Leaving the Country Among Yeshiva Students of Draft Age
One of the key sanctions under debate for Haredim who evade mandatory military conscription is a prohibition on leaving the country. By reviewing the extent and characteristics of Haredim traveling abroad, this analysis paints a picture of how such a sanction would impact Haredi society.
The issue of yeshiva students leaving the country has recently made headlines amid the public debate about personal sanctions on yeshiva students who do not enlist in the IDF. This study aims to present an up-to-date picture regarding yeshiva students of conscription age who leave the country and thereby examine the potential impact of sanctions that would prevent this group from leaving the country.
The study will examine the scope of the phenomenon of departure from the country among yeshiva students and analyze the characteristics of those who leave compared to those who remain in the country, with a focus on employment and other relevant characteristics. To this end, we analyze data on the ultra-Orthodox (Haredim) who left the country based on a cross-reference between data from Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) and the Population Authority. In addition, as a complementary step, a brief sociological review was integrated regarding key characteristics of the various Haredi groups in relation to travel abroad.
The work was conducted in the CBS research roomWe emphasize that the work conducted in the CBS research room is based on anonymized individual-level data in order to preserve confidentiality. We take this opportunity to thank the CBS data access team, and in particular Eden Buganim, for their assistance in carrying out this study. and is based on data concerning 15,709 men born in 1996–1997 who studied in Haredi yeshivasYeshivas that receive support from the Department for Torah Institutions at the Ministry of Education. between the ages of 18 and 26Individuals who emigrated from Israel, as well as individuals who began studying in these institutions only at age 23 (presumably individuals whose religious affiliation changed), were removed from the analysis., including those who studied in yeshivas for only part of that period. From the population under study, 136 individuals (0.9%) who had some indication of leaving the yeshiva for the purpose of military enlistment were removed from the sampleIndividuals who left the yeshiva before age 23, where their first appearance in the labor market or in institutions of higher education was at least 3 years after leaving the yeshiva. It is worth noting that the vast majority of individuals who leave the yeshiva enter the workforce immediately or had already done so..
To begin, we present the characteristics of the two groups under review. The first (and larger) group includes Haredi men who remained in yeshiva at least until age 26. They make up approximately 74% of all Haredi men who studied in Haredi yeshivas at age 18Yeshiva students who began their studies at age 19 or 20 are also included in the study population. (hereafter: "those who remained"). The second group includes those who ceased their yeshiva studies before age 26 and constitute the remaining 26% (hereafter: "the dropouts").
Figure 1: Rate of retention in Haredi yeshivas until age 26 among those born in 1996–1997 who studied in yeshivas at age 18, by age, 2018–2022.
Source: Authors’ analysis based on CBS Research Room databases, Israel Democracy Institute
Figure 2 shows that the majority of yeshiva dropouts (71%) left the country at least once during the conscription age years, with a median of 4 departuresIt should be noted that this is an underestimation, as data on overseas departures exist in our database only for the later years of draft age. Nevertheless, further checks revealed that most departures occur at the “later” ages, rather than in the earlier years.. In contrast, among those who remained in yeshiva, 41% left the country during their yeshiva studies, with a median of 3 departures among those who traveled abroad. Looking at all yeshiva students (both dropouts and remainers), close to half (48%) leave the country at least once during their yeshiva studies. Therefore, a sanction that would prevent their departure could have significant impact.
Figure 2: Rate of departure from Israel among Haredi yeshiva students aged 18–26—dropouts vs. those who remained—and median number of departures among those who left the country, 2018–2022.
Source: Authors’ analysis based on CBS Research Room databases, Israel Democracy Institute
As stated, this section focuses on the 74% of Haredi youth who remained in yeshiva at least until age 26 and presents the differences between those who left the country during this period and those who did not.
Participation in the Labor Market
Some students who learn in yeshivas also participate significantly in the labor market while studying. Under the "Torato Omanuto" arrangement, which granted deferments and exemptions from military service (until June 2023), such work was permitted only for married students over age 22 and only outside regular working hours. Nonetheless, many younger students were also active in the labor market. The data show a correlation between labor market participation and frequency of foreign travel. Figure 3a shows that at age 26, the employment rate is significantly higher among those who left the country at least once (56%) compared to those who did not (35%). In addition, Figure 3b shows that the average monthly salary of workers who left the country is about NIS 1,400 higher than that of their peers who did not.
