Historically and theologically, Jerusalem and the Temple Mount have zero significance for Islam. Muslim rulers and demogogues have only taken up the banner of Jerusalem when it serves their imperialistic ambitions.
David Bukay, a Professor of Middle East Studies at the University of Haifa has written an in-depth article tracing Islam’s historical apathy toward Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. Except, of course, when they can leverage a fabricated allegiance to the city for political purposes.
Following, is part 4 of an important article published by Professor Bukay on the subject:
THE PALESTINIANS FABRICATIONS CONCERNING JERUSALEM: WHAT THE ISLAMIC SCRIPTURES AND ISLAMIC HISTORY INSTRUCT US (D)
Here are more facts concerning the true situation of Jerusalem in science and history.
Jerusalem was never capital all along its Islamic history
If Jerusalem was so important to Islam religiously; and if Muhammad reached the city and established a mosque on the Temple Mount called al-Aqs?a; and if Jerusalem is indeed the third ?aram and the first Qiblah; then
Why didn’t it ever serve as a capital city or even an important religious and political city at any time in Islamic history? When the Arab empire expanded by a deep process of imperialism and colonialism, and the Umayyad dynasty was established (661-750) and later on Abbasid dynasty (850-1250), Damascus and Baghdad respectively were established as the capitals, but not Jerusalem. When the Ottoman Empire established (1299-1922) and controlled the Arab lands including the land of Israel (1517-1919), it marked Istanbul (Constantinople) as its capital and not Jerusalem.
The Ottomans, like the Umayyads and the Abbasids were good Muslims, and they followed the Islamic Scripture properly. Does it sound logical that they did not know about the Mosque Muhammad had ostensibly built in Jerusalem? Why Istanbul, Damascus, and Baghdad and not Jerusalem? The fact is that there was nothing important in Jerusalem. (Click to Article)