Big Ben is a Mosque


By Akiva
November 7, 2010
Share

So it should really surprise no one that the UN, which includes such wonderful (islamic!) abusers of human rights as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Indonesia etc etc announced last week that Rachel's Tomb, isn't actually Rachel's Tomb, but is conveniently a Mosque.

The continuing delegitimization of Israel, our eternal Homeland, has made many almost immune to some of the ridiculous statements being leveled against her. Each day it's something new, such as the Muslim Waqf accusing Israel's installation of a disabled access system to the Kotel as being "destruction of historical muslim artifacts." Rich statements coming from those who un-ceremoniously dumped hundreds of tons of Temple-Era artifacts in the Kidron Valley, still being investigated by archeologists to this day.

Our "peace-loving" arab neighbors who still desire a Judenrein Judea/Samaria are engaged in a war to erase Jews from history. They are helped by the leftists and our brethren who want to "be like the goyim" and who at differing times in our history have aided our enemies until they eventually become the targets themselves.

Nothing new there.

This time however, it's personal. The Midrash relates the story of just how much we owe Mama Rochel. When Hashem Yitbarach decreed the exile of the Jewish people from Eretz Yisrael, our leaders and forefathers beseeched Hashem to have mercy. Only when Rachel asked did Hashem elicite compassion and decree that some day we will return to our land. That time has now come and returned we have and are.

So the arabs want to erase the Jews, again nothing new. That the world is becoming increasingly enamored with the bizarre and outright loony claims of the arabs is however (at least to me) alarming. Latma TV recently did a spoof of the UN declaring the US Congress was actually a Mosque. What about Big Ben? Or 10 Downing Street? Or the Vatican? Or those heads on Easter Island? What's next?

Sounds silly, but this is even moreso, this is the grave site of our great great grandmother Mama Rochel who did everything she could for her children. Surely this must be enough for our ever-decreasing leftists/self-hating Jewish brothers to see how twisted the anti-Israel bias is?

In the mean-time, here's Shwekey's Mama Rochel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYtKqst5Tqg

COMMENTS

telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 19:02

Rate this:

0 points

Actually, Akiva, the current location of Rachel's Tomb is unlikely to be where she was buried. First, it's a 15th-century Ottoman structure.
Second, and more importantly, if you read Shmuel 1, Chapter 2, verses 2-3,

2. When you go from me today, you will find two men by Rachel's tomb, in the border of Benjamin, in Zelzah, and they will say to you, The she-asses which you went to seek, were found. And your father had abandoned the matter of the she-asses, and is worried about you, saying, What shall I do about my son?
3. And you shall go on forward from there, and you shall come to the plain of Tabor, and there will meet you there three men, going up (to bow) to (God), to Bethel, one carrying three kids, and one carrying three loaves of bread, and one carrying an earthenware jug of wine.

it is apparent that Rachel was buried north of Jerusalem, not south of it where the tomb is today.

And according to Rashi

by Rachel’s tomb, in the border of Benjamin: Now, isn’t Rachel’s tomb in the border of Judah, in Bethlehem? Rather, (this is the meaning:) Now, they are by Rachel’s tomb, and when you will meet them, you will find them in the border of Benjamin, in Zelzah. Thus taught the Rabbis in the Tosefta of Tractate Sotah. Zelzah is a combination of the words: ‘zel l’zah,’ the shadow of the Fair One, of the Holy One, Blessed be He, Who is fair and ruddy (So described in Song of Songs 5:10). And this is Jerusalem.


Akiva

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 19:23

Rate this:

0 points

Oh Sam, I should have known! One of our resident well-meaning/duped lefty Jews.

The structure is 16th Century Ottoman. So? The site has been identified as the site of Rachel's Tomb since at least the 4th Century AD (http://books.google.com/books?id=MIUKXuBj5pkC&pg=PA218&dq=Rachel's+Tomb+arab&lr=&cd=7#v=onepage&q=Rachel's%20Tomb%20arab&f=false)

Muslim geographer Muhammad al-Idrisi identifies it as the site of Rachel's Tomb in 1154.

So there you have historical proof of it being Rachel's Tomb since before Islam even existed! Ok now for scriptural:

Genesis 35:19-20 "And Rachel died, and was buried on the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem. And Jacob set a pillar upon her grave: that is the pillar of Rachel's grave unto this day."

This is expounded in the Midrash and Lamentations Rabbah that it was Rachel's wish to be buried, not in Machpelah Cave (another stolen Jewish heritage site!), but on the road to Bethlehem so as to pray for the Jewish people sent into exile and once again welcome them back.

While I'm sure we all appreciate your sudden interest in quoting the Tanach and selective usage of Rashi (when it benefits your skewed argument), you just seem too much like a fish out of water.


telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 19:38

Rate this:

0 points

Akiva, I wouldn't close my mind to any possibility when it comes to ancient texts. You aren't suggesting that Rashi is wrong and you, gaon hador, are right, are you?


