The last secret of the Temple: Where rests the Ark of the covenant?

“The greatest mystery of the Temple is not what was, but what was left to contain.”

1. The historical problem: why is it an enigma

1. In the First Temple (Solomon), the Ark is the absolute center of the Holy of Holies.
2. In the books of the bible that tell the the rebuilding of the Temple after the exile (Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah). not to mention that the Ark has become, or manufacturing, or for your transfer.
3. In all the literature of jewish Second Temple period we (the Bible late, 1-2 Maccabees, Josephus, Qumran, Mishnah, etc) it never appears a story that is believable that the Ark was inside the Second Temple.
4. At the same time, there are traditions very strong the Ark it was not destroyed, but hidden.

Hence the “enigma”:

• Historically, all indicate that the Holy of Holies of the Second Temple it contained the Ark.
• Traditionally, many insist that the Ark there is still, only hidden or out of scene until the messianic times.

2. What it says in the Hebrew Bible

2.1 Latest mentions of the Ark

• The last mention of clara in 2 Chronicles 35:3when king Josiah commanded the levites that put the Ark in the Temple of Solomon.
• After Josiahin the stories of the fall of Jerusalem and the exile (2 Kings 24-25; 2 Chronicles 36; Jeremiah), not narrates what happens to the Ark.
• The list of objects looted by Babylon (cups, utensils, etc) no mention of the Ark of the explicit form, which is already in the antiquity fed the idea that it had been hidden before the destruction.

2.2 Silence in the reconstruction

In Ezra and Nehemiah, which describes the reconstruction of the Temple and the reestablishment of the cult, are mentioned:

• altar, sacrifice, and the levites, holidays...
  But there is no mention of the construction or the presence of the Ark.

At the level of purely historical–literary:

The Bible not stated in any place the Ark has been in the Holy of Holies of the Second Temple.

3. Testimonies of the Second Temple period

3.1 2 Maccabees: Jeremiah hides the Ark

The text deuterocanónico of 2 Maccabees 2:4-8 tells us that the prophet Jeremiah he received an oracle, led the Tent, the Ark and the altar of incense the mount where it went up Moses (Nebo) and hid them in a caveby sealing the entrance, and declaring that will be hidden until God gathers his people and show his glory.

If one takes 2 Maccabees as historically reliable, the conclusion is clear:

At the time of the rebuilding of the Temple, the Ark would be hidden in the mount Nebonot in Jerusalem.

3.2 Josephus: a Holy of Holies empty

Flavius Josephus, a priest and a witness of the destruction of the Second Temple, described the building in The War of the Jews. When we speak of the Holy of Holiessays explicitly that on the inside, “there was nothing at all”; it was an inaccessible space.

That is to say, for a priest of the first century:

The Holy of holies of the Second Temple it contained the Ark, or any other visible object.

3.3 jewish Tradition about the “Stone of Foundation”

The Mishnah Yomá 5:2 describes the Holy of Holies in the era of the Second Temple:

• “Since I was removed from the Ark, there was a stone since the days of the early prophets, call ‘Stone of Foundation’ (Even ha-Shetiyá)raised three fingers on the ground, and on it put the High Priest brazier (with coals) on Yom Kippur.”

The same tradition is repeated in sources talmudic and modern studies on the Rock of Foundation, identified with the rock under the Dome of the Rock.

The conclusion of these sources rabbinical:

• The Ark was no longer.
• Your place marked a rock/stone, which became the rite of Yom Kippur.

4. The liturgy of Yom Kippur without Ark

In the Torah (Leviticus 16), the High Priest was to sprinkle the blood “before the mercy seat”, that is to say, on the lid of the Ark.

In the Second Temple, according to the Mishnah Yomá, the rite fits:

• Since do not spray it on the mercy seat, but in front of the stone where was supposed to be the Ark in the First Temple.

This implies:

1. Explicit recognition the Ark was not present.
2. At the same time, continuity of the place: it keeps the exact point where would have been the Ark, and mark it with the stone.
3. The Holy of Holies retains its maximum holiness, although materially is empty.

“No Ark and without mercy seat, and the Holy of Holies remained the center of the world.”

5. Rabbinic traditions about the fate of the Ark

Within the rabbinic literature and posrabínica there are multiple lines:

5.1 Ark hidden beneath the Temple Mount

A tradition that is very widespread (Talmud, midrashim and later rabbinic literature in medieval and modern) argues that:

• Solomon, to build the First Temple, it would have prepared underground chambers, secret to hide the Ark in case of danger.
• Towards the end of the period of the First Temple, the king Josiahin anticipation of the destruction, I would have commanded hide the Ark down there.

In this line, it says:

The Ark remains hidden “in your place” —in an underground enclosure under the Holy of Holies— and will be revealed in the messianic era.

From this perspective:

• In the Second Temple, the Ark was not visible in the Blessed, but it was still present “beneath” symbolically.
• The High Priest served on the Stone Foundation, which was about the whereabouts hidden from the Ark.

5.2 Ark hidden by Jeremiah (jewish version 2 Maccabees)

Although 2 Maccabees is deuterocanónico in canon christian, the tradition of Jeremiah hiding the Ark it is also reflected in the sources of jewish subsequent return to that reason.

