Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Numbers 17:2-5 describes the covering that was made for the altar from the fire-pans of Korach's rebels:

[...] 4 And Eleazar the priest took the brazen fire-pans, which they that were burnt had offered; and they beat them out for a covering of the altar, 5 to be a memorial unto the children of Israel, to the end that no common man, that is not of the seed of Aaron, draw near to burn incense before the LORD; that he fare not as Korah, and as his company; as the LORD spoke unto him by the hand of Moses.

From v.5 it sounds like this was a covering for the incense altar, not the bigger one. From v.4 (and earlier) it sounds like the fire-pans were beaten flat and joined together somehow.

My questions:

  • Was this formed into one big sheet or was it individual plates joined (hinged? linked?) together?

  • Did this cover stay in place while incense was being offered, or was it just a cover during "off" times and it was removed when the altar was to be used?

  • Was it used only in the Tabernacle or was it brought into Israel and used in the Temples as well?

  • Can 250 fire-pans be turned into a cover of that size? (How big is a fire-pan, anyway?)

(This question arose out of today's parsha chat.)

share|improve this question
    
"Was this formed into one big sheet or was it individual plates joined (hinged? linked?) together?" It seems from Rashi there that it was flattened, since he defines it as "מרודד," which translates (in my Hebrew-English dictionary) to "flattened." –  b a Jun 20 '12 at 18:57
    
@ba, flattened and left as plates, or flattened and welded (?) together into one big rigid sheet? (I am not a metalsmith. Can you tell? :-) ) –  Monica Cellio Jun 20 '12 at 19:04
    
Oh, I had assumed that "flattened" meant all welded together, but I didn't consider that they might have been flattened separately. –  b a Jun 20 '12 at 19:20
add comment

1 Answer

Rashi says it was the outer, Copper Mizbeach that was covered. This makes sense to me, since it was supposed to be a sign to Bnei Yisroel, and only the Kohanim really see the Gold Mizbeach. However, this certainly raises the question 'how is coating the Copper Mizbeach with more copper is a sign?'

It seems like this was a permanent covering, but I can't find a source. In addition, if it was permanent, it would be a physical burden for the Kohatites charged with carrying the Mizbeach.

I don't know what weight of copper was used in each fire-pan, however I calculated the surface area of the Copper Mizbeach as 11,004 square tefachim, or 1,834 square amas (of 6 tefach amas), based on the specifications on Eruvin 4a & Menachos 98a (see diagram). This means each fire-pan would need to be hammered thin enough to cover about 7 and a third square amas.

I'm also not sure if the Copper alter was used as is, replaced, or modified for the Beit Hamikdash.

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
1  
+1 for pictures! Do you just diagram sacred objects for fun? judaism.stackexchange.com/a/13841/759 –  Double AA Jun 21 '12 at 17:29
    
Mostly for fun, but also as research/inspiration for future art projects. –  zaq Jun 21 '12 at 17:50
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.