Commento su Middot 4:1
פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, גָּבְהוֹ עֶשְׂרִים אַמָּה וְרָחְבּוֹ עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת. וְאַרְבַּע דְּלָתוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ, שְׁתַּיִם בִּפְנִים וּשְׁתַּיִם בַּחוּץ, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (יחזקאל מא), וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַהֵיכָל וְלַקֹּדֶשׁ. הַחִיצוֹנוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח לְכַסּוֹת עָבְיוֹ שֶׁל כֹּתֶל, וְהַפְּנִימִיּוֹת נִפְתָּחוֹת לְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת לְכַסּוֹת אַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת, שֶׁכָּל הַבַּיִת טוּחַ בְּזָהָב, חוּץ מֵאַחַר הַדְּלָתוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּתוֹךְ הַפֶּתַח הָיוּ עוֹמְדוֹת, וּכְמִין אִצְטְרָמִיטָה הָיוּ, וְנִקְפָּלוֹת לַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶן, אֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה, וְאֵלּוּ שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת וּמֶחֱצָה, חֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, וַחֲצִי אַמָּה מְזוּזָה מִכָּאן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם), וּשְׁתַּיִם דְּלָתוֹת לַדְּלָתוֹת שְׁתַּיִם מוּסַבּוֹת דְּלָתוֹת, שְׁתַּיִם לְדֶלֶת אֶחָת וּשְׁתֵּי דְלָתוֹת לָאַחֶרֶת:
L'ingresso del Santuario aveva vent'anni Amot alta e dieci Amot larga. Aveva quattro porte, due all'interno [dell'ingresso] e due all'esterno, come dice "C'erano due porte per il Santuario e per il Santo dei Santi" (Ezechiele 41:23) Quelle esterne [ le porte] si aprono nell'apertura [dell'ingresso] per coprire le pareti, mentre quelle interne si aprono nel Santuario per coprire le porte dietro, poiché l'intero Santuario era coperto d'oro, eccetto dietro le porte. Rabbi Yehuda dice, [le porte] sono stati collocati al centro del modo di ingresso, e sembrava porte pieghevoli, questi [le porte esterne] coperchio due anni e mezzo Amot e questi [le porte interne] coperchio due anni e mezzo Amot , [lasciando] mezza amah e uno stipite ad una estremità, e mezza amah e uno stipite all'altra estremità, come si dice, c'erano due porte per [ciascuna] porta, due porte a battente, due per una porta e due per l'altro ". (Ezechiele 41:24)
Bartenura on Mishnah Middot
English Explanation of Mishnah Middot
It had four doors, two on the inner side, and two on the outer, as it says, “And the Hekhal and the Sanctuary had two doors” (Ezekiel 41:23).
The outer ones opened into the interior of the doorway so as to cover the thickness of the wall, while the inner ones opened into the Temple so as to cover the space behind the doors, because the whole of the Temple was overlaid with gold except the space behind the doors.
Rabbi Judah says: they stood within the doorway, and they resembled folding doors. These were two cubits and a half [of the wall] and these were two cubits and a half, leaving half a cubit as a doorpost at the one end and half a cubit as a doorpost at the other end, as it says, “And the doors had two leaves apiece, two turning leaves, two leaves for the one door and two leaves for the other” (Ezekiel 41:2.
Chapter four deals with the Sanctuary or Hekhal in Hebrew. I will call it the Hekhal henceforth in order to encourage the use of Hebrew. The Hekhal was the main structure of the Temple and it stood between the Porch and the Holy of Holies.
Section two: The Hekhal had four doors. Two doors were in the thickness of the wall of the Hekhal, which ran the length of the opening, facing the Hekhal, one on the left and one on the right. Two others were on the other side, facing the Porch.
Section three: The wall of the Hekhal was six cubits in breadth. The doors were each five cubits long, so that when they opened they would cover five of the six cubits of the thickness of the wall. The extra cubit was taken up by the door post. The inner ones opened into the Hekhal, and when opened they would cover the part of the inside of the Hekhal that was not overlaid with gold. The doors were also covered with gold, so that when they were open only gold would be seen.
Section four: Rabbi Judah envisions a different set-up for the doors. Each door was like a folding door and they stood within the doorway and all of them were used to cover the thickness of the wall, each covering 2 ½ cubits of the wall. In other words, the doors did not open into the Hekhal. Rabbi Judah seems to interpret “two turning leaves” as proof that each door was a type of folding door. It is interesting to note that there may be a bit of tension here between the first opinion and Rabbi Judah as to how we know what occurred in the Temple. The first opinion may be based more on tradition or even recollections whereas Rabbi Judah’s opinion is based on more on the text found in Ezekiel.