August 16, 2024|י"ב אב ה' אלפים תשפ"ד Ben-Gvir and Temple Mount Tensions By Rabbi Jonathan Muskat

The recent visit of Israeli Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir to the Temple Mount on Tisha B’Av has reignited a long-standing debate over the site’s status and the broader implications of Jewish prayer there. Ben-Gvir’s assertion that Jews should be allowed to pray on the Temple Mount challenges the decades-old status quo, sparking significant controversy both within Israel and internationally.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, along with several prominent Jerusalem-based rabbis, criticized Ben-Gvir’s actions. Rabbis such as Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, former Chief Sephardic Rabbi, and Rabbis Avigdor Nebenzahl, Shmuel Betzalel, Simcha Rabinowitz, and David Cohen reaffirmed the traditional ruling against Jewish prayer at the site. Their statements were widely circulated, even with Arabic subtitles on platforms like PANet, to ease concerns within the Arab community that Israel might seek to alter the delicate balance at the Temple Mount.

The controversy raises two fundamental questions: the halachic (Jewish legal) issue and the geopolitical implications of ascending to the Temple Mount.

From a halachic perspective, the issue is complex. Jewish law traditionally forbids entry into the Mikdash (sanctuary) area of the Temple Mount for those who are ritually impure—a status that, due to the absence of the ashes of the red heifer (parah adumah), applies to everyone today. However, not all areas of the Temple Mount are considered part of the Mikdash, and some halachic authorities argue that one can ascend to certain areas after proper ritual immersion in a mikvah. While some authorities are uncomfortable with ascending due to concerns about reverence and the potential for inadvertently entering forbidden areas, others permit it and consider it a legitimate halachic position.

The geopolitical question is equally complex. On one side, there is the argument that asserting Jewish prayer rights on the Temple Mount could dangerously inflame tensions with the Arab community. On the other hand, there is a compelling argument for equal religious rights, asserting that if Muslims can pray on the Temple Mount, Jews should be able to as well. This argument is grounded in the belief that the Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism, and Jews should not be barred from fully expressing their faith there.

It is important to note that supporting the right to pray on the Temple Mount does not necessarily align one with the extreme political views associated with figures like Ben-Gvir. However, Ben-Gvir has become closely associated with the movement to assert Jewish prayer rights on the Temple Mount, complicating the issue. His controversial past, including his admiration for Baruch Goldstein, participation in protests against investigations of soldiers accused of abusing Palestinian prisoners, and his support for the migration of Gaza residents, has made him a polarizing figure.

Ben-Gvir has effectively become the face of the movement advocating for Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount. While it is entirely legitimate to support or oppose praying there from both a halachic and geopolitical perspective, we must not allow him to dominate the narrative of the Temple Mount movement, given his extremist stance on other issues. The world currently associates him with this cause, making support for it more controversial and challenging. While Ben-Gvir may not care about global opinion, Israel desperately needs the backing of allies like the United States for military aid and other forms of support. Therefore, it is crucial to consider how the world perceives this issue. Those who support ascending the Temple Mount and praying there must first distance Ben-Gvir from his current role in the movement before attempting to change the status quo.