Another approach which discusses the descent of Ezekiel's Temple from Heaven is that of the late Rabbi Shlomo Goren.

The late Chief Rabbi writes as follows in his book Har HaBayit -- The Temple Mount (p. clxv): "If there is such a concept as the Third Temple descending complete from Heaven, it is very hard to assume the occurrence of so supernatural a miracle of the descent of a built, fiery Temple from Heaven without tremendous changes in nature and without the Messiah." Ibid., on p. clxiii, he writes: "The Third Temple must be built in the pattern of Ezekiel's Temple -- the Third Temple. And then it would have to be built by Heaven, according to Rashi and Tosafot and other French rabbis, and not to be built by man."

The late Chief Rabbi writes two things in the name of Rashi, though in Rashi's commentary one finds a basis for neither:

One, that Rashi is talking of "the descent of a built, fiery Temple from Heaven."

The other, that the "Third Temple must be built in the pattern of Ezekiel's Temple, by Heaven, and not by man."

As we have already noted, the concept of a "fiery Temple" is not mentioned anywhere by Rashi, so that with regard to the building of the Temple described by Ezekiel, Rashi writes explicitly that it will be performed by man. In Rashi's words: And tell the House of Israel of the Temple . . . that they observe all its form and all its laws and carry them out (Ezekiel 43:11): "They shall learn of its measurements from you so that they will know how to build it when the time comes."

According to Rashi, the Temple will be built when the time comes -- by man, in the pattern described by Ezekiel. It is thus difficult to understand how Rabbi Goren writes that Rashi's opinion is that Ezekiel's Temple will not be built by man, but rather will descend from Heaven!

A halakhic ruling stating that the Temple will descend from Heaven is most surprising, for this is what the Rishon leTzion, Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, wrote in his approval of Rabbi Aviner's book, Shalhevetya: "Despite the fact that from Maimonides' writings, we learn [that the Temple] is to be built by man and that it is a precept that it be built that way, Maimonides wrote at the end of Hilkhot Melakhim that we do not know just how this will come about until we actually see it. For my part, I find it easier to rule like Rashi and Tosafot, like the simple interpretation of the Talmud. For it is built by man -- from here to the Gihon there are obstacles to its being built."

The ruling of a Chief Rabbi of Israel is a ruling that cannot be ignored, but the reasoning of the Chief Rabbi in support of this ruling raises a number of questions:

a. While Rabbi Eliyahu writes that "from Maimonides' writings, we learn that the Temple is to be built by man," Maimonides himself says this explicitly time and again -- that this is an eternal positive precept (v. supra).

b. Rabbi Eliyahu writes in Maimonides' name, "that we do not know just how this will come about." This is doubtful, for Maimonides uses this phrase about the appearance of the Messiah, whereas with regard to the Temple he writes "that everyone is obligated to build it, men and women irrespective" (Hilkhot Beth HaBehira 1:12). If so, we know that it will be built by man.

c. Rabbi Eliyahu writes: "I find it easier to rule like Rashi." What he means is that it is convenient for him to rule that the Temple will descend from Heaven. This is surprising for convenience is not a recognized halakhic consideration.

d. Rabbi Eliyahu writes, too, that halakha is ruled like Rashi and against Maimonides, though all halakhic authorities accept that Rashi is merely a commentator, and not a halakhic authority, and so halakha must be ruled like Maimonides.

e. Rabbi Eliyahu writes of the descent of the Temple from Heaven in this world as if it were certain, whereas all the sources adduced supra speak, at best, of a possibility of the Temple descending in the world to come.

f. Rabbi Eliyahu bases his ruling that the Temple will descend from Heaven on obstacles which may prevent it being built. This is incredible, since obstacles cannot serve as a halakhic excuse to invalidate a Torah precept.

g. A halakhic ruling on so central and so comprehensive a topic should be dealt with in detail, with the consideration of all relevant sources. For this reason, and especially in light of the questions raised supra, it would seem that Rabbi Eliyahu's statement, written in three lines in his approval of a book, is not to be considered a definitive discussion of the subject.