Zionist Argument: The Three Oaths are Only Aggadah

Claim: The Three Oaths are aggadah, not halacha. The poskim don’t bring them down as halacha. 

Facts:

The Gemara begins with the story of Rabbi Zeira and Rav Yehuda. Rabbi Zeira did not want Rav Yehudah to know he was moving to Eretz Yisroel, because Rav Yehuda held, based on the Three Oaths, that it was halachically forbidden even for an individual to move to Eretz Yisroel. Rabbi Zeira countered that the Oaths apply only to the Jewish people as a whole, not to individuals. This was clearly a halachic dispute.

True, the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch don’t bring the oaths, but we never reject something as halacha simply because it is not brought down in those two works. The commentaries on the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch are full of halachos that these poskim didn’t bring down, and explanations are sought and found as to why they didn’t bring them down. The law is included in another law, contradicted by another law, etc. Every yeshiva student knows this.

In this case, the Rambam makes it clear in his Letter to Yemen that he did in fact view the oaths as binding law. The Megillas Esther in Sefer Hamitzvos (end of Mitzvos Aseh, responding to the Ramban’s argument that the Rambam should have counted living in Eretz Yisroel as a positive commandment) also makes clear that the Rambam viewed the oaths as binding law.

As to why he did not include them in his Mishneh Torah, one simple explanation is that the Rambam did not need to do so, because he describes the process of the coming of moshiach (Hilchos Melachim 11:1), and the oaths are implicit in that process. He writes: “The king moshiach will arise and restore the dynasty of David to its original power. He will build the Temple and gather the dispersed of Israel.” If moshiach will be the one who gathers in the Jewish people, then it is clear that we are not allowed to gather ourselves in before the coming of moshiach.

This idea is really explicit in the Midrash (Shir Hashirim Rabbah 2:20), which tells us the reason for the oath against going up as a wall: “If so, why does the king moshiach have to come to gather the exiles of Israel?” The Maharzu explains that it is moshiach’s job to bring all of Israel up together from the exile, and if, G-d forbid, they do this on their own, they will lose the redemption of the moshiach. The Yefei Kol understands it the same way: “If we come up as a wall from exile, why will the king moshiach have to come to gather the exiles of Israel? And since we know from many verses in Tanach that moshiach will gather our exiles, we cannot gather ourselves together.”

The Satmar Rebbe offered a different answer as to why the Rambam had no need to bring the oaths: he writes in Hilchos Teshuva 7:5 that the Jewish people will be redeemed only after they do teshuva. Thus, if they haven’t yet done teshuva, then the redemption can’t come in any case, so obviously we can’t take any action to bring it at that point, and if they do teshuva, it will come immediately.

The Shulchan Aruch has no Hilchos Melachim, and so he does not discuss moshiach’s criteria at all. Generally, the Shulchan Aruch is not an all-inclusive work; for example, such important laws as the laws of lashon hara are not mentioned in it.

Furthermore, the Shulchan Aruch doesn’t cover the principles of Jewish belief, although all would agree that they are important. The Three Oaths are more than halacha – they define our belief in Hashem as the only one who can end the exile, who watches over us and protects us in exile, and puts us in the place that is best for us. 

The following is a brief list of some of the poskim who do discuss the Three Oaths as binding: Rashbash 2, Rivash 101, Piskei Riaz Kesubos 111, Kaftor Vaferach chapter 10, p. 197, Maharashdam Choshen Mishpat 364, Pe’as Hashulchan Laws of Eretz Yisroel, Chapter 1, Section 3, Aruch Hashulchan Choshen Mishpat 2:1, the Gadol of Minsk in Sinai v. 6, p. 213.  

And here are some well-known commentators who discuss the oaths as binding: Rabbeinu Bachya on Vayishlach, Abarbanel Bereishis 15:11, Maharal in Netzach Yisroel 24, Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh Vayikra 26:33, Rabbi Yaakov Emden in Sefer Hashimush 66b, Yismach Moshe Tehillim 127:2, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, Siddur p. 703.

When the Zionist movement began, countless rabbanim and poskim spoke out against it, stating clearly that it violated the oaths. Here are a few of them: Rabbi Naftali Adler, Rabbi Eliyahu Chaim Meisel, Rabbi Sholom Ber Schneersohn, Rabbi Yisroel Zev Mintzberg, Rabbi Moshe Hager, Rabbi Mordechai Leib Winkler, the Rogachover Gaon, the Minchas Elazar, Rabbi Mordechai Rottenberg, Rabbi Shaul Brach, Rabbi Ben Zion Halberstam of Bobov, Rabbi Elchonon Wasserman, Rabbi Yitzchok Weiss of Spink, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Ehrenreich, the Chazon Ish, Rabbi Michoel Ber Weissmandl, the Brisker Rav and Rabbi Yonasan Steiff. To read these quotes and more, get the book “I Will Await Him.”

One response to “Zionist Argument: The Three Oaths are Only Aggadah”

  1. R’ Ovadia Yosef ZTZ”L additionally wrote in his Shiur on Mesiras HaShtochim: אולם מ”מ “
    מסתימות דברי הש”ס נראה, שהשבועה שלא ידחקו את הקץ ושלא למרוד באומות
    העולם, היא לעולם, עד ביאת המשיח. וכן מוכח להדיא מתרגום יונתן בן עוזיאל על
    הפסוק השבעתי אתכם וכו . ‘ וכן מוכח מדברי הרמב”ם באגרת תימן, ומדברי הרשב”ש
    “בתשובה הנ”ל וכן מדברי הריב”ש.

    Additionally, R’ Ovadia in the same Shiur seemed to imply that the current occupation of the Palestinian territories is Halachically unjustified:

    אלא שמדברי רבינו אליעזר ממיץ בספר יראים השלם (ס’ שטו) לא משמע כן. ועיין
    למרן החיד”א בשו”ת חיים שאל , )ז,מג( ובשו”ת מהר”ם שיק (יו”ד סי’ שפא) ובשו”ת
    אבני נזר (יו”ד סי’ קמב) ודו”ק. על כל פנים לדעת רוב הראשונים, איסור לא ישבו
    בארצך אינו נוהג לגבי ישמעאלים שאינם עובדים עבודה זרה. ולכל הדעות בזמן הזה,
    שאין יד ישראל תקיפה על האומות לגרש את הגויים מארץ ישראל מיראת האומות,
    בודאי שאינו נוהג דין זה, וכמו שכתב הרמב”ם שם. ועוד, שאפילו הגוים שהם עובדי
    עבודה זרה שוכנים בינינו, הרי בודאי אין כל אפשרות להזיזם ממקומם. ואדרבה, על
    ממשלת ישראל, מכח חק בינלאומי, להגן ולשמור על הכנסיות של הנוצרים בארץ
    ישראל, אף על פי שהם בתי עבודה זרה ומיוחדים לפולחן שלהם, אף שמצווה מן התורה
    לאבד עבודה זרה ומשמשיה ולשרש אחריה עד שנאבד אותה מכל ארצנו, ומכל מקום
    שנכבוש אותו (עיין רמב”ם הלכות עבודה זרה ז , א ). ובודאי שזה מחליש מצד ההלכה
    .תוקף הכיבוש שנעשה על ידי חיילי צה”ל

    Like

Leave a reply to . Cancel reply