The Mystery of Og’s Giant Bed

In recounting Israel’s victories over the Transjordanian kings, the Torah makes a curious note about the “bed of Og, the King of Bashan:”

For only Og, king of Bashan, was left from the remnant of the Rephaim. His bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbah of the children of Ammon? Nine cubits was its length, and four cubits its breadth, according to the cubit of a man.1

Why does the Torah include a description of Og’s enormous bed? Does the Torah mean an actual bed, or is there some other hidden meaning? As we explore this theme, we will also examine the broader context of this verse and clarify its cryptic references.

A Giant Bed for a Giant Man

Rashi takes this at face value, assuming it to be a reference to an actual bed. He explains that Og is called “the remnant of the Rephaim,” an ancient race of giants who once inhabited the land east of the Jordan River. According to tradition, Og was the sole survivor of a battle in Abraham’s time, in which Chedorlaomer’s alliance “smote the Rephaim.”2 He is even identified as “the fugitive” who informed Abraham of Lot’s capture, meaning Og had lived since the days of Abraham.

Now, centuries later, Og reigned in Bashan.

The verse points out that his massive bed was kept on display in “Rabbath of the children of Ammon,” i.e., Rabbah (modern Amman, Jordan), the capital of Israel’s Ammonite cousins. In Moses’ recounting, the mention, “behold, it is in Rabbah,” invites the audience to verify the story by that very relic.

How big was the bed? Scripture tells us that it was 9 cubits in length. A cubit is the size of a man’s forearm, which is in the general neighborhood of a half-meter. So 9 cubits is 4.5 meters, very large for a bed.

But there’s more. Rashi also notes—based on Targum Yonathan—that when the Torah describes the bed’s dimensions as “according to the cubit of a man,” it actually means according to Og’s own cubit – in other words, the bed was measured by Og’s giant forearm. This implies his bed (9 Og-cubits long) was even larger than nine regular cubits. 3

If we apply some of the famous Talmudic lore about Og to these dimensions, the size of his bed would be truly enormous. The Talmud relates that Moses—who, according to this account, stood ten cubits tall—took an axe ten cubits long, jumped ten cubits into the air, and struck Og in the ankle, killing him. If thirty cubits only reached Og’s ankle, one can only imagine the full scale of his stature—and, consequently, the size of his bed.4

This may explain why Rashi insists that the “cubits of a man” mentioned in the verse refer not to ordinary human cubits, but to Og’s own cubits. He never could have fit on a bed with such dimensions!

However, many other commentators do not take those numbers at face value. Rather, they assert that the bed described here is to be measured in standard cubits.5

An Iron Infant Crib

According to Rashbam, the “bed” mentioned was actually Og’s cradle from when he was a baby. A wooden cradle would not be able to withstand his immense strength, so they made one of iron. It remained on display in “Rabbath of the children of Ammon,” where Og had been raised, as a marvel of his extraordinary size in childhood. An adult typically goes through many beds in the course of their life, and would not single out a specific one to preserve, further supporting the argument that this was his infant bed. The phrase “by the cubit of a man” refers to a fully grown adult’s measure, emphasizing the cradle’s massive proportions.6

A Fortified Stronghold

Bechor Shor understands “Og’s bed” not as a literal bed, but as a metaphor for a fortified stronghold, as impenetrable as iron. Perhaps this is along the lines of modern English slang, in which a “crib” can refer to a person’s home.

“Nine cubits was its length,” refers to the height of the wall surrounding the fortress. “And four cubits its width, by the cubit of a man,” refers to the thickness of the wall, measured by standard human cubits.

According to this interpretation, when the verse asks, “Is it not in Rabbah of the children of Ammon?” it is referencing the fact that the fortress still existed so many years later. 7

Iron and the Eternal Temple

In a talk marking the fast day of the 10th of Tevet 1991, the Rebbe discussed the symbolic significance of iron (barzel).

In the prophet Ezekiel’s vision of the siege of Jerusalem, he is instructed to place a pan of iron between himself and the city as a sign of the impending siege.8 Chassidut explains that this “iron” not only alludes to destruction—iron tools being forbidden in the building of the Holy Temple9—but also carries a more profound symbolism of strength, and spiritual transformation.

The Midrash explains that iron was excluded from the Tabernacle and Holy Temple because it symbolizes Edom, who destroyed the Temple.10 In a similar vein, Og’s iron bed represents the opposing force to holiness. Og embodies the “barzel of kelipah”, the hardness of impurity.

Yet in the realm of holiness, iron takes on an entirely different meaning. It represents the unwavering strength of Torah scholars11 and the inner fortitude of the soul needed to resist the Evil Inclination.12 This “barzel of kedushah” is not destructive but redemptive.

On a mystical level, barzel is also an acronym for the four wives of Jacob: Bilhah, Rachel, Zilpah, and Leah. Interestingly, the maidservants Bilhah and Zilpah are listed before their mistresses, hinting at a deeper truth in Chassidut—that elevation often comes through descent, and that what is initially lowly can rise even higher.

This idea culminates in the future Holy Temple. While the First and Second Temples were made of gold, silver, and copper, the Third Temple will also include iron—a material previously excluded due to its destructive connotation. In the future, even iron will be elevated. What was once the force of destruction (used to destroy the Temple) will be transformed into a building block of the eternal Temple, expressing the ultimate redemption: not escaping the low, but refining and uplifting it.13