"The rabbis gave up first," writes Nadav Shragai in Haaretz concerning the question of sovereignty over the Temple Mount.Well yes they did. For political and practical reasons. Restoring the Temple would empty the synagogues and the Yeshivas. It would transfer the center of sacrality back to the Temple. Nobody wants to put themselves out of business.
Some quotes from Shragai,
This prohibition has been convenient for Israel's governments, all of which banned Jewish prayers on the Temple Mount (with the exception of visits) for reasons of preserving public order and preventing conflict.
Even Rabbi Zvi Yehuda Kook, the leader of the settlers movement, denied Jews entry to Temple Mount. Only recently has a group of religious-Zionist rabbis dared to change a ruling. But this is too little and perhaps too late.
Sovereignty cannot be exercised on Temple Mount when the sovereign is halakhically banned from entering the place where he wishes to exercise it. The sovereignty on Temple Mount either exists or it does not.
2 comments:
The author throws around the term "the rabbis" like antisemites throw around the term "the Jews."
And it didn't seem to bother you.
The author's statement, "The sovereignty on Temple Mount either exists or it does not" isn't true, either.
Everybody knows that in order for any Jewish presence on the Temple mount to be legal one thing has to occur first: We have to find a Red Heifer and cleanse ourselves of the impurity to which was have all been exposed. Only then can we even begin considering going up to the Temple mount, let alone commence construction of the Holy Temple.
Post a Comment