Does the Ramban on Yishuv Eretz Yisroel mean that he would support today’s state?

Claim: The Ramban in Sefer Hamitzvos says that we are obligated to conquer Eretz Yisroel in every generation. This clearly shows that he did not pasken like the Three Oaths.

Fact: The Ramban quotes Chazal’s statement that Dovid Hamelech was wrong to conquer Syria before completing the conquest of Eretz Yisroel, and then writes, “So we see that we were commanded to conquer it in all generations.” Then he says, “And I say that the mitzvah of which Chazal speak highly, living in Eretz Yisroel…is all part of this positive commandment, for we were commanded to take possession of the land in order to live in it. If so, it is a positive commandment for all generations, in which each one of us is obligated, even during exile.”

We see clearly that the Ramban needed a second proof, from the fact that Chazal speak highly of living in Eretz Yisroel, that the mitzvah applies during exile. His first proof from Dovid Hamelech did not cover exile. When he says the first time “in all generations” he doesn’t mean literally in all generations; he just means that it wasn’t a one-time-only commandment, and thus should be counted in the 613.

Clearly, the Ramban is making an unstated assumption that exile is different, and during exile there is no mitzvah to conquer, only to live there. This would have to mean an optional mitzvah (see Igros Moshe 1:102), for if it were obligatory on every single Jew, it would usually only be possible through conquest. Therefore, whoever lives there during exile fulfills the mitzvah, but there is not obligation on anyone to go there.

The Ramban has always been understood this way – in fact, one of the Ramban’s sixth-generation descendents, the Rashbash (Rabbi Shlomo ben Shimon Duran, 1400-1467) wrote: “There is no doubt that living in Eretz Yisroel is a great mitzvah at all times, both during and after the time of the Temple, and my ancestor the Ramban counted it as one of the mitzvos… However, during exile this is not a general mitzvah for all Jews, but on the contrary it is forbidden, as the Gemara says in the last chapter of Kesubos, that this is one of the oaths that the Holy One, blessed is He, made the Jews swear: that they not hurry the end and not go up as a wall.  Go and see what happened to the children of Ephraim when they hurried the end! However, it is a mitzvah for any individual to go up and live there, but if there are considerations that prevent him he is not obligated.” (Shailos Uteshuvos Rashbash, siman 2, brought in the Pe’as Hashulchan) 

Furthermore, one cannot learn that the Ramban in Sefer Hamitzvos didn’t treat the oaths as a real halachic prohibition, because then one would be faced with a contradiction in the Ramban’s own writings. In Sefer Hageulah, end of Shaar 1 (p. 274 in the Chavel edition), he writes that the reason most Jews did not go up at the beginning of the Second Beis Hamikdash is that Jews were uncertain whether King Cyrus had meant to give permission for all the tribes of Israel to return, or only for Yehuda. And even if he had meant to give permission to all of Israel, they did not wish to force the end, for they knew that Yirmiyahu’s prophecy of a 70-year-long exile had only referred to those Jews living in Babylonia proper, not in all the 127 Persian states. So we see clearly that the Ramban does cite the oaths as binding.

And a little later in Sefer Hageulah (p. 284), the Ramban writes, “Based on the teachings of our Sages, we consider ourselves today to be in the Exile of Edom, and that we will not arise from it until the coming of moshiach.” This statement would make no sense if the Ramban held that we are obligated to conquer Eretz Yisroel in every generation.