...For Muslims, Jews and Christians, for Israelis and Palestinians, and for peoples around the world, Jerusalem represents a place of faith and longing, a symbol of aspirations for nationhood, and a sacred space that must be open to all...The international community does not recognize Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem...the expansion of settlements contrary to international law and the road map.
...I am concerned at the recent episodes of tension at the Haram Ash-Sharif/Temple Mount compound, and the potential for further clashes. Aided by my envoy based in Jerusalem, I continue to follow this issue closely and to urge all sides to respect the sanctity of the holy sites and cease provocations...
And from the Jordanian News Agency Petra I learned that:-
Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh has said Jerusalem is a priority for Jordan...Addressing the International Forum on Jerusalem, in the Moroccan capital Rabat, Judeh said His Majesty King Abdullah had warned on many occasions against the dangers posed by Israeli violations in the occupied holy city.
Jerusalem, he added, is a top issue for Jordan, noting that King Abdullah had urged the international community to shoulder its legal and historical responsibility towards the city. The minister said it is the Arab and Muslim worlds' duty to address challenges facing Jerusalem and protect the city.
Mahmoud Abbas seems to have left out the Jews in his remarks:
...“Israeli violations harm the people, the holy places and the cultural heritage of Jerusalem,” Abbas told forum participants, “violations of the rocks and the trees threaten not only the peace of the region, but the stability of the world.”
Supporting Jerusalem is like supporting coexistence, Abbas stressed, “Minarets of mosques, and crosses on churches dotting the Jerusalem skyline are a testament to the joint fight of Christians and Muslims to preserve the spirit and identity of the eternal capital.”
The Moroccan King Mohammad VI, in his capacity as chairman of Al Quds Committee... warned Israel against manipulating its ideology into fomenting hatred, extremism and intolerance in the Middle East region.
The message from Bernard Kouchner, France's Foreign Minister included:
You are aware of France’s age-old attachment to Jerusalem, revered and venerated by French writers and poets, starting with Chateaubriand. History, people, religion, art and culture have all inextricably linked France and the French people with this city.
France, a secular country and protector of the religious communities, admires and respects this thrice holy city. France, mindful of the dialogue among the peoples, calls for the city’s history and many identities to be respected.
In recent weeks, the situation in Jerusalem and especially near the holy sites has seen a worrying outbreak of new tensions. We are all aware of the sensitive nature of the holy city, which has all too often been a catalyst for violence and conflict.
The holy sites must remain places of tolerance and reverence. All sides need to refrain from provocation of any sort. It is vital for each and every one of us to call on the parties for restraint to prevent any escalation.
We understand the importance of Al-Haram al-Sharif to Muslims the world over. The Dome of the Rock is etched in the minds and eyes of Muslims through to the Far East. We likewise understand the importance of Temple Mount and the Western Wall to Jews the world over.
Jerusalem is also important to Christians. For five centuries, France has played a recognised role in protecting the holy sites and Christians. This role has been defined by capitulations, the Catholic protectorate granted by the Vatican, the agreements of Mytilene and Constantinople, and tradition. And you will recall that the Consul General of France in Jerusalem makes his entry to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
Now, let's get some Jewish opinions, like these from the JPost letters-to-the-editor section:-
An opportunity we spurned
Sir, - Michael Freund is right on target (in "Dare to dream of a rebuilt Temple," October 29) in standing up boldly for the Jews' elementary right to visit and pray at their holiest site, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem.
The rank injustice - nay, ludicrousness - of a situation where, as Freund writes, "the followers of Muhammad are allowed to visit and pray where Solomon's Temple once stood, but not the followers of Moses," surely cries to heaven. And this situation has been allowed to continue for nearly half a century!
But that, Mr. Freund, is exactly the point here. This injustice should never have been allowed to continue this long; it should have been nipped in the bud. Since it was not, however, the situation, intrinsically absurd as it may be, has hardened into "custom," and the world - especially the Islamic world - has become used to it, to the point where its violation now would be considered an act of sheer provocation.
This is the sad reality today, for which we can "thank" our government's moment of weakness, in the summer of 1967, when we had the opportunity and the power to call the shots - and threw it away.
MOSHE AUMANN
Jerusalem
Who's making trouble?
Sir, - Reading Orly Nov's oped about Temple Mount violence ("Spinning out of control, October 28), one gets the impression that if Jews were to refrain from ascending the Temple Mount completely, then all would be quiet and restrained. According to the Nov doctrine, it was Ariel Sharon's visit to the same Temple Mount that ignited the intifada of 2000. This is the same doctrine that says that by releasing 10,000 Palestinian prisoners, including innumerable convicted terrorists, there would no longer be any attempts to kidnap Israeli soldiers.
The only problem is that Nov has either forgotten or ignored 20th century history in Israel. It was Haj Amin El-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, who ignited and incited false rumors of an Al Aksa takeover. This in turn resulted in the cold-blooded murder of hundreds of Jews in 1921, 1929 and 1936. Which Jewish leader incited the Arab community then?
M. ROTENBERG
Petah Tikva
Sir, - Jordan's caution against "Any new provocative attempts by Israeli troops and Jewish extremists…" would be laughable, were it not so serious ("Jordan warns Jerusalem violence could derail peace process," October 26).
Jordan itself, indeed, could derail the peace process - if the people of Israel insisted that their government not continue any talks until the Jordanian Minister for Media Affairs and Communication apologizes for his demonization of Israel.
Why should we ignore it?
SIMCHA RUDMAN
Jerusalem
Substance, not symbols
Sir, - At last, in "Remember, the Temple was built by Herod" (October 28), the article I thought I had been waiting for! Robert Eisenman, an American historian, calls a spade a spade and gives us historical facts about the builder of the Temple and the function of the Temple. Herod was a nasty character and no one wants to revive the priesthood or the sacrificial cult.
But the conclusions he draws are very unhistorical. "The problem is we must start from scratch based on being a territorial people again" How can a historian talk of starting from scratch? As a matter of fact, our prayers are very territorially based. All our lives are oriented towards the land of Israel. The whole of the Zionist movement was based on that.
What really made Judaism special was when prayers took the place of sacrifice, before and after the Expulsion. From then on Jews have not needed a Temple to maintain religious identity because "The whole earth is filled with His glory."
Rabbinic Judaism, which developed after the Expulsion, preserved Judaism and enabled us to survive extra-territorially. True, it was not equal to (or what Eisenman calls "up to") the task of defending millions against the slaughter. But that's what there was.
Still,, it is clear that the new historical fact of being a people in our own land obliges adaptation. Judaism as a way of life cannot remain static, and just as it has changed over the centuries, so must it continue to adapt to changing conditions.That is where our major struggle is in maintaining our identity.
I am second to none in my wonder at the past, and archeology and architecture have their honored place, but what's gone is gone. To try to build another temple is a diversion and a misguided waste of effort.
The Dome of the Rock and al Aksa sit on top of the Temple Mount today, and they are important to Moslems for their own religious reasons. I myself was thrilled to bits when I visited in 1967, but for historical not religious reasons. As for Eisenman's statement that "there is plenty of room on the Mount for everyone," he must be kidding. Demanding equal rights is just a source of contention.
It would be politically embarrassing to give up visits to the Mount - but it certainly wouldn't affect my Jewish identity or my pride in the Land of Israel, which are expressed in private, communal and national life. Symbols are one thing, but real life requires substance. Who needs another enormous building?
HELEN LEVENSTON,
Jerusalem
Posts
1 comment:
To correct Ban Ki Moon's misconception - which is unfortunately shared by many - Jerusalem is not "a sacred space that must be open to all".
Jerusalem is sacred to Jews. Only Judaism elevates Jerusalem as a whole to a special, sacred status. It is never mentioned in the Quran (only in poor recent English translations where it appears once - it doesn't appear in the original Arabic) and successive Muslim occupiers of Jerusalem never considered it more than a backwater. To Christian, Jerusalem is the location of several places they hold sacred - the city itself is not holy.
It is only recently (post-67) that Palestinians have advanced the notion of Jerusalem as a holy Muslim city. It is a fabrication used to further their cause.
Jerusalem is the holy city of the Jews. It has been the capital of not one, but several Jewish states. And Jews are the only ones who have assured continued access by Muslim and Christians to their places of worship. Christians and Muslims who ruled over Jerusalem in the past never returned the favor to anyone other than themselves. Everyone forgets who granted the Muslim's access to the Temple Mount - Jews, after liberating the Old City the Jordanians had rendered Judenrein, and where Arabs had systematically desecrated both Christian and Jewish holy places.
So, no, Mr. Moon, Jerusalem is not a sacred space for all. The fact that we are the only ones who graciously allow others the opportunity to worship in our city is our prerogative - and a fact you and the rest of the world ignore.
Post a Comment