klahr@csd2.UUCP (12/23/85)
The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, I think). Does anyone know whether or not this has generally been accepted at face value, whether or not it has had any halachic implications on the status of the old Temple site, or why it is ignored by the "zealots" who publicly proclaim their imminent preparation to rebuild the Temple at its former site?
harwood@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (12/25/85)
> > > The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" > portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future > Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically > says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, > but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, > I think). Does anyone know whether or not this has generally been accepted > at face value, whether or not it has had any halachic implications on the status > of the old Temple site, or why it is ignored by the "zealots" who publicly > proclaim their imminent preparation to rebuild the Temple at its former site? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I'm a Christian, not a Jew, but I would propose building some day the Third Temple in stationary orbit above Jerusalem -- to be a visible star of the civilization of peace on Earth, a sign of hope for all those who see it. David Harwood
candide@ihlpg.UUCP (candide) (12/26/85)
> > [original posting -- what is the latitude and longitude of the > > Temple Mount (and altitude, too, if you know it)? ] > > The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" > portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future > Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically > says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, > but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, > I think). Does anyone know whether or not this has generally been accepted > at face value, whether or not it has had any halachic implications on the > status of the old Temple site, or why it is ignored by the "zealots" who > publicly proclaim their imminent preparation to rebuild the Temple at its > former site? This is fascinating. Let me then expand my question. What are the latitudes and longitudes of both locations? Toward which site should we face when we pray? Again, please give the altitudes also if you know them; however, they are not so relevant as the latitude and longitude, because they do not determine which direction we should face when we pray.
ayf@erc3ba.UUCP (A.Y.Feldblum) (12/30/85)
> The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" > portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future > Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically > says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, > but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, > I think). Does anyone know whether or not this has generally been accepted > at face value, whether or not it has had any halachic implications on the > status of the old Temple site, or why it is ignored by the "zealots" who > publicly proclaim their imminent preparation to rebuild the Temple at its > former site? There are several differences between what is described in the Torah concerning the first two Temples and the laws concerning the Temple and concerning the Priests, and what is found in Ezekial's prophecies. My understanding is that these differences are not accepted as having halachic validity. There is also very strong Medrashic support that the Third Temple will not be built by human hands, but in a miraculas way by G-d (it is supposed to last forever, and only something of divine origin can last forever), so much of the discussion may be moot. We just have to wait, hope and see. Avi Feldblum AT&T uucp: {ihnp4, allegra)!pruxc!ayf
tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) (12/31/85)
> [David Harwood] > I'm a Christian, not a Jew, but I would propose building > some day the Third Temple in stationary orbit above Jerusalem -- > to be a visible star of the civilization of peace on Earth, a sign > of hope for all those who see it. ------- Sorry, David, but geostationary orbit is only possible above locations on the Equator, at least according to the currently accepted laws of physics. If you could build such a temple above Jerusalem, you might even make a believer out of me! -- Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan
teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) (12/31/85)
> > > [original posting -- what is the latitude and longitude of the > > > Temple Mount (and altitude, too, if you know it)? ] > > > > The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" > > portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future > > Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically > > says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, > > but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, > > I think). Does anyone know whether or not this has generally been accepted > > at face value, whether or not it has had any halachic implications on the > > status of the old Temple site, or why it is ignored by the "zealots" who > > publicly proclaim their imminent preparation to rebuild the Temple at its > > former site? > > This is fascinating. Let me then expand my question. What are the latitudes > and longitudes of both locations? Toward which site should we face when we pray? I'm not sure whether we have to know the exact latitude and longitude of the Temple in orde to know which direction to face when praying. We face the direction of Israel when we pray. Those in Israel face Jerusalem, tose in Jerusalem the Temple, those in the Temple the Holy of Holies, and the High Priest, when he enters the Holy of Holies ( where the Ark of the Covenant was located ) on Yom Kippur, faces the Ark. The Talmud ( as usual I am afraid I don't have the exact source at hand ) when discussing prayer says that if one wants riches he should face slightly northward, and one who wants wisdom should face slightly southward ( it might be backwards I'm not sure ). So facing the exact spot isn't absolutely necessary. It would also be slightly impractical because you would have to check your position every time you pray unless you always pray from the exact same spot. Eliyahu Teitz. p.s. The question, though, of the exact location is still an interesting one. As I posted earlier, the exact location is unknown.
