Parshas Behaaloscha 5786 – Intriguing Questions & Answers
The Mitzvah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael
Leaving Eretz Yisrael for Vacation — Part I
Q: Every year I am asked whether it is permissible to leave Eretz Yisroel. Many are familiar with the general discussion, but are not always aware of the seriousness of the issue. Therefore, I found it appropriate to elaborate somewhat on the subject of leaving Eretz Yisrael for chutz la’aretz — in which situations and for what reasons it was permitted. Before that, this week we will first expand somewhat on the mitzvah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael, settling and living in Eretz Yisrael, itself, and b’ezras Hashem next week we will elaborate on the prohibition and permissibility of leaving Eretz Yisrael.
A: We find a major dispute among the Rishonim regarding the mitzvah of settling in Eretz Yisrael. The Torah states in Parashas Mas’ei:
“You shall possess the land and settle in it, for to you have I given the land to possess it” (Bamidbar 33:53).
The Ramban explains that “You shall possess it and settle in it” is a positive commandment to conquer and dwell in Eretz Yisrael. Likewise, the Sefer Chareidim writes that it is a Torah obligation to live in Eretz Yisrael, as it says:
“And you shall inherit it and dwell in it” (Devarim 26:1).
So too rules the Chochmas Adam (1:3).
However, Rashi on Parashas Mas’ei explains that through “possessing the land of its inhabitants,” you will then be able to remain there, but otherwise you will not be able to remain there. According to his view, “and you shall dwell in it” is not a commandment, but rather a promise.
Regarding the mitzvah of settling Eretz Yisrael nowadays, see Tosafos in Kesubos (110b) who writes that in our times there is no mitzvah to ascend to Eretz Yisrael because of the dangers of travel. Tosafos further cites Rabbeinu Chaim Kohen, who maintained that nowadays it is not a mitzvah to live in Eretz Yisrael because there are many mitzvos hateluyos ba’aretz, mitzvos that dependent upon the Land (terumos, maasros) and many punishments connected with them, and we are unable to properly observe and uphold them.
The Beis HaLevi (Vol. 2, 50:3) explains Tosafos that the mitzvah of settling Eretz Yisrael is dependent upon fulfillment of its mitzvos, as is clear from the Rambam. Therefore, Rabbeinu Chaim Kohen held that since nowadays we are unable to properly fulfill the mitzvos hateluyos ba’aretz, the mitzvah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael does not apply. However, the Acharonim challenged this from the Mishnah in Kesubos (110b) which states that “all may compel ascent to Eretz Yisrael,” and this clearly applies even nowadays after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash.
Therefore, the Avnei Nezer (Yoreh Deah 454:4) and Minchas Shlomo (Vol. 3, 158:22) explain that even Rabbeinu Chaim Kohen agrees that the mitzvah of settling Eretz Yisrael applies even in the absence of the Beis HaMikdash. However, this applies specifically to one who is knowledgeable in the halachos. In his time, people were not sufficiently versed in those laws, and therefore he wrote that there was no mitzvah, since one could easily stumble in observance.
The Avnei Nezer further elaborates there that the mitzvah of settling Eretz Yisrael contains three dimensions:
- The positive commandment of “You shall dwell in it.”
- The mitzvah to fulfill the commandments dependent upon the Land.
- The mitzvah of dwelling in a holy place that is sanctified for Hashem’s Shechinah.
A similar approach is found in Yosef Ometz (§52) by the Chida. See also Igros Moshe (Even HaEzer Vol. 1, end of §102) who writes that the majority of poskim maintain that nowadays the mitzvah of settling Eretz Yisrael is not a mitzvah chiyuvis, personal obligation incumbent upon the body. There is no explicit prohibition mentioned other than, one who already dwells in Eretz Yisrael is forbidden to leave with intent to settle permanently in chutz la’aretz, as explained by the Rambam (Hil. Melachim 5:9).
