Making the Case for the Beis Hamikdash

Building the Beis Hamikdash

Monday, 25 July 2016

Active or Passive?

From the beginning of modern Zionism (and possibly before, depending on what you call ‘modern’) there was debate in the Jewish world as to whether we must wait for redemption from exile, or whether we should play an active role. After the establishment of the State of Israel this debate seems less relevant, as very few would advocate for disbanding it.

However, with regard to the Beis Hamikdash this debate remains extremely relevant. Should we be doing whatever is necessary physically to facilitate its rebuilding, or is it enough to rely on our constant davening together with teshuva for the sins which caused its destruction in the first place?

Although the question is definitely similar to the one debated years ago in regard to the State of Israel, there is one major facet to that debate that is not relevant here. The main objection that some had to establishing the State, and still have to celebrating its establishment today, is the issue of collaboration with irreligious and anti-religious Jews. As there certainly are very few irreligious Jews interested in this, we naturally may have expected the proactive camp to be much larger here.

The reality is not like this, and we need to try to come to an informed decision as to whether this is correct from a Torah perspective. To do this we need to look at some of the reasons that have been given for this passive stance.

Is there a mitzvah?

One reason some have given is Rashi’s comment that the future Beis Hamikdash will descend from Heaven in fire.[1] What then is the point of us trying to build it ourselves?

This argument is flawed on two counts. Firstly, Rashi’s explanation is disputed by the Meiri,[2] and the Rambam says explicitly that the Mashiach will build the Beis Hamikdash.[3] Secondly, even from Rashi there is no proof that we are exempt from the mitzvah of building the Beis Hamikdash.[4]

According to all those who list the 613 mitzvos (Behag, R’ Saadiah Gaon[5], Rambam[6], Ra’avad[7], Ramban[8], Smag[9] and Sefer Hachinuch[10]) building the Beis Hamikdash is one of them. It is also undisputed that only mitzvos that apply for all generations are counted.[11] It seems improbable that Rashi would differ on this, and it certainly seems extremely problematic to exempt ourselves from something that so many consider to be a mitzvah without stronger proof.

Does the mitzvah apply now?

Some claim that there is a prerequisite to the mitzvah of building the Beis Hamikdash. The gemara tells us that the correct order is first to fulfil the mitzvah of appointing a king.[12]

Here too, they are wrong for two reasons. Firstly, although ideally we should indeed be appointing a king first, when this is not possible the mitzvah of building the Beish Hamikdash certainly applies. Not only is there no source that says that the order is an imperative, there are clear indications that this is not the case.

The second Beis Hamikdash was built approximately three-hundred years before the Chashmonaim set up their kingdom.[13] It is also explicit in the Yerushalmi that the future Beis Hamikdash will be built before the Davidic kingdom is re-established.[14] The suggestion that this was and will be based on an extraordinary ruling meant for the time only, is extremely difficult.

Chazal tell us that three nevi’im came out of the Babylonian exile, and their prophecies were needed to tell us about the altar and its place, that sacrifices could be brought before the Beis Hamikdash was rebuilt, and according to one view that the Torah should be written in Assyrian script.[15] There was no need for prophecy to allow the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash itself.

Secondly, even if the mitzvah of building the Beis Hamikdash does not apply yet, it is certainly meritorious to make all possible preparations for the time when it will apply. David Hamelech was told that he could not build the Beis Hamikdash,[16] but nevertheless dug the foundations.[17]

Physical danger

Another argument I have heard is that anything we do to upset our neighbours endangers human life, and this is sufficient reason to do nothing until the situation improves (presumably miraculously). As the question here is predominantly one of judgement and not of halacha I will be brief.

This issue extends further than to the Beis Hamikdash alone, but also to our control of the whole country. Simply put, in my mind it is clear that whenever we have been soft with those who are out to destroy us we have lost more lives, and the nature of these enemies is to run away when they are shown power. One example of this is M’aras Hamachpela, where we now have partial control thanks to the defiant efforts of R’ Levinger zt”l.[18] The security situation there is definitely far superior to what it once was.

Continue reading…

From Torah Clarity, here.