Question:If it could be proven that the majority of Jews in the world live in Eretz Yisroel, will terumos and ma’asros be min hatorah? Introduction: The Rambam clearly rules (Hilchos Terumos Perek 1 Halocho 26) that terumoh nowadays is only an obligation midrabonon, because the only possibility for terumah to be an obligation min hatorah is in Eretz Yisroel and when all bnei yisroel are present in Eretz Yisroel. The Shulchan Aruch (Hilchos Terumos u’Maasros Siman 331 Se’if 2) rules like the Rambam. Discussion: The first point that needs to be clarified is if “all bnei yisroel” is to be understood literally, or if a majority suffices: After having established that according to these Rishonim a majority is sufficient, if at any given point it will be shown that the majority of Jews in the world live in Eretz Yisroel will the chiyuv of terumos and ma’asros become d’orayso? The Kessef Mishna (Hilchos Terumos Perek 1 Halocho 26) writes that the Rambam [who maintains that terumos and ma’asros are only an obligation midrabonon nowadays] will concede that if all of klal yisroel return to Eretz Yisroel the obligation of terumos and ma’asros will revert back to an obligation min hatorah. The Chazon Ish (Shevi’is Siman 21 s.k. 5) differentiates between challah and terumos v’ma’asros and writes that regarding terumos and ma’asros if the majority of klal yisroel return to Eretz Yisroel even during golus, the obligation of terumos and ma’asros will revert back to being min hatorah (the Chazon Ish bases this ruling on the aforementioned Kessef Mishna). (We see also from these two sources that the Chazon Ish clearly learns that for bi’as kulchem a majority is sufficient, and there does not need to be the presence of the entire klal yisroel.) However, regarding challah the Chazon Ish (ibid) deliberates that there may be a requirement of having kiddush ho’oretz by a melech or novi for the chiyuv of challah to be min hatorah, or even if a kiddush ho’oretz by a melech or novi is not essential, the Chazon Ish suggests that it may not be possible to be mekadesh Eretz Yisroel during golus. Conclusion: The Rambam clearly rules regarding terumos and ma’asros that the only possibility for the chiyuv of challah to be min hatorah is in Eretz Yisroel and when all bnei yisroel are present in Eretz Yisroel. We have seen that according to the Ritvo, Sefer Hachinuch and Chazon Ish the requirement of “bi’as kulchem” or the presence of “all bnei yisroel” is not understood literally; rather, a majority is sufficient to render the obligation of challah, terumos and ma’asros to be min hatorah. |
Mitzvos Teluos Bo’oretz
Leave a Reply