle) appears to be most significant as the probability this is purely coincidental
is very slight. Also notice point (bbb). Here three lines intersect-- the two sides of two 8x:8x:5x
triangles, and the diagonal line connecting two 40C courts.
Another right triangle whose sides are 5:5 (5x:5x) works similarly as the previous one. This
triangle overlaps the previous two 5x locations seen in Figs. 6a, 21). This equilateral triangle is
important in the formation of a square. The hypotenuse of this triangle (which is a little over 7x
long) intersects just to the right of the previously described point bb (see Fig. 21) on the western
wall of Court of Wormy Wood. Here also is another instance of the same diagonal line of the 500
cubit square (the line passing over the northern wall of the Court of Oil) all meeting at a single
point on a wall of two tiny 40 Cubit courts-- one in the southwest and the other in the northeast.
Here again the intersections of several lines at this point on a similar wall appears to be most
significant as the probability this is purely coincidental is very slight.
Fig. 22 shows a similar intersection of triangles. Note how two 5:8:8 triangles and one
23

diagonal intersects at point labeled 1. This point falls within the area of the great layered altar of
the Azarah. Point labeled 2 is on one of the diagonal lines of the 500 Cubit square. This is where
the small 1 Cubit square at the border of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah was located (see figs.
6, 6a, and Fig. note5) Point 3 was near the other side of the square, at the old 28 Cubit SE corner
of the altar. Point labeled I within the Court of the Women is the mirror image of point I (of
Figs. 6, 6a) at the 6x location of the triangle A, B, C. Point Q is the same point in Fig. 6. Point
4 is on a cistern very likely associated with the Court of the Lepers in the Court of the Women.
This point is at the intersection of the triangle A, B C and the half way line of the 500 Cubit
which is 4x or 250 Cubits running from north to south and also labeled M to V where V is the
center of the great square. This line passes through point labeled R which would be the location
of Necanors Gate at the eastern edge of the Azarah.
Where could the idea for laying out sacred space by using a triangle come from? It is possible
the idea come from ancient Egypt. What has the shapes of equilateral triangles within a square?
The Pyramids. Another similarity is the square points to the four compass points, just as the
square base lines of the large pyramids point to the four compass points. The differences are that
the temple triangles are not the same angle as any pyramids (see. Note 23 for details concerning
angle of this triangle. ), and these triangles are not centered on the square. The age of the
pyramids are far older then the age of the square, but at the time the square was being laid out,
pyramids would have been in existence.
A number of other theories exist which all attempt to located the site of the Jewish temples.
All theories have shortcomings but a number of alternate locations cannot explain how the altar
would have been in contact with the bedrock if bedrock was not high ground at the altars
location, nor how the Sotah bedrock could also have not been at a high ground location. My
theory has one fact no other theory can explain: where did the various dimensions of the temple
come from? Where did the 135 Cubit square of the Court of the Women to the east and the 135
Cubit (north to south) dimension and the 187 Cubit dimension (east to west) of the Azarah to the
west come from? Why was the altar 32C square after adding 4C on the western and southern
sides, and not 34 Cubits or 30 Cubits square? What determined the location of the Soreg? Why
was the Court of Israel 11 Cubits wide etc.? This article does explain these and a host of other
major dimensions which no other theory can.
Why There Are Two Locations For The Ark Of The Covenant
Fig. 1N shows the placement of the temple (shown in red), according to my survey system, over
the rock (shown in green) and the Muslim building (shown in black) surrounding it. three
features stand out: the rock occupies the ground under the eastern part of the Heickall, the wall
and offices just to the north of this great room, and the center of the debir was once on the site of
the current western door of the Dome of the Rock. The outer ring of this building is where the
veil of the temple once was located. Other features are listed in the accompanying description.

24

Fig. 1N

1. Hole in rock.
2. temple axis line
3. True site of center Debir (Holy of Holies) on western door of building
4. Site of Veil
5. Small western porch of building on site of western end of Debir (Holy of Holies).
9. Rain water storage in temple
11. Eastern Door of Muslim building
25

12. Extension of walls


18. Northern edge of rock
21. Western edge of rock.on site of Heickal and northern rooms.
23. Site of N.E. room in temple by two passage ways into Heickal and Ulam.
24. blocked portion of cave running under pier of building. Part of water system going to laver.
25. Southern edge of rock at southern edge of Heickal near one passage way into S.E. room.
26. S.W. corner of rock on site of southern part of Heickal.
27. High point on rock with a depression. Center of building. Site of Sotah dust and 1 Cubit
square stone in floor connected to an iron ring.
28. Point where temple axis line crosses western face of rock. Here the scarped face of the rock
bows outward.
29. Depression in rock on site of half the northern Heickal wall. .
Fig. 2N
.

1. Hole in rock
3. Center of Debir (Holy of Holies) on current site of door into Muslim building.
5. Western end of octagonal building circle on location of western end of Holy of Holies.
26

14. Construction of octagonal building matches point of wall of Heickal at the southern corner of
the veil.
15. Construction of octagonal building matches point on location in Ulam by open doorway.
27. Center of octagonal building on site of Sotah dust under 1 Cubit Square stone in floor with
iron ring attached.
80. Construction of octagonal building matches point in an office near northern corner of the
veil.
Fig. 2N above shows the relationship of the octagonal buildings creation (shown in green)
overlaying the temple (shown in red).Notice many points in green fall on important points in red.
A few are numbered such as 14 and 50 are close to the temples veil. Point 5 is at the back wall
of the Debir. The nearby temple wall just to the west, was the last wall standing. If so, then the
octagonal building fits neatly into the space just to the east of this wall.
Fig. 3N shows an important and difficult mystery to understand. The placement of the Debir is
shown in orange. To the east, another similar size square is centered around a depression in the
rock discussed else were (the Ritmeyer Debir location) shown in green. The green square is
drawn on the rock under the center of the building. There are three possibilities of what is
happening:
This paper gives all my arguments why the orange square is the correct location of the temple
rather than the green square. (The major points being that the altar had to be on bedrock which
would be the case if the temple Debir was at the orange location, and that the cistern shown in
Fig. 5N marked the N.W. corner of the Cheil which would be true only if the Debir was at the
orange location.)
The Ark was brought to Jerusalem and King David put the Ark in the place he prepared for it in
the center of a tent he also prepared. ( 2 Sam.6:16-17; 2 chron.1:4 ) This tent was not the old tent
of meeting but a new specially constructed tent with the Ark placed in the exact center. This tent
must have been double the size of the old tabernacle size of 10 Cubitsi.e. 20 Cubits square
which was also the length of the tent of meeting. It was also the size of the Debir in the temple.
The green square is exactly 20 Cubits square with the depression in its center matching the size
of the ark at point 28. When Solomon built the temple using any part of the survey system
discussed in this paper, the location of the Debir would have been a short distance westward
within the area of the orange square. The green square would not have allowed the altars
foundation to contact bedrock as the bedrock would have been slightly below court level. Only at
the farther westward orange square location could the altars foundation just contact bedrock.so
that the feet of barefoot priests would be in contact with the earth Priests could not even walk on
a perceived barrier of salt.) Also, the eastern part of the Heickal had to be close to the floor level
for the ritual of Sotah which could happen at the orange square, but not at the green square
location.
The depression in the center of the green square was the original place prepared by King David
for the ark (see Fig. 3N and the detail Fig. 3Ngreen).
The floor of the Heickal appears to have been divided into two sections: the western 20 x 20
Cubit section and the eastern 20 x 20 Cubit section. The rock was the bedrock floor of the eastern
half ( I cannot determine if this section had any covering) while the western half must have been
a wooden floor covered in gold. Examining both figures, note that a 6 Cubit wall shown in green
on the north side can be extended on the western and southern sides of the square where both the
northern and western sides do not exist but they do define the northern and western sides of the
rock. Only the southern side of the square remain and show what appears to be flat areas on the
27

rock surface. The rock must have been carved, for some reason such as honoring Davids place
prepared for the ark with temple dimensions.
Solomon prepared a different place for the ark ( 1kings 8:20-21) This would be at the center of
the Debir on the raised 3 Finger breath high stone shown in the center of the orange square.
There is a relationship between the green and orange squares by virtue of the northern
green wall having spacing and orientation duplicated in the orange northern wall of the Debir,
and by half the depression running under other wall.
Fig. 3N

1. Hole in rock..
3. Site of Debir (Holy of Holies) marked by western door of octagonal building.
5. Location of western wall of Debir (Holy of Holies).
6. Location of northern wall of Debir (Holy of Holies).
7. Location of stair way within temple.
8. Location of southern wall of Debir (Holy of Holies).
28

11. Eastern door of octagonal building.


13. Location of wall of temple in line with green square.
14. Northern wall of green square.
15. Same point as 15 in next figure at corner of green square.
16. Western wall of green square.
17. Same as point 17 in next figure .on green square.
18. Point on wall of Ulam by a passage..
19. Location of wall by doorway into Heickal.
20. Location of southern wall of green square.
21. Sloping surface of rock at south eastern corner of Heickall.
22 Location of flat area by hole in rock within green square.
27. Sotah location at summit of rock.
29. Depression in center of green square.
65. Jacobs Pillow
Note that each side of the rock occupies specific parts of the temple:
West sidethe eastern half of the Heickal.
Northsidea wall on the north side of building between offices and staircase
Southsidea wall on south side of building between offices and cistern
Eastside-- western end of Ulam and inner faade of building
The distance from the Sotah point (27) to the center of the Debir (3)
is exactly three parts (1/3, +1/3,+1/3) an important number.
Fig. 3Ngreen

Fig. 3Ngreen shows seven major discoveries. ( 1. distance from veil to rock is 20 C or half the
length of the Holy Place. 2. Holy place divided into two equal parts. 3. Western edge of rock
29

marks eastern half. 4. Thickness of office/stairs wall (6 Cubits) is duplicated on floor of rock
within eastern half. 5. Western edge of rock and northern edge of rock are the western and
northern edges of the rock. 6. Floor may be different in western half then in eastern half. 7.
Depression was half in Holy Place and half under northern wall. ) It shows a simplified detail of
Fig. 3N.
Fig. 4N is a close up drawing of the rock shown in Fig. 3N.
A number of features on the rock face still hold evidence of the temple. The western face of the
rock is a scarp with a lip which may have once held timbers covered in gold plate. Point 23 may
have originally been the basement of a room to the north of the Heickal. Point 29 shows the
rectangular depression half way under the northern wall, and half way within the Heickal room.
This lends credence to the idea that the depressions location was not randomly located within
the temple building. The northern edge of the rock also lines up with the long gone rooms of the
temple. Likewise, the figure shows the southern edge of the rock also lines up with the long gone
Heickal room and southern wall.
A number of important connections with water and ladders may be seen at the southern side of
the drawing.
Two very important considerations can be seen in the southern part of this picture. In the vicinity
of location 21 within the current cave a slanted pillar once existed. In the temple, at the roof of
the S. E. corner of the Heickal a ladder once ran from the roof into the upper room. It is
possible a long lost memory of a ladder once being at this location centuries earlier, was the
germinal idea for the installation of a slanted pillar by Muslims or Christians here.
Most important is that this area has a number of associations with water. Here is a well like
opening into a cave. The cave has a section which narrows out. We have biblical stories of a
stream starting at the Debir, growing wider, than exiting from the threshold on the south side of
the east front foundation (the altar was on the south side of the central axis. The water ran near
the altarhence this river must have been running from under the south side of the foundations
eastern front.)
The name Even Shiteah can also mean drinking stone which is a reference to water.
The Garden of Eden also has allusions to water with the primeval waters being under this cave
as discussed elsewhere in this paper. Note that the cave would have been close to the s.e corner
of the Heickal and the Ulam from where the water would have issued forth. Again, memory of
this location having associations with water could be the cause of these traditions up to the
present time.
Here also could have been found a cistern within the building by which rain water fed the
Laver. Notice have the presumed location of this cistern matches the resumed location of the
Laver, and also how the narrowing of the cave would have emptied into this laver. Even Ezekiel
may have a reference to this pipe, or at least the direction of the laver as stated in Ezekial 47:1-2
(water issues from under threshold and runs on south side of altar. Description of right side of
building only works is viewed from inside the building while looking out toward the east, but
there may also be an aversion to using the word left here.) Also, the cistern seen in Fig. D7
holds a very significant piece of evidence: The well head of this cisterna presumed well of
the Golah chamber, and the presumed location of the Laver with this cave are all in a
direct line.
Thus, the area of the rock near the opening into the cave and the hole in the rock have many
associations with water, and with slanting ladders. The area had a slanting ladder on the roof of
the south eastern corner of the Heickal, It was near the pillar called Boaz in the Ulam, by the
doorway into the temple. It also was near a cistern which collected rainwater which could have
filled the Laver outside the southern side of the Ulam and the altar.

