Temple Mount Faithful

The movement’s central objectives are Jewish access and prayer on the Temple Mount and the building of a Third Temple. Its stated objective includes “liberate the Temple Mount from Arab (Islamic) occupation,” and it seeks the removal of the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque to make way for a Third Temple.[1] Its aims also include advancing Jewish access, prayer, and sovereignty at the site.[7] Published aims reproduced in 2012 called for building the Third Temple “in our lifetime” in accordance with the Hebrew prophets and for “the liberation of the Temple Mount from Arab (Islamic) occupation.”[8]

Further stated objectives include consecrating the Mount as a moral and spiritual center for the Jewish people, making Jerusalem Israel’s undivided capital, opposing peace talks the movement believes would divide the land, and supporting settlements in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, and the Golan Heights. These positions are presented as grounded in the movement’s belief that God granted the land to Israel and that it should not be divided or transferred to another people.[9]

The organization has sought to make these aims visible through rallies, marches, prayer sessions, flags, attempted visits, and demonstrative religious ceremonies near the Mount’s gates.[7] It has also raised funds for future Temple construction and held recurring demonstrations.[10] Its public actions have included calls for Jewish visits on holidays. In the days before Passover in 2016, the group announced a call for Israelis to visit the Mount; a report reproduced an image of a Palestinian media post containing an Arabic translation of the announcement.[11]

A distinctive proposal was to establish a “time-sharing plan” reserving specific hours for Jewish worship, similar to arrangements at the Ibrahimi Mosque/Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. The proposal was advanced while state restrictions on non-Muslim prayer remained in place and Muslim officials opposed dividing visiting hours or allowing such prayer.[3] A 2016 report again identified the movement among organizations calling for a temporal division of the site, setting aside days or hours for Jewish access or worship, and noted Muslim authorities’ opposition.[4]

These demands exist amid disagreement among Jewish religious authorities over whether Jews may enter the site at all.[3] Advocacy for access is also distinct from the question of public prayer: police generally did not permit public non-Muslim prayer, while representatives of Jewish groups sometimes claimed in media interviews that they had prayed inside the compound.[12][13] The movement’s program therefore concerns both access to a sacred place and the terms under which Jewish worship might occur there.

The Temple Mount Faithful emerged after the Six-Day War and was founded in 1967 by Gershon Salomon, a former Israel Defense Forces officer and lecturer in Middle Eastern studies.[1] It is described as an organized Jewish movement led by Salomon and is also called the Temple Mount and Eretz Yisrael Faithful Movement.[7][14] Ynet calls the movement Orthodox, while a Jerusalem Post account calls it messianic.[14][15] The Times of Israel characterizes Salomon as a secular nationalist.[16] Sources do not provide a consistent membership count; they describe the group as small or tiny but also note its substantial publicity.[16][9]

The organization opposed the Israeli government’s 1967 decision not to permit Jewish prayer on the Mount, regarding the policy as undermining Israeli sovereignty. It pursued legal action and public advocacy for Jewish ascent, prayer, and a stronger expression of Jewish sovereignty at the site.[17][7] Its aims formed part of the wider history of Jewish advocacy for ascent after the Six-Day War. Larger and broader groups joined the cause in subsequent decades, particularly around rabbis in the national-religious world, though not exclusively.[18]

From 1986, the movement complained of alleged legal violations by the Waqf on the Mount and petitioned over enforcement of Israeli law, including antiquities, planning, and building rules.[7] The litigation is identified as SCJ 193/86, but the study gives inconsistent filing dates: one passage says the first suit was filed in March 1988, while another refers to a lawsuit submitted in 1990. The source does not resolve the discrepancy.[7]

A related legal change followed a Supreme Court appeal by the movement in 1988 and Attorney General directives concerning government agencies’ authority and procedures for work on the Mount. Those directives led the Department of Antiquities and Museums, and later the Israel Antiquities Authority, to carry out regular inspections of work there and report to the Attorney General.[5] In litigation concerning Waqf work, the Waqf contested the court’s jurisdiction, arguing that it did not recognize Israeli sovereignty at the site. The court perceived that authorities had turned a “blind eye” to legal violations but favored flexible enforcement and arrangements designed to avoid conflict rather than strict enforcement.[7]