Figure 3a: Employment rate at age 26 among Haredi yeshiva students—those who traveled abroad vs. those who did not, 2018–2022.
Source: Authors’ analysis based on CBS Research Room databases, Israel Democracy Institute
Figure 3b: Average monthly income (2023 prices) among 26-year-old Haredi yeshiva students who work—those who traveled abroad vs. those who did not, 2018–2022.
Source: Authors’ analysis based on CBS Research Room databases, Israel Democracy Institute
Social Characteristics
In the next section, we examine the social characteristics of those who left the country versus those who did not. Figure 4a indicates a statistically significant representation of Hasidim among those who left the country compared to those who did not—38% versus 23%, respectively. The data also indicate that while Haredim born to two parents from America or Europe make up 6.4% of the yeshiva population, among those who left the country, the proportion of Haredim born to two parents from America or Europe make up 9.7% out of all those who left Israel. This demonstrates an over-representation of foreign born Haredim among those who leave the country, relative to their general proportion.
These findings are consistent with the data presented in Figure 4c, which illustrates the overrepresentation of individuals who left the country in specific Haredi cities. Notably, there is higher representation in cities with a considerable presence of Western-origin Haredim (“chutznikim”), such as Jerusalem and Beit Shemesh. Additionally, there is a prominent presence of those who traveled abroad from Beitar Illit—a city largely identified with the Hasidic community, similar to Beit Shemesh. By contrast, cities such as Modiin Illit and Elad, associated primarily with the Lithuanian and Sephardic sectors respectively, show an underrepresentation of individuals who traveled abroad.
Figure 4a: Distribution of Haredi yeshiva students aged 18–26 who left the country versus those who did not, by Haredi subgroup, 2018-2022
Source: Authors’ analysis based on CBS Research Room databases, Israel Democracy Institute
Figure 4b: Distribution of Haredi yeshiva students aged 18–26 who left the country versus those who did not, by city of residence.
Source: Authors’ analysis based on CBS Research Room databases, Israel Democracy Institute
According to the CBS Social Survey of 2019, four main reasons can be identified for Israelis traveling abroad: leisure, business, family visits, and studies.
The overwhelming majority of Israelis overall (about 87%) travel abroad for leisure, and the rest for the other purposes listed above. Naturally, these reasons are not mutually exclusive and often occur simultaneously. Among the Haredi public, reasons for leaving the country may be unique to their community and lifestyle—for example, pilgrimages to the gravesites of tzaddikim, visits to Hasidic rebbes, participation in seasonal employment markets such as cantorial services, kosher slaughter, and other religiously skilled occupations, as well as fundraising as “shadarim” (emissaries of the rabbis) for private or public causes.
While for most Israelis, travel for leisure is mainly a question of desire, cost, and vacation time, the situation among the Haredi public is more complex.
First and foremost, the very act of leaving the Land of Israel for a destination abroad, especially for leisure, is not a simple matter from a halachic perspective. Among contemporary Haredi Poskim (authoritative Jewish legal scholars who interpret and apply Halakha), opinions range from a complete prohibition on leaving the country for vacation, to allowances made for specific reasons such as pilgrimage to the gravesites of tzaddikim, health-related needs, or travel to observe the wonders of creation.
Additionally, there may be reservations stemming from concerns about “bitul Torah” (wasting time from Torah study) and time misuse. For an insular community, open and unregulated exposure to the outside world and its spiritual dangers also serves as a reason for objection to foreign travel. Above all, there is a stark contradiction between vacationing abroad and the value of “contentment with little,” a foundational ideological and practical tenet upon which the Lithuanian Torah society is based.
However, in recent decades, with the rise in standard of living and the formation of a Haredi middle class, more and more Haredim are taking vacations abroad. The availability of low cost air travel is not lost on the Haredi sector, and the availability of kosher food—thanks to the proliferation of Chabad houses and Jewish centers around the world—have also contributed to the growing demand for vacations abroad. Even Yated Ne’eman, the flagship newspaper of the Lithuanian party Degel HaTorah, which for many years refrained from publishing about vacations abroad, joined the general trend over a decade ago and began advertising such trips. That said, given internal ambivalence and occasional criticism, it does so with disclaimers and disavowals of the content.