30

Fig. 4N

1. Northern point on hole in rock by threshold of temple building marking the center of the
Azarah.
15. Slight curve in rock within N.W. office by wall.
17. Where an office crossed the rock.
18. Same wall by another office room.
19. Missing portion of door jam by Ulam.
21. Entrance into cave at southeast corner of Heickal.
23. Late flat area was bedrock under north east office on north side leading to the winding stairs
up going up to the roof.
24. A pier holding up the dome of the octagonal building, which was part of cave leading to
laver.
25. Southern edge of rock in line with a temple wall.
27. Sotah dust location at summit of rock. Current dome centered here.
28. Where center axis line of temple crosses western edge of rock.
29. Depression on rock surface, half inside Heickal and half under wall making the northern edge
of the Heickal room.
51. Where temple center line exists rock in eastern part of Heickal.
52 Where temple center axis line exited the low eastern rock face at the western end of the
31

Ulam.
53. south down sloping surface between 25 and 28.
65. Remains of a rock which was under a northern office on rock on which a Christian structure
called the Chapel of Jacobs Dream was constructed in the middle ages.
70. Flat area from point (70) to point (71). Distance from red line to red line was 6 Cubits.
71. A flat area running from point (71) to point (70).
The reason the rock under the dome of the building was not named is simply because it was the
high bedrock upon which the eastern half of the Heickal and accompanying eastern features of
the temple building was built upon. It was never considered to be the Even Shiteah, although the
actual Even Shiteah was removed from part of this mass making the visible hole in the rock.
(This hole in rock also was associated with an angel holding a revolving flaming sword guarding
the entrance into the Garden of Eden which is discussed in my book Sacred Stones Sacred
Stories vol. 1.)
When the temple was destroyed, the Romans kept the high ground core and built a temple to
Jupiter over it just as they kept the cracked rock intact where they built the temple of Venus to
the west.
When they finished leveling the western end of the temple, they erected a statue to the emperor
over the site of the Diber.
The sotah depression in the Heickal must have been at a prominent spot in this temple for
when the pagan temple was removed, this bedrock was never leveled by Christians so that
Muslims could then build the Dome of the Rock centered upon it.
The Jerusalem Talmud (see foundation stone Wiki article.) states that the temple and
foundation stone were destroyed, but how can this be? If the rock we see today was the
foundation stone, it was never destroyed, but if the Diber and its stone set in its floor was the
foundation stone, then this Talmudic statement would be a true witness statement of the time.
This is a major piece of evidence to support my theses.
Roman temples should face west so that worshiper would be facing the rising sun [(Vitruvius,
iv,v.1) Vance Tiede paper]. This would have been opposite the Jerusalem temples orientation. If
a temple to Jupiter would have been constructed according to this principle, the rock could have
been under its crepidoma with the Hadrian statue to the west on the leveled site of the Diber and
the altar built nearby below the old Cheil steps. The Roman temple would have been turned
around and set on the eastern side of the destroyed temple allowing for the western side to have a
Roman Stature and the Roman altar. (There may have been more Roman statures east of the
Roman temple seen by the Bordeaux pilgrim.)
1. Southeast pier on inner ring under dome which involves the orientation and the location of
building.
2. Southeast corner of Heickal holy place room.
3. Southeast mehrab private prayer place facing Mecca.
4 Southeast corner of cave by mehrab and tongue of rock.
5. Zacharias priest connected with word mihrabquran 19:11, 3:37, 3:39 all refers to a praying
place or private room/ corner of room Se entrance into cave (at the tongue).
6. Southeast stairs into cave (next to the tongue)
7. Southeast where footprints are on top of rock by tongue.
8. Southeast corner of cave with a collapsed floor of Heickal holy place along southern wall
length.
9. Southeast corner of cave may be sacred to Methrus (Methreum?)
10. Southeast corner of room having two passageways (one to Ulam and the other into holy
place).
11. Southeast corner of room having slopping ladder to roof.
32

12. Southeast corner of room having opening on roof.


13. Near Southeast corner of Heickal room within the Ulam was a pillar called Boaz.
14. Near Southeast corner of Heickal holy place room within Ulam was a golden table for
putting old showbread upon it every week.
15. By the Southeast corner of Heickal, by the Southeast corner of the rock at the tongue
opening and where footprints were once seen on the rock the Southeastern pier of the dome of
the building is located. This building still holds the dimensions of the Jewish temple because the
octagonal buildings size is dependent upon the size of the rock which was cut to be under the
Temple of Jupiter which was set over the Jewish temple. This would explain why the size of the
building puts the center of the Debir at the location of the outer octagon (the western outside
wall)
16. The tall column at the southwestern corner of the rock is exactly located at a point on the
southern wall once existed. A number of other locations between the Jewish temple and the
Muslim building can be seen in Fig. 6N such as the northern edge of the clean knife room was on
the northern edge of the octagonal building, the southern corner of the veil was near an existing
pillar of the Muslim building, and the dirty knife room ran where the southern edge of the
Muslim building exists today,
I believe the size of the Anastasias dome within the Church of the Holy Sepulcher was chosen
to be the same diameter as could fit over this rock, Thus, the Moslem Building, even though it
postdates the Byzantine church, the coincidence of similar diameters puts the rock diameter
being the model for the Byzantine church dome.
17. The southern side of the rock slopes downward. This would have been under the floor of the
southern side of the Heickal. This line would have been in line with the southern doorpost of the
temple and could have been in line with the menorah farther to the west off western edge the
rock. [This would be the southern edge of the green line in Figs. 3N,4N. A 6 Cubits width in the
green band is here, which was a measure of 6 Cubits hidden under the floor (see. Fig. 4N red
lines (70), (71) Nearby flat areas may be other internal measurements.] On the other northern
side, the table of Showbread would have been located also in line with the northern doorpost of
the temple, so that both the menorah and the table of showbread would have been seen by a
person standing only on the center axis line of the building.
A reason for the sloping surface could be to mimic the sloping roof overhead. The roof would
have slopped down to the south to allow rain water to drain off the roof and into the great cistern
which ran the whole length on the southern side of the building to fill the laver.

Major Archeological Proof of The Location Of The Temple


A major proof for the temples location can be found on Figs. 3N, 4N. at point (65). Here a
protrusion on the surface of the bedrock would have been directly under the wall making up the
division between the Ulam and the Heickal. Here were two passages: one opening to the
northward between the Heickal, and the easternmost of five offices on the north side of the
Heicka, and the other passage opening to the north between the office and another passage
opening to the north leading to the bottom of a winding staircases going up to the roof. This was
the only office having two connecting passages running north and south.
This protrusion was the only bedrock not covered by the crusaders during the middle ages. A
tall shrine was built over this bedrock at this time.
This rock was reputed to be Jacobs Pillow discussed in Gen.28:11-12 . Jacob had a dream
where he saw angels (messengers of God) going up and down a ladder running between heaven
and earth.
33

Note these facts: if the word angels were changed to priests going up and down the
staircase, with the winding staircase of the temple considered a ladder, and the ladder reaching
from earth to heaven changed into the staircase reaching from the earth to the very high roof,
then we have a description of this bedrock under this part of the temple being in the
description of Jacobs pillow.
The reason this is major archeological proof of the location of the temple is that this
archeological remains may possess knowledge of this portion of what was on this site when the
temple existed. This knowledge appears to have not been lost by the middle ages but handed
down over the centuries, but was preserved in the biblical story. Point (65) would have been next
to the passage leading into the only office which had the opening into the winding stairs nearby.
If this rock was here at the eastern part of the temple and memory of this being preserved in the
biblical story, than all other theories about the temples location such as this rock being on the
site of the Debir ,cannot work since they cannot show any connection with this story. The Debir
was never close to the winding staircase.
Another Major Archeological Proof of The Location Of The Temple
The following section describes what I believe are major proofs of the Temples location, with
archeological evidence and well as Talmudic references to back my claims.
Figs. 6, 6a, show a triangle in the upper left corner in the area the design shows was the N. W.
corner of the Cheil. This triangle is shown in detail below in Fig. 5N. The Cheil was divided into
two parts: a 6 Cubit inner zone which may have or may not have steps depending upon the
bedrock level, and a 4 Cubit outer zone which was flat. The outer edge of this 4 Cubit zone was
the Sorega boundary which had a number of entrances. (All Cubit measurements in this paper
are of the same Cubit 52.5 cm length).
This triangle can be seen on a slopping rock face under a Muslim building on the inner
Muslim platform, N.W. of the Dome of the Rock. This rock floor can be designated cistern 24 (or
36 depending upon different cistern numbering systems. The area of the rock surface goes
beyond the triangle which may be either a small scarp or a surface with a different patina (I
cannot get a photograph of this rock surface, so can only speculate as to its appearance.)
Point 2 is the corner of a scarp of very finely worked bedrock. This point I take to be the N.W.
corner of the sacred area outside of which would have been the Cheli. The distance from 2 to 3
is exactly 6 Cubits. The distance from 3 to 4 is exactly 4 Cubits. These measures adding up to
10 Cubits match the dimensions of the Cheil as stated in the Talmud and are presented as
archeological evidence for this area once being part of the Cheil. There is also evidence this 6
Cubit slopping rock once had steps now missing. The very fact this surface is slopping
downward from east to west shows this surface may have once had steps.
The slopping rock is steeper near the bottom than at the top. This could indicate that the rock
originally had steps with steeper risers near the bottom. (This sloping rock is more noticeable at
the northern side than at the southern side.) This would have been similar to step at Duchin steps
which were steeper at the bottom than at the top (from the bottom 1C +.5C +.5C +.5 C).
Another piece of archeological proof can be given when considering the temples veils.
There were three veils (curtains) in the temple: two between the Debir and the Heickal, and one
between the Heickal and the Ulam. If these veils became highly unclean, they were to be washed
outside the holy area and laid out on the Cheil to dry before nightfall.
These veils were made up of 72 separate woven sections each measuring 3.3333 Cubits square,
sown into 6 rectangles of 3 by 4 sections (see Fig. 6N). Another way of seeing this is a square of
3 by 3 sections with an additional row added (or 3 rows across by 4 rows down). The numbers 3,
4, 6, and 12 are all found in these sectional arrangements which were numbers associated with
34

the breastplate.
If you look at Fig. 5N notice how 12 sections consisting of 3 rows across by 4 rows down.
Also notice how the additional row would fit but at a slight angle. To the north of sloping rock is
a scarp with a wall behind. The space between the scarp (6) and a wall (9 to 10) filled with debris
to an unknown depth. Point 2 is a low corner of rock. Point 17 is a niche and a corner in the fine
wall face (1).
The distance from 2 to 19 is 6.66 Cubits. I believe this was the designated location for drying
a veil on the Cheil. (This was not the designated location for displaying a newly created veil
which was on the roof of a building, or a veil laid out in the sacred area. This location may never
have been used as the Sadducees did not consider this necessary.) The veil would have been
folded up, and carried to the Cheil, opened and allowed to dry. At sundown the veil would have
been folded up again and carried to the temple. The method of folding could have been added by
the northern scarp at point 6 and low wall at point 2. The method of folding could have been as
follows: (see Fig. 7N)
1. fold in half lengthwise.
2. fold in thirds.
The veil would have then looked like Fig. 8N. The entire veil of 72 squares (3.33 Cubit2) would
have been folded onto this space of six 3 by 4 squares each The top three squares could have fit
into a slightly different angle.
The folded veil could have been wrestled onto the Cheil by priest standing in the space
between points 6, 18, 9 and 10 and on any available space in Fig. 6N, then opened in reverse
order. First the veil would have been opened in half so that the mid line faced westward. Then
priests could have starting in the upper right hand corner, while standing barefoot on the veil,
move this corner on a diagonal as seen in Fig. 9N. The veil would have looked like a triangle
which mimics the curved shape on the rock face. The area covered would have been 3 by 4 in
small squares of the veil. A niche and corner at point 17 in Fig. 6N, would have marked the
diagonal opened veil, as shown in Fig. 9N.
The reason I suspect the veil would have been cleaned here, is partly because of the dimensions
of the rock surface matching dimensions of the Cheil and of the veil sections, partly because this
would have been in sunlight before sunset as it is on the western side of the Azarah, and also
because I believe the building where the veils were manufactured would have been located just
to the east of this location.
A Gospel detail may have had its origin in this veil cleaning procedure. Notice that the veil is
folded down its midline from top to bottomthe midst of the veil. Also notice that the western
edge would face west toward Golgotha. This may be the germinal idea for one of the three veils
ripping in half (Matthew 27:51).
There would have been no steps as seen in Fig. 10N. Remains of steps on the rock surface have
been seen as stated elsewhere in this paper. Steps would not have been needed since there were
no gates at the top of the steps here. The wall at 2 shows no one could mount the top of these
steps and into a gate into the sacred area. I believe there were no gates into the west wall leading
into the sacred area. There were no gates into the western end of the Azarah.
But there may have been a gate into the Azarah which was not an authorized gate- one of 13
unauthorized reworking, or enlargements, done by pagan Greeks at the Soreg which lead into the
Cheil. This gate would have been to the south of the central axis line of the Jewish temple. When
the temple was destroyed, this pagan opening might have been used by Romans as a gateway
into any pagan temple building built on the site of the Jewish temple. This pagan temple may
have been approached from the west with its main staircase being the on old Cheil steps. This
may account for the fact that the central axis line of the Muslim steps behind the Dome of the
Rock is just south of the axis line of the building. If the Dome of the Rock is on the site of the
Jewish temple, then the fact the nearby staircase is off center of the building cause show the
35

original alignment of the Jewish temple. (Remains of this gateway as well as remains of original
Cheil steps could be under the present staircase. The current Muslim staircase is one of the
oldest constructed on to the inner platform.) Also, a gateway and steps located here is a major
affront to Jews because any entrance into a building fronting here would put pagan, Christian or
Muslim worshipper directly into the Jewish Debir (Holy of Holies).

