SOLOMON B. FREEHOF

Hoezer 75, 4 and 5) first states the law definitely that a husband may compel a wife to settle in the Holy Land with him but adds, then,“Some say it is dangerous and a man has no right to bring himself or others into danger; therefore(if the journey is short) from Alexandria eastward, he may compel his wife to go with him; but if they live west of Alexandria he may not.” Hayim Benvenisti (Turkey, seventeenth century) in his Keneses Hagdola to Bes Joseph, Even Hoezer 75, marshals all the arguments on both sides and tends to agree with the above compromise opinion Caro takes in the Shulhan Arukh.

There is an interesting discussion of the question from Prague at the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century. It is a responsum by Jonah Landsofer in his Mil S’daka 26. The circumstances are interesting enough to deserve mention. A group of three men decided to settle in the Land and take with them their young children, aged three and four. Many people raised the objection that they had no right to endanger the little children on this perilous journey. Landsofer answers that the commandment to settle in the Land is eternal. As for the dangers that may vary from time to time and place, they must, of course, be considered when we discuss the question of whether a man may compel his family to go with him. But aside from the question of the rights of his wife, if there is not too much danger, it is just as safe for the children as for the adults. A fair statement of the law is to be found in the balanced opinion reached in the Be’er Hetev (Judah of Tiktin) to the passage. He says,“Since the question of whether it is a religious duty is a subject of disagreement among the great teachers, it is clear, then, that a man may not compel his wife to move with him to the Holy Land. See also Igros Moshe Hoezer 102(end), where he says that it is a mitzvah for Palestinians to

181