Skip to: Most Recent Newsletter - Newsletter Archive - Updates Archive
Events Archive - Newsletter Subscription

News Update:

Where's the compromise over the Temple Mount?

reprinted from The Jerusalem Post
Oct. 31, 2009

by David Kirshenbaum

In seeking to present a modus vivendi for the Temple Mount that "mainstream" Israelis can support, The Jerusalem Post's editorial, "The 'Third Templars'" (October 27, 2009) falls surprisingly short in fairness and substance.

The characterization of those who seek to change the status quo on the Temple Mount as "post-Zionists," "messianic followers" of the Lubavitcher Rebbe and "Third Templars" is false. A number of synagogues in my hometown of Beit Shemesh schedule regular visits to the Temple Mount. The vast majority of the members of those synagogues are immigrants from Western countries. We yearn to pray on the Temple Mount and not be muzzled and followed every step of the way by the religious bigots of the Wakf.

Far from being post-Zionists, we made aliya by choice, and as our children have grown, we watched with pride and knots in our stomachs over the years as they joined their fighting units in and around Gaza and Lebanon.

Wild-eyed messianics? Cultists? After we come down from our visits to the Temple Mount, we can be found at our day jobs as doctors in this country's hospitals, university professors, educators at prominent religious institutions, participants in the country's thriving hi-tech industry and lawyers at the most prominent law firms and financial institutions. Our rabbi, who has led many of our visits, is a former tanker in the IDF and was one of the subjects of a Jerusalem Post article last year about an interfaith legal studies program.

SIMILARLY, EVEN the most cursory good faith check would expose the speciousness of the "post-Zionist" and "messianic" labels the Post uses to deride the many rabbinical figures who are advocating that Jews be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount. This, for example, is how Haaretz described the Temple Mount conference in its October 26 issue. "Top religious Zionist leaders came together Sunday at a rightist conference advocating Jewish ascent to the Temple Mount. It's hard to remember when was the last time Israel saw such a unity between its religious Zionist leaders. Political rivals such as MKs Uri Orbach and Michael Ben-Ari sat side by side on the center stage. Moderate rabbis 'respectful of the government' like Rabbi Yuval Cherlow and Rabbi Ya'acov Medan came together with 'rebellious haredi nationalists' such as Rabbi Elyakim Levanon and Rabbi Dov Lior."

One of the most widely respected Zionist rabbis in the country, Chief Rabbi of Haifa She'ar Yashuv Cohen, has long championed a change in the status quo on the Temple Mount. Cohen, who has chief responsibility for the Chief Rabbinate's dialogue with the Vatican and has had tremendous success in working together with the large non-Jewish communities in Haifa, has for many years been trying to gain support among both his rabbinic colleagues and the political echelon for establishing a synagogue on the Temple Mount.

Indeed, "mainstream Israelis," on whose behalf the Post purports to be speaking, would find a much higher comfort level and far more common ground with the rabbis who support Jews entering and praying on the Temple Mount than with those rabbis who favor a ban on Jewish entry.

In trying to reach what the Post refers to as "the perfect compromise" on this very weighty issue, it's important to understand the respective Jewish and Arab positions. The two holiest places in Islam are Mecca and Medina, both in Saudi Arabia. Not only are non-Muslims forbidden entry into the Ka'ba in Mecca, Islam's holiest spot, Islam forbids any non-Muslim from stepping foot anywhere in Mecca or Medina.

Following Muhammad's death, Muslim religious figures began teaching that Jerusalem was also holy to Islam. Notwithstanding that Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran and is 1,200 kilometers from Mecca, Jerusalem was asserted to be Islam's third most holy site. By contrast, Judaism does not seek control of or ascribe holiness particular to the Jewish religion to any place outside of Israel. The Temple Mount in Jerusalem is the place most holy to the Jews, with Jerusalem cited in the Bible 669 times.

Judaism has no designs on Mecca or Medina and does not wish to deny religious rights to Muslims in those or any other city. Indeed, none of those attending this week's Temple Mount conference seek to deny Muslims the right to pray at their third holiest place - the Aksa Mosque. Rather, they are simply asking that Jews be allowed to pray on their holiest of sites. The Muslims vehemently deny any Jewish rights to the Temple Mount - in their eyes the First and Second Temples never existed - and militantly pursue exclusive rights of religious worship there.

IT IS surely curious then that the Post finds that Jews who wish to open their mouths in prayer on the Temple Mount are the "extremists" and that the Jews, not the Muslims who deny basic historical facts and exhibit not even a thread of tolerance, are said to be "high on a toxic potion." Even when a religious Jew simply pauses on the Temple Mount for the "silent meditation and inspiration" that the Post editorial suggests should be more than enough for the Jews, this is often too much for the Wakf thought police.

