It is highly doubtful whether any of the tens of thousands of worshippers and lamentations who gathered yesterday, Tisha B'Av, near the Western Wall, had ever heard the names of Eliel Lofgreen, Charles Barda and S.Y. Van Kempen. The first was a former Swedish foreign minister, the second a high-ranking Swiss official, and the third a senior official in the Dutch Colonial Service. In the summer of 1930, the three were appointed by the League of Nations (on the recommendation of the British Shaw Commission) as members of the commission of inquiry tasked with deciding the bloody conflict between Jews and Muslims over the rights and conflicting demands for use of Western Wall Alley.
As Tisha B'Av approached, they put on the table a controversial compromise proposal: the Jews would recognize Muslim ownership of the Western Wall. Muslims, in return, will recognize the right of prayer and Jewish access to the Western Wall. The proposal led to a fierce internal dispute within the Jewish community between the political echelon, members of the National Committee who supported the compromise (which even during their appearance on the committee refrained from claiming ownership of the Western Wall) and the religious and ultra-Orthodox leadership – Rabbis Kook, Yaakov Meir and Sonnenfeld – who vehemently opposed it.
From the perspective of almost 100 years, the rabbis were right. Had the Yishuv agreed to a compromise and recognized Muslim ownership of the Western Wall, the Israeli government would have found it difficult to implement, and especially to explain, its steps after the Six-Day War at the Western Wall, including the erasure of the Mughrabi neighborhood and the preparation of the large prayer plaza that replaced the narrow Western Wall alley. After all, you don't take possession and take over what is owned by another person you knew. The expropriation of the central part of the Western Wall and its registration in the land registry in the name of the State of Israel would also have been much more difficult to carry out and explain if the state institutions along the way recognized Muslim ownership of the Western Wall.
Against the background of the committee's deliberations and the compromise proposal was the conflict over the Western Wall, which also gave rise to the riots of 133. In the riots, 339 Jews were murdered and 116 were wounded. Settlements and communities throughout the Land of Israel were abandoned and destroyed, most notably in Hebron, where a terrible massacre took place. On the Arab side, 232 were killed and <> wounded, most of them by British policemen during the suppression of the riots.
One of the high points of the conflict over the Western Wall occurred on Yom Kippur in September 24, 1928, when an English officer, Douglas Duff, insisted on forcibly removing the curtain partition separating the women's and men's sections in the small prayer plaza. The incident was violent, with Jewish worshippers beaten, and the Hebrew press accompanied the story for weeks.
Many revolted. One of them was the poet Haim Nachman Bialik, who rejoiced at the sight of the Western Wall: "When you walk out through the filthy foyers surrounded by dirt on every side, the place becomes not a holy place, but – excuse my word – a sight, dung of cattle and man all around! In such an existence in front of Israel, it is not the disgrace of the English, but our own."
Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husseini spearheaded the Muslim struggle for the Western Wall, and was willing to grant Jews at most tourist status there. Husseini accused them of dropping bombs on the courtyard of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and that the Western Wall was a "bridgehead" from which they planned to invade Islam's "holy of holies" – the mosques on the Temple Mount.
Those were the early days of the false libel known today as "Al-Aqsa is in danger." To illustrate the "danger," the Mufti distributed paintings that portrayed the Jewish side as planning to conquer the mosques. One of them showed Herzl next to the mosque holding an Israeli flag.
"All the bastard courtyards"
The Western Wall Committee's compromise proposal – recognizing Muslim ownership in exchange for the right of use for Jews – was welcomed by the heads of the National Committee. But the British insisted on obtaining prior agreement to the compromise from both the chief rabbis, Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Hacohen Kook and Rabbi Yaakov Meir, as well as Rabbi Yosef Chaim Sonnenfeld, as the rabbi of the Haredi community. The British explained to the heads of the National Committee that they could not ignore the fact that the issue was in the religious realm.
At the end of August 1930, the heads of the National Committee – including Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, David Yellin, Haim Arlozorov, Meir Dizengoff and Pinchas Rotenberg – exerted heavy pressure on the rabbis, especially Rabbi Kook, to persuade them to adopt the compromise formula, but Rabbi Kook rejected all appeals to him on this matter.
"What does it mean for the committee to decide who owns the Western Wall?" asked Rabbi Kook when he appeared before them, "Is the committee or the League of Nations the owner of the Western Wall? When did you get permission to determine whose ownership of the Western Wall?... No power in the world – not the League of Nations and not this committee – can expropriate our divine right..."
"The Trial of the Wall",
Rabbi Kook stood out in those days not only as a religious leader but also as a leader with distinctly national characteristics. His remarks corresponded with Ze'ev Jabotinsky's response after the partition incident: "The Jews forgot to be offended!" and with the reaction of the young Betarians who, a week before the riots, on Tisha B'Av 5729, waved the Israeli flag at the Western Wall and sang "Hatikvah" there. Rabbi Kook met with the young people who participated in the procession and declared to them that the "national genius" in their hearts "is nothing but an expression of the holiness of the Divine soul in each and every one of Israel," and that in their zeal for "the sanctity of the nation" they remind him of the "holy zeal of the Maccabees."
In an interview published with him by the Daily Mail newspaper on August 18, shortly before the riots, Rabbi Kook expressed his opinion on the appearance of Western Wall Alley and, like Bialik, said: "It is impossible that the state of this holy place, which is much more revered by Klal Yisrael than all the houses of the churches... All over the world, will continue endlessly in the form of such an insult. It is impossible for this holy place to always be surrounded by courtyards and alleys so dirty and ugly that serve as a nest for any disease and filth. Our goal is to clear all the bastard courts and create there the meeting status of the entire Israeli nation..."