The movement’s legal campaigns continued in later years. In a 1993 case, the Temple Mount Faithful Association and other petitioners asked the High Court to order the Attorney General and other authorities to prosecute the Muslim Waqf over work allegedly undertaken without a required permit. The court declined to interfere with the authorities’ discretion. The account says the court affirmed that the Mount was within Israel’s territory and that Israeli laws concerning access, worship, and protection of holy places applied there, while also noting that the Supreme Court had not fully applied those laws in some Temple Mount cases.[19] Other litigation cited in discussions of police restrictions includes High Court judgments 4185/90, Temple Mount Faithful vs. the Attorney General, and 10450/07, Temple Mount Faithful vs. Major General Franco.[20]

During the 1980s, the group was described as the only organization promoting the Temple Mount issue and as focusing on it exclusively for years.[21] In later decades, the advocacy landscape expanded to include numerous associations and initiatives, among them Women for the Temple, Students for the Temple Mount, and the monthly “Gates Tour.” This later expansion was not attributed solely to the Temple Mount Faithful.[21]

The group’s attempts to visit or pray at the Mount repeatedly brought it into conflict with police restrictions and court decisions. In October 1986, an agreement among the Temple Mount Faithful, the Supreme Muslim Council, and police permitted brief visits by small groups. The arrangement was used once and not repeated after a crowd of 2,000 Muslims, armed with stones and bottles, attacked the group; stones were also thrown at worshippers at the Western Wall. Later attempts by the movement to hold Jewish prayers on the Mount were prevented by police.[1]

In later legal disputes, courts and police weighed activists’ claims of religious access against official concerns about potential violence and public order. In HCJ 2725/93, Gershon Salomon v. Commander of the Jerusalem District, then-Supreme Court President Aharon Barak recognized every Jew’s right to ascend and pray as part of freedom of worship and expression. The court nevertheless accepted police arguments that allowing prayer at that time could endanger human life.[17] In another related case, Supreme Court President Shimon Agranat wrote that the Mount’s sanctity for the Jewish people did not depend on any regime.[17]

In 2001, the High Court rejected the movement’s petition to enter the Mount during Passover, accepting the state’s position that Jewish ascent could cause disturbances across the country. The state’s representative told the court that the Waqf controlled the Mount and prevented Jewish entry, while also saying Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was seeking a way to enable Jews to enter. Salomon condemned the ruling as a “shameful surrender to threats of violence.”[22] That same year, the Supreme Court allowed a cornerstone to be moved temporarily to the gates of the site but ruled that it could not be placed on the Mount, citing the interests of religious peace.[9]

In August 2001, on Tisha B’Av, the movement held its customary rally commemorating the Temple’s destruction opposite the Mughrabi Gate and asked to ascend. Police barred entry amid heightened tensions. Under a High Court-approved arrangement, leaders briefly took the cornerstone to the Givati parking lot near the Old City for a ceremony at about 8 a.m.; afterward it was returned to its usual location in western Jerusalem. Members chanted, “The Temple Mount belongs to the people of Israel.”[23] More than 3,500 Palestinian worshippers had gathered after leaders called on them to defend the site, and clashes occurred amid the competing claims surrounding the planned ceremony. Western Wall Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovitch criticized the cornerstone call as a “prank.”[23]

In 2003, dozens of members led by Salomon attempted to enter through the Mughrabi Gate and were stopped by police and Border Police. The movement was also petitioning the High Court, claiming discrimination because its members were Jewish.[24] In 2006, the High Court permitted members to visit during regular public visiting hours on Tisha B’Av while excluding Salomon. The conditions barred banners, unusual clothing, and provocative behavior, and police could stop the visit if circumstances changed or the conditions were breached.[14]

