"Is there really a new discovery about the location of the Holy Temple?? Response to R' Barak Sharagai's book" by Rabbi Elisha Wolfson (Yeshivat Har Habayit).

Summary by Gemini AI

Here is the structured summary and direct refutation of R’ Barak Sharagai’s theory presented in this video:

Overview of R’ Barak Sharagai’s Theory

Rabbi Wolfson addresses R’ Barak Sharagai’s 800-page book (Noyov Shel Olam). Sharagai claims that the Holy Temple was not located at the Dome of the Rock (the Foundation Stone / Even HaShetiya), but rather hidden deep underground in the southern area of the Temple Mount.

Key Arguments by R’ Sharagai & Rabbi Wolfson’s Refutations

1. “Stone” (Even) vs. “Rock” (Sela)

R’ Sharagai’s Argument: The Mishna and Sages refer to the Even HaShetiya as an “even” (movable stone), whereas the Dome of the Rock is a “sela” (bedrock/cliff). Therefore, the traditional location must be wrong.
R’ Wolfson’s Refutation:
- Midrashic sources explicitly refer to the Foundation Stone using terms like Shen Sela (a crag of rock).
- Pirkei De-Rabbi Eliezer explains that Jacob took a stone, which G-d sunken into the depths as the foundation of the world (Even HaShetiya).
- Even if the physical stone was originally separate, referring to its historical location as Even HaShetiya is linguistically standard and does not disprove the site.

2. The Temple Location on the Mountain Peak

R’ Sharagai’s Argument: The Mishna/Talmud states the Temple was not built on the absolute peak of the mountain, pointing to verses/texts about descending slightly from Ein Etam.
R’ Wolfson’s Refutation:
- Ezekiel explicitly states, “Upon the top of the mountain… its whole border round about shall be most holy”.
- Topographically, Jerusalem is surrounded by higher peaks to the north and northwest. Relative to the broader ridge, the Temple is on a slope, but on the Temple Mount itself, the Sanctuary sits at the elevated top, stepping down eastward as detailed in the Mishna.

3. Rabbinic & Historical Testimonies

Sharagai’s Argument: Certain medieval travelers (e.g., Rabbi Meshullam of Volterra, Kaftor VaFerach) and Islamic/Christian records placed aspects like the Red Heifer burning or the Southern Wall in ways that R’ Sharagai interprets as putting the Temple in the south. He further claims Jewish tradition was broken for ~500 years.
R’ Wolfson’s Refutation:
- Those exact medieval commentators explicitly identified the Dome of the Rock as the Holy of Holies in their writings. Sharagai selectively quotes them while ignoring their direct statements.
- Prominent Halakhic authorities throughout history—including the Radbaz, the Shelah HaKadosh, the Chida, the Chatam Sofer, and Rabbi Tzvi Pesach Frank—unanimously affirmed that the site under the Dome of the Rock is the exact location of the Holy of Holies without interruption.

4. The Infrared Imaging Claim

R’ Sharagai’s Argument: Infrared aerial photos allegedly show underground structural outlines of the Temple in the southern section.
R’ Wolfson’s Refutation:
- Infrared measurements are affected by minor surface factors (water pipes, trees, flower beds, heat variance).
- The outlines Sharagai highlights correspond directly to visible surface features (garden plots and paths between trees), not hidden subterranean Temple walls.
- Natural bedrock is clearly visible near the surface in the southern plaza, disproving Sharagai’s claim that the ground level there is 10–15 meters above the actual bedrock.

Conclusion

Rabbi Wolfson concludes that Sharagai’s theory relies on weak, far-fetched interpretations and ignores explicit rabbinic tradition, Halakha, historical records, and basic topography. The traditional identification of the Dome of the Rock as the site of the Holy of Holies remains solid and unquestioned.

Comment by Shlomo Moshe Scheinman: Most of the arguments by R’ Barak Sharagai have been refuted in depth in the articles on this web site refuting Tuvia Sagiv’s Temple Mount viewpoint. I myself do not have clarity if the HaShetiya was a stone that could or could not be moved. But this has no impact on the theory that R’ Barak Sharagai is trying to prove.