This Week in Yerushalayim Now on Twitter!

https://twitter.com/InYerushalayim

Follow us!

Why is it Forbidden to get Married During the Three Weeks?

 

Question: The Gemara in Berachot (6b) says: "One who brings joy to the bride and groom is as if he rebuilts the ruins of Yerushalayim".  If so, why it is forbidden to get married during the Three Weeks, since we would be rebuilding Yerushalayim?

Answer: Ha-Rav Avigdor Nevenzal, Rav of the Old City, wrote me: "The Gemara in Shabbat (105b) says that anyone who gets angry is as if he worships Avodah Zarah.  Nevertheless, we do not stone one who gets angry", meaning that it is "as if".

Ha-Rav Shlomo Aviner, Nasi Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim, told me: "See the Gemara in Baba Batra (60b) that after the destruction of the Temple, it would have been proper not to get married, but this was rejected because then the seed of Avraham would have died out.  It is therefore at least appropriate not to get married during the Three Weeks".

Ha-Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein answered based on the explanation of the Chatam Sofer (Derush to 7^th of Av 5499) on the verse: "Hashem builds Yerushalayim, He will gather the outcasts of Israel" (Tehilim 147:2).  He asks: Why does it say that Hashem "builds" Yerushalayim in the present tense instead of in the future tense as in "will gather"?

The Chatam Sofer answers that our Sages say that the Third Temple will descend in fire from Heaven already built (there is a dispute whether will we will build the Temple or it will descend from Heaven – M.T.), and it is built each and every year, by the crying and mourning of the Jewish People over its destruction.  It therefore says that Hashem "builds" Yerushalayim in the present tense, since He is constantly building it.

This is similar to the words of the Shelah (Ta'anit Ot #33) that there is therefore no mourning on Shabbat, since the mourning builds Yerushalayim, and the building of the Beit Ha-Mikdash does not supercede Shabbat.

Based on this, it is clear why there are no weddings during this time, since the mourning during the Three Weeks builds Yerushalayim even more than weddings do (brought in "Vavei Ha-Amudim Ve-Chishukeihem" of Rav Zilberstein, Gilyon #46, p. 115).

 

Tearing One's Garment upon Seeing the Temple Mount after the Six-Day War

 

The Halachah rules that one must tear his garment when seeing the place of the Temple in ruins (Moed Katan 26a and Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim #561).  In the Beit Yosef when discussing the obligation to rip one’s garment upon seeing the cities of Yehudah and Jerusalem in ruins, Rav Yosef Karo explained that we hold that "in ruins" means "under non-Jewish control."  The Magen Avraham (#1) and Mishnah Berurah (#2) accepted this view.  This means that even if there is a Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel but it is under non-Jewish control, it is still considered "in ruins", and one must tear his garment upon seeing it. Our Rabbi, Rav Tzvi Yehudah Ha-Cohain Kook, explained that the same applies for seeing the place of the Temple in ruins, and just as "in ruins" means "under non-Jewish control" for the cities of Yehudah and Jerusalem, so too does "in ruins" mean "under non-Jewish control" for the Temple Mount.  Therefore after the famous call of "Har Ha-Bayit Be-Yadenu - the Temple Mount is in our hands" during the Six-Day War, he ruled that there is no longer an obligation to tear one’s garment when seeing the Temple Mount, even though the Temple is still destroyed.  Our Rabbi explained that it is possible to claim that since there is no Temple, one must tear his garment.  One must understand, however, what prevents us from fulfilling the Divine Commandment of "Make for me a Temple" (Shemot 25:8).  Our inability to build the Temple is not due to "exile."  The Temple Mount is in our hands and we are in control. But we are prevented from building the Temple because of halachic and political reasons.  These are our reasons, not those of the non-Jews (Sichot Ha-Rav Tzvi Yehudah – Yom Ha-Atzmaut and Yom Yerushalayim, talk for Yom Yerushalayim p. 90 and Tal Chermon - Moadim, p. 218).  Our Rabbi wrote, additionally, that we should also be concerned about ripping our garments when we are not obligated and thus violating "Bal Tashchit" (wanton destruction of items) when the whole prohibition for tearing when seeing the Temple in a destroyed state is a Rabbinic prohibition.

In the book, "Mekor Chaim" (2:95 #1), Ha-Rav Chaim David Halevy - Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv-Yafo for 25 years - wrote that he agrees with our Rabbi's opinion.  He explained that when a close relative dies, we tear our garments when the "dead is before us." After the mourning, we observe an annual Yahrtzeit.  Similarly, when our "dead was before us" – the Temple Mount was under non-Jewish control – we had the obligation to tear our garments. Now that we have control, the dead is no longer before us, and we observe an annual Yahrtzeit: Tisha Be-Av.  Despite his agreement, Rav Halevy concluded that in order to exempt us from this obligation, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel must make this decision.