During Passover 2007, police escorted more than 100 affiliated activists into the compound on two consecutive days; on the second day they carried a model of the Second Temple. The report says members were allowed into the compound, including access to the Dome of the Rock, while public non-Muslim prayer generally remained prohibited.[12] During Sukkot later that year, police also escorted affiliated activists onto the compound carrying a model of the Second Temple. The report gives neither a participant count nor an exact date and again notes that Jewish-group representatives claimed prayer had taken place despite the general restriction.[13]

Police restrictions also applied to Salomon personally over a much longer period. INSS author Shmuel Berkovits reports that police barred him from ascending for 28 years, regarding his presence and plan to lay a cornerstone for a Fourth Temple as likely to provoke a violent reaction from the Palestinian public.[20] A later Jerusalem Post account says Salomon and his followers tried to ascend before major Jewish holidays and that he received special permission to ascend once in the final year of his life.[15]

In October 1990, the Temple Mount Faithful publicized plans for a cornerstone-laying ceremony for a Third Temple near the Dung Gate and for erecting a sukkah beside the Magharibah Gate. Police prohibited the cornerstone event near the Sacred Esplanade but allowed a ceremony in nearby Silwan; another account says police permitted a water-drawing ceremony at the Siloam Tunnel instead.[5][7] The episode became a focal point for the movement’s campaign and for the security concerns surrounding its proposed actions. Before the confrontation, al-Aqsa preacher Shaykh Fathallah Silwadi had called on Muslims to defend the mosque.[5]

The accounts differ in how they describe the events of October 8 and the movement’s proximity to the violence. Reiter’s study says a gas grenade accidentally rolled toward Muslim women as thousands of Jewish worshippers were leaving the Western Wall Plaza after the Priestly Blessing. It reports that crowds then stormed police and that police used live ammunition, rubber bullets, and tear gas. The study gives 17 Palestinians killed and more than 100 wounded, including 53 taken to hospitals; it also reports 34 Jewish worshippers and police officers wounded, 28 of whom required hospital treatment.[7] Reiter characterizes the clash as the deadliest on the Mount since 1967 and notes that Muslims called it the “Al-Aqsa Massacre.”[7]

United Nations Security Council Resolution 672, adopted unanimously on October 12, 1990, expressed alarm over violence at Al-Haram al-Sharif and other Jerusalem holy places on October 8. Its summary gave a different toll: over 20 Palestinian deaths and more than 150 people injured. The resolution particularly condemned violence by Israeli security forces and called on Israel to meet its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention.[6] A separate UN Digital Library record describes a Secretary-General report submitted in connection with the resolution, published November 1, 1990. The catalog record says it contains a summary of an Israeli Commission of Investigation report titled “Into events on the Temple Mount, 8 Oct. 1990” and identifies it as a 24-page document.[25]

Other accounts also differ over casualties and sequence. The Jewish Virtual Library reports 17 Arab deaths and summarizes Israeli investigations: the Zamir Commission concluded that a threatening mob threw stones and metal projectiles at police, who opened fire in self-defense, while criticizing police for failing to anticipate that the situation could turn violent. It says Judge Ezra Kama’s later investigation confirmed the commission’s principal findings.[26] Encyclopedia.com instead describes a violent confrontation between the group and Muslims that led to a confrontation with Israeli police, reporting 21 Muslim deaths.[9] The Jewish Virtual Library’s account says the group was about a mile away praying peacefully when violence broke out, a materially different account of its role.[26]

The casualty record also varies within the cited material. Reiter’s detailed account reports 17 Palestinians killed and more than 100 Palestinians wounded, while another Jerusalem Institute account gives 150 wounded; the latter figure is not reconciled with the detailed account.[7][27] The UN resolution’s summary reports over 20 deaths and more than 150 injuries, while Reiter’s chapter gives 17 Muslims killed and 83 injured people across Muslim and Jewish casualties.[5][6] These differing figures and narratives are retained here as source-specific reports rather than combined into a single total.