harwood@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (01/02/86)
Response to a reply ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >From: ayf@erc3ba.UUCP (A.Y.Feldblum) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: the location of the Temple Mount Message-ID: <173@erc3ba.UUCP> > The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" > portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future > Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically > says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, > but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, > I think). Does anyone know whether or not this has generally been accepted > at face value, whether or not it has had any halachic implications on the > status of the old Temple site, or why it is ignored by the "zealots" who > publicly proclaim their imminent preparation to rebuild the Temple at its > former site? There are several differences between what is described in the Torah concerning the first two Temples and the laws concerning the Temple and concerning the Priests, and what is found in Ezekial's prophecies. My understanding is that these differences are not accepted as having halachic validity. There is also very strong Medrashic support that the Third Temple will not be built by human hands, but in a miraculas way by G-d (it is supposed to last forever, and only something of divine origin can last forever), so much of the discussion may be moot. We just have to wait, hope and see. Avi Feldblum ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I proposed building the Ezekiel Temple in stationary orbit above Jerusalem. But since I am a Christian, given the comments by Avi Feldblum, I would like to repeat what I told my Orthodox friend Ari Gross, who sometimes posts to the Net. (I understand that the original inquiry was by his cousin.) What I had in mind, of course, anticipates the time when Israel receives the Messiah, when the Shalom of God is sincerely received, when mankind would want Jerusalem to be capital in a civilization of peace. Then it is possible to rebuild an earthly Temple there which would be everlasting, when we are reconciled to one another and to God. The apostle Paul says this is the purpose of Christ. To clarify matters, I don't foresee building the Temple 'speedily in our time', before the end of this era, so there may be no point in prematurely speculating, as I have, about the 'location of the Temple', or of its 'steeple' (something like 'the Star of Bethlehem', I suppose). Conversely, to prematurely advance rebuilding the Temple before the Coming of the Messiah to Israel would be offensive and self-destructive. However, my suggestion about the 'steeple' of the Temple was partly motivated by the 'visual' metaphors of the prophets about the location of Zion: Besides the Song of Ascent "I lift mine eyes to the heavens, from whence does my help come...," Isaiah and Micah say that Zion "will be raised above the mountains," and Ezekiel beheld the city "from a very high mountain", as before he beheld the Chariot of angels of 'the celestial orbits'. Furthermore, in the final book of the NT, referring explicitly to the same vision of Ezekiel's Jerusalem, says John foresaw New Jerusalem 'coming down out of heaven from God.' Moreover, there were 'the trees of life on either side of the river running through the midst of the city, the river arising from the throne of God'. This visual metaphor may refer to the Milky Way, as if the there were indeed a kind of celestial Jerusalem, alternatively a kind of celestial Christmas tree with many worlds and stars as ornaments. (Please excuse the rhapsody. The Milky Way is suggested to be the original celestial figure.) Returning to earth, and our present reply to Avi Feldblum concerning the supernatural, eternal status of the new Temple, I will observe, as I did before with my Orthodox friend, that this 'Heavenly Jerusalem' is said to have no earthly temple, because God with Christ is the new Temple. This is a somewhat obscure spiritual concept perhaps among Jews, as well as among Christians. I will try to explain this by mentioning a few other similar passages from different NT texts. First, it is said that Jesus foresaw the destruction of the Second Temple, also anticipated his own destruction, saying that the true Temple, the Body of Christ, would be resurrected thereafter on the third day. This is somewhat similar to the idea that the spirit of the Messiah followed upon the destruction of the Temple, also to Jesus' saying that unless he must die so that the spirit of truth should come into the world. Similarly, Paul, perhaps the greatest of the apostles in theology, 'sent' to the Gentiles by 'a great flash of light from Heaven', identified all those who were similarly 'baptised in Christ' with the Risen Body of Christ, which transcends the generations. Finally, the Letter to the Hebrews, identifies Christ with the Heavenly High Priest of mysterious descent, like Melchizedek, who has entered the Heavenly Temple, to offer his sacrifice for our sins. As we know it is the High Priest who enters the Holy of Holies, that of our innermost hearts, to invoke there the Very Name of the Lord, which God alone can pronounce, which is verily like the Lightning, as Paul was found out. Therefore, the High Priest is said to pronounce the blessing, like that of Aaron, upon His people Israel. So we certainly know that the Very Name has become the revelation of Christ in eternity of generations. For this reason, Jesus said, referring to Jacob's ladder between heaven and the earth, above Bethel, the abode of God: "Truly, I tell you -- you shall see Heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending over the Son of Man." As if the 'ladder' were like the staff of lightning on the dark horizon of human racial consciousness, between the clouds of heaven and the earth below -- so is Christ eternally identified with his Living Presence on earth. To this extent, there is agreement with the remarks of Avi Feldblum. I hope my remarks have been informative about the Christian theology, and are not offensive. (These personal views are not generally representative of common Christian opinions, nevertheless I believe they should be intelligible to Jews.) Again I apologize for interrupting your newsgroup with this 'news-flash'. And promise not to again. David Harwood