Fig. 6N
1. Fine wall.
2. N.W. corner of sacred area. End of fine wall.
36

3. Point where distance measured from 2 is 6 Cubits. The western zone is 6 Cubits.
4. Point where rock cutting intersects end of western Cheil .
5. Point where rock cutting meet scarp.
6. Scarp on rock face.
8. Point where western Cheil intersects line of scarp.
9. Corner of two walls.
10. Another corner of two walls.
11. Part of rock cutting outside Cheil.
12. Point where ground flattens out. Is in line with point 18.
13. Point on sloping rock where veil would have overlaid the 6 Cubit zone.
14. N.W. corner of 6 Cubit zone of Cheil.
15. N.W corner of full 10 Cubit (6 Cubit +4 Cubit) Cheil.
16. Right angle.
17 Where niche is in fine wall. Also a corner is seen here. The walls height is high at this point.
18. N.W. corner of sloping rock.
19. Distance from 3 to 19 is 0.3 Cubits making the distance from 2 to 19 exactly 3.3 Cubits.

37

Fig. 7N

38

Fig. 8N

39

. Fig. 9N

40

Fig. 10N
Veil laid over steps. Area within the 6 Cubit zone of the northern Cheil had no steps.

41

Explaining The Eastern And Western Sides Of The Inner Platform


The eastern and western sides of the inner platform are odd angles on the temple mount. I
can demonstrate that they could have been created by the same survey system used to design the
temple detailed in this paper. I also come to the conclusion that these two sides may have
originally been temple features within the area of the 500 Cubit square. They would have been
very discrete such as a row of stones on the pavements or fashioned as a low step across the
pavements. At a later time, these lines were deepened creating the current eastern and western
side of the inner platform we see today. Each side of the inner platform can be accounted for. The
northern edge was the northern edge of the 500 Cubit square. The southern edge of the platform
is very close to the southern side of the Cheil, but at a slightly different angle and slightly outside
the line of the Cheil. The terminus of the eastern and western ends of these lines would have
ended at the southern edge of the Cheil and never existed farther to the south. (Shown as dashed
lines in Fig. 10N)
The eastern wall begins at the point labeled 11, where the northern edge of the 500 Cubit square
measured 3x from point A ( the N.E. corner of the square). (If x = 62.5 Cubits then 3x is 187.5
Cubits. Where the east-west length of the Azarah is also 187 Cubits.) The remaining length of
the square is 5x since the total length of the line is 8x or 500 Cubits. At the southern edge of the
square, at the half way point of the southern edge, the point 4x we draw a line connecting these
two points. This is shown as a red line. The line south of the Cheil was excluded because this is
the excluded segment shown as a dashed red line. The solid red line is the current eastern edge of
the inner platform.
The western edge of the platform could have been worked out by the following method: The
northern edge of the square measured out 3x from point Athe NE. corner of the square. On the
southern edge of the square, measuring from the opposite diagonal SW corner of the square, they
measured out another 3x. (Again, we have 5x remaining). Measuring from point 11 on the
northern edge of the square, the same distance from here to the Cheils eastern end (from point
11 to point 14), we would reach point 1 (both lines measure 302.1 Cubit). We then create a right
angle (Point 7) to point 1 terminating at the 3x measure on the southern edge of the square.
(Point 1 is just to the east of the squares N.W. (C) corner because the length of the line is fixed
as the same length of the solid and dashed red line to the east.)
A 5:4:3 right triangle is present in this figure. The distance from point 11 to C is 5x. The
distance from 11 to A is 3x. The right triangle formed would have a leg of 4x which makes a
5:4:3 right triangle which was a sacred triangle known since ancient times.

42

Fig. 10N
1. Point on northern edge of Cubit square where line from point 7 terminates making west wall.
2. Point on east wall were a right angle of 153 Cubit length (Azarah width) reaches hole in rock
on temple axis line. (shown as a red line).
3. Center line of Muslim staircase terminating at Point I in Fig. 6a.
4. Point on east wall where a right angle of 187 Cubit length (Azarah length) reaches Debir
center on temple axis line (shown as a black dashed line).
5. Point where two lines from ends of the 5x segment on northern edge square are equal
length. (Shown as crosses.) This point is on the center axis line just to the east of the rock.
7. Right angle point making line up of the western wall of inner platform.
8. Ruined staircase which may have been part of the southern Crepidoma of a small temple
once abutting against the southern edge of the old Cheil (today near the current southern edge
of the Muslim Platform).
9. Terminus of aqueduct and two cisterns are here.
10. Northern edge of 500 Cubit square.
43

11. Point on Northern edge of 500 Cubit square measuring 3x from point A, leaving 5x
remaining (since total length of line is 8x.)
12. Point where right angle from point 4 intersects center axis line at center of Debir.
13. Center axis line
14. Southern end of eastern inner platform where wall ended at Cheil.
((wall has marginal draughts showing stones may be in situ.))
A N.E. corner of 500 cubit Square
C S.E corner of 500 cubit Square
C S.W corner of 500 cubit Square
C N.W corner of 500 cubit Square

Fig. 11N shows the eastern wall of the inner platform at three eras: the top view is when the
temple existed; the middle section shows the temple destroyed, and the bottom section shows the
Muslim repair and the subsequent erection of Dome of the Rock on the inner platform.
In the top view, east of the temple (9) I believe a diagonal wall existed within the area of the
500 Cubit square, north and south of Court of Lepers (6), and the Court of Wheat, wine, oil (8).
This wall started at the 3x (5x) location (1) on the northern edge of the square. This wall had a
space between these two courts within the Court of the Women centered on Nekaners Gate (7)
This would have made the two small courts opened only on two sides as shown.
The area had a number of cisterns (2,3, 4, 5) two of which whose lower part is cut into
bedrock, were high up on the wall (4,5) and one below the wall whose lower part also is cut into
bedrock (2). Cistern (3) is shown because it is an important landmark as it marks the N.E. corner
of the Cheil. Cisterns (4, 5) rests on bedrock i.e. bedrock must be behind the wall at this area of
the wall. This is a retaining wall backed by bedrock inferred by what we know of the nearby
cistern (4,5). Cistern (2) infers that the bedrock level here was below the wall. This cisterns
western end is very close to the edge of the wall, suggesting that when this cistern was dug, the
diggers measured so that they stopped digging at the wall and did not intend to go past it. These
three cisterns are evidence that the wall existed at the time these cisterns were dug. One cistern
(4) is one of the oldest dated cisterns on the temple mount as discussed elsewhere in this paper.
This suggests a wall here was a very ancient feature. This wall would have divided the Court of
the Women into two parts: an eastern less sacred area, and a western more sacred area by
Nikanorss Gate. I believe there is a Talmudic discussion about the sacredness of the curved steps
and the gate (7) itself of which this wall would have been a part.
The middle view shows the destroyed temple (13), the destroyed gate (7) and its adjacent
curved steps, and the space which would have been between the two little square courts (6,8)
seen in the top view.
Someone, after the temples destruction, either pagan Romans, or Muslims did a rebuilding of
the inner area by leveling this space (10) with fill, and extending the original wall by adding a
new section of wall across the space between the two temple courts and then adding a new
straight staircase outside the wall line, which is drawn in red. These steps are labeled 11. Point
(7) would be the location of the original 15 curved steps now buried within the inner platform.
The Dome of the Rock is shown labeled (14). The upper portion of the wall was repaired. A few
of the original temple stones making up this wall can still be seen just south of point (1). These
few stones have marginal drafts as is expected if the stones are in situ. The view from this area
today is one of the few locations very similar to what this area must have looked like in Herods
44

time.
The area west of the red wall and steps but not have bedrock, but have fill if my theory is
correct. Leen Ritmeyer would have bedrock under the steps at 11 in the form of buried curved
steps, while I put this location within space within the Court of the Women which had to be flat
ground. The bedrock has to end as shown in the top view, at the edge of the once Court of the
Lepers with fill to the south. This is the case. (I have pictures but the text is in Hebrew and I
could not get the entire article translated. I do see fill and no bedrock in the photos.)
The area behind the southern part of the wall could be either bedrock or fill.
The western edge of the inner platform seen in Fig. 10N also must have been a temple feature
running at an angle within the 500 Cubit square. It would have appeared as either a low rise step,
or a row of flag stones. There is no description of why this was done, but my argument for it
being a temple feature is that whoever laid it out, was an expert in the system of survey discussed
in this paper. (utilizing 3x making 187Cubits etc.) At some time after the destruction of the
temple, the ground level was lowered to create a new wall along this alignment creating the
western edge of the inner platform we see today.
Thus, a four walls of the inner platform can be accounted for: the northern edge was the
northern edge of the 500 Cubit harh a biyet or the Ritmeyer Square, the eastern and eastern
wall and western wall both terminate at the southern edge of the Cheil and the southern edge
being at or very close to the actual line of the Cheil.

45

Fig. 11N See accompanying text.


46

1. Northern corner of platforms Eastern wall intersecting northern edge of 500 Cubit square.
2. A cistern whose western end terminates under wall.
3. H shaped cistern at N.E. corner of Cheil.
4. Very ancient cistern high up on wall. Bottom cut into bedrock
5. cistern high up on wall. Bottom cut into bedrock.
6. N.W. Court of the Lepers in the Court of Women.
7. Nikanors Gate
8. S.W Court of Oil in the Court of Women.
9. Temple building
10. Destroyed area of Court of Women with the removal of courts 6 and 8.
11. Muslim steps on eastern wall of platform and Muslim reconstructed wall shown in red. .
12. Southern edge of inner platform on site of southern edge of temples Cheil.
13. Destroyed temple building.
14. Dome of the Rock

Fig. 12N (See footnote.)

More Evidence for the Temple being at my location


Here is more evidence for my location of the temple. Look at Fig. 6 which is a top view of the
site. Note the locations of the northern and southern cheil and soreg. The southern cheil and
soreg is by the southern end of the Muslim platform. Just as the northern edge of the temple
feature the har h`biet was preserved in the northern edge of the Muslim platform, so too the
southern edge of the Cheil was preserved in the southern edge of the Muslim platform. Now
look at the eastern wall and note that the southern cheil visible as the southern edge of the
platform, extended eastward would intersect the eastern wall at one specific spot.
The northern cheil also can be extended eastward to intersect the eastern wall at one specific
spot. This spot is labeled stairs in the figure. Nearby on the north is labeled gate.
Look at Fig. 13N- a vertical view of the eastern wall as would have been seen from the Mount
47

of Olives. The point b is in line with the southern Cheil (southern end of platform), and point a is
directly above the bottom of a flight of stairs (dotted line in red) going up to the Eastern Gate
labeled g, These stairs do not exist, but the calculated bottom level of the street can show where
point a is. The center axis line of the temple and inner courts is at point c. (see Ritmeyer
Jerusalem The Temple Mount; A Carta Guide Book, 2015; pp..74-75.)
The Talmud states that the eastern wall was lowest (dipped) at point c. In my plan, a perfectly
symmetrical curve could be drawn from point b to point a with these facts: if the temple were
shifted to the right or left, no symmetrical curve would have existed at these points which
today have archeological elements such as a staircase and a platform. Fig.13N would have
been the view looking toward the temple from a viewer on the Mount of Olives. He would have
seen the beginning dip of the wall beginning at the bottom of a staircase in line with the northern
Cheil, and the other beginning dip of the wall in line with the southern Cheil.
The four edges of the original 500 Cubit har ha biyet were extended on the northern, western,
and southern sides but not on the eastern side. One possibility is that if the walls were extended
on the eastern side, a dip in a farther extended wall would have defeated the purpose of the dip
to allow for vision not blocked by a high wall.

Fig. 13N
Look at Fig. 14N.
This is the horizontal view of Fig. 13N. You see the same points g, a, c, b. I also show half of a
5:8:8 triangle, where the vertical bisector makes the eastern wall [drawn in red]. The hypotenuse
is length 8x [drawn in red], and the base line is half of 5x or 2.5x (5x/2=2.5x)[drawn in red].
Note that the intersection of point g is at the center post of the gate. (This gate had two
sections with a center post.). This is major piece of evidence that the temple (at least this major
gate) was laid out by using 5:8:8 triangles.
Remember that the northern line of the Cheil would have been at point a, the southern line of
the Cheil would have been at point b with point c in line with the center axis line of the temple,
all shown in Fig. 6 again showing this to be a major piece of evidence that the temple located as
described in this paper.
48

Fig. 14N
Look at Fig. 15N. Note the red 5:8:8 triangle how its short side measured the width of the
building not including the two extensions of the Ulam, and reached the outer edge of the western
Cheil. This same size triangle measures to the southern edge of the Cheil as shown.
The western edge of the Debir and the western edge of the temple building can be the starting
points of two triangles which set the size and location of the large cistern of Fig. D5 seen in Fig.
15N. This cistern has a number of smaller compartments whose angular walls were parallel as
well.
The use of these triangles to lay out large cisterns is similar to the main large triangle being the
source from which other features, such as the large cistern which can be seen in Fig. D7.
This is more evidence that the 5:8:8 triangle was being used at the Jerusalem temple and that
the layout as drawn was correct.
There is no written evidence to suppose 5:8:8 triangles were used at any sacred space, but the
evidence here is compelling. I suspect the use of these triangles were held as a great secret
mystery known only to builder initiates, or was not considered important enough to be recorded,
or was lost in history.