Reiter says Arabic publications titled The Aqsa Massacre and an exhibition at the Islamic Museum followed the incident. He also writes that the Security Council unanimously passed a resolution condemning violence by Israeli security forces and sought a Secretary-General mission; the United States supported the decision, while Israel did not consent to receive the delegation. Reiter identifies the episode as a starting point for a campaign by Shaykh Ra’id Salah alleging that Israel intended to destroy the Aqsa Mosque.[5]

The movement’s small scale has coexisted with high public visibility. It has been described as a small or fringe movement that held marches and demonstrations when permitted, received substantial publicity, and repeatedly provoked tensions through its rhetoric and efforts.[1][9] The Times of Israel describes it as a tiny group that helped keep alive the desire for a Jewish Temple Mount and reports support from evangelical Christians and some members of the religious settlement movement.[16]

The movement also pursued claims about preservation of Jewish archaeological material. In 2011, it petitioned the High Court seeking full publication of a secret State Comptroller’s report on works at the Mount. The group said it feared destruction of artifacts; Salomon alleged that Waqf construction and demolition had damaged material connected to the site’s Jewish past.[10] The publicly released portion described deficiencies in state oversight. Kadima MK Otniel Schneller said the reported shortcomings had been corrected and defended keeping the remaining material confidential on grounds of security and sovereignty. The movement’s petition argued that withholding the report concealed state inaction, while officials defending confidentiality cited possible harm to national security, foreign relations, or Israeli sovereignty.[10] The allegations of deliberate damage were Salomon’s claims, not an uncontested finding in the reported material.[10]

The organization continued to promote holiday visits. Its Passover 2016 announcement urging Israelis to visit the Mount was reproduced in a report amid Palestinian media coverage and warnings by Palestinian officials about Israeli visits.[11] This episode exemplifies how the group’s public calls for access were reported within a wider dispute over visits, prayer, and the site’s administration.

The Temple Mount Faithful’s significance lies in its sustained effort to place Jewish access, prayer, sovereignty, and Temple reconstruction on the public and legal agenda. It pursued those goals through demonstrations and symbolic ceremonies as well as court petitions, and its legal actions were linked to changes in inspection procedures for work on the Mount.[5][7] Its activism also formed part of a broader development: what had once been described as an issue promoted by a single organization later attracted multiple groups and initiatives.[21]

The movement’s program has been unusually explicit in linking Jewish worship and sovereignty with rebuilding a Third Temple, and some accounts describe its desired removal of Muslim structures.[1] That agenda has met opposition from Muslim authorities and exists alongside state restrictions on non-Muslim prayer and disagreement among Jewish religious authorities over entry.[3][4] Its calls for greater Jewish access and proposals for a time-based division of worship entered official discussion of access arrangements at the site.[3][4]

The group’s history also illustrates the intersection of religious claims, legal rights, public order, and security decisions. Court accounts recognize claims of Jewish religious freedom while also recording acceptance of police arguments about danger to human life; restrictions on visits have therefore been shaped by circumstances and conditions as well as by general policy.[14][17] The 1990 cornerstone plan and ensuing violence remain especially prominent in accounts of the movement.[5][7] Sources disagree over the movement’s proximity to and role in the confrontation.[26][9] They also give different casualty totals.[6][7]

The movement’s stated objectives and actions are politically and religiously contested because they concern Jewish prayer and sovereignty at a site containing Muslim holy places, as well as construction of a Third Temple and, in some formulations, removal of Islamic structures.[1][9] Muslim authorities opposed proposals for Jewish prayer or time-sharing, while Jewish religious authorities also disagreed over whether Jews should enter the Mount.[3][4] Sources record disputes over police restrictions, Waqf work, and the balance between claimed access rights and security concerns.[17][7] The movement’s 2011 petition raised a separate dispute over archaeological oversight and the confidentiality of the State Comptroller’s findings.[10]

Accounts of the October 1990 violence differ on the movement’s proximity to the events and its causal role.[26][9] Reiter reports 17 deaths,[7] the Security Council summary says over 20,[6] and Encyclopedia.com gives 21.[9] Injury totals also differ, and the Security Council resolution frames responsibility differently from the accounts of Israeli investigations.[6][26] These are source-specific descriptions of a highly consequential event, not a single reconciled narrative.