I know there i the well kown teshuva of Rav Moshe Feintein who says to live in Eretz Yiroel is only a kiyum mitvah and not a chiyuv. Are there any achronim/poskim/other seforim that argue on Rav Moshe and say that living in Irael is a obligation like wearing tefillin?
A K, Jerusalem
I came across the following views:
RISHONIM:
1. Rabeinu Chaim Kohen (from the Ba'alei ha'Tosfos) says theoretically there is a Mitzvah to live in Israel, but practically it does not apply nowadays, since it is so difficult to properly fulfill all of the Mitzvos that apply in Israel (9). I believe the Kneses ha'Gedolah (Klalei ha'Poskim 16) follows this view.
2. The Rambam: It is permissible to live anywhere except Egypt (1). One should live among idolaters in Israel rather than Jews in the Diaspora (2).
3. The Ramban: There is even a Mitzvas Aseh to live in Israel (3). One who reads the Ramban (see (10)) gets the impression that it is an obligation like Tefilin.
ACHARONIM:
1. The Sefer Megilas Esther (16th century Italy (8)) says that today there is no Mitzvah to live in Israel (4).
2. The Pe'as ha'Shulchan (circa 1800) cites other authorities who agree with the Ramban that it is a Mitzvah (5).
3. Eim ha'Banim Semeichah (who passed away in 1945) says that in modern times, with the tremendous need and effort to rebuild the Jewish homeland, even the Rambam would agree there is a Mitzvah to live in Israel (6).
4. The Satmar Rav (who passed away in 1979) wrote that in modern times (post World War II), even the Ramban would agree there is no Mitzvah to live in Israel (7). His view is largely based on "the three oaths" in Maseches Kesuvos.
Best wishes,
Yishai Rasowsky
1. https://www.sefaria.org.il/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Kings_and_Wars.5.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
2. https://www.sefaria.org.il/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Kings_and_Wars.5.12?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
4. https://www.sefaria.org.il/Megilat_Esther_on_Sefer_HaMitzvot%2C_Positive_Commandments_Omitted_by_Rambam.4.1.1?vhe=Sefer_HaMitzvot,_Warsaw_1883_new&lang=bi
8. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8192-isaac-leon-ben-eliezer-ibn-zur-sefardi
9. https://www.sefaria.org.il/Tosafot_on_Ketubot.110b.14.1?lang=he&with=Haflaah%20on%20Ketubot&lang2=he
Thank you for your reply. When these opinions say it's a mitzvah (like the pas hashulchan) are they saying it's mamesh a chiyav like tefillin or just a keyim mitzvah? Are there any achronim who say be-farish it is a obligation that a person has to do or do they use the ambiguous loshon of mitzvah (which would leave room to say they agree with Rav Moshe and hold its "only" a kiyum mitzvah and not a obligation)?
You are welcome. I know you asked for Acharonim, but at the moment it seems to me that perhaps the most striking language is from the Ramban who writes that each individual is obligated (1). To our limited understanding, this would seem difficult to reconcile with Rav Moshe Feinstein's zt'l interpretation (2) that it is not a Chiyuv but only a Kiyum if one does it. Granted, however, the proof that Rav Moshe brings is based on the Rambam who does not write that it is forbidden to live in Chutz la'Aretz.
Best wishes,
Yishai Rasowsky
1. https://www.sefaria.org.il/Hasagot_HaRamban_on_Sefer_HaMitzvot%2C_Positive_Commandments_Omitted_by_Rambam.4.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en#:~:text=%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%AA%20%D7%A2%D7%A9%D7%94%20%D7%9C%D7%93%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA-,%D7%9E%D7%AA%D7%97%D7%99%D7%99%D7%91%20%D7%9B%D7%9C%20%D7%90%D7%97%D7%93,-%D7%9E%D7%9E%D7%A0%D7%95%20%D7%95%D7%90%D7%A4%D7%99%D7%9C%D7%95%20%D7%91%D7%96%D7%9E%D7%9F
2. https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=59509&st=&pgnum=253&hilite=
Thanks for your reply. The reason I asked for achronim is because I am not fully convinced the loshon of the Ramban is a rayah he holds its a chiyuv. I know he uses the loshon of chiyuv but Rav Moshe brings a good rayah that it never says in the gemara it's a chiyuv. Also the gemara also only says its asur to leave and not that a person is chayiv to move to Israel. [I think it also sounds like form the gemara in gitin (I think its gitin76b) that says the talmidim from eretz yisrael were milaveh the bnei bavel when they lft eretz yisrael until Acco, and from there we learn the issur to leave Eretz Yisrael. It sounds from that gemara that there is no chiyuv to live in Israel because the Bne Bavel did leave Eretz Yisrael which was muter for them. And its not mashmah from the gemara there that the Bnei Bavel left only when they had a heter to leave Israel (like shiduchm or parnasah) and Bnei Bavel can leave stam (and I will add they certainly did not leave al manas lihacher to Eretz Yisrael) .] In any case my point is it sounds from the gemaras that there is no chiyuv and you have to say either that when the gemara says its asur to leave Eretz Yisrael its lav davka and it really means your chayiv to live in Eretz Yisrael (and the bnei bavel in gitin left when they had a heter), or the Ramban is lav davka and he means a mitzvah kiyumis. Either way it's shvare and you're either being lv davka the gemara or the Ramban and I don't see why it's easier to lav davkah the gemara over the Ramban (or vice versa). That's why I was wondering if any achronim say befaarish that the Ramban is not lav davka. We have Rav Moshe (as well as other achronim, I think it's a avne nezer if I remember correctly) who says the Ramban is lav davka but I dont know of any achronim who argue on Rav Moshe and say the Ramban is davka. If you know of any/have any other comments to make I would be happy to hear.
Kol tuv
Shalom Aleichem!
I did not yet see someone say openly that the Ramban is Lav Davka. But two important issues I saw the Acharonim discuss are:
1. Assuming there is a Mitzvah to live in Israel even today, why did the Rambam not count it? (Besides the Perush Megilas Esther on the Rambam, who understands that the Rambam means that there is no Mitvah now.) The Avnei Nezer brilliantly suggests that it is because it would be considered redundant after the Rambam has already counted the Mitzvah to destroy the Canaanites (unlike the Ramban, who counts these as separate Mitzvos). He points out the Rambam and Ramban are consistent with their opinions elsewhere, since they also argue regarding how to count the building of the Mishkan and the construction of the Klei Mikdash, as one (Rambam) or two (Ramban) Mitzvos.
2. Assuming there is a Mitzvah to live in Israel even today, why do so many people not do so? (-Besides Rabeinu Chaim Kohen, cited by Tosfos, who writes that people are excused from going to Israel since they will not be able to keep the unique laws of Holy Land properly.) The Poskim heavily emphasize that a person's great need to take care of his family and Parnasah indeed exempt him from living in Israel.
I came across an insightful article (see footnote (1)) that you might find interesting.
Best wishes,
Yishai
(1) https://etzion.org.il/en/halakha/yoreh-deah/eretz-yisrael/there-mitzva-settle-land-israel