Forum Replies Created
before you even think about getting the bais hamikdosh (or anything for that matter) you need to YEARN for it.
So, if I understand you correctly, it is OK to YEARN for the Beis HaMikdash but not do anything tangible about building it?
Is that like making hachanos for davening and then not actually davening?
History of the Jews under Muslim rule
In 1834, in Safed, Ottoman Syria, local Muslim Arabs carried out a massacre of the Jewish population of the city in the Safed Plunder.
In 1840, the Jews of Damascus were falsely accused of having murdered a Christian monk and his Muslim servant and of having used their blood to bake Passover bread. A Jewish barber was tortured until he “confessed”; two other Jews who were arrested died under torture, while a third converted to Islam to save his life.
Throughout the 1860s, the Jews of Libya were subjected to what Gilbert calls punitive taxation. In 1864, around 500 Jews were killed in Marrakech and Fez in Morocco. In 1869, 18 Jews were killed in Tunis, and an Arab mob looted Jewish homes and stores, and burned synagogues, on Jerba Island. In 1875, 20 Jews were killed by a mob in Demnat, Morocco; elsewhere in Morocco, Jews were attacked and killed in the streets in broad daylight. In 1897, synagogues were ransacked and Jews were murdered in Tripolitania.
In 1656, all Jews were expelled from Isfahan because of the common belief of their impurity and forced to convert to Islam. However, as it became known that the converts continued to practice Judaism in secret and because the treasury suffered from the loss of jizya collected from the Jews, in 1661 they were allowed to revert to Judaism, but were still required to wear a distinctive patch on their clothing.
In 1839, in the eastern Persian city of Meshed, a mob burst into the Jewish Quarter, burned the synagogue, and destroyed the Torah scrolls. It was only by forcible conversion that a massacre was averted. There was another massacre in Barfurush in 1867. In 1839, the Allahdad incident, the Jews of Mashhad, Iran, now known as the Mashhadi Jews, were coerced into converting to Islam.
Confined to city quarters, the Bukharan Jews were denied basic rights and many were forced to convert to Islam. They had to wear black and yellow dress to distinguish themselves from the Muslims.
Under the Zaydi rule, discriminatory laws became more severe against the Yemenite Jews, which culminated in their eventual exile, in what later became known as the Exile of Mawza. They were considered to be impure, and therefore forbidden to touch a Muslim or a Muslim’s food. They were obligated to humble themselves before a Muslim, to walk to the left side, and greet him first. They could not build houses higher than a Muslim’s or ride a camel or horse, and when riding on a mule or a donkey, they had to sit sideways. Upon entering the Muslim quarter a Jew had to take off his foot-gear and walk barefoot. If attacked with stones or fists by Islamic youth, a Jew was not allowed to defend himself. In such situations he had the option of fleeing or seeking intervention by a merciful Muslim passerby.
I bet this is all the fault of the “Tziyoinim.”
147: Make sure to pray on Har HaBayis.
It is a singular opportunity.
About Zionists being the root of all our woes:
A friend told me that he once asked a Satmar bachur who killed Gedalia ben Achikom. The boy replied, “The Tziyoinim.” He informed the boy that there were no Zionists around 2400 years ago. to which the boy replied, “All Reshu’im are Tziyoinim.”
There you have the Satmar Shittah: All troubles are caused by Reshu’im/Tziyoinim.
And, of course the main thing is to absolve all of us of personal responsibility. It is always “their fault.”
Putting aside the halachic prohibition, do you think that it is a good idea for Jews to ascend HHB? Should these actions be encouraged or discouraged?
Let me rephrase that:
If all of the Gedolim thought that it was GREAT idea to ascend HHB, would they all then oppose it on purely halachic grounds?
It is interesting to me that no sooner do these Rabbis declare that it is an issur that skirts kares, they discuss how not to do it because it ticks off the Arabs.
Can you see a responsible Rav saying something like that in other areas:
“This action is probably chilul Shabbos Deuraisah, so, you shouldn’t do it because it might upset the kana’im”?
I agree. I was citing the strict halachah.
The Azarah, including the Ezras Nashim and Chel, into which we are forbidden to enter these days because of corpse tumah, measures roughly 250 amos by 150 amos, including the area of the thickness of the old Azarah walls. That is aproximately 9500 square meters. The Har HaBayis area today measures around 150,000 square meters. That leaves 94 percent or so into which a man may enter after immersing in a mikvah. But even being concerned for all of the various chumros the large amah, a more expansive chel), we will be left easily with 80% of the Mount in which to walk. And, again, one cannot simply meander onto the Dome of the Rock platform, which contains the entire Azarah and some. It is ten meters high and can be reached only by going up a flight of stairs. And the police do not allow frum people to go there in any case.
We kinda do. We know the measurements from the Mishnayos. If the Dome of the Rock is the Makom HaAron, then we for sure can extrapolate everything. If it isn’t, there are still parts of Har HaBayis that we know for sure are Muttar. There are just a lot fewer of them.
Actually, we DO know exactly where one can go and where one cannot go. The area where there is kares is less than 6 percent of the mountain, and it is on a raised platform where the police do not let anyone that looks Jewish go anyway.
The “We do not know today where the prohibited areas are” is a libel no less insidious than the incitement one.
The Rabbis did say it 60 years ago, but that was then and this is now. They might not have known offhand in Sivan 5767, but today we know exactly where the Azarah was.
In any case, the area where (Jewish) religious people go up today is 100% OK by tumah and taharah standards. And most Rabbanim who are willing to address the matter at all agree to this.
Let me see if I understand this discussion:
1. does ascension to HHB actually provoke Arab violence, or is it just a convenient excuse for Mr. Abu Mazzen to call for terror attacks. in which case he has no shortage of convenient excuses?
2. does cessation of ascension to HHB cause even more Arab terror, by a. emboldening the Arabs in the notion that Al Kuds is theirs and b. allowing the Arabs a greater foothold in a strategic area, from which they can launch greater attacks in the near future (like in Gaza, where it took them a few years before they eventually began to shoot rockets and dig tunnels)
Can anyone prove any of these two points, using actual facts, and not just “EVERYONE knows” or “Rabbi A is greater than Rabbi B”?
I do not understand all this about “provoking” the Arabs. We are in the midst of a war with them. In a war does every bullet fired at the enemy constitute “provocation”; or must we wait until the enemy has their gun aimed at us before “provoking” him?
There seems to be some confusion here about “counquering” the Temple Mount and Eretz Yisrael in general.
The point in our gaining more strategic areas from the Arabs, rather than handing them crucial parts of the land on a silver platter so that they should not rabble-rouse, does not have to be in order to establish a Jewish kingdom there, although I would welcome such a thing. Perhaps, it is not proper to do that while still in Galus. This matter is debatable.
The point is that 5 million Jews live in Eretz Yisrael now, and they must be protected. And, yes, giving the Arabs Har HaBayis was aterrible tactical mistake, because it gave them a toe-hold in Jerusalem, which they now see as their capital. Had we retained sovereignty over the Mount, it is eminently likely that the Arabs would not be willing to “defend” Jerusalem itself. In Barak’s days we faced the possibility of Arafat ruling the Old City. You do the math. It is no secret that every concession to the Arabs has brought death and destruction to us.
It is very convenient to cowl in fear of Galus and do nothing. But by doing so we are simply putting ourselves in mortal danger.
There is not the slightest doubt as to what Rav Elyashiv held on this matter.
Is that so?
So, have you any clue why he held that ascension is assur – except what you have read here, in TYW, that it was because of political reasons (incitement)?
Where has he written a responsa on the matter? an we examine his sources and discuss them, as is the traditional Torah way of deciding the halachah?
So, this is how we decide halachah? No discussion of the issues, no Gemaras, no Rishonim, no Acharonim, no Responsa, no live Poskim. Just reports from a posek’s “sons and loyal talmidim,” and from tirades of Moshe Gafni in the Knesset, and from newspaper articles!
And you have the nerve to call this halachah.
So, you would advise an ill person to follow the instructions found in a medical book written 50 years ago?
Or investment advice from 1967?
The situation has changed. The Rabbanim today know that it is permitted to ascend. The matter is all political. Why else would Gafni get involved in Uri Ariel going up? Does he ever lambast Netanyahu for not being religious?
Plenty of religious (even Chareidi) people ascend these days, with permission of responsible, knowledgeable LIVE Rabbanim.
Depends which Gedolim, though. Some permit ascending.
Joseph: Why do you say it is Forbidden? Is there a halachic basis for that, or just because “EVERYONE knows” it is forbidden?