candide@ihlpg.UUCP (candide) (01/02/86)
> > > > [original posting -- what is the latitude and longitude of the > > > > Temple Mount (and altitude, too, if you know it)? ] > > > > > > [ followup -- the prophet {Ezekiel} specifically says that the Third > > > Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, but rather > > > at a significant distance from it (close to, but outside Jerusalem). ] > > > > This is fascinating. Let me then expand my question. What are the latitudes > > and longitudes of both locations? Toward which site should we face when we pray? > > > I'm not sure whether we have to know the exact latitude and longitude > of the Temple in orde to know which direction to face when praying. We face > the direction of Israel when we pray. Those in Israel face Jerusalem, tose > in Jerusalem the Temple, those in the Temple the Holy of Holies, and the > High Priest, when he enters the Holy of Holies ( where the Ark of the > Covenant was located ) on Yom Kippur, faces the Ark. The Talmud ( as usual > I am afraid I don't have the exact source at hand ) when discussing prayer > says that if one wants riches he should face slightly northward, and one > who wants wisdom should face slightly southward ( it might be backwards > I'm not sure ). So facing the exact spot isn't absolutely necessary. It > would also be slightly impractical because you would have to check your > position every time you pray unless you always pray from the exact same > spot. > > > Eliyahu Teitz. > > p.s. The question, though, of the exact location is still an interesting one. > As I posted earlier, the exact location is unknown. Although the exact location is unknown, surely this does not affect the original question. No latitude and longitude can be given exactly. Let it be accurate to the nearest second. If it cannot be accurate to the nearest second, then let it be accurate to the nearest minute. If it cannot be accurate to the nearest minute, then let it be accurate to the nearest degree. To say that the exact location is unknown does not address the question -- every location is unknown beyond a certain measure of accuracy. Perhaps it is slightly impractical to check your position every time you pray, but this information is certainly relevant to the initial construction of a synagog. Synagogs within Israel, in particular, can be designed facing the right direction, not just `east' or `west'. In fact, a congregation could decide in advance whether they prefer wealth or wisdom, and construct their synagog accordingly. An interesting question, however, arises: How do you indicate a request for wealth or for wisdom if you are on the same line of longitude as the Ark of the Covenant?
harwood@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (01/02/86)
> > [David Harwood] > > I'm a Christian, not a Jew, but I would propose building > > some day the Third Temple in stationary orbit above Jerusalem -- > > to be a visible star of the civilization of peace on Earth, a sign > > of hope for all those who see it. > ------- > Sorry, David, but geostationary orbit is only possible above locations > on the Equator, at least according to the currently accepted laws > of physics. If you could build such a temple above Jerusalem, you > might even make a believer out of me! > -- > Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Obviously I can't 'locate' the Temple 'steeple' if I can't first 'locate' the city :-) Of course, the NT account of Ezekiel's vision of the New Jerusalem 'locates' the City in heaven, so let's lift up the New City of Peace as well. (And throw down the Orbital Battle Stations of the 'Superpowers' of this world, who would indefinitely secure an incredible and unjust 'peace' with probable horror, with threats of horrifying retaliation against the innocent, while exploiting the misery of the poor, poisoning our only an common planet, profiting by mercenary violence all over the world -- religiously appealing to the 'necessary evil' of an abomination whose ungodly light would leave our planet desolate.) I already wrote that the NT account is of a supernatural Temple, although I would foresee the orbiting Jerusalem as well. Anyway, Bill, thanks for the physics lesson. David Harwood
dsg@mhuxi.UUCP (David S. Green) (01/03/86)
>>>>> [original posting -- what is the latitude and longitude of the >>>>> Temple Mount (and altitude, too, if you know it)? ] >>>> [ followup -- the prophet {Ezekiel} specifically says that the Third >>>> Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, but rather >>>> at a significant distance from it (close to, but outside Jerusalem). ] >>> This is fascinating. Let me then expand my question.What are the latitudes >>> and longitudes of both locations? >>p.s. The question, though, of the exact location is still an interesting one. >> As I posted earlier, the exact location is unknown. >Although the exact location is unknown surely this does not affect the original >question. No latitude and longitude can be given exactly. Let it be accurate >to the nearest second. > An interesting question, however, arises: How > do you indicate a request for wealth or for wisdom if you are on the same > line of longitude as the Ark of the Covenant? This is one of the most interesting series of follow-ups I've ever seen. Let me rephrase the question: DOES ANYONE OUT THERE IN NET LAND KNOW THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, WITHIN A REASONABLE DEGREE OF TOLERENCE, OF THE TEMPLE?
