The month of Elul is a month of teshuvah of returning to HaShem, preparing for the New Year and Yom Kippur. In yeshivas world-wide added study sessions in mussar and personal introspection are the call of the month. In general, a feeling of seriousness grips the religious community.

This pilgrimage has been accepted by many Jews around the world, especially amongst Israeli Jews.



The past few years, Elul has taken on a new look for some, with preparation for the yearly pilgrimage to the tomb of Rebbe Nachman in Uman, Ukraine. In religious neighborhoods, advertisements are plastered on every street corner and in synagogues offering specials on airfare to spend Rosh Hashanah in Uman. If in years past this was a private pilgrimage of Breslov Chassidim to be at their Rebbe's tomb on the Jewish New Year, over the past several years this pilgrimage has been accepted by many Jews around the world, especially amongst Israeli Jews. Recently, I came across an article on www.Breslev.org titled "Harosh Hashanah sheli". The goal of the article was to explain the rationale behind traveling to Uman for Rosh Hashanah.


The article's convictions were solely based on oral traditions and written documents attributed to Rebbe Nachman and his followers. Breslev tradition has it that Rebbe Nachman promised that whoever visits his tomb on Rosh Hashanah and recites certain chapters of psalms will merit great salvation. Is this the way Jewish practice is determined?


Jewish law and practice is determined by the long chain of our mesorah (tradition), beginning with Moses at Mount Sinai continuing through the prophets and the Anshei Knesset Hag'dolah and the Sanhedrin, through the Tanaim, Amoraim, Gaonim, Rishonim, and Achronim. Jewish law or practice doesn't begin with an 18th-century Rebbe, however great he may be.


The article continued with four issues that may prevent someone from spending Rosh Hashanah in Uman. The first two dealt with leaving the Land of Israel. The Halachic problem is certainly more acute amongst Israeli Jews, who leave Israel for Uman; however, it is a problem for Jews worldwide.


An even casual reading of our texts, especially parshat Re'eh and other portions of Sefer Devarim, would show that such a mass pilgrimage to Uman isn't the desire of HaShem. In Sefer Melachim, when Yerovam Ben-Nevat becomes king of Israel, he builds a temple in Bet El whose main purpose is to stop the mass pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which he thought would be a threat to his kingdom (I Melachim 12:26-33). The sin of Yerovam Ben-Nevat was mainly in building an alternative to Jerusalem (Sanhedrin 101b).
How has it

Such a mass pilgrimage to Uman isn't the desire of HaShem.

happened that we have replaced Jerusalem with Uman? Jerusalem, which is described throughout the Torah as hamokam asher yivchar HaShem - "The place that HaShem will choose." Jerusalem is the site of the binding of Isaac, which occurred on Rosh Hashanah. Jerusalem; the future site for the third Beit HaMikdash. Jerusalem; where Shlomo HaMelech builds the first Beit HaMikdash, where Ezra builds the second Beit HaMikdash.


The Halachic and traditional site for Jewish pilgrimage and prayer is Jerusalem. A generation that has been privileged to freely pray almost anywhere in Jerusalem should to everything possible, at the very least, to establish a symbolic Aliyah Leregel festival pilgrimage to Jerusalem and not look for alternative sites. Chazal (Berachot 30a) teach us that all prayers rise to heaven via Jerusalem. Have we traded Jerusalem for Uman?


The Breslev.org article raises the idea that perhaps separating oneself from one's wife and family isn't proper behavior for a holiday. The article answers, "Such a question should be directed to our leader Moses, who said three times a year all males should come to see the Lord, and that in time of the Bet HaMikdash men left their wives and family to arise to Jerusalem." (Here the writer himself compares Uman to Jerusalem.)


With all due respect to the writer, his statement is inaccurate. We know for certain that the thrice yearly pilgrimage commandment in the Torah was a family event. The verse referring only to males that the writer quoted is explained by the Rambam (Hilchot Chagigah 1) as referring to the specific positive commandment of coming to the Temple on the first day of the holiday with an offering to HaShem. That doesn't apply to women just as any other time-oriented positive commandment. However, we have no mention in the Tanach or rabbinic sources that the thrice yearly pilgrimage was male only. To the contrary, we know from the Talmud (Succah 51b) that discusses building a balcony for the women during the Simchat Bet Hoshoaivah on Succot that obviously women were present. Women are obligated to eat from the Korban Pesach inside the walls of Jerusalem on the first night of Pesach (Rambam, Hilchot Korban Pesach). Hak'hel, which took place on Succot following Shmittah, was a family event with men, women and children (Devarim 31:12). The beginning of Sefer Shmuel discusses Elkanah going to Shiloh (prior to the conquest of Jerusalem) with his wives and children.


The article then deals with the monetary issue of spending such a large amount of money for the trip (close to $1,000), which the writer claims is acceptable. The laws of how much to spend on mitzvot and the enhancement of mitzvot are outlined clearly in Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 656). The amount is no more than a fifth of one's savings for a positive commandment. Even if we accept the opinion of the writer that Uman on Rosh Hashanah is a positive act, it certainty wouldn't be labeled a mitzvah, Torah or rabbinic.

The thrice yearly pilgrimage commandment in the Torah was a family event.

 Perhaps he would call it a "Chasidic custom." But a custom doesn't warrant spending such a large amount year after year, especially not for a large family with limited means. Last year and this year, a donor gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to subsidize the cost of the flight to Uman. At a time when there are thousands of hungry children in Israel, when many Torah institutions worldwide are experiencing budget deficits, Jewish philanthropists would do better donating to the poor and Jewish education than subsidizing a controversial custom. Many times I have seen men begging funds for their trip to Uman. Even with regard to Shabbat, Rabbi Akiva taught his son (Pesachim 112a) that it is better to eat the same food on Shabbat as on any other day than to take charity.


The article concludes: "Even if one isn't convinced one hundred percent, he should still make the pilgrimage to Uman as he has nothing to lose and much to gain."


With all due respect, what does the writer mean when he writes, "nothing to lose"? Is leaving the land of Israel "no big deal"? Is establishing a mass Jewish pilgrimage to Uman in the Ukraine and ignoring Jerusalem as our spiritual capital "nothing to lose"? Is leaving one's family during a holiday, when the Torah clearly describes holidays as family experiences, considered "not a major loss"? The first mitzvah (the Pesach offering) given to the Jews as a nation, while they are still in Egypt, is to "draw out and take lambs according to your families." (Shemot 12:21)


I have tremendous respect for those who go to such lengths to worship HaShem in the way they understand. But I think they are mistaken as to what is the correct way to serve HaShem. I would suggest organizing huge prayer gatherings in Jerusalem, reminiscent of the Biblical directive.


May we merit seeing Jerusalem restored to its former glory speedily, in our day.