6

Is there any halachic work around for a Jewish Temple and an Islamic shrine to be on the Temple Mount at the same time? I am talking about the the shrine know as Qubbat aṣ-Ṣakhra (or in English as the Dome of the Rock).

Are there any halachic restrictions on an Islamic shrine being on the Temple Mount? I am envisioning a scenario where both buildings are next to each other.

Can the Temple Mount be shared?

Islam, which is monotheistic, came into the picture way after the Gemara was finished (hence such a question was never brought in our legal codes). How would the Tannaim respond to this question?

Assuming that the Temple is in the halachically correct spot and the shrine is wherever they want it to be.

Improve this question
10
  • Are you assuming they need to be in the same spot or just both somewhere up on the platform?
    – Double AA ♦
    Commented May 11, 2022 at 14:21
  • Assuming that the Temple is in the halachically correct spot and the mosque where ever they want it to be.
    – Mars Sojourner
    Commented May 11, 2022 at 14:28
  • 1
    Ok, but if where they want it to be is the same spot we want our Temple then you'll still have a problem.
    – Double AA ♦
    Commented May 11, 2022 at 14:29
  • 2
    on Har Habayis you can't have any other structure. Rashi says that "lo sita lecha asheira kol eitz eitzel mizbach hashem elokecha" refers to planting any tree or building a house on Har Habayis
    – Esther
    Commented May 11, 2022 at 15:20
  • 2
    @Esther rambam rules that only apply in the azara (rashi on chumash is quoting the first half of the sifri, but he may agree halacha is like the other opinion). Indeed historically there was plenty of stuff up on har habayit in second temple times.
    – Double AA ♦
    Commented May 11, 2022 at 15:24

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

It is important to differentiate between the sanctified section of Temple Mount, which is 500 amot (roughly 270m) by 500 amot (Midot 2:1), and the entire site of today, which is much bigger.

There would not be any problem with a mosque on the non-sanctified area.

Improve this answer
10
  • What are your sources?
    – N.T.
    Commented Jun 17, 2022 at 9:48
  • Midot 2:1 and the map of today's Temple Mount.
    – tcdw
    Commented Jun 18, 2022 at 20:11
  • That does not cover your assertion about permissibility of mosque.
    – N.T.
    Commented Jun 19, 2022 at 19:42
  • Yes it does - the mosque is not situated in an area with any halachic sanctity, and is no different to any other mosque. No source is required to permit the existence of mosques, just like no source is required to permit the existence of car parks.
    – tcdw
    Commented Jun 21, 2022 at 4:38
  • That is just flat out wrong. See sefaria.org/Mishnah_Kelim.1.8?lang=he&with=all&lang2=he
    – N.T.
    Commented Jun 21, 2022 at 10:17
-6

You have asked an excellent question, that has interesting repercussions. The truth is, the Beit HaMiqdash has already been built. There is no reason this building cannot be used for the Avodah. In fact, the Byzantine historian Theophanes wrote,

“In this year [635 C.E.], Omar began to restore the Temple at Jerusalem, for the building, in truth, no longer then stood firmly founded, but had fallen to ruin. Now when Omar inquired the cause, the Jews answered saying, ‘Unless thou throw down the Cross, which stands on the Mt. of Olives, the building of the Temple will never be firmly founded.’ Thereupon Omar threw down the Cross at that place, in order that the building (of the Temple) might be made firm…”

The Dome itself easily fulfills the aspect of the Qadosh HaQadoshim. A mishkan with the kaporet would need to be erected to serve as the Qadosh.

So yes, Omar rebuilt the Temple for us.

Improve this answer
3
  • I do not know why this makes me sound like a Muslim. HaRav Shlomo Goren also wrote in his book "Har Ha Bayit" that the Dome of the Rock was founded as a shrine for Jews. This is why it does not face Mecca... There is nothing controversial about the statement I made. Unconventional, perhaps. But there is nothing halachicly that would prevent using the Dome as a Miqdash. The shalshelet dome, which marks where the Mizbeah was would have to be deconstructed. However, I would challenge you to find any halachic source that contradicts anything I have said.
    – JewAnon
    Commented Feb 12, 2023 at 17:11
  • 3
    Adding a full explanation of how this unconventional opinion is derived and how it fits with sources would be your responsibility, and would greatly improve the value of the answer
    – Rabbi Kaii
    Commented Feb 12, 2023 at 17:14
  • 1
    @RabbiKaii It sounds like he is relying on the Torah of Rabbi Shlomo Goren on the subject. I’ve tried to find a copy here in the United States for years unsuccessfully. But definitely authoritative.
    – Yaacov Deane
    Commented Mar 8 at 16:38

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .