MOSHE MA’OZ The Role of the Temple Mount / Al-Haram Al-Sharif in the Deterioration of Muslim–Jewish Relations or both Jews and Muslims the Temple Mount and world, and especially in Palestine, mourn this event the Old City of Jerusalem constitute highly import­ as a historical trauma and an immense naksa (defeat). Fant religious, cultural, political and national cen­ For them the conquest of East Jerusalem (Al-Quds tres. For centuries Jews in the diaspora prayed in the Al-Sharif) and the Al-Haram Al-Sharif by the Jews direction of Jerusalem, vowed never to forget it (‘If I occurred after more than 1400 years of Muslim rule forget thee Jerusalem, may my right arm wither’); and (with the exception of the Crusader conquest). blessed one another ‘Next year in Jerusalem’. The Zion­ For both Jews and Muslims the Temple Mount ist­Jewish movement (since the 1880s) – although pre­ and the Old City of Jerusalem are hugely important dominantly secular – has considered Jerusalem (Zion) religious, cultural, political and national sites. For as the political and cultural centre of the Jewish people. centuries Jews in the diaspora prayed in the direc- By comparison, the Palestinian­Arab national move­ tion of Jerusalem, vowed never to forget it (‘If I for- ment has, since the 1920s established its national and get thee Jerusalem, may my right arm wither’; Psalms political­cultural centre in East Jerusalem, while the 137:5), and blessed one another with ‘Next year in Haram al Sharif, particularly the Al­Aqsa Mosque, has Jerusalem ’. The Zionist-Jewish movement (since the continued to be a top religious shrine for Muslims. They 1880s) – although predominantly secular – has con- termed it Awla Al-Qiblatayn (the first prayer direction sidered Jerusalem (Zion) to be the political and cul- before Mecca); Thani Masjidayn (the second mosque tural centre of the Jewish people. after Mecca); a place where Prophet Muhammad By comparison, the Palestinian-Arab national ascended to heaven (Isra’ and Mi’raj). movement established its national and political-cul- This article will examine the changes in Muslim– tural centre in East Jerusalem in the 1920s, while Al- Jewish mutual relations, especially since 1967, at both Haram Al-Sharif, particularly the Al-Aqsa Mosque, government and public levels. Special attention will be has continued to be a foremost religious shrine for given to the development of both Islamic Judeophobia Muslims. They called it Awla Al-Qiblatayn (the first and Jewish Islamophobia, which have been associ­ prayer direction before Mecca), Thani Masjidayn (the ated with the dispute over the Temple Mount and East second mosque after Mecca), and Isra’ and Mi’raj (the Jerusalem . place from where Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven; Al-Qur’an 2:144; 17:1). Failing to acknowledge the particular sanctity of Introduction this shrine for Islam and overwhelmed by its spec- For the last 47 years, on 5 June, many Jews in Israel tacular military victory and the historic magnitude and abroad have celebrated the military victory of this event, the Israeli government decided in June known as the Six Days War (1967) and the ‘liberation’ 1967 to annexe East Jerusalem to West Jerusalem; and of East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. For Jews in July 1980 the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) passed a this euphoric occasion meant a return to the Temple law to this effect. However, Israel also granted control Mount (Har HaBayit in Hebrew) after more than of the Temple Mount to the authority of the Jordan- 2,000 years of exile. ian waqf (religious trust) . Since then, many Israeli By contrast, millions of Muslims around the governments have rejected requests by Muslim lead- 60 Approaching Religion • Vol. 4, No. 2 • December 2014 3.0 . Creative Commons BY-SA- Commons . Creative 2013 Andrew Shiva, Shiva, Andrew Northeast exposure of Al­Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount, in the Old City of Jerusalem. ers, largely Palestinians, for sovereignty over East be given to the development of both Islamic Judeo- Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. Israeli govern- phobia and Jewish Islamophobia, which have been ments have declared them to be ‘disputed’ places. associated with the dispute over the Temple Mount Furiously reacting to the Israeli occupation of the and East Jerusalem. But, first, this should be placed Haram, East Jerusalem and other Arab territories, within a brief historical perspective. many Muslim political and religious leaders called for a jihad (holy war) to ‘liberate’ these sites. Period- ically, Muslims have used violence against Israeli Changes in Muslim–Jewish relations and the issue and Jewish targets, causing severe bloodshed and of Jerusalem destruction. These leaders have employed not only For many centuries, including under Ottoman-Mus- anti-Zionist, but also anti-Semitic language in their lim rule (1453–1918), the Jews were considered as Ahl campaigns against Israel. A major case in point was Al-Kitab (‘People of the Book’), or Ahl Al-Dhimma at a special conference held at the Al-Azhar Academy (‘Protected People’) by the Muslim state; being only in Cairo, 1968, attended by hundreds of Muslim reli- partial believers, they were given an inferior politic al gious leaders, arriving from most parts of the Arab and judicial status compared with Muslims. They had and the Muslim world (Al-Azhar 1968: passim). to pay jizya (poll tax; Al-Qur’an 9:29, 5:60) and suf- By contrast, a growing number of Jews, particu- fered other legal and social restrictions. From time larly in Israel, developed an Islamophobic attitude, to time Jews were subject to acts of oppression and partly in reaction to Muslim Judeophobia and partly violence by fanatic rulers and the mob. However, by as a rejection of the Muslim claim to the Temple and large they were tolerated by Muslims and largely Mount. This hostile attitude has persisted with the cooperated with them in commerce, the arts and backing of Jewish rabbis and with little interference sciences, and the like. For long periods Jews occu- from Israeli authorities. All this has transpired despite pied senior positions in government administration the gradual development of pragmatic, conciliatory and the economic life of the state. Like Christians, approaches by Arab and Muslim leaders since the Jews were granted communal autonomy within the late 1970s (excepting revolutionary Iran and militant millet (nation, community) system and in personal Muslim groups). matters, as well as in education, religious worship This article will examine the changes in Muslim– and other social and cultural issues. On the whole, Jewish mutual relations, especially since 1967, at both Jews were treated better than their Christian fellow governmental and public levels. Special attention will subjects since they were mostly loyal to the Muslim Approaching Religion • Vol. 4, No. 2 • December 2014 61 (Ottoman) state, whereas Christians were suspected century. Jews were also grateful to the Ottomans of collaborating with hostile European powers. Fur- for permitting them to settle in Palestine, notably thermore, for centuries Jews under Islamic rule were in Jerusalem: by the year 1800 Jews in Jerusalem – much safer than their brethren in various Christian many of them non-Ottoman subjects – numbered countries, where they were frequently persecuted some 2,000 people, among 9,000 inhabitants; and in and subjected to great humiliation and violence 1914 – 45,000 of 70,000 (Parfitt 1987: 33–8). Further- (pogroms, for example). These anti-Jewish attitudes more, the Ottoman authorities allowed Jews to pray reflected Christian anti-Semitism. at the Western Wall, but not on the Temple Mount. On the other hand, with a few exceptions, Jews The Ottomans also protected Jews in Jerusalem and in Muslim lands did not experience anti-Semitism. elsewhere against periodic harassment by local Mus- As the noted scholar of Islam, Bernard Lewis, wrote lim zealots (Cohen 1976: passim; Grajewsky 1977: in 1984: 112–16). During the nineteenth century the Otto- man authorities protected Jews against a newly- One important point should be made right emerging form of anti-Jewish sentiment on the part away. There is little sign of any deep rooted of local Christians; namely anti-Semitism. This new emotional hostility directed against Jews … phenomenon was manifested in a series of ‘blood [in Muslim lands…] such as the anti-Semitism libels’ against Jews in the region, particularly in of the Christian world. There were, however, Damascus in 1840. Such accusations, inspired by unambiguously negative attitudes. These were old European-Christian anti-Semitism (including in part the ‘normal’ feelings of a dominant the Dreyfus Affair) were intermittently employed by group towards a subject group, with parallels in some Ottoman Christians against their religious and virtually any society. (Lewis 1984: 32) economic Jewish rivals. It is possible that they were aiming to destroy their Jewish enemies while trying Indeed, Jews in Muslim countries used to occa- to forge a common agenda with their Muslim neigh- sionally praise the Islamic state for its benevolent bours against the alleged Jewish crimes. As it turned treatment, while aspiring to the destruction of ‘evil’ out, some Muslims in the region were influenced by Christianity. For example: ‘God did not bring along this new trend and from time to time used the ‘blood the Kingdom of Ishmael only in order to rescue Jews libel’ weapon against Jews (Frankel 1997: passim; from the evil one (Christendom)’; ‘The Kingdom Levi 1994: 40). of Ishmael is moderate’… ‘is a benevolent kingdom’ (Lazarus-Yaffe 1968: 268). Yet, one significant but rare exception to this Jewish Islamophile attitude The impact of the Arab–Zionist conflict was articulated by the great Jewish Rabbi and scholar A turning point occurred with the advent of the Zion- Maimonides (d. 1204), who labelled the Kingdom ist-Jewish movement and its enterprise in Palestine of Ishmael ‘the most hateful nation towards Jews’ since the late nineteenth century, which included the (Iggeret Teyman 1952: 98–9; Stillman 1979: 241).