Regarding one who cannot properly fulfill all the mitzvos, it is worth citing the Kol Bo who writes in the name of the Maharam Rottenberg that the primary fulfillment of the mitzvah of going to Eretz Yisrael is only when a person resolves from that point onward to separate himself from sin, to guard himself from all transgression, and to fulfill all the mitzvos practiced in the Land. For if he sins there, his punishment is greater than if he sins in chutz la’aretz, because Hashem constantly seeks the Land; the eyes of Hashem are always upon it and His providence rests there continually.
We cannot compare one who rebels against the king within the royal palace versus outside the palace. The Land itself “consumes its inhabitants,” and the verse states:
“Let not the Land vomit you out” (Vayikra 18:28),
because the Land expels sinners. Even the gentiles dwelling there do not prosper because they engage in sin.
Regarding those who travel there only to behave frivolously and engage in quarrels, he applies to them the verse (Yirmiyahu 2:7):
“You came and defiled My Land; Who requested this from you, to trample My courtyards?”
However, if one goes there to conduct himself with holiness and purity, there is no limit to his reward, provided he is able to earn a livelihood there.
In the Chiddushei Chasam Sofer, he explains the statement of Chazal that:
“whoever dwells in chutz la’aretz is considered as though he has no G-d,”
that even the Krias Shema one recites in chutz la’aretz is not comparable to Krias Shema recited in Eretz Yisrael, for he has been “driven away from attaching himself to the inheritance of Hashem” (I Shmuel 26:19). This carries a powerful lesson.
However, he adds there that regarding the great Torah scholars who toil in Torah, on them the verse states:
“In every place offerings are brought to My Name and a pure offering” (Malachi 1:11; see Menachos 110a).
The hagahah there notes that in Derashos Chasam Sofer he adds: any place where Torah is studied lishmah is considered like Eretz Yisrael.
Thus far we have brought sources regarding the mitzvah of Yishuv Eretz Yisrael. B’ezras Hashem next week we will elaborate upon the prohibition of leaving Eretz Yisrael for chutz la’aretz, and in which circumstances it was permitted.
Photographing The Sunset
Q: I was asked by someone who was traveling and wished to photograph the sunset at the time of sunset. He asked whether this is permitted, since doing so creates an image of the sun, moon, and stars. Essentially, the question is: does this prohibition apply even to photography?
A: We will present here a brief response, since I have already discussed at length all the practical halachic details in my sefer Ohel Yaakov, Hilchos Avodah Zarah §141.
The Torah states in Parashas Yisro (Shemos 20:19):
“You shall not make with Me gods of silver or gods of gold; you shall not make for yourselves.”
Chazal expound in Rosh Hashanah (24a) and Avodah Zarah (43a):
“You shall not make with Me” — you shall not make likenesses of My attendants who serve before Me on high, such as the sun, moon, stars, and constellations.
The Rambam rules accordingly in Mishneh Torah (Hil. Avodah Zarah 3:10):
“It is forbidden to make decorative forms, even though they are not for idolatry, as it says, ‘You shall not make with Me gods of silver or gods of gold’ — meaning decorative forms of silver and gold, lest people err and think that they are objects of worship. The only decorative form forbidden to fashion is that of a human being… and this applies only when the form protrudes… If one fashions such a form, he is liable to lashes. However, if the image is recessed, or if it is merely a painted image, such as forms on tablets or boards, or embroidered in fabric, these are permitted… Likewise, it is forbidden to fashion images of the sun, moon, stars, constellations, and angels, as it says, ‘You shall not make with Me’ — you shall not make likenesses of the attendants who serve before Me on high — even on a flat tablet.”
The Rishonim dispute this matter, but the halachah is ruled in the Shulchan Aruch in accordance with the Rambam, that it is forbidden to make a human image even for decoration, but that this applies specifically to a protruding image, while recessed or painted images — such as those woven into garments or painted onto walls — are permitted. However, images of the sun, moon, and stars are forbidden whether protruding or recessed.
This is the halachah in principle. Nevertheless, the Taz (end of 13) writes that although drawings are less severe than engraved images since they possess no actual substance, nevertheless those who illustrate the twelve constellations in machzorim for Tefillas Geshem are not acting properly, since they intentionally depict the constellations.