In the Jewish public, therefore, there was unanimity among rabbis such as Rav Kook, leaders such as Jabotinsky, and poets such as Bialik, that the situation at the Western Wall could not continue. The Western Wall Committee was presented with extensive documentation describing the difficult situation of Jews at the Western Wall throughout the generations. Albert Rhodes, the U.S. consul, described in his book how as early as 1856 Jews were forced to pay an "unrelenting fee" of $1,500 a year for the right to cry at the Western Wall.
In 1768, 1812 and 1814, the registers of the Sephardic Community in Jerusalem recorded reports on the expenses of the Jewish community to clean garbage from the Western Wall plaza and remove the camels that lay there. Raphael Michos, the sun of the Western Wall at the beginning of the 20th century, documented how he cleaned the Western Wall plaza of donkey dung and secretions. Judith Montefiore, who visited the place in 1875, described the road there as "in the state of their name, abandoned and destroyed, and between man and horse will fail it by the fragments of stones scattered there since the days of our forefathers..."
For many days, the Western Wall Committee conducted its deliberations. She held dozens of meetings and listened to the testimonies of experts and witnesses: 30 Muslims, 21 Jews and one Briton. Rabbi Kook, who was asked to present evidence of Jewish rights at the Western Wall, replied that relying on documents could weaken the truth, "and it is one of the famous ones that does not need evidence. What is this like?" the rabbi explained, "to someone who raises a candle to strengthen the sunlight."
The detailed memorandum on the question of the Western Wall (76 pages), submitted to the committee by the Jewish side, was prepared by Dr. Cyrus Adler of New York, who meticulously reviewed the history of the Western Wall. The late historian Prof. Yosef Nadeva later defined it as a masterpiece.
Like the "beams of sheaves"
The Arabs presented themselves before the Western Wall Committee in a 16-member delegation headed by Awni Abdul Hadi and Jamal al-Husseini – both members of the Mufti. They presented a tough approach, claiming that they owned the place, which is part of the Al-Aqsa Mosque area, and that millions of Muslims were on their right. If our position is even partially rejected, they threatened, the Muslim world will not accept this.
The British authorities strove for a compromise – recognition of Muslim ownership in exchange for the right of use for Jews – but also wanted the rabbis in the deal. The heads of the National Committee preferred to be practical, even at the expense of principle and ownership. They quickly sent the chief rabbis, Kook and Meir, and the ultra-Orthodox leader, Rabbi Sonnenfeld, three delegations at once. The goal was to prevent the rabbis from discussing the issue and asking them to form an immediate opinion, without convening a broader rabbinical forum for consultation.
The first delegation reached Rabbi Kook and included Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, later President of the State of Israel, Avraham Almalich and Rabbi Moshe Ostrovsky (Hameiri). She offered him to relinquish ownership of the Western Wall in exchange for recognizing the Jews' right to free access and prayer, without interference there. The rabbi protested excitedly: "The people of Israel did not embellish our strength to give up the Western Wall in its name. We have no right to that. If, God forbid, we give up the Western Wall, God will not want to return it to us either..."
He escorted the members of the delegation out of his home and hurried to call his servant, Meir David, and update him on what was happening. Rabbi Kook estimated that a similar appeal would be sent to Rabbi Sonnenfeld. The sun was tasked with quickly conveying to Sonnenfeld Rav Kook's response to the National Committee delegation.
Rabbi Kook did not know at the time that while the members of the delegation headed by Yitzhak Ben-Zvi were staying at his home, another delegation was already visiting Rabbi Sonnenfeld's house, and that he too refused, like Rav Kook, to accept the compromise offer. Rabbi Sonnenfeld, just like Rav Kook, hastened immediately after announcing his position to the National Committee delegation to send an emissary to Rav Kook to update him on his position. The two apostles met halfway, without one knowing in advance about the other's mission, with the same message.
The story of this symbolic encounter was somewhat similar to the famous mythology about the two brothers who met at night with the beams of the sheaves, who wished to pass on to each other, and at whose meeting point the Temple was later established.
In the end, the committee decided unilaterally, and as a result of the rabbis' position – without the consent of the Jewish side – that "Muslims have the sole right of ownership and sole property to the Western Wall, since it is an integral part of the courtyard of the 'Haram al-Sharif' (Temple Mount), which is Waqf property." The committee also determined that Muslims have the right of ownership of the narrow plaza near the Western Wall and the nearby Mughrabi neighborhood.
On the other hand, the committee ruled that Jews would enjoy free entry to Western Wall Alley for prayer purposes at any time, subject to status quo restrictions, such as the prohibition on bringing benches, carpets or mats, chairs, curtains and partitions to the prayer alley, as well as the prohibition on Jews blowing the shofar there. The decisions of the committee were validated by the King's Word.
Immediately after the Six-Day War, the High Court of Justice ruled that with the establishment of the State of Israel, the British "King's Word" on the Western Wall (which determined, among other things, the Waqf's ownership of the Western Wall) expired.
In 1967, Israel also evacuated residents of the Mughrabi neighborhood at the foot of the Western Wall, demolished their homes and prepared a large prayer plaza with a capacity of thousands and tens of thousands. In addition, the state expropriated part of the Western Wall, 143.72 meters long and 4 meter wide, from the width of the base of the Western Wall (about 5.<> meters) and its entire height, and registered it in the Land Registry as property of the State of Israel.
The positions of Rabbi Kook and his colleagues, Meir and Sonnenfeld, enabled the State of Israel to claim ownership of the Western Wall. Had the National Committee recognized Muslim ownership of the Western Wall in 1931-1930, the State of Israel would have found it very difficult to claim, 37 years later, in 1967, ownership there, and grant the Western Wall the religious and national status it enjoys today.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us