על שני צדיו. פרש"י שני זויותיו אשר בשני צדיו ולכאורה היינו ארבע טבעות שצריך שנים לכל צד ותימה שהרי מזבח זה לא היה כי אם אמה ארכו ואמה רחבו וא"כ היכי עברו תרי גברי באמה חדא והלא גבי הארון הוצרכו לפרש שהיו הטבעות קבועין לרחבו כדי שיהיו הנשאין עומדין לארכו כי ברחבו לא מצו קיימי דלא הוי אלא אמתא ופלגא וכ"ש גבי מזבח דלא הוי אלא אמה וצ"ל דהכא לא היו נושאין אותו כי אם ב' בני אדם אחד לכל צד והוא היה עומד בין שני הבדים ושני ראשי הבדים בין שתי כתפיו: על שני צדיו, “on its two sides.” According to Rashi, what is meant here are the two corners of each side of the (golden) altar to which the rings had been fastened. Apparently, there were four rings which had been fastened to the four corners. This appears problematic. Seeing that the dimensions of the golden altar were only one cubit in length and one cubit in width, (60cm by 60cm), how could two men stand behind one another supporting the staves of this altar when carrying it? When explaining the position of the rings and the staves attached to the Holy Ark, it was understood that they were attached to the two long sides of the Ark, which were two and a half cubits long each. The reason they carried it in such a fashion was that the alternative, namely carrying it on the short sides which were one and a half cubits wide, (50% longer than the golden altar’s sides) was not considered long enough to enable two men to walk behind each other while carrying it, The only way we can understand Rashi, would be that only two men carried that altar, one on each side. They must have positioned themselves between the walls of the altar and the wooden staves supported by the rings through which they had been inserted.