So while no non-Muslim can step foot anywhere in Islam's holy cities, Muslims can gather on the Temple Mount by the hundreds of thousands and they can play soccer and have picnics on Judaism's holiest site. And the Jews? After being thoroughly checked for any religious contraband and warned not to recite any prayers, they can silently and quickly walk through the Mount in very small groups.

Surely, this cannot honestly be deemed the Post's "perfect compromise." The confluence between a policy of appeasement and overly stringent rulings by certain influential rabbinic authorities has led to the situation where we are in danger of losing the Temple Mount. Ask an average Israeli of whatever age - religious or not - what the holiest place in Judaism is and they're likely to say the Western Wall. One will probably get the same answer from most foreign correspondents operating here. This type of ignorance has led to suicidal "peace" proposals, such as Barak's Camp David offer in 2000 and the still heavily pushed Geneva Plan, where the Jews will get the Western Wall and the Arabs the Temple Mount.

Even if one is motivated purely by realpolitik, which when you cut through the veneer of the smirches is what seems to really be at the heart of the Post's editorial, it would be fool hardy to think that Jews could live safely in any part of Jerusalem if it did not maintain exclusive control of the Temple Mount.

Is it too much to ask that the country's laws be protected and enforced and that we not become a society where Arab threats of force and violence become an easy excuse to deny Jews fundamental rights on its holiest spot on earth?

The writer is an attorney in Israel and New York.

Security Official: Waqf Quietly Pleased at Raed Salah's Arrest

reprinted from The Jerusalem Post
Oct. 29, 2009

Khaled Abu Toameh

Heads of the Waqf Department have quietly expressed their satisfaction with the Israeli authorities' recent measures against Sheikh Raed Salah, leader of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, and top Fatah operative Hatem Abdel Qader, a senior official with the Ministry for Internal Security said on Thursday.

Salah and Abdel Qader have each been arrested by the Jerusalem Police for their role in instigating the latest wave of violent protests at the Temple Mount.

The two have also been banned by the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court from entering the Old City of Jerusalem for different periods of time.

The official praised the heads of the Waqf Department for their role in "calming the situation" and preventing a further deterioration.

Noting that the Waqf Department, which reports to the Jordanian Government, had refrained from joining the "wild campaign of incitement" against Israel in recent weeks, the official told The Jerusalem Post that the heads of the department were "very pleased" that Salah and Abdel Qader have been banned from entering the Temple Mount.

"The directors of the Waqf Department in Jerusalem did not like the fact that Sheikh Salah and Abdel Qader were meddling in the affairs of the Temple Mount," the official said. "Some of the people at the Waqf even advised us to take certain measures to keep the followers of the two men away from the holy site."

The official would not say whether the Waqf heads were acting on instructions from their superiors in the Jordanian Government.

However, he pointed out that the Jordanian authorities have also expressed dissatisfaction with the activities of Salah and Abdel Qader and their followers on the Temple Mount.

The official said that the Jerusalem police and the Waqf Department have for years maintained a "constructive, frank and positive dialogue" to ensure that the status quo on the Temple Mount was preserved.

"We have a common interest with the Waqf Department," the security official continued. Both of us are aware of the dangers coming from Fatah and the Islamic Movement."

He added that in recent weeks Waqf officials told Israeli police officers in private that they were worried by the increased activities of Fatah and Sheikh Raed Salah's followers on the Temple Mount.

"Most of the young men who had barricaded themselves inside the Aqsa Mosque during the recent events belonged to the northern branch of the Islamic Movement or Fatah," the Israeli official disclosed.

"The cooperation of the Waqf Department with the Israeli authorities prevented a serious deterioration and bloodshed," the official said.

"The problem is that there are certain things the Waqf managers can't say in public; that's why they tell us what they really feel only behind closed doors. And the truth is that the Waqf doesn't want troublemakers like Salah and Abdel Qader on the Temple Mount."

Fundamentally Freund: Dare to dream of a rebuilt Temple

reprinted from The Jerusalem Post
Oct. 28, 2009

by Michael Freund

Something astonishing, even alarming, is taking place in the battle over the future of Jerusalem. Even as Palestinian rioters run amok on the Temple Mount, egged on by the radicals of the Islamic Movement, much of the anger and dismay in the Israeli and international press is being directed, ironically enough, at Jews who merely wish to visit the site.

Mustering all the righteous indignation at their disposal, the media have been filled in recent days with all kinds of pejoratives to describe them, ranging from "extremist" to "fringe" to "ultra-right-wing,' as though a Jew's desire to exercise his basic, fundamental rights somehow constitutes an act of provocation.

Local pundits and commentators alike have also joined the fray, going to great lengths to justify the restrictions imposed by the police on Jews wishing to visit the Mount, even accusing the would-be pilgrims of seeking to trigger a firestorm of Islamic fury. It does not seem to bother them one whit that the policy in place today is entirely discriminatory in nature, as the followers of Muhammad are allowed to visit and pray where Solomon's Temple once stood, but not the followers of Moses.

Indeed, all the enlightened defenders of civil rights, and the champions of equality before the law suddenly fall silent when capitulation to Muslim threats is given preference over respecting vital Jewish rights.

And why not, you might be asking. After all, if it is just a bunch of kooks who want to ascend the Mount, why go to all this trouble on their behalf? Needless to say, this approach plays straight into the hands of our foes, whose ultimate goal is to wrestle the holy site away from us by denying its historical and spiritual connection with the Jewish people.

AND WHAT a sad and pitiful sight this is to behold. Before our very eyes, we are witnessing a concerted effort to delegitimize and even demonize our people's most cherished dream: the longing for the Temple. The very aspiration that was born in the moments when Roman flames engulfed the Second Temple more than 1,900 years ago, and which was carried in Jewish hearts throughout centuries of exile, has now become an object of scorn, mockery and ridicule.

Make no mistake: This is nothing less than an unbridled assault on Judaism itself, and it is time for the derision and name-calling to stop.

Opine all you want about how to "solve" the Jerusalem issue, but don't belittle the place of the Temple in Jewish eschatology or belief. Like it or not, the longing for a rebuilt Temple is no less central to Judaism than the desire for peace or social justice. And dreaming of a time when the Temple will stand again is no more fanciful or fanatical than hoping for the day when poverty and hunger will be eliminated.

Just open any prayer book and you will see what I mean. Every day, three times a day, Jews conclude the Amida prayer, which is central to our liturgy, with the following plea: "May it be Your will, O Lord our God and the God of our forefathers, that the Holy Temple be rebuilt, speedily in our days."

Does this mean that every Jew who prays daily is a wild-eyed extremist? And just a few weeks ago, in the Musaf prayer recited on the festival of Succot, we implored God to "be compassionate to us and to Your Temple with great mercy, and rebuild it soon and magnify its glory."

Is this utterance the province merely of the "ultra-right-wing"?

The Temple and its sacrificial rites are a core component of our faith, and they play a central role in the Jewish vision of a better world. Vilifying those who uphold this belief is simply an act of small-minded intolerance and bigotry, and it has no place in the current debate.

And denying Jews the right to visit the Temple Mount is no less objectionable, for it tramples upon the principal constitutional values which underpin our democracy.

As Thomas Jefferson pointed out some two centuries ago, "The most sacred of the duties of a government is to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens." That means that when Palestinian Arabs try to prevent Israeli Jews from visiting the Temple Mount, it is the responsibility of the powers that be to come to the defense of the latter, rather than to capitulate to the former.

So let's stop bad-mouthing those who want to visit or pray where our forefathers once stood. And let's bear in mind one very important rule: The real extremism is not to dream of a Temple, but to attempt to silence those who do.

Temple Activist Asks Court: Protect Me from Police

reprinted from Arutz 7
Cheshvan 10, 5770, 28 October 09

by Gil Ronen

Yehudah Glick, Head of the Organization for Human Rights on the Temple Mount, filed a motion to the Supreme Court against the Israel Police Thursday, accusing them of contempt of court. He claimed that the police are "seeking revenge" against him because of his public and legal activity aimed at exposing their illegal conduct.

Glick noted that after he filed a motion several months ago against the prevention of his ascent to the Temple Mount, the High Court determined, with police consent, that the police would formulate a document which Glick would sign. That document would commit him to behave according to the rules of behavior on the Temple Mount, while the police would agree in return to allow him into the holy site.

Two weeks passed

Glick said that he signed the document two weeks ago yet the police continue to block his way onto the Temple Mount. He added that he has no doubt that the police are behaving vindictively in this matter.

The Organization for Human Rights on the Temple Mount petitioned the High Court earlier this year in a bid to stop the Israel Police's discrimination against religious Jews at the entrance to the Mount. Police denied the charges but the organization prepared a report showing that the police lied to the court, Glick said. This, and the recent conference in favor of Jewish ascent to the Temple Mount, which he helped organize, caused the police to seek revenge against him, he maintained.