49

Fig. 15N
The system of survey creating 5:8:8 triangles used to design the temple and its courts I can
demonstrate variations of this theme being used in a number of other locations around the middle
east. This helps strengthen the argument that the Jerusalem Temple was designed using this
method because Solomons temple was built by Tyre builders knowing Tyre building practices. I
believe this was lost knowledge used in designing some specific sacred temples and buildings. I
believe all of the structures listed below are proofs for the Jerusalem temple location because
they were using the same 5:8:8 triangles:
1. Israelite temple at Arad
2. Temple of Bel at Palmyra
3. Temple at Ein Dara
4. Temples of Jupiter and Bacchus at Baalbeck.
5. Tel Dan
6. amrith
7. Cave of Machpelah
These seven articles can be reached from links on my blog: 1ofkersondiscoveries.wordpress.com
and also on my website: sacredstonessacredstories.com.
50

All my work carries endorsements from ex- Senator Joe Lieberman, Chairman of the Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Appendix:
note 1 Temple Mount Areas calculated
(see Fig. 1)
If the whole area is 500 Cubits, and if the eastern edge of the inner sacred court (the Azarah) was
located along the north-south center line of this square (250 Cubits from either parallel northsouth running edge of the square, then the following area dimensions are true.
Southern area: 187C * 239.5C = 44,786.5 C2
Eastern area: 135C * 250C = 33,450C2

[where 187 is 3x- 0.5]


[where 250 is 4x ]

Central area (Azarah): 187C * 135C = 25,245C2

[where 135 is 2x +10]

Northern area: 187C * 125.5C = 23,667C2


Western area: 135C * 63C = 8,505C2

[where 125.5 is 2x +0.5]


[where 63 is 1x +0.5 ]

Notice the pattern of the southern area being greater than the eastern area which is greater than
the central sacred area, which is greater than the northern area, which is greater than the small
western area which matches the Talmudic description or expressed mathematically:
[S]> [E]> [C]> [N]> [W]
Other descriptions dating from the middle ages, record linear distances, but the Talmud implies
areas and not linear lengths.
Notice other interesting set of geometric relationships caused by the lengths created in this
design. In each set of areas: [S] > [E] and [N] > [W], a difference is close to the basic length 1x
or 62.5C. Eastern area has one side of 250C and Southern area has one side of 187C. The
difference is [250C-187C] or 63C which is 0.5C from 62.5C. The northern area has one side of
125.5C and the western area has one side 63C. The difference is [125.5C - 63C] or 62.5C which
is exactly 1x the base number seen in Figs. 6, 6a and 0.5C longer then the required width of the
altar.
If a measuring cord was used to lay out these lines, a hidden relationship would occur. The
lines in the southern-eastern pair would appear as a straight line as in a ruler, and the line in the
northern- western pair would appear as a right angle made by a groma surveyor measuring tool.
The design would have had two hidden builders (masons) tools represented if the four areas
around the Azarah were laid out with measuring cords.
Notice on the design of Figs. 6, 6a that the western edge of the Soreg is close to the western
edge of the 500C square. In fact, this is the Soreg edge closest to the corresponding square edge.
Josephus states the Soreg was close to the edge of the square. He could have had the western
edge of the Soreg in mind when he wrote this.
The distance from the southern, eastern, northern, and western Soreg or Cheil lines hold the
same relationships to the edges of the 500C square as the areas shown at the start of this section.
Thus you can see in Figs. 6, 6a that the southern edge of the Soreg or Cheil was the largest
distance from the southern edge of the square. The eastern edge of the Soreg or Cheil was a
smaller distance from the eastern edge of the square. The northern edge of the Soreg or Cheil was
a smaller distance from the northern edge of the square. The western edge of the Soreg or Cheil
was the smallest distance from western edge of the square. These facts again agree with Josephus
51

and the Talmud.


Also:
Total area inside Cheil 326C by 200C approximate
Area inside Cheil (including the 187C by 135C Azarah courtyard) --189C by 200C
approximate
Area inside Cheil (including the 135C by 135C Court of Women ) 138C by 200C approximate
All Measures are from the edge of the 500 Cubit square to the corresponding edge of the Azarah.
My
measurements
Shiitai
HaGiborim
Tosafot Yom Tov

South
239.5 Cubits

East
250 Cubits

North
125.5 Cubits

West
63 Cubits

265 Cubits

250 Cubits

100 Cubits

63 Cubits

250 Cubits

213 Cubits

115 Cubits

100 Cubits

In the above chart, my measurements do not follow the Talmudic description of South
>East>North>West whereas the bottom two does but if these measures are linear measurements
and not area measures, they are not correct as only area measures were correct.
The linear measures of Tosafot Yom Tov written during the Middle Ages does match the debir
in the center of the green square of Figs. 3N, 3Ngreen.
Note 2 (See Fig. Note2) The Azarah from east to west was as follows: for Herods Temple is composed of the following
dimensions:
1. - Court of Israel: 11C
2. - Court of priests: +11C
3. - altar
+32C (original 28C+ post exile 4C)
4. - space from altar to Ulam: +22C
5. - Eastern part of Ulam to the center of Azarah at the hole in rock: + 17.5C
... Divided as follows :{ this is center of Azarah location which is 187C/2 or 93.5C. Note the
same distance on each side of Ulam from northern and southern edges of Azarah [17.5C
+100C+17.5C is 135C]}
- Ulam eastern wall thickness +5C
Space in Ulam
+11C
Distance to center of Azarah eastern part of threshold under lentil stone between doorposts (the
doorway) at hole in rock +1.5C
Total: (5C+11C+1.5C or 17.5C)
6. - Distance past Center of Azarah the western part of threshold under lentil stone between
doorposts (the doorway) at hole in rock + 4.5C (making threshold-- the doorway-- 1.5C + 4.5C
or 6C)
7. - Width of Heickal: +40C (20C *2)
8. - Space of Veil:
+1C
9. - Debir:
+20C
52

10. - Offices and wall


+17.0C (0.5C less then 17.5C )
11. - Space behind temple +11C
Total 187C
Solomons Temple would have had a smaller Ulam width since it was 10C. This would mean the
center of the Azarah was at the same 4.5C location, but was just to the east of the Solominic
threshold in the floor of the Ulam because Solomons Temple had a thinner threshold. Herods
temple engulfed the older threshold.
Note 3 It is very significant that the center of the Azarah was just to the east of Solomons threshold and
at the location of the Herods temples threshold (also between two doorposts, a lintel, and a
folding door). The threshold of the temple building had special religious significance to the
ancient world as it marked a special entrance and exit into the sacred space. Special acts were
committed over the threshold.
Note 4 The 500C square can be divided into two center lines forming four 250C sections. Each section
can be divided as follows:
187C + 52C + 11C = 250C
where: 187C = (135C + 52C)
then: (135C +52C) + 52C +11C = 250C
this shows the importance of 11C in temple measure. The easternmost 11C may have been the
width of Solomons Porch. The 11C western end of the Court of the Women was more holy then
the eastern remainder of this court. Also 62C the length of the altar and ramp is (52C +10C).
Also if we measured in Herods Temple along the center line 135C from the eastern edge of
the Azarah we would be 3C east of the Veil. This would have been the logical location of the
Altar of Incense. The math is: 11C (Court of Israel) +11C (Court of Priests) + 32C (altar) +22C
(space between altar and building) +17.5C (the Ulam plus 1.5c on the threshold) +4.5C (on the
threshold) + 37C(within the Heickal) = 135C where adding another 3C would reach the Veil
since 37C + 3C = 40C the length of the Heickal. Note: 1.5C +4.5C on the threshold shows the
threshold was 6C-- the width of the folding doors as stated in the Talmud. (See also note 21 for
another important discussion on the distance of 11C being in the design.
note 5 (See Figs. 6, 7, Note5 ) The altar was extended 4C on the western and southern sides. The
original sides of the altar were on the eastern and northern sides. Measuring westward 4C from
the N.E. corner along the central axis line, would have reached the point (F) marking the middle
of the line on the central axis which is the sum of 135C + 187C. The mathematics is:
135C +187C = 322C. Where the center is: 322C/2 = 161C
Then measuring from the eastern end of the Azarah toward the west we get: 135C + 11C+ 11C +
4C = 161C.
If we measure from corner to corner of the Soreg, the exact center of the sacred area (Azarah,
Court of Women, Cheil, Soreg) falls just to the east of point (F).
Note 7 53

A strange fact of the design seen in Fig. 5: The distance from the angular bisectors running
through points (aa) and (bb) to the northern edge of the two northern 40C courts within the
larger square Court of the Women, is the same distance from the center line of the 500C square
(OVP) to the northern edge of the two southern 40C courts within the larger square Court of the
Women. This distance is the same 30C mentioned previously concerning four 30C by 40C little
open court yards.
Note 8 Point U is in the small space between the temples axis and the Dome of the Rocks axis lines. It
is also between the eastern door of the Dome of the Rock and the NW corner of the altar.
Note 9 (See Fig. Note9) A number of additional facts of an archeological nature corroborate the
hypothesis Figs. 6, 6a is the true representation of the temples location.
1. There are one to one correspondences between structures on the southern side outermost
Temple Mount and the southern side inner areas of the Temple Mount. These structures are in
approximately similar locations. They are from east to west a non sacred area in the outer area
under the Royal Stoa, large storage rooms for wheat, wine, oil(22) used in temple sacrifices
(connected to the Triple Gate(1) ) corresponding with the very small space in the more sacred
inner area of the Court of the Women the Court of wheat, wine, oil (5).
A very important fact which may be considered another smoking gun concerns the fact that
the Triple Gate is in a direct line with the S.E. corner of the inner platform (3). Looking at Figs.
6, 6a you will notice a line northward would reach the Court of Oil which is depicted a being a
short distance north of this corner. In other words, the Triple Gate with its connecting storerooms
was in a direct line with the Court of Wheat, wine, oil in the more sacred inner area to the north.
Dr. Ritmeyer who makes note of this alignment in the book The Quest, believes the gate was in
line with the Chamber of Hewn Stones, but there was never any association of this Sanhedren
chamber with this gate or with any storerooms. The Sanhedren (high court) was composed of
prominent members the tribes and not necessary of priests, whereas my alignment is truly an
alignment of the outer storerooms for oil, wine, and wheat with the inner distribution area for the
very same oil, wine, and wheat. Another point of contention is the fact my location of the altar
slightly to the west is on higher bedrock do to the hill being higher toward the west, allowing the
altar to be directly in contact with bedrock and not constructed on an artificial base which was a
serious and definite violation for the construction of the great altar. (One reason priests had to
ascend the altar barefoot as if they where in contact with bedrock at all times.)
Next we had in the outer non sacred area, a large public building (6), corresponding with a
location in the inner area by the Azarah, the very sacred Chamber of Hewn Stones (24). To the
west of this public building we had non sacred ritual washing places (8) (Mikvaot) corresponding
with the very sacred High Priest Mikvah and adjacent Water Gate (9) by the Azarah, a wellhead
by the Golah Chamber by the Azarah, also the line crosses the largest cistern called the great sea
(23) on the Temple Mount. Next we had the main southern Gate (12) (Double Gate), in the outer
area, corresponding with the Gate of the First Born (14) in the sacred area ( The Tadi Gate (17)
was very likely in line with this gate to the north. The large rectangle cistern (16) which I am
calling the Cistern used for the washing of intestines was also on this alignment.)
This one to one correspondence has an interesting significance: when the temple was built,
they matched the line of inner with the outer structures (storeroom, meeting room, mikvah, gate).
Although the line of inner structures are gone, the same outer lineup remains today. The position
of the outer lineup still is close to the position of the missing inner lineup.
54

2. A line from this right angle border point at the corner of the altar southward would have
intersected the large public building, thus showing a connection of the Chamber of Hewn Stones
with this building. A continuation of the border line in Figs. 6, 6a would intersect the Mikvah
building. Thus the border line would have gone through the Mikvah building.
3. I wish to state a very important fact: If ever a trench is cut on the eastern side of the Muslim
platform on the temple mount, which shows archaeological evidence for a curving staircase (15
curving steps would be the total number of steps, but even finding evidence of one curving step
would be enough) buried below the surface of the platform, this would be confirmation of the
location of the temple, since the Talmud describes curved steps leading up to Nikanor's Gate
from the Court of the Women. A curving step was a unique feature found nowhere else in the
temple. Since we have dimensions stated in the Talmud, we can reconstruct were many locations
were if we know the length of a Cubit.
If these stairs match the location of the calculated location for these stairs then this paper
has proven where the temple stood on the temple mount because this one calculated piece of
the puzzle is specific enough to confirm other parts of the puzzle such as the location of the
Azarah etc. My paper uses the same size cubit as Leen Ritmeyer's cubit measure.
Also L. Ritmeyer points out (Ritmeyer, L. (2006). The Quest, Carta Jerusalem, p. 354) and
also is apparent by looking at his drawings of the temple) that his placing of these curved steps in
the location shown in his book and various publications, coincides with the present straight
Muslim staircase (but at a slightly different angle) that if remains of any curved staircase were to
be found under the present Muslim staircase whenever this Muslim staircase might be excavated,
then this would be confirmatory evidence of his location (labeled 3). But the inverse also is true:
if no curved stairs or staircase is found under the Muslim staircase, then this may mean
Nakanor's Gate was never nearby and my location (labeled 2) could be possible.

