Court Ruling Makes Sharansky Kotel Plan Moot
The problem is that the problems will likely continue
As we noted last week, a Jerusalem district court decision, which ruled that the five female worshippers arrested during a Rosh Hodesh service at the Western Wall earlier this month should not have been arrested, appeared to give the Women of the Wall the legal protection they have been seeking after many, many years. (Today on Tablet, Elliott Horowitz deftly outlines how some calls to desegregate the Kotel have their roots in the 19th century.)
It has also rendered moot the Natan Sharansky plan, which would provide for an egalitarian prayer section at the Western Wall. As Ben Sales explained:
The plan would expand the egalitarian section of the Western Wall Plaza – called Robinson’s Arch – and create a unified entrance to the Wall’s traditional and egalitarian sections. It was meant as a compromise between haredi Orthodox leaders who wanted to maintain exclusive control of the Western Wall, and religious pluralism activists who wanted the site opened to egalitarian prayer.
(For a thorough look at the arguments on both sides, Rabbi David Wolpe wrote a stellar piece about the controversy earlier this year for Tablet.)
The Sharansky plan was initially accepted, you know, in the way one imagines any compromise on a religious issue might go: Shmuel Rabinowitz, the so-called Western Wall rabbi, said he could live with it while Anat Hoffman of the Women of the Wall also tenuously agreed. Rabinowitz went to America, where he met with American Orthodox leaders who seemingly convinced him to take a harder line against the plan while a Jerusalem district court made its landmark decision, leaving Hoffman to say the plan is “not relevant.”
Support for the Sharansky plan having evaporated, what goes with it, perhaps, is the whiff of leverage that had the potential to get both sides to come together as the controversy gained momentum over the past few months. Agreements on this issue had seemed highly unlikely, but the Sharansky plan was an example of one that could have gone forward.
But the issue isn’t settled now. One scenario is that a higher court could overturn the district ruling that offers female worshippers protection. Another complicating factor could be next month’s Rosh Hodesh service that plans to incorporate women reading from the Torah at the Western Wall for the first time in a decade. These are rights that should be protected, but history has not shown that all of Jewish Jerusalem agrees with that.
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at email@example.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.