harwood@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (01/03/86)
> This is one of the most interesting series of follow-ups I've ever seen. > Let me rephrase the question: > > DOES ANYONE OUT THERE IN NET LAND KNOW THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, > WITHIN A REASONABLE DEGREE OF TOLERENCE, OF THE TEMPLE? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sorry, if the true Temple is supernatural, then it's hard to 'locate'. But my Jerusalem Bible locates the previous Temples at ~750 meters altitude on the eastern border of the present old Jerusalem, with the Temple proper about 300 meters facing east, with the Innermost 200 meters within. The apparent latitude is ~31*48', longitude ~35*14' by inspection of the map, with error of perhaps 3km. Sorry I don't have a detailed map. By the way, I cited the Song of Ascent, "I lift up my eyes to the heavens (mountains)...", replying before about building an orbiting city of peace, which would be visible everywhere as a sign of hope. Actually, I confused the reference of the different Psalms of Ascent to Mount Zion and heaven, because I once wrote one for an as yet unfinished science fiction in which the orbiting city was inscribed with: We lift up our eyes to the heavens, above the hills of Jerusalem, to the shores of Galilee -- May the Lord be with you, as you leave and return, by the Way of the Sea. So my interest in the 'location' of the 'heavenly' Jerusalem: In the story, I likened the starry heavens to the Sea of Galilee, where Christ has come, because of the obscure last words of Jesus, those of the angel of resurrection: When I am raised up, I shall go before you into Galilee. Which to my mind refer both to Jesus saying: In my Father's house are many dwelling places... I go (before you) to prepare a place for you. Both these were made celestial metaphors for the similarly obscure promise of Exodus: I shall send my angel before you (into the promised land)...My Name is in him. So the 'angel' of Christ appears at the 'heavenly' City of Jerusalem, which I called (the star) of New Bethlehem. Otherwise, I recall talking to Quaker Harlan Smith a few years ago at Christmas. He is a Professor of Astronomy at U.Texas with an interest in the L5 Society -- we discussed why did not the nations build a truly international city in space, for peaceful purposes, to be a visible sign of hope and reconciliation for all, especially for new generations of children everywhere. David Harwood
warren@pluto.UUCP (Warren Burstein) (01/05/86)
In article <386@mhuxi.UUCP>, dsg@mhuxi.UUCP (David S. Green) writes: >>>>>> [original posting -- what is the latitude and longitude of the >>>>>> Temple Mount (and altitude, too, if you know it)? ] > DOES ANYONE OUT THERE IN NET LAND KNOW THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, > WITHIN A REASONABLE DEGREE OF TOLERENCE, OF THE TEMPLE? eur.il (from mod.map) lists three sites in Jerusalem, each has #L 31.46N 35.14E. I hope that's accurate enough for all you shul architects. Please point the shul directy at Jerusalem and let the congregants decide if they want to be rich or wise for themseleves. I don't know the elevation and won't go to your shul if you tilt the floors! Now we need the formula to compute the direction you should face given your own lat/long. -- The Maxwell R. Mayhem Institute for Quandary Requiem and Maternal Sciamachy Accept no substitutes.