Fig. note9

55

1. Triple Gate
2. Triple Gate tunnel
56

3. Current corner of inner platform which once was by Cheil.


4. A room south of Court wheat. Wine, oil.
5. Court of wheat, wine, oil
6. Outside the temple grounds, a building which may been used by the great Sanhedren.
7. The center of the 500 Cubit square designated point (V) in Figs. 6,6a.
8. Outside the temple grounds, Ritual washing place (Mikvah)
9. Water Gate/mikvah
10.Shis
11. Libation of wine or water on corner of altar.
12 Double Gate.
13. Double Gate tunnel
14. First Born Gate
15. point I in Figs. 3,6,6a.
16. Cistern 24
17. Taddi Gate
18. Firewood Gate
19. Wilsons Arch and Gate
20. Area between Wilsons Arch and Firewood Gate
21. Nekanors Gate
22. in outer court a storeroom for wheat, wine, oil
23. Largest cistern
24. Chamber of Hewn Stones
Note 10
The design has four centers: point (hole) at the northern edge of the hole in the rock is center of
Azarah on the East West center line of the temple at its threshold; point (F) a point on the
same east- west axis line (CL ) 4C to the west of altars NE corner along its northern base on
the East West center line of the temple, marking the center of the innermost rectangular area
consisting of the Azarah and Court of the Women with its surrounding Cheil and Soreg; and
point (V) the center of the 500C square at the eastern edge of the Azarah on the wall marking
the western edge of the Court of Oil. A door connecting the Court of Oil with the Court of Israel,
which was the easternmost part of the Azarah, may or may not have existed here. A door would
have been useful to allow oil, wine and wheat to be conveniently brought into the Azarah. (See
note 13 for more detail.)
In Fig. 4 the intersections of triangle bisectors making right angles are labeled aa, bb, cc, and
dd. Point aa was on the western wall of the Clean Knife Room of the Ulam. The point bb was
on the western wall of the Court of Wormy Wood. The center point labeled V was the center of
the 500 Cubit square and was on the western wall of the Court of Oil opening westward into the
Azarah.
A fourth center incorporating the enlarged Herodian portions of the Temple Mount, would be
where the Dome of the Chain now exists, the very center of which was the area just to the north
of the altar where lots were chosen for the two goats on the Day of Atonement, and the major site
for sacrifice on the northern side of the altar. This point was in the center line between the
Double and Triple Gates.
The manner of laying out Herods enlarged Temple Mount could have been in this manner:
1. It was first decided to enlarge the area so that the area just to the north of the altar would be
the newly made center of the quadrangle.
2. The distance from this center point eastward to the eastern wall existed and was fixed
unchanged.
57

3. The same previously determined distance of step 2 from this center point due westward would
fix a point on the new western wall. This would allow the center point to remain at the center.
4. The flat area making the foundation of the Antonia fortress (and possibly the pool to the east)
fixed a point due north on the line of the new northern wall.
5. The same previously determined distance of step 4 from this center point southward would fix
a point due south on the line of the new southern wall.
Now that four points were determined the walls would have to be laid out in the following
manner: the line of the eastern wall was fixed and could not be changed since this was the line of
the original 500C square. The line of the northern wall had to be 90 from the eastern wall. The
line of the western wall had to be 90 from the southern wall. Thus the four walls could be laid
out from two 90 angles from four fixed points.
The walls could also have been laid out using Cherubim measure fully detailed in Volume 1 of
my book Sacred Stones Sacred Stories.
Note 11 This wellhead was directly south of a feature used as a blood drain called the Shis, described as
a natural cave near the SW corner of the altar draining toward the east. Three close points
concerning water were within the territory of Benjamin: the wellhead, the Shis, and the Laver,
and two other water locations within Benjamin would also have been nearby: the Water Gate and
a Ritual Bath (Miqvah) for use by the High Priest.
If a line were to be drawn from the Shis to natural cave within the H shaped cistern seen in
Figs. 6, 6a and this line were to be divided into four equal sections. Each of these sections would
fall on significant locations. One section would be on the northern edge of the 135C line inside
the western wall of the Court of Wormy Wood, the next section would be on the eastern edge of
the inner platform wall which was also on the eastern wall of the Court of the Lepers, and the
final section would be just to the south of the temple main axis line very close to the half way
line of the square MVN.
This same line crosses the temples axis exactly at the eastern end of the Azarah. This would
have been the center line of Nekanors Gate (21) the main gate into the Azarah.
This may be significant because this line terminates at a small natural cave. The Shis was
described as being a natural cave. It was possible the Shis was an artificial hole which was
known to align with this natural cave. The probability a natural cave being exactly at the right
spot near the altar must be very low.
Note 12 The East West center line of the 500C square passes though the following structures: The Court
of the Nazarines; the base of a large foundation unearthed in a trench labeled (G ) in Figs. 6, 6a,
; the Court of Oil all three within the Court of the Women; the center of the 500C square at point
(V) at the eastern edge of the Azarah courtyard; The lower part of the altars ramp; a distance of
5.5C south of the southern edge of the Temples Ulam; a possible unnamed or named the Upper
Benjamin Gate (see Jeremiah 20:2) on the western side of the Azarah. This gate like most gates
would have been in the tribe of Benjamin. Three gates where in the territory of Judah: The Triple
Gates in the ancestral and Herodian Southern walls, and a small double gate near the S.E. corner
in the Herodian Eastern Wall. It most definitely was not on the border of Benjamin and was not
on the highest point of the Temple Mount. Simple inspection shows this to be on the rock within
the Muslim octagonal building.
Note 13 58

A receipt chamber was located in the non- sacred part of the Hearth Building. Worshiper paid for
oil, wine, wheat and received a receipt token which was then brought to the Chamber of Oil to
collect the same. It appears in Figs. 6, 6a and also Fig. Note13, both locations were on or very
close to the 500C squares diagonal line running through the temple building (also the Dome of
the Rock).
This same diagonal line passed through the altar. Again, the Receipt Chamber was where defiled
altar stones were stored. Thus four things were all located on this axis line: defiled altar stones
storage and the actual altar site, also Receipt Chamber and Chamber of Oil.
A third relationship would have existed along this diagonal line: If the priests slept in a building
on this line, which passes over the altar and the Court of Oil, they must have some function
involving the altar and this court. They do since both involve sacrifice. We know the sleeping
building was here because the Talmud states the Receipt Chamber and the storage of defiled altar
stones were both in the non sacred northern part of this large Hearth Chamber building (in Figs.
6, 6a the building was in and just outside the northwestern part of the rectangle near the diagonal
line.) The temple had two large buildings which extended outside the Cheil the Hearth
Chamber on the northern side of the Azarah was on this particular diagonal line of the 500C
square. What of the other large building? This was the Chamber of Hewn Stones on the southern
side of the Azarah. Looking at Figs. 6, 6a you will notice the Chamber of Hewn Stones, in fact,
was built along the opposite diagonal line of the 500C square.
Note 14 A major consideration is whether the altar site was determined before or after the triangle was
laid out. If the latter, then the biblical account ( 1 chronicles 21:18 and 2 Samuel 24:18) for the
choosing of the altar site was a story created to give a non- geometry explanation to the God
given sacred site.
Four facts must be considered when examining Figs. 6, 6a: the SE corner of the original 28C
altar was precisely on the ABC triangle; the 500C squares diagonal is near the SE corner; the
border between Benjamin and Judah is also close to this corner; and the addition of 4C on the
western and southern sides of the original 28C altar makes a perfect fit in the space between the
temple building and the eastern edge of the Azarah. Why was the altar so perfectly situated on
the Temple Mount to allow these four facts seen in Figs. 6, 6a if the altar site was determined by
a previously situated threshing floor before any triangular measures were taken to build the
temple and its courts?
The most likely explanation was the altar site was chosen at the time the triangle was being
surveyed to lay out the 500C square, courts, etc. A number of problems exist with the biblical
accounts such as the name of the threshing floors owner is different in the two biblical accounts,
the price and coinage paid for the land is completely different in the two versions. A major
problem with the biblical account is the gigantic 28C size enlarged to 32C of the altar and the
wedding cake appearance of its many stepped tiers, (not shown in Figs. 6, 6a), and its very
unusual design. Most altars in the ancient world did not have priests walking around on its top
lighting piles of wood with fires and sacrifices burning on this top surface.
A close inspection of how the temple areas were laid out given in the opening paragraphs of this
paper, gives a plausible explanation for the locating of the altar exactly on the site shown in Figs.
6, 6a without any need for a threshing Floor in the explanation.
(See Fig. Note 14a) The following is a probable explanation of how the altar site and size was
determined. The altar could have meet three criteria after the triangle (ABC ) was laid out:
1. -- It had to be laid so that its eastern edge was fixed within the space defined by the temple
axis line marking its northern edge and its SE corner fixed by a point on the triangles line (CB).
59

2. After the eastern edge (length) taken as a right angle from the temples east-west axis line,
the other sides of the altar had to be the same length so that the altar was a perfect square.
3. The altar had to fit neatly in the space provided since the limiting factor was the line (CB).
It the altar was place too far eastward or westward, it would be encroaching within the Court of
Israel, the Ulam etc. The best fit was to have the eastern edge of the altar 22C from the eastern
edge of the Azarah. Then the length of the eastern side of the altar would fit exactly in a space of
28C. Enlarging the altar on two sides to 32C would still give a perfect fit in the space provided.
My analysis of the altar location explains how the altar could have fit perfectly in the space
provided.
2 Chornicles3:1 positively states that the temple building (the House of the Lord) was
constructed over a threshing floor bought by King David and not the altar was constructed over
this spot. But David had previously built an altar on the threshing floor. This cannot be the exact
same altar site as that altar was east of the temple building. There is a question as to whether the
altar or the temple building was the site of the threshing floor, or whether there was any
threshing floor used for either the temple building or the altar at all.
Also, we cannot be sure what was on the site before the temple was built. A pagan temple would
have been very likely and even a threshing floor somewhere is possible. The only important
landmarks which had to be up on the mount were a natural scarp, and two natural caves in the
rock to lay out the entire ancient most part of the temple which does not take into account the
need for any threshing floor.
But it still is possible the biblical account is correct: that firstly the altar existed on a threshing
floor and then the square was laid out by the method described in this article. But the major point
still holds true: that this geometry absolutely forbids the altar being built of any other dimensions
or at any other spot by being even a millimeter off.
It is said, where God caused Abraham to build an altar to sacrifice Isaac-- there is vision. Could
this vision be the amazing geometry from these natural features?
When was the square laid out? It might be a Solominic feature or a later feature dating from say
the time of King Hezekiah, or it may have been simply laid out at the time of Solomons temple,
and redone in stone at a later time.
Another consideration is the fact the bible discusses the border line between the tribes of
Benjamin and Judah in early texts such as the Book of Joshua which predate the building of
Davids altar on a threshing floor by many centuries. Why does the altar worked out by this
system of strings stretched across the ground, fit so perfectly on the border line? Why does the
ancient border line fall on the 500C squares diagonal which allows the territory allotted to Judah
to be in the shape of a perfect square? (See Figs. 6, 6a) There is no mention in the bible of the
border making a right angle near any threshing floor. It does put the border running by the city of
Jerusalem (Jebus).
And here is another consideration: does the bible mention another threshing floor in any
location on this same border line? In fact it does. The Ark was at Kyiriot- Jaerim on a threshing
floor before being moved to Jerusalem. Here the Ark was on a threshing floor, and not an altar.
The ark was to be moved eventually when Solomon built the temple into the building just to the
west of this same altar site. Both towns on the Benjamin-Judah border where the actual border
line made a right angle exactly on the SE corner of the Jerusalem Altar base.
Why was a 1C2 notch cut out of the altars base? The answer to place the entire altar within
the territory of Benjamin, has a major confirmation that the altar was exactly where I have placed
in Figs. 6, 6a. It also is a major confirmation of the date the border was set.
The original 28C2 altar was entirely within the territory of Benjamin. When the altar was
enlarged at the time of the return from the Babylonian Exile, for the reasons previously
mentioned, the exiles continued to keep the altar entirely within the territory of Benjamin. This
notch is major evidence they kept the practice of keeping the altar only within Benjamin. At the
60

