AboutDavid Rosenblum Expertise I am an ex-student of yeshiva and I like to be
presented with Torah study problems. If you have
studied the Torah and have questions on the subject
matter, I want to hear about it. I am not a Rabbi and
not qualified to decide halachic issues. I am still
interested in halachic questions for which I can
sometimes offer general guidelines or present
decisions in halachic works such as Mishna Berurah. I
welcome questions from non-Jewish people but I cannot
respond to religious references that are not part of
Judaism. If you are working on a paper or doing
research and want general information on a Jewish
subject, I may or may not satisfy your need, depending
on how comfortable I am with the question. If you
have a personal problem, I am not qualified to help
you but I will do what I can to offer you some
assistance.
I have a question about the pilgrimages made during the first and/or second Temple periods. It is my understanding that males (not sure of the age requirement) were to make the pilgrimage to Jerusalem for the three major festivals (Pesach, Shavuot, and Sukkot).
1. This could put a hardship on some families with farm animals left behind, as well as potentially other family concerns. Was every male required to make these three trips annually?
2. Was this a mitzvah and were there consequences of not making the journey?
3. Was there a large percentage of women that were pilgrims each year?
Thanks.
Bob
ANSWER: Hello Bob,
Anyone who was able to make the trip was required to go, even children as long as they could walk up the Temple Mount on their own holding on to someone's hands.
1. The trip did not need to last longer than approx. two days as people who lived more than half day walk from Jerusalem were exempt from even sacrificing the paschal lamb on Passover. If I find the other holidays have different guidelines I will let you know. In addition, people who had a farm had servants who were exempt from the trip and who can perform the necessary tasks in the interim. Finally, see Ex. 34:24, "no man will covet your land when you go up..." which is a promise from G-d to protect our property from attack from enemies in our absence. We deserve such protection because we are engaged in fulfilling G-d's commandments; it is reasonable to assume that lesser threats to our land and property will be prevented as well.
2. It is a mitzvah, yes. The courts were not mandated to punish an individual for violating this commandment because the violation is effected through inaction. He will however suffer the consequences from the Heavenly Court just as for not fulfilling any other mitzvah for which the human courts do not punish. Know though that this was a great opportunity to visit the King of Kings, it would be quite boorish not to appreciate the significance of such a great mitzvah. Even now many people go through a lot of trouble to visit the Western Wall as much as possible when they're in the area. There is a powerful sense of G-d's presence there.
3. I don't have the number of how many women went but although they are exempt from the mitzvah mentioned in the Torah, they are nevertheless obligated in participating in the joy of the festival in Jerusalem with their husbands. Some say that just like men they are also required to partake in the festival offering that was sacrificed. See Samuel 1:4-5 and ibid. 1:22 where she excused herself.
Have a great day!
David.
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Thanks David,
Even though I have a great collection of Jewish commentaries, including the complete Me'am Lo'ez, I don't seem to come across answers to questions like this so I greatly appreciate your insight.
I would like to ask a follow-up question on something you said, "The courts were not mandated to punish an individual for violating this commandment because the violation is effected through inaction."
Suppose one does not observe Shabbat through intended inaction. I believe the punishment could be death although the courts probably never executed that judgment because life was so precious, even in the event of potential murder. But I would like you to please elaborate on the phrase "because the violation is effected through inaction." Does that then mean that violations of all the positive mitzvot might not have been "prosecuted" by the courts?
By the way, I am hoping that during the next year to visit Israel and I know I want to spend good time at the Kotel, so I can only imagine people longing to go there when the Temple(s) stood.
Thanks again!
Bob
Answer Hi Bob,
It is a pleasure to talk about Torah and your questions have been very relevant and interesting.
The death penalty for violating the Sabbath is only for doing work on the Sabbath such as the person in Numbers who collected wood on the Sabbath. If a Jew were to stay "inactive" an entire Sabbath he would not incur the death penalty. Execution is indeed a rare thing because the courts were obligated to seek and use any justification to avoid execution. If however after deliberation the court sentences the individual to death, avoiding the execution would be a grave sin, the value of life is not to be considered in such a circumstance.
The Torah does not require the courts to prosecute a violation of a positive mitzvah but when the courts determine that a situation needs to be addressed, they are authorized to use any means available, incarceration, excommunication, lashes and even the death penalty. This is in order to prevent decadence in Torah observance. The courts uses its own judgement in such cases, the Torah does not have a procedure for it. I haven't found anything directly addressing punishment for not performing positive mitzvoth but I would imagine that this would apply equally to positive mitzvoth as negative mizvoth.
