The Future of Jerusalem's Temple Mount
Giving Up the Temple Mount? Steven Plaut,
FrontPageMagazine, July 16, 2013
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ca8ae/ca8ae584f0e7612696d984eecf6fb329d37b6ab6" alt=""
The site has religious
significance for Christians as well. After the destruction of the Second
Temple, churches were sometimes erected there. When the Muslims conquered the
area, they followed the practice of building mosques or proclaiming as sacred to
Islam the religious sites of other religions. The Muslim general Umar bin
al-Khattab was the second Caliph and led the armies of Islam. In his writings
he expressed scorn for Jerusalem and never acknowledged its sanctity. When a
temporary mosque was erected on the Temple Mount (long pre-dating the current
Al-Aqsa mosque structure), it was placed in the southern edge of the Mount. A
general in the armies of Umar, an ex-Jew who had converted to Islam, pointed out
to Umar that placing the mosque in the northern section of the Mount would allow
Muslims to pray while facing both the Holy of Holies of the Jews and Mecca.
Umar insisted that it be placed on the southern margin so that Muslims would
pray facing Mecca but with their backsides toward the Holy of Holies. That is
where the Al-Aqsa mosque stands today.
Thus, the southern
edge of the Mount, that is located above the ruins of what archeologists call
Solomon’s Stables, has religious significance for Muslims. In the center of
the Temple Mount is another structure known as the Dome of the Rock, famous for
its golden domed roof. Some refer to it mistakenly as the “Mosque of Omar.”
But the structure is not a mosque at all and has no special religious
significance for Muslims. The problem is that this structure sits exactly on
the spot that most (but not all) experts, archeologists and rabbis, believe is
where the Holy of Holies once stood. It also contains the “Foundation Stone,”
which has religious significance for Judaism.
The Israeli army conquered the Temple Mount in 1967 in
the Six Day War, when Israel liberated Jerusalem from the illegal Jordanian
occupation. At the time Israel should have dismantled the “Dome of the Rock”
and moved it elsewhere, while leaving the Al-Aqsa mosque in peace. Muslims
could then continue to control and administer everything associated with the
mosque. But doing so did not require Israel to relinquish control over every
inch of the Temple Mount. The Israeli government nevertheless decided to pursue
tranquility through appeasement and cowardice (sound familiar?). Not only would
the Muslim religious authority be granted de facto hegemony over the entire
Temple Mount, they would also be granted the power to prohibit or restrict entry
to it for Jews.
This has been the
status quo ever since. Jews are often prevented altogether from entering the
Mount. At other times, Jews are permitted some limited access, but under
condition that they do not pray while on the Mount. Jews whose lips move
quietly while on the Mount have been arrested and evicted, motivating a few to
learn ventriloquism. Anyone daring to prostrate themselves while on the Mount
in the direction of the Holy of Holies is treated even more harshly. So here we
have the spectacle of the Israeli government backing a prohibition on Jews
praying in the holiest site of Judaism for fear of upsetting
Muslims.
Meanwhile, serious
collateral damage from Israel’s cowardly decision to maintain Muslim control of
the Mount has been the systematic destruction of artifacts and antiquities
uncovered on the Mount by the Muslims, particularly in cases where the artifacts
clearly point to the ancient Jewish presence on the Mount. Islamic radicals,
including the “moderates” from the Palestinian Authority, have long denied that
there ever were Biblical temples on the site, mountains of overwhelming
archeological and historic evidence notwithstanding. They have destroyed
priceless evidence to the contrary. UNESCO has never uttered a word in protest.
It should be noted that radical Muslims also object to Jews praying at the
Western Wall, which they also deny has religious significance for Jews. Jews at
the Wall are regularly assaulted by stone-throwing Muslims on the
Mount.
The status of the
Temple Mount and the question of public access to it for Jews is further
complicated because of some seemingly bizarre and esoteric features of Jewish
religious law. Rabbinic law prohibits Jews from entering the grounds where the
Temples stood while they are in a “state of impurity.” The notion of “state of
impurity” is a Biblical one, where one becomes “impure” by having any contact
with a dead body, including being present in a cemetery or funeral. This
impurity is not a moral judgment, and in some cases indeed one is commanded to
make oneself “impure” (such as attending a relative’s funeral or burying a
corpse found in public space), but merely serves as a basis for prohibiting
entrance into the Temple for ritualistic purposes. The Biblical “cure” for the
impurity using ashes from a special red heifer cannot be used today because no
such bona fide animals are available. The bottom line is that according to
Jewish rabbinic law itself, Jews may not enter the grounds where the Temple
stood, and especially not where the Holy of Holies stood.
On the one hand, the
Jewish religious restrictions upon Jews make the politics of the Temple Mount
seemingly easier to surmount. Religious Jews do not seek access to the center
of the Mount for religious purposes, the area where the Dome of the Rock now
stands. On the other hand, most of the Temple Mount is clearly outside the
grounds of the Biblical Temple, in areas where the “impure” may enter, and there
is no reason why Jews cannot enter these and conduct prayers there. (No one is
seeking to conduct Jewish religious activities inside the Al-Aqsa mosque!!) But
radical Muslim hegemonists consider this an affront to Islam. Not only must
Jews be denied access to the Temple Mount to “defend” the Mosque, but Jews
should be denied any sovereignty or presence in Jerusalem
altogether.
All of the above puts
some results from a recent public opinion poll into proper perspective. As
published in Makor Rishon, July 12, 2013, the vast majority of Israelis oppose
construction of a new Temple now, and opposition among religious Jews is even
stronger. Those who say they favor building of the New Temple may actually
mean they’d like the Messiah to show up and order such a move, not that
government bureaucrats do so. No one seems opposed to “preparing” for the
coming Messianic Age by doing things like tailoring garments for Temple priests,
forging Temple trumpets, or learning the rabbinic laws concerning conduct of
Temple ritual. Even the most ornery atheist can find nothing in such things
objectionable. A minority of Israeli Jews favor some preliminary construction
for a new Temple building, presumably including dismantling and relocating the
Dome of the Rock, but no such proposal is being seriously considered by the
government.
Interestingly, a full 72% of Israeli Jews favor partitioning of the
territory of the Temple Mount so that Muslim control and administration is
restricted to the Al-Aqsa mosque, and where Jews would have access to other
parts of the grounds. A large plurality favor legal initiatives that protect
Jewish rights of access to the Mount, including the right to conduct prayers
there. More generally, the entire legal status quo for the Temple Mount, under
which Israel relinquishes control to the Muslim religious authorities, serves as
yet another reminder that Jewish self-abasement and cowardice do not win Israel
any tolerance or goodwill. The time has come for Israel to make it clear that
it will no longer seek peace via gestures of debasement of Jewish dignity nor by
auto-suppression of the legitimate religious rights of Jews. If the Muslim
world should ever wish to come to terms with Israel and seek an actual modus
vivendi, then it will have to do so with an Israel that insists on the defense
of legitimate Jewish religious rights, including their right of access to (at
least) parts of the Temple
Mount.
No comments:
Post a Comment