nachum@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU (01/06/86)
/* Written 8:52 am Dec 23, 1985 by klahr@csd2.UUCP in uiucdcs:net.religion.jewish */ The Book of Ezekial (Sefer Yecheskel), one of the books of the "Prophets" portion of the Bible, contains a long section discussing how the future Third Temple will be built and conducted. In it, the prophet specifically says that the Third Temple will NOT be built at the site of the previous two, but rather at a significant distance from it(close to, but outside Jerusalem, I think).... /* End of text from uiucdcs:net.religion.jewish */ Where in Ezekiel is the location specified?
wkp@lanl.ARPA (01/07/86)
Anyone who believes that he can face the Temple Mount by living in New Jersey ought to try praying for common sense. Actually, our friends the Muslims worried about this in the tenth century quite a bit since they need to face Mecca five times a day. From their exhaustive calculations (which they themselves knew to be somewhat bogus) they invented many elements of planar and spherical trigonometry, and provided many important astronomical observations. The problem was this: from every point on the earth one can measure one's latitude and longitude from the stars (e.g., the North Star is within one minute of true north). Knowing the latitude and longitude of the Temple Mount (or, in the Muslim case--l'havdil--the qibla) within some degree of tolerance, one can construct a great circle from one's own position which may (if everything is perfect) PASS THROUGH the Temple Mount, but one's own line of sight is directed out into space, and not toward any place on earth. So, even if the earth were a perfect sphere, the concept of "facing" another point on the sphere is somewhat meaningless. But even defining "facing" to be "aligning one's line of sight along the great circle joining the two points" is unacceptable, since the earth is more correctly an oblate spheriod, and the definition of a "great circle" becomes ambiguous. In short, I believe that only Jews living in Eretz Yisrael, or at least in Jerusalem, can truly "face" the Temple Mount. Exiled Jews will always end up staring out into space. -- bill peter ihnp4!lanl!wkp
nachum@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU (01/07/86)
Of course, it's the direction of the great circle route that needs to be computed. From San Francisco, for example, that's only about ten degrees East of due North. /* Written 5:25 pm Jan 4, 1986 by warren@pluto.UUCP in uiucdcs:net.religion.jewish */ In article <386@mhuxi.UUCP>, dsg@mhuxi.UUCP (David S. Green) writes: >>>>>> [original posting -- what is the latitude and longitude of the >>>>>> Temple Mount (and altitude, too, if you know it)? ] > DOES ANYONE OUT THERE IN NET LAND KNOW THE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE, > WITHIN A REASONABLE DEGREE OF TOLERENCE, OF THE TEMPLE? eur.il (from mod.map) lists three sites in Jerusalem, each has #L 31.46N 35.14E. I hope that's accurate enough for all you shul architects. Please point the shul directy at Jerusalem and let the congregants decide if they want to be rich or wise for themseleves. I don't know the elevation and won't go to your shul if you tilt the floors! Now we need the formula to compute the direction you should face given your own lat/long. -- The Maxwell R. Mayhem Institute for Quandary Requiem and Maternal Sciamachy Accept no substitutes. /* End of text from uiucdcs:net.religion.jewish */
arig@cvl.UUCP (Ari Gross) (01/08/86)
> > Anyone who believes that he can face the Temple Mount by living > in New Jersey ought to try praying for common sense. > > So, even if the earth were a perfect sphere, the concept of "facing" > another point on the sphere is somewhat meaningless. But even defining > "facing" to be "aligning one's line of sight along the great circle > joining the two points" is unacceptable, since the earth is more > correctly an oblate spheriod, and the definition of a "great circle" > becomes ambiguous. > > In short, I believe that only Jews living in Eretz Yisrael, or at least > in Jerusalem, can truly "face" the Temple Mount. Exiled Jews will always > end up staring out into space. > -- > > bill peter ihnp4!lanl!wkp If the logic of your argument is carried to its logical conclusion, most of Jerusalem is not level with the Temple Mount and one davening there would thus not be considered facing the Temple Mount. I think the concept of facing the Har Ha'bayit should not be constrained to such a narrow ,literal definition. Maybe its more symbolic in nature -- to show that we yearn for Jerusalem -- "im esh'ka'chech yerushalayim tish'kach yi'mi'ni" etc. If so, Jews in Galut need to 'face' Jerusalem at least as much as their brothers already living in the Holy Land. ari gross