By a vote of 56-47, the so-called “Western Wall Law” passed a preliminary reading in the Knesset on Wednesday. Under an amendment to the 1967 Protection of Holy Places Law proposed by lawmaker Avi Maoz of the Noam party, all areas of the Western Wall in Jerusalem — including the southern plaza — would be subject to the authority of Israel’s chief rabbis, and prayer there would be conducted exclusively according to Orthodox custom. The move threatens in practice to nullify the mixed gender “Ezrat Yisrael” prayer section.
“The message is problematic, to say the least,” Tami Gottlieb, vice chair of Women of the Wall, said Thursday in an interview with Ynet. “It essentially pushes out every Jew who is not Orthodox or Haredi and says: You have no place at the Western Wall. That pains me as an active Israeli, as a reservist, as a former combat soldier, as a taxpayer."
2 View gallery
Women of the Wall Torah reading in the' Ezrat Yisrael' section
(Photo: Women of the Wall)
"It is very painful that the State of Israel tells me, ‘You cannot practice your custom at the Western Wall,’ and it hurts Diaspora Jewry, most of whom are Jewish like me, a liberal Jew. I am a Conservative Jew and pray in a Conservative synagogue. Yesterday I met with hundreds of our supporters who simply could not believe it and needed to understand the situation, and there are already thousands of appeals to the Israeli government, to Israeli ambassadors and diplomats from Diaspora Jewry asking: What is this supposed to mean? How can the State of Israel be a state of the Jewish people like this?”
Attorney Doron Taubman, who represents the Chief Rabbinate, responded: “Everything being raised in this bill already exists in practice under the law enacted in 1967. Precisely because there are attempts to undermine the Jewish identity of the State of Israel and to create division at the Wall, the bill seeks to make it unequivocally clear: There can be no interference, and we must return to the original law and the original legislative intent, which determined that the representatives of the relevant religions are responsible for prayer arrangements at the Wall. They have always been responsible for this.
“What is the custom of the place at the Wall? The custom of the place is Orthodox custom, which ultimately means gender-separate prayer, but anyone may approach the Wall. Sixteen million people visited the Wall in the past year. No one checks anyone’s prayer book, no one determines what someone prayed, whether they can pray, whether they can approach the Wall and do what they wish. Therefore the Wall is open to everyone.”
According to Taubman, “The law requires acting in accordance with the custom of the place. The Western Wall is a synagogue, it is holy along its entire length and has the legal status of a synagogue. What do the Reform believe? Regrettably, they write on their website that they would respect the custom of the place if it were in fact a synagogue or a mosque or a church, but they explicitly state that the Wall is not a synagogue, but merely a retaining wall. That is their approach.”
Gottlieb responded: “I do not represent the Reform movement. Women of the Wall includes Reform, Conservative and Orthodox women. If the issue is the custom of the place, the court has ruled that we are part of that custom. This is about defining one correct way to be Jewish in law. The Wall is not a private synagogue but a public space funded by taxpayers, and it should be open to all. There is no single ‘correct’ way to pray. I am entitled to pray in my own way, wearing a prayer shawl.”
“You are right, the Wall is a synagogue of the entire Jewish people. We must seek a common denominator that includes everyone,” Taubman said. “That is how it has always been. If you say you do not represent the Reform movement, which says the Wall is merely a retaining wall and not a synagogue, then fine, I respect that.”
When asked about the original legislation and the High Court of Justice ruling that there is a designated plaza near Robinson’s Arch for mixed prayer that was meant to be implemented, Taubman said: “That is not correct. There is no such ruling, and there never was. The court never addressed the issue of mixed prayer. It never addressed the new demands of Women of the Wall, who want to pray according to their custom. For example, they want to recite the priestly blessing. I have never heard of such a thing. No one has heard of such a thing.
“The petitioners said they wanted to pray according to Orthodox custom, but with certain differences, such as wearing tefillin. Now they are seeking additional changes, including reciting the priestly blessing. Millions visit the Wall each year. Women of the Wall come once a month and, under the ruling, have one hour to pray with tefillin and a prayer shawl. They come to provoke, not to pray.”
Gottlieb, vice chair of Women of the Wall, responded sarcastically: “I am glad he knows how to judge our hearts and determine what prayer is for me and what I come to do. That is simply not true. For the sake of accuracy, I want to say that the court’s decision last week was to require the government to move forward with the Western Wall framework, which is a framework the government approved, that Netanyahu advanced.”
Taubman interjected: “You are mistaken. That is not correct. That is not what happened. Go and check. That is not what happened.”
Gottlieb replied: “Right, it is wonderful when men tell you that you are wrong and that ends the discussion, but that is what is correct. There was a Western Wall framework, and the court is requiring the state to implement it.”
In fact, the High Court ruled that the government must act to connect the Ezrat Yisrael section to the stones of the Western Wall, in accordance with the Western Wall compromise. The compromise was approved by the government about a decade ago but was later frozen following political pressure.