Akiva

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 19:49

Rate this:

0 points

I'm not suggesting Rashi is wrong, I'm suggesting you are.

Notice I never gave my opinion, I'm not a Gaon or even a Rav, but the consensus amongst all the gedolim is that Rachel's Tomb is indeed...Rachel's Tomb.

Don't take my word for it, how about the Ramban?

"When I was still in Spain, it was clear to me that the holy place must be not far from Ramah in Eretz Binyamin. As it says "kol beramah nishmah"(Jeremiah 31:15) and also the fact that Yaakov Avinu was coming from Bet-El and the site is describes as being very far from Efrat (v’od kivrat ha’aretz lavo Efrata). The concept "kivrat haaretz" implies a very great distance from the word "kabir: meaning "mighty". However, says the Ramban, "Now that I have had the zechut of seeing Kever Rachel near Bet-Lechem, I understand that this is the site"


telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:01

Rate this:

0 points

Bet El is north of Jerusalem, there is even a settlement there (close to Ramallah). It is exceedingly difficult to determine geographical places based on ancient texts (which at first weren't even written down but passed by word of mouth). All I am suggesting is that one needs to keep one's mind open. Until someone does a high-tech examination of these kind of places, all bets are off. Unfortunately, neither the rabbinical nor Muslim authorities will allow that kind of examination since they are frightened of what they might or might not find.


telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:01

Rate this:

0 points

Bet El is north of Jerusalem, there is even a settlement there (close to Ramallah). It is exceedingly difficult to determine geographical places based on ancient texts (which at first weren't even written down but passed by word of mouth). All I am suggesting is that one needs to keep one's mind open. Until someone does a high-tech examination of these kind of places, all bets are off. Unfortunately, neither the rabbinical nor Muslim authorities will allow that kind of examination since they are frightened of what they might or might not find.


telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:01

Rate this:

0 points

Bet El is north of Jerusalem, there is even a settlement there (close to Ramallah). It is exceedingly difficult to determine geographical places based on ancient texts (which at first weren't even written down but passed by word of mouth). All I am suggesting is that one needs to keep one's mind open. Until someone does a high-tech examination of these kind of places, all bets are off. Unfortunately, neither the rabbinical nor Muslim authorities will allow that kind of examination since they are frightened of what they might or might not find.


Akiva

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:09

Rate this:

0 points

That's fine IF you are just going by religious arguments.

The UN is supposed to ignore them and concentrate on hard evidence and the evidence shows the site being identified as Rachel's Tomb since as early as 4th Century AD and even Jerome writing about it in the 3rd Century AD. History also shows it was never used as, a mosque until Ottoman rule and even then it was still called Rachel's Tomb even by the arabs.

By saying all bets are off you doing exactly what the arabs want you to, erasing 1700 years of Jewish history. This is their war now.


telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:21

Rate this:

0 points

Of course it is a religious argument, Akiva. It's about something that's written in the Torah. And if Rachel Tomb isn't where it is, but somewhere else, say north of Jerusalem, how is that erasing any period of Jewish history? Isn't better to be accurate in these things? If you aren't accurate, they can blow up in your face. You wouldn't want that.


Akiva

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:48

Rate this:

0 points

You're wonderful at dodging the point. It's not a religious argument from the UN's point of view as it is supposed to be politically and religiously neutral. For them it is supposed to be historical and cultural. This highlights the anti-semitism present in the UN and the hypocrisy of lefty Jews who buy into the lies of the arabs, such as yourself.

From a Jewish point of view, it's very much a religious argument. As quoted above, Ramban identifies the site as being outside Bethlehem and agrees with the Torah. Also (once again) the Gedolim, whether chassidic or litvish etc all agree on the location of the site.

Your sudden (read: convenient) interest in Jewish spirituality is welcomed, but very very half-hearted.


Anthony Posner

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 20:57

Rate this:

0 points

Akiva,

"dodging the point".

Tsam couldn't even directly answer a question that I asked about Shakespeare and his plays. I don't think that he is well-read.


telegramsam

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 21:29

Rate this:

0 points

Akiva, my interest in Judaism predates you, probably. And as for Posner's posers, he just wants to be a nudnik. And as a phudnik, (a nudnick with a PhD), I outrank him.


Anthony Posner

Sun, 11/07/2010 - 21:33

Rate this:

0 points

tsam,

Don't show off. DLE did and he is drowning.


jose (not verified)

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 13:00

Rate this:

0 points

Islam always made a point of building mosques on religious sites of conquerred territory. So Turkish Sainte Sophie is now a mosque and on the Temple Mount there is now the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque. At least, they did not destroy the Temple themselves. Someone did it before they do.
The fact that there is a 'mosque' on Rachel's tumb is kind of a 'proof' that there was something else there.
I guess that is Islam's respect for other religions. Just one step away from that of the Talibans.


DLeigh-Ellis

Mon, 11/08/2010 - 18:31

Rate this:

0 points

A 'phudnik'... that's fantastic... Love it!

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS