23 Sep ESCORTING GUESTS FROM ONE’S HOME

And the men got up
from there, and they
looked down upon the
face of Sodom, and
Avraham walked with
them to send them off.
Bereishis 18:16
A fascinating kuntrus entitled Omer
HaShikcha, gathers “forgotten” halachos,
those found in the Gemara and discussed by
the rishonim but for some reason not codified
in the Shulchan Aruch. These include the
prohibition against speaking lashon hara, the
obligation to have a mechitzah in a shul, and
numerous others. One example is the
obligation of levayah, for a host to escort his
guest out of his home. The Gemara discusses
this mitzvah, and the Rambam records it
(Hilchos Avel 14:2) and even explains that we
learn this practice from no less than Avraham
Avinu himself. The Rambam adds that
escorting one’s guests on their way is the
greatest aspect of the mitzvah of hachnasas
orchim, and yet it is not found in the Shulchan
Aruch.
The Source
The Gemara (Sotah 46b) derives this mitzvah
from the parsha of eglah arufah. After the dead
body of a stranger is found in the vicinity of a

town, the ziknei ha’ir oversee the ritual of the
eglah arufah and proclaim that “our hands did
not spill this blood.” The Gemara explains that
beyond actually committing the murder, they
are declaring that they are in no way complicit
or even indirectly responsible for the murder.
This includes the fact that “they did not see
this man leaving and refrain from providing
him with an escort.” Thus, we see the
responsibility that a host has to escort his
guest, since one who deliberately does not
escort his guest is deemed complicit in any ill
that befalls him.
Rabbi Meir rules that we are kofeh (we force)
the host to escort his guest, just as we would
for any positive mitzvah that one refuses to
observe. He emphasizes that the reward for
this mitzvah is boundless, as illustrated by the
city of Luz, a C’na’ani built the city, and
because they observed this mitzvah by merely
pointing the way for a departing guest, they
were rewarded in four ways: the city of Luz
produced techeiles; it was neither captured nor
relocated by Sancherev; it was not destroyed
by Nevuchadnetzar; and the Malach
HaMavess had no jurisdiction there —
someone wishing to die had to first leave the
city. Rabbi Meir concludes that if a C’na’ani
city received such a reward for performing

this mitzvah in a minor way,
kal vachomer if Jews
observe the mitzvah
properly, they will be
rewarded beyond their
imagination.
The Reasons for the
Mitzvah
The above cited Gemara
implies that the obligation
of levayah falls upon the
beis din and not the
individual hosts, since the
source for the halacha is learned from the beis
din’s declaration. However, the Rambam,
cited above, derives the mitzvah from
Avraham Avinu, a different source, which
implies that the obligation falls upon the
individual host to escort his guests. Rav Asher
Weiss (Minchas Asher Al HaTorah Bereishis
32) suggests that there are two aspects and
two reasons for this mitzvah. The beis din, on
behalf of the community, must escort the guest
or ensure he is escorted in a manner that will
ensure his safety. Additionally, emulating
Avraham Avinu, the host has a personal
obligation to escort his guest as an expression
of respect and appreciation. We can prove that
interpersonal respect and care is one aspect of
the mitzvah from the Gemara that teaches
that one receives great reward for escorting
his guest even four amos, but the full shiur
mitzvah is much greater. A rebbi should
escort his talmid all the way until the
outskirts of the city. An individual should
escort a friend beyond the city limits until
the end of the techum Shabbos, another
2,000 amos. A talmid should escort his rebbi
a full parsah (8,000 amos), and for a rebbi
muvhak he should go up to three parsahs.
Clearly, these differences are rooted in the
different levels of respect that the host must
show to his guest. If the only reason for the
mitzvah of levayah was safety, these
differences would not make sense.
At the same time, the declaration associated
with the eglah arufah, which states that the
city did not neglect to escort the person,
highlights another purpose of the mitzvah:
ensuring the safety of the traveling guest.
How exactly does an escort ensure safety?
The Maharsha (Sotah 46b s.v. UMah)
explains that escorting guests prevents them
from getting lost and potentially getting
harmed on unfamiliar roads. The host
should therefore accompany him for a
certain distance to ensure he is headed in the
right direction. On the other hand, the Kli
Yakar offers an explanation based on the
psychology of who may pose a threat to the
guest. Typically, criminals target individuals
with limited social connections, since they
are often alone and there are few
repercussions for harming them. Thus, if a
host escorts his guest, the bandits will see
that this person has friends and people who

care about his wellbeing, which will deter
them from approaching and lead them to seek
out an easier target.
Does This Mitzvah Still Apply?
As we previously noted, both the Tur and the
Shulchan Aruch make no mention of this
obligation. The Rema, though, in his Darchei
Moshe (C.M. 426:1), does reference the
obligation, while stating that nowadays, a
talmid is not obligated to escort his rebbi a full
parsah, since we assume that the rebbi is
mochel on (i.e. is willing to forego) his kavod,
and he can either walk him to the city limits,
or even just four amos. The Sema (427:11)
cites the Rambam’s description of the mitzvah
to escort guests and cites the Darchei Moshe’s
comment as the practical halacha which still
obligates us to escort our guests.
However, many other poskim present
arguments to advance the thesis that the
mitzvah no longer technically applies. Be’er
Sheva (Sotah 46b) suggests that nowadays
(i.e., in his time) the roads are so dangerous
that escorting one’s guest is dangerous for the
host, and thus the host is exempt since he is
not obligated to sacrifice his own safety to
protect his guest. On the other hand, the Aruch
HaShulchan (C.M. 426:2) writes just the
opposite, that since nowadays (in his time) the
roads are not dangerous, and people often
travel in a carriage, there is little reason to
escort a guest more than the minimum amount.
Similarly, the Chafetz Chaim (Ahavas Chesed
3:1) writes that since nowadays the streets are
clearly marked, the obligation to escort a guest
is not as significant, and a shorter distance is
sufficient.
Similarly, the Emek Beracha records that the
Chazon Ish told him that the main reason for a
levayah is to make sure that the guest will not
have to travel on the roads alone. However,
nowadays, the streets are generally very well
populated and thus the mitzvah doesn’t serve
the same function as it once did. Obviously, in
a situation in which the guest requires an
actual escort to help him find his way or keep
him safe, the full obligation certainly applies.
Nevertheless, Rav Asher Weiss concludes that
even if often none of the reasons apply, one
should still escort his guest at least four amos,
as a partial fulfillment of the mitzvah and as a
segulah that the guest should safely reach his
destination.