In the weeks leading up to Tisha be-Av, the Religious Zionist and Modern Orthodox communities engage in the annual rite of agonizing over the relevance of Tisha be-Av in light of the State of Israel and unified Jerusalem. The discussion focuses on the text of a short liturgical prayer titled Naḥem, recited only once a year during the afternoon Tisha be-Av service (in the Ashkenazic practice). Following Rabbi Sacks’ translation, Nahem describes Jerusalem as “laid waste of its dwellings, robbed of its glory, desolate without inhabitants. [Sitting] with her head covered like a barren childless woman.” The image is stark—and totally at odds with current reality.
Over the years, numerous articles, blog posts, and online forums have debated the continued viability of the received text. As several of the referenced articles note, positions range from advocating wholesale reconstruction to instituting minor amendments, allowing for deviations so long as they remain “private,” and, finally, resisting all efforts at change.
The dilemma is easy to understand. On its face, the liturgy strikes a false note—which a community that takes prayer seriously should try and avoid. Further, retaining the liturgy smacks of ingratitude, crying out as if Jerusalem lay in smoldering ruins, when God has granted a beautiful, populated city which sprawls out amongst the hills.[1] On the other hand, the Temple is still not rebuilt—the site currently occupied by a shrine of another religion—and the Jewish hold on the city is not without its complications. There is also a more sweeping objection: “Who are we moderns to tinker with texts that have served as the bedrock of Jewish identity for millennia?” My sense is that within Religious Zionism, there is a slow drift towards allowing for liturgical accommodation, yet the matter remains hotly debated and far from resolved.
In some quarters, the issue has moved beyond (relatively) minor points of liturgy, to questioning whether the fasts commemorating the destruction of the Temple (other than Tisha be-Av itself) remain obligatory in the era of Jewish sovereignty over Jerusalem. From a halakhic perspective, the issue revolves around talmudic interpretations of the prophet Zekhariah’s vision which indicates that when peace returns to Israel, the fast days will become holidays, and/or when Jews coexist peaceably with the Gentiles, the fast days become optional. From a theological standpoint, the matter touches on whether the Temple will be rebuilt through human actions by or via miraculous divine intervention (as the text of Nahem suggests). At the moment, the discussion about the fast days remains more of a thought experiment than a direct call to action.[2] But that this has become a thinkable thought within mainstream Orthodox Zionism, is bound up with efforts to assert Jewish rights over the Temple Mount, and reflects a sustained drift towards the idea that Jews may take an active hand in rebuilding the third Temple.