English
Bahasa Melayu
BAZ’s Second Position: Baitul Maqdis Is Within al-Masjid al-Aqsa, Not the Other Way Around
Series: The Incident of Quraysh Questioning the Prophet About Baitul Maqdis
Introduction
I believe many people assume that Masjidil Aqsa is inside Baitul Maqdis. Are you one of them? I used to think the same. I assumed Masjidil Aqsa was inside Baitul Maqdis. As it turns out, the arrangement is the reverse: Baitul Maqdis is inside Masjidil Aqsa.
Before we go further, the term Baitul Maqdis itself needs to be examined. This term is very close to the Hebrew expression Beit HaMikdash or בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, which means “the Holy House” or “the House that is Sanctified”. In Jewish tradition, this term refers to the Temple or their holy house associated with Jerusalem.
In the Old Testament, the concept of this holy house is indeed linked with Jerusalem. However, the Qur’an does not name Baitul Maqdis as Jerusalem. The Qur’an also does not name the destination of Isra’ as Baitul Maqdis or Jerusalem. What the Qur’an mentions is al-Masjid al-Aqsa, the destination Allah describes as a place whose surroundings are blessed.
This is where the root of the major confusion occurs. When the term Baitul Maqdis is read through the framework of Jewish history and the Old Testament, it begins to be understood as a city, a territory, or a large area associated with Jerusalem. After that, al-Masjid al-Aqsa is then assumed to be a mosque building located inside that territory. I think this is what many people hold to.
However, the structure of the wording in the Qur’an and hadith does not mean that. The Qur’an does not begin the event of Isra’ with the word bayt, and it does not end it with the word bayt. The Qur’an mentions a journey from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa. Therefore, the more important issue is not merely where Baitul Maqdis is, but what masjid means in Qur’anic usage.
If the meaning of masjid has already been reduced to nothing more than a prayer building, then the entire arrangement will be reversed. People will read Baitul Maqdis as a large territory, and then read Masjidil Aqsa as a small building inside that territory. Yet the usage of the Qur’an shows masjid as a field, a center of prostration, a center of obedience, a center of trust, a center of law, and a wider space of worship.
I believe you have read the definition of masjid according to the Qur’an in the series “Malaysia Is About to Be Attacked, Because This Is the Land of Bani Israel” under the sub-article "They Attacked Istana Melaka Before. Will They Attack Istana Negara Later?". It has also been discussed again in this series in "BAZ’s First Position: Baitul Maqdis in the Hadith Is al-Masjid al-Aqsa in the Qur’an".
Once this foundation regarding the meaning of masjid is understood, Insyaallah, the arrangement between Baitul Maqdis and al-Masjid al-Aqsa can be read again more accurately. Masjid is not merely a prayer building. Masjid is a broader field. Bayt, on the other hand, is a house, a center, or a sacred object located within that field of masjid.
That is why, in this article, I want to rearrange this confusion from its foundation. It is not Masjidil Aqsa inside Baitul Maqdis, but rather:
Baitul Maqdis is inside Masjidil Aqsa.
A Note Before Continuing
Before continuing this article, I assume that you have already read BAZ’s First Position and understood the important foundation explained there, namely the difference between masjid and bayt according to the structure of the Qur’an and hadith.
In the First Position, it was explained that masjid is not merely a prayer building. Masjid is a wider field, namely a center of prostration, a center of obedience, a center of trust, a center of law, a center of the affairs of the ummah, and a center of authority that should submit to Allah.
Bayt, on the other hand, is a house, a center, or a sacred object located within that field of masjid.
Therefore, this article will not repeat that discussion at length. This Second Position is built upon that foundation. If this foundation is not clear, the reading of this article can easily become confused again. You may continue reading Masjidil Aqsa as a small building inside the territory of Baitul Maqdis, whereas the arrangement being presented by BAZ is that Baitul Maqdis is inside Masjidil Aqsa.
That is why, for those who have not read it or are still unclear, it is better to return first to BAZ’s First Position before continuing this article.
The Clearest Foundation Is in Makkah
This foundation is easiest to see in Makkah. When we read the arrangement of Qur’anic wording, Insyaallah, we will notice that Allah refers to the first house placed for mankind with the word بَيْتٍ (baytin).
Allah says:
إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ
“Indeed, the first house placed for mankind was the one in Bakkah, blessed and a guidance for all worlds.”
Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:96
This verse mentions بَيْتٍ (baytin), meaning house. That first house is in Bakkah. Then, in another verse, Allah explains that the Kaabah itself is al-Bayt al-Haram.
Allah says:
جَعَلَ اللَّهُ الْكَعْبَةَ الْبَيْتَ الْحَرَامَ قِيَامًا لِّلنَّاسِ
“Allah has made the Kaabah, the Sacred House, a qiyām for mankind...”
Surah al-Ma’idah 5:97
Here we can see a structure. The Kaabah is called al-Bayt al-Haram. It is the Sacred House. However, when Allah commands the direction of the qiblah, the wording used is not merely al-Bayt, but al-Masjid al-Haram.
Allah says:
فَوَلِّ وَجْهَكَ شَطْرَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ
“So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram.”
Surah al-Baqarah 2:144
This is where the pattern begins to become clear. The Kaabah is al-Bayt, but the field of qiblah is called al-Masjid al-Haram. Therefore, al-Bayt is inside al-Masjid al-Haram, not al-Masjid al-Haram inside al-Bayt.
From this Makkah pattern, we can reread the arrangement of Isra’. If in Makkah there is al-Bayt inside al-Masjid al-Haram, then we need to be careful when reading the relationship between Baitul Maqdis and al-Masjid al-Aqsa. Perhaps all this time, the arrangement has been reversed because we read Baitul Maqdis as a large territory, not as a bayt within the field of masjid.
From the Makkah Pattern to the Event of Isra’
Once this pattern becomes clear in Makkah, only then can we bring this method of reading to the event of Isra’. I do not want us to jump too quickly to Baitul Maqdis before first observing how the Qur’an arranges its wording.
In Makkah, we have already seen that the Kaabah is al-Bayt, while the field of worship and qiblah is called al-Masjid al-Haram. This gives us an important indication. Al-Bayt is not a field that swallows the masjid. Rather, al-Bayt is located within the field of al-Masjid al-Haram.
When we read Surah al-Isra’ again, we will find that Allah does not say the Prophet SAW was taken from al-Bayt al-Haram to Bayt al-Maqdis. If the arrangement were truly bayt to bayt, then perhaps we could expect wording like that. However, the wording Allah uses is not like that.
Allah says:
سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي أَسْرَىٰ بِعَبْدِهِ لَيْلًا مِّنَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ إِلَى الْمَسْجِدِ الْأَقْصَى
“Glory be to the One who took His servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa...”
Surah al-Isra’ 17:1
Here, we need to pause for a moment and observe the arrangement of the wording. This verse moves from masjid to masjid. Not from bayt to bayt.
The starting point of the journey is called al-Masjid al-Haram. Its destination is called al-Masjid al-Aqsa. Therefore, the pair established by the Qur’an is not “the Kaabah to Baitul Maqdis”, but al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa.
For me, this is where the arrangement needs to be read again. If, on the Makkah side, we do not read the Kaabah as a large field that contains Masjidil Haram, why on the Isra’ side do we read Baitul Maqdis as a large territory that contains Masjidil Aqsa?
Would the more balanced pattern not be this:
In Makkah, al-Bayt is inside al-Masjid al-Haram.
Therefore, at the destination of Isra’, Baitul Maqdis should also be read as being inside al-Masjid al-Aqsa.
Not the other way around. I hope this confusion and misuse of terminology can be corrected.
Hadiths That Strengthen the Pattern of Masjid to Masjid
After seeing the pattern in the Qur’an, I want us to examine the related hadiths. The purpose is not to open a new debate, but to see whether the pattern we have observed is supported by hadith or not.
The pattern we are reading is clear. In Makkah, the Kaabah is al-Bayt, while the field of worship and qiblah is called al-Masjid al-Haram. In Surah al-Isra’, the journey of the Prophet SAW is mentioned from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa. So I want you to see, when the Prophet SAW himself mentioned these places in hadith, did he refer to them as bayt or as masjid?
This is where the hadith of Abu Dharr RA becomes important. Abu Dharr RA once asked the Prophet SAW:
أَيُّ مَسْجِدٍ وُضِعَ فِي الْأَرْضِ أَوَّلُ
“Which masjid was first placed on the earth?”
The Prophet SAW answered:
الْمَسْجِدُ الْحَرَامُ
“al-Masjid al-Haram.”
Abu Dharr RA asked again:
ثُمَّ أَيٌّ
“Then which one?”
The Prophet SAW answered:
الْمَسْجِدُ الْأَقْصَى
“al-Masjid al-Aqsa.”
Then, when asked about the distance between the two, he answered:
أَرْبَعُونَ سَنَةً
“Forty years.”
Here I observe one thing. Abu Dharr RA did not ask, “Which bayt was first built?” The Prophet SAW also did not answer, “Baitullah, then Baitul Maqdis.”
What was asked was masjid. What was answered was also masjid.
The answer was al-Masjid al-Haram, then al-Masjid al-Aqsa.