It is related what our Rabbi, Ha-Rav Tzvi Yehudah, did on the day when the Temple Mount was liberated: "On the day of the liberation of Jerusalem, our Rabbi and "The Nazir," Rav David Cohain, were together at the Kotel, and the next day our Rabbi went to him to bring him his book "Le-Netivot Yisrael" volume 1 which was published on that very 28th of Iyar 5727.  Our Rabbi said that while standing facing the Kotel, he did not tear his garment upon his seeing the place of the Temple since "it is only considered in a destroyed state when the non-Jews rule over it" (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 561 and Mishnah Berurah #2), and this fundamental principle which was stated regarding the cities of Yehudah also applies to the spot of the Temple.  "The Nazir" responded in agreement and added: "Is it not also true that his honor saw that our Master the Rav was there in his Shabbat clothing and he did not tear?" (He had seen a vision of Maran Rav Kook).  All were astounded and all eyes turned to our Rabbi, who nodded his head approvingly: "Yes, certainly" ("Rabbenu" - On the Life of Ha-Rav Tzvi Yehudah p. 211).

[Note: In one book, a Rabbi wrote that our Rabbi, Ha-Rav Tzvi Yehudah Ha-Cohain Kook, would agree today that one should tear his garment upon seeing the spot of the Temple, after the horrible desecration of Hashem's Name which have occurred there.  When asked about this, Ha-Rav Shlomo Aviner Shlit"a, Nasi Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim, responded: "Baruch Hashem, the Temple Mount is still in our hands, and with Hashem's help it will remain so," i.e. our Rabbi's ruling still stands that we are exempt from tearing our garments upon seeing the spot of the Temple – M.T.]

Where are the Vessels of the Beit Ha-Mikdash Today?

 Ha-Rav Shlomo Aviner, Nasi Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim, discusses this question in his commentary on the Book of Esther (pp. 23-24):

We do not know exactly where they are located.  Some say that they are in the Vatican, other say in other places, but the truth is that they are buried somewhere under the Temple Mount. King Shlomo dug tunnels under the Temple Mount, because he knew through his Divine Spirit that the Beit Ha-Mikdash would be destroyed (See Yoma 52b.  Horayot 12a.  Radak on Divrei Ha-Yamim 2 35:3). 

Question: Isn't it written that Nebuchadnezar took everything (see Megillah 12a)? 

Answer: The vessels which he took were replacement vessels. The original vessels are located under the Temple Mount.

Question: Aren’t there vessels in England which are associated with the Temple? 

Answer: Perhaps, but the real ones are under the Temple Mount.

Question: The Menorah and the Table of the Show-Bread also?

Answer: Yes. As is known, Titus stole the Menorah.  We see this in the Arch of Titus in Rome. The Jews of Rome have a custom to say Lamentations there on Tisha Be-Av. But those vessels are also replacements. There were ten Menorahs (Menachot 29a, 98b-99a) and many vessels. We do not know if he took the actual Menorah or a fake which was placed in the Beit Ha-Mikdash in order that he would think that he plundered the Temple. Even if he took the actual Menorah, there are nine others. Nonetheless there is no need to search for them today. When the time comes, everything will be found including the Ark of the Covenant and the jar of "man" (manna) as well.

Question: Did anyone ever search for the vessels of the Beit Ha-Mikdash? 

Answer: Many certainly searched, but they did not find them. There are different stories and fables.

Question: What about those people who claim to have seen the Ark? 

Answer: Anything is possible. Nevertheless, everything that they saw also disappeared.  Do not worry, there are others. Incidentally, my daughter who studies art made a relief of the Arch of Titus. She brought to my attention the fact that the direction of those walking is not from Yehudah to Rome, but the opposite, from Rome to the direction of Israel, and this is true today.  We are all returning home!

Living in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City of Yerushalayim

 

I heard from Ha-Rav Aviv Tzuberi, Rosh Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim, that when Ha-Rav Yosef Zilberman decided to move to the Old City and live on Ma'alot Ha-Midrasha Street, his brothers-in-law, who were important Torah scholars, brought him to a Din Torah before Ha-Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, for endangering their sister and nieces and nephews.  Rav Zilberman said that he is not obligated to appear before Rav Elyashiv since he is not his Rav but rather his father is his Rav.  Nonetheless, he agreed to go.  During the Din Torah, the brothers-in-law talked at great length about the danger involved in moving there.  Rav Elyashiv stopped them in the middle and said: Until you bring a letter from the Police Chief on the Yerushalayim District saying that it is dangerous and forbidden to live there, what you are saying is Lashon Ha-Rav against Yerushalayim!

Rav Aviv further related that in Shevet 5778, a couple wanted to move into a newly-redeemed house in the Old City next to the Lion's Gate, where no Jews lived, and when Jews move into a new area, Arabs often awaken and riot.  They asked Ha-Rav Amiel Sternberg, Rosh Yeshivat Har Ha-Mor, if it is permissible to move there.  He answered: It is a personal decision.  One who does not move there is not considered a coward, and one who does move there is not considered irrational.  It depends on 1. The feelings of the couple.  2. The future plans, i.e. for more families to move into the area when possible.

I once asked Ha-Rav Shlomo Aviner, Nasi Yeshivat Ateret Yerushalayim: Is it forbidden to live in the Old City of Yerushalayim on account of "You shall surely safeguard your soul" (Devarim 4:15, 23:11)?

He answered: No.  It is a Mitzvah.  1. Settling Eretz Yisrael requires Mesirut Nefesh.  2. It is not more dangerous than living elsewhere.