Individual Postings 1st appeared(& were copied in html form) on the Email List Mail Jewish

From: Russell Hendel <rhendel@saber.towson.edu> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:25:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RE: Aliyah with Lower Living Standards David Curwin in mj-v33n2 presents two questions on the Aliyah thread First he comments on Moshe Feldmans comment that we never spend more than 20% of our income on any positive commandment. Moshe argues that this 20% rules applies to the mitzvah of moving to Israel David responds that > I'm unfamiliar with this rule -- what is the source? In any case, there > certainly are positive mitzvot that don't have that restriction -- > having children, for example. And just as children are our future, > settling the land of Israel is "equal to all the mitzvot in the Torah". But the Rambam explicitly states that AFTER one has 1 boy and girl that further fulfillment of procreation is only obligatory if the person is ABLE to both physically and economically (Hence, if the extra child would dig beyond the 20% mark I assume there is no obligation to have an extra child). Also one of the suggestions to Moshe was that we only apply the 20% rule to the ACTUAL EXPENSES of moving, not to the potential loss from salary differential. By analogy one would be exempt from having children ONLY if the actual cost of delivery was more than 20% of ones salary. One would not be allowed to take future expenses into consideration Davids 2nd point is citation of Rambam Kings 5:9-11. However a careful reading of this Rambam shows that it gives criteria for when one may LEAVE THE LAND(If a famine is so bad that wheat doubled in price). Moshe and I are talking about the criteria for NOT GOING UP to the land In other words if you read the Rambam in CONTEXT he is saying One may not leave Israel and then reside outside it permanantly unless wheat has doubled in price" Russell Jay Hendel; Phd ASA; rhendel@Towson.edu Moderator Rashi is Simple http://www.RashiYomi.Com -------------NEW NEW CHECK IT OUT