Here, the emphasis is on:

• The Ark is outside of Jerusalemin a remote place (Mount Nebo or other).
• Do not play any role is physical in the Second Temple.

5.3 Other variants rabbinical

In some sources, there are references to it more generic:

• That the Ark was hidden by the priests before the site babylonian.
• Or it was removed to an unknown place by divine order.

But the common point is always the same:

It is not in the Holy of Holies of the Second Temple.

6. Testimonials are not jewish and christian tradition primitive

6.1 The episode of Pompey

Later authors, supported by Josephus, remember when Pompey (63. e. c.) he entered the Temple, he wanted to see the Holy of Holies, and found him empty, which surprised him.

This reinforces:

• In the eyes of an external observer he had not Arca or any object.
• The character “mysterious” of the empty space was already visible to the pagans.

6.2 Readings christian theological

In a good part of the christian tradition:

• The absence of the Ark in the Second Temple is interpreted as symbol of the withdrawal of the divine presence (shechinah).
• Christ (or the christian community) is seen as the “new Ark” where dwells the presence of God.
• The tearing of the veil after the crucifixion shows that the Holy of Holies was already “empty” in the sense of both material and spiritual.

Beyond the theological evaluation, to your question, what is relevant is that also this tradition assume that the Ark was not there.

7. Consensus academic modern

Historiography and archaeology today, working with:

• Bible Hebrew
• Deuterocanonical (2 Maccabees)
• Josephus
• Mishnah, Talmud and midrash
• Archaeological data of the Temple Mount (very limited for political and religious reasons)

arrive almost unanimously to three basic points:

1. The Ark disappears from the documented history with the fall of the First Temple.
2. There is No historical evidence or archaeological reliable that has been placed in the Second Temple.
3. The Holy of Holies of the Second Temple was emptyunless the Stone Foundation, which marked the former site of the Ark.

In other words, for the academy:

No: the Ark was not in the Holy of holies of the Second Temple.
There was a holy space empty that worked liturgical and symbolically as the Holy of Holies.

About the ultimate fate of the Ark (destroyed, hidden under the Temple Mount, hidden by Jeremiah, Ethiopia, etc), the consensus academic is that there is no evidence testable; are traditions and legendsinteresting from the point of view of religious and cultural, but not verifiable historically.

8. Main hypotheses as to the whereabouts of the Ark

To close the map of the debate, these are the great lines:

1. Destruction or loss during the conquest babylonian
   • Hypothesis more sober historically.
   • The Ark would have been destroyed, melted, or loss without registration.
2. Hidden under the Temple Mount (rabbinic tradition classical)
   • Preparation of secret chambers by Solomon.
   • Josiah (or priests) the hiding there.
   • In the Second Temple: Holy of Holies empty, but the Ark would “under”, invisible.
3. Hidden in the Mount Nebo by Jeremiah
   • Version 2 Mac 2:4-8.
   • Implies that the Ark you no longer have physical relationship with the Second Temple.
4. Other traditions later (Ethiopia, Templars, etc)
   • Very late and without support in the sources of the Second Temple period.
   • Have value more mythical–religious history.

9. Theological implications and symbolic

From the point of view of the theology of jewish Second Temple and rabbinic later:

1. Holiness is not dependent on an object (the Ark), but of the place:
   • The Holy of Holies, preserving the maximum kedushá even if it is empty.
   • The Stone Foundation it is the focus: the place where it was supported the Ark, where God created the world, where Abraham offered up Isaac, etc
2. Transformation of the cult:
   • The sacrifice of Yom Kippur is done without Arkadapting the rite.
   • This shows a flexibility liturgical to preserve the biblical structure in conditions changed.
3. Shift of emphasis towards the Torah, prayer, and the halachah:
   • After the destruction of the Second Temple, rabbinic judaism can go ahead without the Ark, without a Temple and without sacrificesbut with:
     • Torah study
     • Prayer sinagogal
     • Life halachic daily

That is to say, the “emptiness” of the Ark in the Second Temple anticipated, in some way, the possibility of judaism dematerialized object sacred central.

10. Synthetic answer to the question

If we ask the question in precise terms:

What in the era of the Second Temple was physically the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of holies?

The answer, supported by primary sources and current research, is:

• Historically and according to the sources of the period: no.
  • Josephus describes a Holy of Holies empty.
  • The Mishnah and the Talmud describes the service of Yom Kippur, on a rock, not on the Ark.
  • Biblical texts late not to mention your return.
• Traditionally, since the jewish faith: the Ark was not visible or accessible, but not necessarily had ceased to exist.
  • For some, it was hidden under the Temple Mount.
  • For others, hidden by Jeremiah abode in the Mount Nebo.

Therefore, what we “know” about the riddle is:

1. There was No Ark in the interior of the Holy of Holies of the Second Temple.
2. The Holy of Holies was an empty space whose holiness was sustained by the place, not by the object.
3. The various traditions about the fate of the Ark (under the Temple, Mount Nebo, destruction, etc) respond to needs theological, symbolic, and continuityrather than verifiable data.
4. The current debate is no longer “whether or not it was in the Second Temple” (there the consensus is negative), but where he went and what it means to your absence/presence to the theology of judaism and, secondarily, christian.