Therefore, in my reading, this hadith of forty years is not merely evidence of the time gap between two structures. It is more important than that. It shows that the two earliest places placed on the earth were referred to by the Prophet SAW under the category of masjid, not bayt.
This is consistent with Surah al-Isra’ verse 1. The Qur’an mentions the journey from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa. The hadith of Abu Dharr RA likewise mentions the arrangement of the first two masjids as al-Masjid al-Haram, then al-Masjid al-Aqsa.
So we see the same pattern repeated, namely not bayt to bayt, but masjid to masjid.
The Hadith of the Three Masjids
The same pattern also appears in the hadith of the three masjids. The Prophet SAW said:
لاَ تُشَدُّ الرِّحَالُ إِلاَّ إِلَى ثَلاَثَةِ مَسَاجِدَ، الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ، وَمَسْجِدِ الرَّسُولِ، وَمَسْجِدِ الأَقْصَى
“No special journey is undertaken except to three masjids: al-Masjid al-Haram, the Masjid of the Messenger, and Masjid al-Aqsa.”
Once again, I see that the wording used is masjid. This hadith also does not mention three bayt. It does not mention Baitullah, Baitul Maqdis, and another bayt. Instead, this hadith mentions three masjids.
Therefore, from the perspective of the virtue of worship-related travel, the category emphasized by the hadith is masjid, not bayt.
This further strengthens the pattern we are reading. In the Qur’an, Isra’ takes place from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa. In the hadith of Abu Dharr RA, the first two places placed on the earth are referred to as al-Masjid al-Haram and al-Masjid al-Aqsa. In the hadith of the three masjids, special travel is also linked to al-Masjid al-Haram, the Masjid of the Messenger, and Masjid al-Aqsa.
Therefore, for me, these hadiths become supporting evidence that the original arrangement indeed moves under the category of masjid. Not the category of bayt.
From here, what I am arguing becomes clearer. If the Kaabah as al-Bayt is located within al-Masjid al-Haram, then Baitul Maqdis is also more appropriately read as a bayt located within the field of al-Masjid al-Aqsa. It is not Masjidil Aqsa inside Baitul Maqdis. Rather, Baitul Maqdis is inside Masjidil Aqsa.
Conclusion
From all these arrangements, we have confirmed several very important matters. First, the Qur’an does not name the destination of Isra’ with the historical name we commonly hear today. The Qur’an does not mention Jerusalem. The Qur’an does not mention Baitul Maqdis. What the Qur’an mentions is al-Masjid al-Aqsa, the place Allah describes as far, at the farthest end, and blessed in its surroundings.
Therefore, for me, the fame of a place cannot be the main factor in finalizing the location of Isra’. A place may be famous in history, famous in tradition, famous in politics, and famous in human memory. However, when the Qur’an itself does not name that place with the name made famous by people, then all factors must be reopened for examination.
If a location is truly to be called al-Masjid al-Aqsa in the event of Isra’, then it must be able to bear the pattern we have seen in the Qur’an and hadith. It does not merely need to be famous. It does not merely need to have been mentioned by people for a long time. It must conform to the structure of the wording.
Among the important checking factors is the existence of Baitul Maqdis itself. If the Makkah pattern shows that al-Bayt is located within al-Masjid al-Haram, then at the destination of Isra’, we must also ask: where is Baitul Maqdis within the arrangement of al-Masjid al-Aqsa?
Is Baitul Maqdis located within the field of Masjidil Aqsa? Or does Baitul Maqdis actually not exist at all within the complex that today is called Masjidil Aqsa? Or is it located outside Masjidil Aqsa, thereby proving that the arrangement inherited all this time does not match the pattern of the Qur’an?
That is why I am presenting my position, because this question is very important. If Baitul Maqdis only exists as the name of a city, the name of a territory, or an external historical name, but does not exist as a bayt within the field of al-Masjid al-Aqsa, then that location has not yet conformed to the pattern we are testing.
That is why I do not want us to stop at fame. Fame is not the final measure. What needs to be tested is the arrangement. In Makkah, the Kaabah as al-Bayt is located within al-Masjid al-Haram. Therefore, at the destination of Isra’, if the pattern is truly the same, Baitul Maqdis must be located within al-Masjid al-Aqsa.
For me, based on the existing pattern, if there is no Baitul Maqdis within it, that is a problem even if the whole world accepts it. If Baitul Maqdis is only regarded as a large territory outside the framework of masjid, that is also a major problem. If Masjidil Aqsa is placed inside Baitul Maqdis, then that is an even greater problem because its arrangement is the reverse of the Makkah pattern.
The answer to this question will be one of the determining factors in whether the arrangement inherited all this time is truly consistent with the Qur’an and hadith, or whether we have actually inherited an inverted arrangement of terminology.
Reply to: