Posted to Israel on

Israeli Court Allows Jewish Prayer on Temple Mount

by Israel National News

Temple activists were euphoric Monday after a precedent-setting ruling by Magistrates’ Court Judge Malka Aviv in the case of Yehuda Glick vs. the Israeli Police, a day earlier. The judge ruled that the police “must make sure that Jews are able to pray on the Temple Mount” – in a ruling replete with harsh criticism of the police’s policies on the Temple Mount.

Activists were quoted on a Temple activists blog as saying: “This day will be remembered for generations in the annals of the struggle for the return of Jews to the Temple Mount.”

The police are legally bound “to ensure that Jews are able to pray on the Temple Mount, and not to act sweepingly to prevent Jews from praying on the Temple Mount,” the judge determined.

Attorney Aviad Visoly, who represented Glick said Tuesday that the verdict “has made prayer on the Temple Mount ‘kosher’. In essence, the court took the Supreme Court’s rulings about the Jews’ right to pray on the Temple Mount, and implemented them.”

“This is almost the first ruling – and certainly the most sweeping – in which the court implements the right of Jews to pray on the Temple Mount. From today, every Jew is allowed to pray on the Temple Mount. The prayer itself is not an offense.”

Judge Aviv said that the police ban on Glick’s visiting the Mount was issued “without appropriate consideration” and was “arbitrary.”

“There is nothing in the deeds of the plaintiff [Glick] that justified in any way the punishment that he received, not in the ban itself and not in the extended period [of the ban],” she said.

Glick was awarded NIS 500,000 in damages and NIS 150,000 in legal costs.


    • 4. Ezra wrote:

      1. But not all.

      2. Strictly speaking, there are areas where definitely one may go (as long as he or she is not a zav/ah, baal keri, etc.); it’s just that there’s the concern that one may end up in other areas where a tanei mes is not allowed to go.

      3. It shouldn’t be up to the Arabs, or the Israeli government, to say whether we may or may not go there. That should be up to rabbanim who decide the halachah. This court decision correctly puts this in their hands, where it should have been all along.

    • 5. @Ezra wrote:

      1. But all chareidy rabbonim.

      2. This is a opening for all misguided Jews to go up to the har habayis and just walk over to the sacred areas, and be condemned with kares!

      3. We don’t differentiate between nidah and zava. You try telling a teenager she can’t go up during her long awaited trip to Israel even though everyone in her camp, or cteen or birthright group, or fsmily is.

      This is a terrible decision. A sad day for Israel.

    • 6. listen wrote:

      what says that people will listen. who says that this wont open the door to those who will serve avoda zara there?

    • 7. Ezra wrote:

      1. Well, yes, if your definition of “all chareidy rabbonim” is “all rabbonim who agree with me,” then yes, you’re right. But I’m pretty sure the definition of “all chareidy rabbonim” is “all rabbonim who fear Hashem, not who fear Yankel.”

      2. There is that possibility, and I said as much. That just means that it is the responsibility of people who arrange these things to clarify where exactly one may or may not go, and to ensure that this is observed.

      3. True, neither a niddah nor a zavah can enter the Har Habayis. Also true that we don’t distinguish between those nowadays. Very well, then, it means that whoever is arranging these things will have to make sure that girls above a certain age don’t enter (unless they go to the mikvah first, which generally unmarried girls don’t do).

      So with all your fulminations, you still haven’t explained why it should be up to the Arabs to deny us access to there. Whether and what is allowed al pi halachah is one thing, and that’s what this decision does – make it possible for rabbonim, not for Yankel and co., to decide exactly where and how people should enter.

    • 8. Milhouse wrote:

      Rabbi Glick is not chareidy and has no obligation to pay any more attention to their rabbis’ psokim than you do to those of the mizrochi rabbonim. Chareidy does not mean more learned or more observant or more in tune with Hashem’s will.

      There is also an aspect of eis laasos. If the government kept everyone off the site, then you could say we shouldn’t go. But when Arabs are free to tread everywhere and to treat it as their private park, our not going means surrendering it to them, which we have no right to do. Especially if you hold like the Ramban, (as Mizrochim do) that kibbush ho’oretz is a mitzvah that applies at all times.

      As for girls, they are allowed to go to mikveh for the purpose of going to the beis hamikdosh, just as they would for eating terumah, etc. If they are instilled with a proper sense of the kedusha of the moment it should help forestall the considerations that are behind the usual custom for them not to go.

  • 9. The kangeroo wrote:

    All the Gdolei Israel do not think that it is a good idea to go to Har Habais. Glick is creating an issue So there is no practical need for the court ruling from a chalacha standpoint. No need to spill jewish blood for this Glick should find something more constructive to satisfy his ego.

  • 11. Satmar lubovitch wrote:

    Bravo! Kudos to Gluck. First the embassy move, now this? The palis are listing their grip.

  • 12. Eli wrote:

    The court should at least allow or request a Rabbi to put up signs on the Temple Mount listing the places Jewish People are allowed to go and not allowed to go.

  • 14. The kangeroo wrote:

    Gdolei Haposkim are against Jews going to Har Habais.And since it a sakona you are probably not allowed to go there.Peoplel sitting in Brooklyn are ready to fight till the last drop of blood of somebody else.

    • 15. Eli wrote:

      Gemara (Shevuot 39a) says
      “Kol Yisrael areivim zeh lazeh”
      “All Jews are responsible one for another.”

  • 17. Why should arabs be the ones in charge of who prays on har habayit wrote:

    It was only arabs who were allowed to pray there. Christians and jews were not allowed to pray there. Since when should arabs decide who can pray on har habayit? Thats why arabs feel they own har habayit! This led them to riot last year when israel tried to put in cameras and metal detectors after arab terrorist murdered police there. Rabbis should put up signs about where you can go on har habayit. But arabs should not control israeli police in stopping prayer there for anyone but arabs.

  • 18. The kangeroo wrote:

    #12 When you will serve in the army you will ask.Meantime take your meds and your logic will improve

  • 19. The kangeroo wrote:

    R loird is only one if he is Min Haminian.Sakanta is more homur than isur therefore common sense tells you not to do it.Hashem is able to built the 3rd Beis Mikdash without Glucks help.Therefore take your meds and take a nap.


Comments are closed.