However, the Nekudos HaKesef disagrees with the Taz and writes that it is obviously permitted, since the purpose is for instruction and understanding, and furthermore it is not considered a complete form.
See also Shevet HaLevi (7:134:6), where he was asked whether it is permissible to photograph the sun before sunset. He writes that there is room to question whether this constitutes a Torah prohibition, since in photography the image forms automatically, and perhaps this does not fall under the category of “You shall not make.” Nonetheless, he concludes that there is at the very least a prohibition against keeping such a picture in one’s home.
Similarly, in Mesoras Moshe, volume 3 (p. 213), it is brought that Rav Moshe Feinstein ztz”l prohibited photographing the moon and sun because of the prohibition of “לא תעשון אתי.”
Likewise, Minchas Yitzchak (10:72) discusses the issue and questions whether a photograph is considered a lasting image or not, and concludes stringently in practice.
However, Teshuvos VeHanhagos (7:147:3) was asked whether taking a photograph with a camera is considered like drawing the sun. He responded that only an image created with colors, where there is an actual physical impression of the image upon the paper, is prohibited. But with photography, where there is no tangible imprint of the drawing itself upon the paper, it appears to be permitted.
He adds that we do not find people acting stringently to avoid photographing human beings, despite the dispute among the Rishonim regarding drawing human images. It is clear then that photographs are not the same as pictures. Accordingly, one may likewise photograph the sun.
Therefore, although there is a dispute in the matter, one who wishes to be lenient and photograph the sun, and to keep such photographs in his home, has Poskim upon whom to rely.
Eating at a Chasunah Before Ma’ariv
Q: During the summer months, most Chuppahs take place close to shkiah. By the time the guests wash for the seudah, the time for Krias Shema of nighttime has generally already arrived, or is very close to arriving. The question therefore arises whether one is obligated to daven Ma’ariv before washing for the wedding meal, especially since such a meal is classified as a large seudah, which is treated more stringently than a small seudah.
A: The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 235:2) writes that it is forbidden to begin eating within a half-hour prior to the time for Krias Shema of Ma’ariv. The Mishnah Berurah (16) explains the reason, that perhaps one will become drawn into his meal, and at times this may even lead to falling asleep, causing him to forget to recite Krias Shema.
Nevertheless, tasting, fruits, or even bread up to the amount of a kebeitzah is permitted.
The Mishnah Berurah further writes, citing the Magen Avraham, that if one asked another person to remind him to daven, there is no prohibition against beginning to eat, even after the time for Krias Shema has already arrived. However, this leniency of appointing a “shomer” does not help in the case of a seudah gedolah, since people often become intoxicated, as explained by the Mishnah Berurah (232:29). Nonetheless, it would seem that when there are no alcoholic beverages served during the meal, there would be no concern for this issue.
It should also be noted that the entire leniency of appointing a shomer applies only when the shomer himself is not eating, as stated by the Mishnah Berurah there. Therefore, if one has a cellphone, he may call a friend who is not present at the meal to call and remind him to daven.
There were some who wished to be lenient even without appointing a shomer, arguing that the banquet hall closes before end time for Maariv. However, it is cited in the names of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Elyashiv ztz”l that one should not rely upon this, since there remains concern that a person may entirely forget his obligation to recite Krias Shema and daven.
Accordingly, one must specifically appoint a shomer, and this too only works when the shomer himself is not eating.
Some, however, sought to defend the common custom to be lenient in this matter, based on what the Mishnah Berurah writes in his introduction to Siman 669, that there is a leniency whenever many people gathered together will remind one another and will not come to forget Ma’ariv.
Similarly, the Eshel Avraham (Butchatch; end of §232, Mahadura Tinyana) writes this, and B’Tzel HaChochmah (Vol. 3, §§88–99, 93) elaborates extensively to prove that based on this principle, it would be permissible to eat at a large gathering before davening Ma’ariv.