ALIYAH: CONFLICT AND AMBIVALENCE

contradiction between Maimonides ’ ruling and his deeds is resolved by the existence of extenuating circumstances. The Rambam was forced by Egypt ’s rulers to remain and attend to the medical needs of its royalty. In contrast, the Radbaz remained there for the sake of Torah , which is halakhically permitted. But he, unlike, Maimonides , did go back to Jerusalem , where he started a second rabbinic career that lasted until the ninety-fourth year of his life.

Nahmanides (Gerona , Spain , 1195-1270) was probably the greatest and most consistent halakhic exponent of the Land of Israel. As we have seen, his view of the halakhic role of Eretz Yisrael had vast influence on sages in every age. This influence has continued to our day.*® Maimonides did not establish settling the Land of Israel as a biblical precept in his Sefer HaMitzvot. In his gloss to Maimonides ’ Book of Commandments, the Ramban filled the void by claiming that settling Eretz Yisrael is indeed a divine commandment.

We are commanded to take possession of the Land that God gave to our forefathers, Abraham , Isaac, and Jacob, and not to leave it to any of the Gentiles or to become desolate. God decreed:“You shall take possession of the land and settle it, for I have given the land to you to possess it”(Num. 33:53) and“you shall settle the land which I have promised to your ancestors.”’

In his commentary to this verse, Nachmanides admits that Rashi offered a contrary interpretation, that this is merely God ’s promise to Israel and not a commandment. He contradicts his late predecessor, claiming that his, and not Rashi’s, rendition is correct—‘our interpretation is the essence.”

134