time the notch was made after the exile, the existence of the right angle turn in the border near
the corner of the altars SE base was known and acknowledged as being at the correct spot.
Another major proof of the design is that the Chamber of Hewn Stones was placed here at the
border. No other location on the border line allowed access to both the Azarah and Cheil. (See
for yourself if you can find any other location on the border with access to both Azarah and
Cheil.) The Talmud actually states this chamber was accessible to both the Azarah and Cheil, but
it does not discuss the border line which had to be nearby since the border was near the altar in a
very small area of the Azarah Courtyard.
(See Fig. Note14b)
Note how the border line between Benjamin and Judah creates a square greater then the square
created from the center point of the 500C square (V). Thus we have four squares: the 1C square
making the notch in the S.E. corner of the altar, the square making the territory of Judah within
the 500C square, the smaller square being exactly 1/4 the area of the great 500C square, and
lastly, the actual 500C square.
Here is an important consideration: Any size Cubit or even the same size Cubit but a different
number such as 300 Cubits instead of 500 Cubits could make a square and still have the same
temple axis line. Point (I) would change, but the axis could still be the same. This means it would
be possible to have a smaller square around the same Solomonic temple, and a larger square built
at a later time.
Note 15 The angle and location of the inner platforms eastern edge could have been laid out using the
following method. This method would create an absolutely unique edge which cannot be
duplicated by any other means. A fact is that the eastern edge had to be laid out using measuring
cords only after every one of these conditions were previously laid out. They are:
1. The northern end of the platforms edge must be at the point 3x (point Z) measured along the
northern edge of the square measured from its NE corner point A.
2. A second point must be found to define the eastern edge. Such a point can exist. A right angle
line taken from the point 6x along the northern edge of the platform, having a length of 137C,
would create this second point. These two points create the eastern edge of the platform.
Note that three of the platforms edges can be accounted for: the northern, eastern and southern
but not the western that I can determine.
Similar lines of the Azarahs length and width, measured from this inner platform to the
temples actual axis have the following facts: 135 and 135.5C measures to the center of the
Azarah (where there currently is a hole in the rock) and to a point just to the east which would
have been where the axis line crossed a spot in the Ulam. Likewise 187 and 187.5C lines reached
points along the axis line (CL) within the eastern half of the Debir.
Note 16 Dr Ritmeyer wrote that the hole in the rock he believes was a vent cut in the Middle Ages37.
Two problems with this theory: A hole was described by the Bordeaux Pilgrim centuries before.
That hole may not be the current hole, but how can you disprove it?
The second problem he has is the fact that I can show, in the proceeding paragraphs how his
500C square can locate the exact center of the Azarah courtyard when using descriptions given
in the Talmud to be precisely at the location of that hole which suggests the hole was cut by
37

Ritmeyer, 263

61

people who knew where the exact center of the innermost courtyard was and not a randomly cut
vent hole in the ceiling of a cave. The hole appears to be perfectly aligned on the temples center
axis line and on the spot marking the exact center of the Azarah courtyard.
Note 17Tradition has the temple building and altar laid out before the 500C square was laid out, but
this paper suggests the opposite: the square was surveyed out first from two natural caves and a
rock scarp, and then the square was subdivided into courts. The temple building and altar was
then fitted in the space provided.
A subtle proof for this argument was the creation of a 1C space between the main room of the
building and the Debir. This space prevented any part of the designated space to be diminished.
The area of the Heickal would be 40C and the Debir would be 20C with 1C of separation. The
design allowed for 1C to be added to separate the two spaces. The two spaces were not fixed but
would be tweaked.
The temple building, as with the altar, had to be fitted in the spaces provided. The following is
a possible order for such a fitting.
The temple building could not be set too far westward nor eastward lest it would not fit in the
available space. For example, the Debir could not be placed in the center of the Azarah, least the
building would be shifted eastward. The design only allowed the space to the east of the Hachkal
the Ulam to be at the center of the exact Azarah with the bulk of the building to the west.
The steps for the buildings placement could be thus:
1. Find center of Azarah.
2. Heickal placed 4.5C west of center (part of Ulam)
3. Then I was 7C and Western Scarp was 10C and 3C past this scarp was the center of and also
the eastern half of Heickal. (7C +10C +3C = 20C where 20C was the half way point in the length
of the 40C room i.e. 40C / 2 = 20C)
4. Adding another 20C brings us to the western end of the Heickal.
5. Adding 1C was the space of the Veil.
6. The next 20C was the Debir.
7. Remaining space was the rooms in back of the Debir and back wall.
8. The last 11C was the space in back of the building marking the western end of the Azarah.
Note 18
(See Figs. 6, 6a, and Fig. Note18)
The first stream is the temples axis line (CL) . The Talmud states a stream of water starts in the
Azarah and grows larger and flows from under the center of the threshold toward the valley on
the east. This exactly describes the west- east axis line. The stream divided and a branch flowed
out of the right side of the threshold. It flowed by the south side of the altar. The design does
branch at point I, and it does come out nearby on a side of the threshold. (The distance from
point I to point hole is 7C. See note 17) This line runs across the altar onto its south side. Note
the account states the stream came out of the right side of the threshold which differs from the
drawing showing the left side of the threshold. If the altar was truly on the right side this
stream, it would have been on the north side of the axis line, which by all accounts was not true.
The altar is drawn on the south side of the axis line, with the stream emerging form the left side
of the threshold and crossing to the south side of the altar.
This vision is not the existing temples. This vision implies some knowledge of the two lines,
62

and could indicate at the time Ezekiel saw this vision, Solomons or the rebuilt temple on the
same site, the altar site and the 500C square were known.
The next line Ezekiel 47:3 speaks about measuring lines and distance which is what these lines
are. Even the length of 1000C is hear as the triangle has two sides of 500C .
Note 19
Also a small square can be seen in Figs. 6, 6a and Fig. Note19. A square 23C2 whose NW
corner was the 1 C2 notch in the SE base of the altar (11C +11C +1C =23C). This square at the
NW corner of the tribe of Judahs territory was a vertical angle to the NW corner of the 250C2
square FNVO. This right angle at the altars base is at the deepest intrusion of the border line
inside the Azarah.
Note 20
The triangles seen in Fig. 4 can create another design from the overlapping of two edges of two
different triangles. The resultant design is seen in Fig. Note20. There are 60 overlaps and 12
overlaps are on the diagonals of the 500C square. These 12 overlaps are drawn circled. They
form three squares: an outer, a middle, and an inner square labeled as shown. The inner square
forms an octagon (and pentacle). The inner circle of the Dome of the Rock, and hence, the size of
the rock under the dome is exactly the size of this octagon. The location of this octagon is
centered on the 500C square and not on the site of the actual Dome of the Rock which is toward
the northwest portion of this figure. Remember, this figure would be the actual 500C square
making the outermost four lines. Each triangle is 8x,8x,5x or 500C, 500C, 312.5C. The total
number of overlaps is 60+12 or 72 overlaps which was the number of days and the number of
translators working on the Septuagint Bible. This was also one number greater then the number
of members on the Great Sanhedren. This number is also the numbers of Gods name in
Kabbalah. Another relationship is that the 72 names all possess three letters. The twelve overlaps
form three rowsthe same number as of the letters.
The design is centered around point (V) which was on the eastern edge of the Azarah (see Figs.
6, 6a and Fig. Note20). This point marks the center of three bands. This overlapping of bands is
reminiscent of the last illustration on my book Sacred Stones Sacred Stories vol. 2.
Some of the 12 points on the two diagonal overlapping triangles are on important temple
locations. If we would overlap figure Note20 with Figs. 6, 6a we would see how on the actual
temple site, these triangles would have been on important temple locations.
1. Falls on one of the outer four points where a diagonal crosses the northern edge of the
Azarah
2. Falls on one of the outer four points where a diagonal crosses the northern edge of the Court
of Wormy Wood in the Court of the Women.
3. Falls on where a point over the diagonal crossing the altar from one of the four middle four
points.
4. Falls on the southern wall of the Court of Oil from one of the four inner four points.
5. Falls on the northern wall of the Court of Oil from another one of the four inner points.
Thus 4 and 5 are both delineating the size of the court.
6. Falls on the inner platforms eastern wall.
( See Fig. 4aNote20 for the following)
This figure shows how the temples axis center line passed through the eight triangles of
Fig.Note20. Note the perfect symmetry if the NS line making the eastern edge of the Azarah.
Note the intersection of two triangles meeting the center line at Nicanors Gate the main
entrance into the Azarah. Also note the perfect symmetry around point V the center of the 500C
63

square.
Note 21
In Figs. 6, 6a, the distance from the southern line of the Azarah to the half way line of the 500C
square (PVO) is 11C. The distance from this line to the southern edge of the Ulam is 6.5C. The
total distance from the southern line of the Azarah to the southern edge of the Ulam is 11C+6.5C
or 17.5C. We have seen a number of instances where the distance was 11C and also 17.5C.
This is a major piece of evidence the Azarah was where I have placed it in Figs. 6, 6a because
any shifting of the Azarah north or south would not allow this 11C distance to exist.
Note 22 (See Figs. 6, 6d, note22 for the following)
Note22 shows the vertical cross section of the sloping rock surface on the left side of the
figure. (It is a compilation from page 167 Below The Temple Mount In Jerusalem, Shimon
Gibson and David Jacobson, BAR international Series 637m 1996 and page 358-359 The QuestRevealing The Temple Mount In Jerusalem, Leen Ritmeyer, Carta Jerusalem, 2006.Figure 6d is
taken from the same Gibson figure where the eastern scarp is labeled 4") On the right side of
the figure is shown the corresponding vertical heights of the various temple structures. Note that
the floor of the chamber and rock are both at the same height as the Court of the Women (2419'
above sea level). Then the sloping surface of the rock, which may have once been steps as traces
of steps may be here, occupies the same vertical level as the 15 curved steps by Nakanors Gate
on the other side of the sacred area. The bottom of the scarp seen in Fig. 6d is within the same
level going from the Court of Israel to the Court of the Priests. This was a zone of four steps
making a total height of 2.5C. The lowest step was 1C, and each of the upper three were 0.5C
making a total height of 2.5C. The bottom of the scrap appears to be at the 1.5C level or the
lowest step plus the next one. The level here is 2427'. The scarp reaches the level of the Court of
the Priests at 2429' and continues upward through the height of the lowest seven of the twelve
0.5C steps which fronted the temple, to a height of 2435'. This corresponds to a height about
2.5C below the level of the temples foundation at 2439' 8" which was 6C above the Court of the
Priests. Thus the level of the ground and of this scarp is slightly below the level of the temples
foundation. The level of the paving stone (not bedrock. A proof given is in my book Sacred
Stones Sacred Stories Vol 1) under the Dome of the Tablets is also at this elevation.
Fig. Note22b shows how the vertical section of the various courts of the temple would have
looked with the scarp and rock abutting the western Azarah at the western Cheil.

Fig. note22
64

Note 23 Why was the triangle 5:8:8 and not some other ratio? This triangle, and hence the resulting
square comes from an object in the tabernacles descriptionthe altar of sacrifice which stood in
the courtyard. This altar was 5 Cubits long by 5 Cubits wide, by 3 Cubits high. The triangle has
as one side the number 5, and the other two sides have the sum of 5+3 or 8. In Fig. 2 you can
actually see on the right (the east side of the square) the 5 on the triangle, and the 3 below
making the total of 8 parts of this side of the square. To make one side of the triangle they simply
added the length (5) of the altar with the height (3) of the altar giving it the number 8. Then they
made the other side of the triangle by adding the width (5) of the altar with the height (3) of the
altar to make another side of number 8. The third side was simply the length (5) or the width (5)
of the altar which was the number 5. You can also see this division of square into 8 parts, on the
north side of the square. This side is divided into 5x on the western part, and 3x on the eastern.
Here can be found actual archeological evidence as here is the existing inner platforms northeast
corner. The distance from (A) to this corner is 3x and from here to the western edge of the square
is 5x, making a total of 8x. If 8x is 500C, then 3x is 187.5 C (this measure runs from east to
west.) Each x would then be 62.5C. These numbers are found in the Talmud, where the east-west
length of the Azarah was 187C, and the combined length of the altar and ramp was 62 C. (See
Fig. 11 for the above.)
The shape of the sacred inner area of the temple called the Mountain of the House was a
square here derived from the shape and dimensions of the square shaped altar. The altar was
65

central to the concept of the sacred area of the temple both figuratively and physically literally.
Note that the number 5 coming from the horizontal length and width of the ancient tabernacle
altar, was enlarged by a factor of 100 in the temple. Thus the Mountain of the House was 100
times larger than 5 Cubits square or 5 * 100 which was a horizontal 500 Cubits square. The
actual size of the triangle, and hence the actual size of the square, instead of being written as
8x:8x:5x where x= 62.5 Cubits, can be written with the tabernacle altar numbers as
(5+3)x:(5+3)x:5 instead.
If one triangle were to be folded lengthwise in half, then stood upright with the fold touching
one corner of the square, the triangle has the appearance of an altar horn. There can be a total of
eight such triangles touching the four corners of the square, which would create a very realistic
image of the four horns of the altar.
At Tel Arad the archeological remains of an Israelite altar was been found having the correct
shape and ratio of the 5C by 5C by 3C dimensions. Here again, I can show the same triangle and
square concept (see article on Arad).
Also the Egyptians knew about 5:4:3 right triangles. Looking at Figs. 6, 6a you will note the
east side of the square is composed of a 5x segment and a 3x segment, making the total size 8x
(5+3= 8). The half way locations of the square are all 4x (8x/2=4x). Thus all numbers of the
5:4:3 right triangle are present in the 5:8:8 triangles.
The ratio 8/5 is 1.6. Also the ratio of the numbers 5/3 is 1.67. The Golden Ratio is 1.62a
number falling between the two extremes.
The use of this triangle may have had its origins in the layout of the earlier tabernacle court.
This court was a rectangle 50C wide by 100C long. Such a space is composed of two squares
50C on a side. The court was surrounded by 60 pillars having hangings to enclose the sacred
space. The interior of the space had a number of features symmetrically arranged on the long
axis. The temples at Jerusalem and Arad were asymmetrically arranged within squares. This
article demonstrates the asymmetrical nature of the main axis within the 500C square (see Figs.
6, 6a). But notice the Mosaic court can be considered two squares. Note also that the squares
were subdivided by the pillars on the northern, southern and either an eastern or a western side,
depending on which square is being considered. Each side would have been divided into 10 parts
on a side. This is similar to the division of the 500C square into 8 parts on a side.
The question is asked, why was a triangle used to locate the axis off center (asymmetrically)
within the square? It may because the designer wanted to allow more space on the southern side
of the square which required the temple axis to be shifted toward the north, but we can never
know for sure.
We can say for sure that a single 50C square was enlarged by a factor of 10 to create a 500C
square.
Even the altar of the temple may have within its design a possible basis in the triangle design.
Fig. 3 shows how sides of the triangle work inward which can create a step like pattern. The altar
of the temple was symmetrically arranged in steps, but the analogy is not perfect as the altar
steps were centered whereas any steps created by this triangle would be asymmetrically
arranged.
Note 23a-b I suspect the existing eastern wall of the Moslem Platform was a temple feature once running
at an angle through the Court of the Women. But no ancient description of the temple even
remotely describes such a feature. A few mysteries need to be explained: why is the N.E. corner
of the Moslem Platform exactly the distance of 3x [3*62.5 Cubits or 187.5 Cubits from the north
east corner of the 500 Cubit square] which would be a temple distance? Remember, 187.0 Cubits
was the length of the Azarah. Another mystery is that the peculiar orientation angle of the eastern
66

Moslem Platform resembles the orientation angle making the Tunnel of Hezekiah (see note 26)
which may reflect similar dates of construction. Finding Gigantic Herodian stones set in the
lowest levels of this eastern wall near the northeastern corner of this platform is also
suspicious38. Fig. note 23a at the top shows four small open courtyards numbered 1 through 4
with each corner at the four corners of the 135 Cubit square Court of the Women. The western
courtyards 1 and 4 have the diagonal wall running through them. In this representation, the
ground to the north of courtyard 1 and south of courtyard 4 would have been higher than ground
level of these two courtyards within the larger Court of the Women making them enclosed at
least on two sides. Two cisterns partly within the Cheil and partly without would have been north
of courtyard 1 (The Court of Lepers), and a third cistern below the level of the Court of Women
would touched the wall at its western end. Water from the surrounding area would have filled
these cisterns which must have furnished water in some fashion to the Court of Lepers.
The point labeled (r) would have been the site of Nekanors Gate. The space to the east would
have had 15 convex or a concave stairs.
Courtyard 1 and 2 were 40 Cubits square, but could have been a rectangle 30 by 40 Cubits as
discussed elsewhere. Courtyards 3 and 4 had the same 30 by 40 Cubit rectangles along the line
of the 250 Cubit line (marked v) the 500 Cubit square as discussed elsewhere. Point (g) is the
location of a paving discovered recently.
The north eastern corner of the Moslem Platform (labeled 3x) on the northern edge of the
Ritmeyer Square, has the following relationship to courtyard 1: the distance from 3x to the inner
edge of the Cheil (point a) is the same from here to the inner edge of courtyard 1 (point b). The
wall ran from point labeled (3x) to point (labeled c) at the southern edge of the Cheil and Soreg.
Three cisterns run near courtyard 2 (Court of Wormy Wood Storage). One cistern had a corner
within this courtyard and would explain the ancient legend discussed in text concerning Fig. D8.
A very deep cistern ran south of courtyard 4 (Court of Oil) Most cisterns ran under the Cheil and
the area just outside this sacred area.
Fig. note23b at the bottom shows the same Court of Women but with the four little courtyards
outside the four corners instead of inside the four corners in the top illustration. This arrangement
opens up the space for larger crowds, but a number of problems occur making this arrangement
not as desirable and probably not on the site of an older area. Note the cistern spanning the space
between Courtyards 1 and 2. Here would have been a gate into the Court of Women. In Fig.
note23a this cistern would have been north of this gate and would have had access to more rain
water since walls would not have been close by.
Note 24- This cistern is very deep but there are three apertures near the low S.E. corner of the
Moslem Platform. The layout of the Court of the Women in Fig. Note 23a could allow a cistern
to be close to the surface since the Court of Oil Storage would not interfere, while the layout of
the Court of the Women in Fig. Note 23b would interfere since the Court of Oil storage would
necessitate the cistern to be very deeply placed.
Note 25 Leen Ritmeyer puts these cisterns in Court of Lepers but they are too deep for ritual baths nor
can they collect much rain water since this court was walled in and open to a small portion of the
sky. They lack stairs to enter. The cistern is roofed in bedrock so they cannot be truncated pools.

Note 26 38

Leen Ritmeyer, 364

67

The Moslem Platforms eastern walls angle is similar to Line 1 in Hezekiahs tunnel at the
southern end of the City of David which was a short distance south of the temple mount. I
suspect the angle here was a feature mimicking the angle of the tunnel. To learn about Line 1 and
its relationship to the tunnel, see my scribd article How String laid out Hezekiahs Tunnel.
Note 27 The bible says David bought and built an altar on a threshing floor which later became the site
of the temples altar (1Kings 22:19, Gen. 50:10, 2 Sam 6:61), but there is an alternate statement
that David bought a threshing floor and later the temple building (and not the altar) was built
upon this site (2Chron. 3:1). This paper shows an association of the building with the summit of
the hill (the current rock under the dome). It must be noted that the procedure I used to lay out
the master drawing Fig. 6a, does not require the existence of any threshing floor. What was
needed was to take measurements from a few natural features such as rock scarps, and caves.
This paper discusses the border running close to the S.E. corner of the altar. (See text, note 5,
Fig. note5, Fig. 6, Fig. 6a, and Note 28) If the border ran near or on the old threshing floor any
statement placing the temples altar here would be creditable.
But 2Chron. 3:1 placed the actual temple building- The House- on the site of the threshing
floor. The building is described in detail until 2Chron. 5:1 when The House was finished. There
is no mention of the altar up until now and no mention that the temple altar was to be built on
any threshing floor. Only The Housethe temple building was to be built on the threshing floor.
The altar is mentioned at 2Chron. 6:12, after the building is described. My temple layout puts the
eastern part of the Heickal, the threshold of the temple, and western part of the Ulam over the
fairly flat summit of the hill sacred rock under the Moslem Dome of the Rock building.
Threshing floors were built at or near the summit of high and fairly flat ground. By definition,
the Heickal was part of The House.
Of course if the altar and the temple building were worked out solely by my triangle method,
and the threshing floor connection was an attempt to justify the location without mentioning
triangles, then the contradiction of whether an altar or a building built on a threshing floor could
be explained as well.
Note 28The border between the tribes of Benjamin and Judah does not run over the temple mount
according to the Bible, but it is possible to reconcile the description of the border running
through a threshing floor at Kiriath-Jearim (the temple mount also is described as being on the
site of a threshing floor) in the Book of Joshua39 with statements in the Talmud which does place
the border on the temple mount (here were two threshing floors on the border line.) The border
according to this paper matches the Talmuds description in parts instead of on the whole. (See
Figs. 6,6a, note5 for the following) I show the border running through the southern part of the
Court of the Women, while the Talmud implies the whole of the court was on one side of the
border. I show the border running through or on the wall between of the Chamber of Hewn
Stones, a part of the lineup of chambers on the south side of the Azarah. The Talmud puts the
border running the whole length of the chambers on the south side of the Azarah. The border ran
through part of the 500 Cubit square (The har habiyet). The entire building was in Benjamin.
The entire altar was in the territory of Benjamin40.
39
40

Joshua 15:8-9, 18:16


See Gen. 49:27 which might refer to the altar.

68

A gate of the temple in Benjamin called the Upper or Benjamin Gate was supposed to be on
the border line at the highest point of the mount, but this is pure nonsense. The temple building is
described being on the summit of the mount which cannot be on a gate of a lower elevation. A
possible explanation for the discrepancy is that there were inside the territory of Benjamin an
upper Benjamin Gate at a higher elevation on the temple mount then a lower Benjamin Gate
further down the ridge in the City of David.
My design allows for, although not recorded, an Upper Judah Gate as well. Notice the Triple
Gate (The Eastern Huldah Gate) and its tunnel would have been within the territory of Judah and
the Double Gate (The Western Huldah Gate) and its tunnel would have been within the territory
of Benjamin. A gathering place such as a plaza must have existed in front of the old Double Gate
(an older gate before the Herodian extension was created.) The high Priest had the prophet
Jeremiah flogged and put in stocks before the Benjamin or upper Gate of the temple41. If the
Benjamin Gate was synonymous with the Double Gate, and by either name was the main
entrance of the temple, its plaza would have been very crowded as this would have been the
temples most public of spaces. The location of these punishments would be today on or near the
tunnel of the Double Gate and not overlooking the Azarah. A gate on the western side of the
Azarah or a single gate on the southern side of the Azarah would have had very little traffic as
opposed to the main Double Gate entrance and exit from the temple site. And punishments had to
be in a very public spot. The book of Jeremiah then helps to reconcile a number of facts
concerning these gates and my design.
Another problem which may be solved is where was the well called en-regol located where
Solomons brother Adonijah was anointed king of Israel?42 This well was on the border line
between Benjamin and Judah43. This paper has discovered a very important fact: If the border
ran close to the S.E. corner of the altar in the Azarah courtyard, then the border line
running south of the temple would fall very close to or even fall on the Spring of Gahon.
(See text, note 5, Fig. note5, Fig. 6, Fig. 6a, and Note 28 for diagrams of the border on the temple
site.) Also the Spring of Gahon run through the Siloam Channel (later through Hezekiahs
Tunnel) to the Pool of Shiloah on the southwestern side of the ridge upon which the City of
David was located. The same waters of the spring at the northern end ran to the well pool at the
southern end. I believe the well called en- regol and the pool of Shiloah were synonymous.
Adonijah and Solomon were both anointed at the same water source, but Adonijah at the
southern pool site, and Solomon at the northern Spring of Gahon site44.
The name en- regol implies a well of pilgrimage (well of legs) and implying the three
pilgrimage holidays one of which the Feast of Booths required water to be drawn from the Pool
of Shiloah (also called the Pool of Siloam) to be poured upon the temple altar. This water was
close to the city and temple so any noise of shouting and trumpets originating here would be
heard. Now the border line running through the temple mount can be explained if we consider
the Spring of Gahon was also on the border line but not recorded in the descriptions given in the
Book of Joshua which only records the border passing through the same water source at its
southern end and not its northern end. The border would have ran to the Spring of Gahon east of
the City of David, southward then crossed at the southern tip of the ridge to the en- regol pool.
This then would be south of the City of David, as stated in Joshua. If the southern end of the
ridge was called the Stone of Zoheleth or if such a stone was located here, then the pool would
be next to the stone described as being near en- regol. If the stone was on the eastern side of the
Kidron Valley where the village of Silwan today is located, or where to the south Jobs Well is
41
42
43
44

See Jer. 20:2-12.


See 1Kings 1:9
See Joshua 15:8-9, 18:16
See 1Kings1:34

69

located, the distances are both far from the city but still may preserve the name Zoheleth being
on the other side of the Kidron Valley. En- regol then would have been on the northern edge of
the Valley of Hinnom (or ben Hennom) which again agrees with the Book of Joshuas
description of the border.
The name of one of the four rivers coming out of the Garden of Eden was called Gahon45the
same name as this water source. Thus being anointed with water at the spring or in the pool, or
pouring water from this source onto the altar has the symbolism of Eden.
Note 29.Point I is 6x measured from C or 2x measured from B where the total length of the line is 8x.
Thus 6x= 375 Cubits and 2x = 125 Cubits. Then 375C+125C = 500 Cubits.
The widths of the Court of the Women and the Azarah are both 135 Cubits. This was exactly 10.0
Cubits more than the length of 2x (125 Cubits). (Stated mathematically: 2x+10 = 135 Cubits
where x= 62.5 Cubits )
Also the width of the Cheil was 10.0 Cubits. Thus numbers found in the width of the Cheil and
the important width of the two major inner courts, are widths hidden in the size of the 5:8:8 500
cubit triangle.
Point I hold another important measurement: from Point I to the beginning of the original 28
Cubit north west corner of the altar measured along the temple axis line (Point I is on this line,
and the northern edge the altar also is on this line), is the distance of 1x. The most important
point on the entire system of survey, is point I since it marks out the temples axis line by using
the main 5:8:8 triangle. From this the most important location, the altars position on the har
habiyet would have existed.
The octagon and octagon star discussed in my paper, Discovery of a Sacred Ancient Survey
Technique Used in the Middle East would be at point V on the eastern edge of the Azarah near
the altar and the Court of Oil in Fig. 6.
Also note that from the apex to point I is same distance as point I to point V.

45

See Gen. 2:13

70

Fig. 4.

71

Fig. 5a.

72

Fig.5b

73

Fig. 6

74

Fig. 6a

75

Fig. 6c.

76

Fig. 6d

77

Fig. 7.

78

Fig. 8

79

Fig. 9.

80

Fig. 10.

81

Fig. 11

82

Fig. 12.

83

Fig. 13.

84

Figs. 14-15 cross sectional view drawn across highest point on rock. (see text for discussion)

(same numbering as in Fig. 16-17 below with this addition:


23. Iron ring connected to stone in floor for Sotah dust.)

85

Figs. 16-17 Cross sectional view along central axis line. (see text for discussion)

2. Ground begins to fall away toward the west.


7. Plug of rock missing from cave in rock, This was removed to become the foundation Stone
86

in center of Debir.
8. Cave in rock.
9. Top portion of rock at eastern part of Heickal. This eastern part of room had no floor boards.
10. Scarp on western edge of rock within eastern part of Heickal.( wall is not drawn sloped since
it would be very imperceptible at this scale.)
11. Sloping of western edge of rock which once contained beveled fitted boards. (Notch in rock
is exaggerated to demonstrate concept.)
12. Wooden boards cover in gold at the eastern end of the Heickal (Holy Place).
14. Plug of rock removed from point 7 protruding 3 finger breadths above floor level.
15. An open space within foundation, to prevent contamination with any graves below.
16. Floor or Debir (Holy of Holies).
17. Floor of rooms behind Debir. Ground level is sloping down toward the west.
18. Sloping rock surface at eastern end of rock under Ulam in Solomons temple. Was under an
eastern foundation in Herods temple.
20. Steps in Herods temple leading up to Ulam.
21 Eastern foundation in Herods Temple under Ulam. Missing from Solomons Temple.
24. Bedrock under most of the Heickal and eastern end of Debir.
(Note- Height of (14), the Foundation Stone (Even Shitiah) is not drawn to scale but drawn
exaggerated since it was only 3 finger breadths high.)
Fig. 17b

87

1. Upper part of Ulam


2. Point where ground falls away.
3. Holy of Holies (Debir)
4. Room in back of Holy of Holies
5. Bedrock under Ulam and eastern part of Hechial. Currently the Rock in center of Building.
6. Doorway into Heickal. Threshold into temple building.
7. Current hole in rock which marked the center of the Azarah.
8. Cave in rock.
9. Eastern end of Heickal
10. Western edge of rock once holding floor boards. The eastern part of Heickal was bedrock.
11. Floor boards were beveled to fit over the sloping western edge of rock.
12. Floor boards covered in gold in Heickal.
14. Even Shitiah in center of Holy of Holies taken from point 7.
15. spaces under Holy of Holies floor to prevent contact with possible tombs.
17. Foundation of building under western end.
18. Slopping rock once at eastern end of temple, now covered by a stepped approach.
20. Steps in Herods temple.
21. Lower part of Ulam.
22. Retaining wall on downslope under western end of temple.
25. Foundation on eastern side of temple before the Ulam.
26. The Heickal
(Note- Height of (14), the Foundation Stone (Even Shitiah) is not drawn to scale but drawn
exaggerated since it was only 3 finger breadths high.)
The figure below shows the temple structures overlaid on top of the existing bedrock. Note that
the altar is close to the summit. The actual summit of high ground is under the eastern half of the
Holy Place (the Heichal ) and the western end of the threshold leading into the Heichal. A
slopping of the rock is under the eastern most part of this rock being under the back end of the
Ulam, and the Threshold. The Diber is shown at the top of the high ground making its decent to
the west. The back end of the temple is shown on a built up foundation.

88

Fig. 17C

1. Location of 15 steps in Court of Women.


2. Court of Israel floored in either bedrock or sand.
3. Court of Priests at top of 3 big steps.
4. Altar foundation on bedrock.
5. Ulam of temple partly on eastern slope of rock under current Dome of the Rock building.
6. Rock under threshold of temple and eastern part of Heickal (Holy Place).
7. Western part of Heickal.
8. Debir (Holy of Holies) near where bedrock begins to slope downwards toward the west.

89

Figs. 18-19

90

Fig. 20.

91

Fig. 21.

92

Fig. 22

93

Figs. D1/D2

94

Figs. D3-D4

95

Figs. D5-D6

96

Figs. D7-D8

97

Fig. Note2

98

Fig. Note5

99

Fig.note13

100

Fig. Note14b

101

Fig. Note20

102

Fig. note4a(note20)

103

Fig. note23a-note23b.

104

Top is note23a- bottom is Fig. note23b

At the beginning of this paper, I discussed the creation of the 500 Cubit square (har ha biyt)
created either clockwise or counterclockwise. The description of the square created from point A
at the northeastern corner of the square is exactly the description of the blood sprinkling ritual
upon the square golden altar within the temple by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement.
(This was counterclockwise from the altars northeastern corner.) This can be more evidence the
big har ha biyt square and the small square altar was being consecrated from the same starting
corner. This line from northeastern to the northwestern corners of the square plays an important
part of the discussion in my paper proof of Jerusalem temples Location In The Church of The
Holy Sepulchre .

How I found method for locating the Temple


The method I used to deduce the system for working out the Jerusalem and Arad surveys did not
spring fully developed. There was a method involved. Here I give the method. (see figure
below)
On a drawing of the Temple Mount I placed the following:
1. I have Leen Ritmeyers Square drawn out (500 Cubits on a side)
2. Have my axis line drawn out. This I found many years previously as described in my book

Sacred Stones Sacred Stories vol. 1


3. I think what would happen if I drew a radius line from the northeastern corner of square (point A)
. Why this corner? I know the temple and the Dome of the Rock is on the western side of the
square. I must take the radius from the eastern side to get the arc of the curve to sweep through
the building.
4. Does nothing. I draw an equilateral triangle having two sides, the same length as the length of the
squares sides. Only one equilateral triangle is possible to be drawn to meet these conditions with
the short side on the eastern edge of the square. I set up this triangle from point (A) .
5. I notice the drawn axis line intersects the southern long leg of the triangle exactly at the point
of the line {(B) to(C)}. I suspect I am on to something.
6. Now I wanted to divide the triangle into equal segments.
7. I divided the square into four equal areas.
8. I found the eastern side having the short leg of the triangle was slightly longer then the half way
mark on the eastern side of the square.
9. This length (x), was exactly the length of the southern half of the eastern side.
10. If the total length of the eastern side was 500 Cubits, then the half distance was 500/2 or 250
Cubits.
11. Then the length of each segment of (x) was 250C / 4 or 62.5 Cubitsthe same length the Talmud
states was the length of the altar plus the length of the ramp, but ignoring the fraction of a cubit.
12. Then the total length of the short side of the triangle was 4x from the northern half, plus 1x from
the southern, making a total of 5x or 5* 62.5C = 312.5C.
13. The long sides of the triangle also divided perfectly into exactly 8 parts making a total of 8x or
8*62.5C = 500C.
14. Thus the triangle was 5:8:8 or 5x: 8x: 8x.
15. This ratio was 8/5 or 1.6 which was close to the Golden Ratio. I later learned this ratio may not
have been known by the ancient Egyptians, but the explanation of these numbers being in the
dimensions of the Tabernacle altar is what works to explain this particular ratio being used in this
design

105

16. On the northern side of the square we get 3x from point (A) to the NE corner of the inner
platform on an eastwest line which is 3*62.5C or 187.5C. This means we get 5x from this
corner of the inner platform to the western edge of the square on an eastwest line.
17.
The Talmud states the eastwest length of the Azarah inner courtyard was 187C the same
distance in the previous statement, but ignoring the fraction of a cubit. These numbers show
archeological evidence the inner platform still has dimensions recorded in the Talmud (although not
at the actual location of the Azarah).
18. If the line from (B) to (C) is 8x, then of this length is 2x from point (B) and 6x from point (C)
since 8x= 2x +6x.

106

107

I am Robert Kerson
I may be reached at:
rkerson@snet.net
My website is:
www.sacredstonessacredstories.com
My blog is:
http://www.1ofkersondiscoveries.wordpress.com
My youtube videos are at youtube.com. Search on the words <Robert Kerson> to find them.
My website, blog, and videos all have discussions on different topics including more details
concerning the Jerusalem temples.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Appendix 1.
This is a quote from the appendix P. 173. A theological Commentary to the Midrash by Joseph
Neusner vol. 8
but here the verse states: and the border went up to the side of the Jebusite southwardthe
same is Jerusalem (Josh. 15:8). This teaches that the chosen house was built in the property of
Benjamin. Another statement says house was in Benjamin. An example: Benjamin did not sell
brother Joseph. R. Meir says the chosen house was built in the property of Benjamin, and a
triangular section protruded there into the property of Judah. But I do not find any such triangle.
I do find that no part of the altar was in Judah. The scepter shall not depart from Judah (Gen.
39:10) [which refers to a point at which the property of Judah serves as the locus of government]
It refers to the Chamber of Hewn Stones [supreme court office] which was located in the
property of Judah. The entire chamber was in Judah, thus the border line between Judah and
Benjamin must have ran within the western wall of the Chamber of Hewn Stones.
The border line between the tribes could not have run along the line of the Azarah from west
to east, but across the Azarah from south to north to the S.E. corner of the altars foundation.
Appendix 2.
Here are very important pieces of evidence preserved in stories preserved about Julian the
Apostate that the temple was located on this site. The story tells about a pillar standing in water
found inside a quadrangular cave underneath the bedrock on the temple site. Such a quadrangular
cave does exist today under the Dome of the Rock. The cave did once have a leaning pillar
nearby. This pillar would have mimicked a ladder to the roof of the temple which would have
been close by this cave as discussed previously in this paper. But also, look at Figs. 12, 13, 3N
Note that the column of Boaz would have been located about where the entrance to the
current cave natural opening is. This is next to the current staircase into the cave by a feature
called the Tongue of the Rock. The story of a man entering this cave and finding a pillar
standing in water may have been a distant memory of the Boaz Column being near the current
opening into the cave.
The mention of water here likewise could have been a distant memory of water near this
108

location as detailed previously in the paper. Below is the actual quote:


. Julian the Apostate attempts to rebuild the temple. When foundations were laid, a workman
found a cave underneath in bedrock. He entered and explored the cave. It was quadrangular in
shape. When he returned to the mouth of the cave, he discovered a pillar standing in water.
Eccesiasticae Historicae, Nicephori Callisti, tome ii,lib. X, cap, xxxiii, and also in the
Patrologza Graeca, Migne, volume cxlvi, pages 542-3, and in the Epitome of the Ecclesiastical
History of Philostorgius. Quoted in masonicdictionary.com/enoch.html.
Appendix 3
A comparison of the Leen Ritmeyer temple location and mine.
My location can explain the following: (all of them discussed in this paper) He cannot explain
any of the following:
1. The exact location of the 500 Cubit square including any of its corners.
2. Dimensions, orientation of rectangular Azarah and also the square Court of the Women.
3. The anomaly of Cistern 24. Its location and possible remains of steps on its sloping surface.
4. The main orientation angle of cistern 5 and a number of other parallel and mirror imaged
features to this cistern can be explained.
5. Altar on bedrock.
6. Important distance of 11 Cubits can be explained by my system.
7. 1 Cubit2 notch in altar base being in line with Chamber of Hewn Stones.
8. Border line between Judah and Benjamin.
9. A host of alignments involving water, columns, ladders, with ancient legends.
10. No bedrock near steps on east side of inner platform.
11. The angles of the eastern and western edges of the inner platform.
12. The location of the southern edge of the inner platform.
13. Location priestly tombs 2000 Cubits from presumed site Chamber of Hewn Stones.
(Described by Leen Ritmeyer)
14. A number of sites utilizing the same basic survey system in their constructions: At Arad,
Palmyra, Ein Dora, Beth Shan, Tel Dan, Amrith, Baalbeck.
15. Hole in cave ceiling of rock.
16. Line up of steps with northern line of Cheil.
17. A number of depressions and flat areas on the rock surface which have alternate explanations.
18. Line up of temple axis line with half way point between bullets 11 and 15.
19. Davids place for the Ark.
20. Site of Sotah paving stone with iron ring attached.
Both can explain the following:
1. Ancient cisterns circling inner courts
2. Rectangular Depression in rock
3. Location of 500 Cubit square in line with rock within Church of Holy Sepulchre (discussed in
paper concerning church).
4. Division of areas around Azarah.
5. Details on rock surface.

109