The attitude toward travel abroad also differs among the Haredi subgroups of Hasidic, Lithuanian, and Sephardic communities. The Hasidic community is transnational and globally dispersed. While the Lithuanian group is organized around the local yeshiva institution, Hasidism is centered around the figure of the rebbe, who is the sole leader of all members of the sect. At key Hasidic events such as weddings and holiday gatherings, Hasidim from all locations endeavor to visit the rebbe. This creates a strong supralocal element that unifies Hasidim in Israel and abroad. Furthermore, Lithuanians and Sephardim usually speak only Hebrew fluently, while Israeli Hasidim generally speak Yiddish as well, allowing them to communicate and even form marital matches with Hasidim from abroad. Most cross-national matches occur within smaller Hasidic groups with limited local matchmaking pools, but the phenomenon is also present in larger groups, due to the absence of language and cultural barriers. Owing to their cosmopolitan character, ties between Hasidim and the broader diaspora are especially strong and reflected in their frequent foreign travel.
Moreover, whereas leading rabbis in the Lithuanian sector disapprove of pilgrimages to gravesites of tzaddikim, in Hasidic culture, such pilgrimages are a central and meaningful component. Nonetheless, this is not an exclusively Hasidic phenomenon. Increasingly, Lithuanians are traveling for such tourism, which may be motivated by religious reasons, leisure, or both.
Two Hasidic sects in particular are noteworthy for having their spiritual centers abroad: Breslov and Chabad. Traditionally, Breslov Hasidim have viewed the pilgrimage to Rebbe Nachman’s grave on Rosh Hashanah as a paramount religious obligation and strive with all their might to travel to the city of Uman, Ukraine, for the holiday. In recent decades, the phenomenon of traveling to Uman for the High Holidays has spread beyond the sect, attracting tens of thousands from across the religious spectrum, both from Israel and abroad8%of the Jewish population reported that they customarily visit the grave of Rabbi Nachman of Uman: 4.5% once in their lifetime, 3% every few years, and 0.5% at least once a year. By sector: 16.5% of Haredim (ages 18+) had visited Uman at least once at the time of the survey, 13% of national-religious Jews, 10% of traditional-religious and traditional-secular Jews, and 2.5% of secular Jews. See: Finkelstein, Goldberg, Ravitzky-Tur-Paz, and Padan, Biannual Report on Religion and State in Israel 2024, Israel Democracy Institute.. Nonetheless, the core travelers in this regard remains Breslov Hasidim who visit Rebbe Nachman’s grave both on Rosh Hashanah and throughout the year. In Chabad, in addition to pilgrimages to the Rebbe’s grave and other gatherings, it is customary to send young men to spend at least some time at the movement’s legendary headquarters—770 Eastern Parkway in Crown Heights, Brooklyn.
The Sephardic Haredi group is composed of two main circles: one is the Torah-yeshiva circle, influenced by the Lithuanian yeshiva world; the other is a Sephardic “Haredi-traditional” circle, which has not fully adopted the Haredi ethos and is closer to mainstream Israeli society.
Generally, the circle aligned with the Lithuanians is influenced in its lifestyle by the Lithuanian core and is presumably similar in its attitude toward foreign travel. The “Haredi-traditional” circle is, in many respects, akin to the general Israeli public in regards to travel abroad. However, it is important to note that pilgrimages to gravesites, wherever they may be, are a deeply embedded cultural practice in Sephardic Jewish heritage. Accordingly, travel abroad within this group is certainly influenced by that tradition.
Additional groups that are important to mention in this context are the “chutznikim,” the “modern Haredim,” students of “soft yeshivas,” and yeshiva students from the mainstream Lithuanian stream.
The “chutznikim” are children of Haredi families originally from abroad, and thus, naturally, their connection and attachment to foreign countries is deep and significant, and of course their travel abroad for family visits corresponds accordingly.
The “modern Haredim” are those who belong to the emerging middle class, and as such, they vacation abroad during yeshiva break periods, or take holiday getaways at hotels during religious festivals—a custom that has become an integral part of modern Haredi-bourgeois culture.
Another group in which foreign travel is found extensively, and even in organized fashion, is students in yeshivas for youth at risk and in “soft” yeshivas—that is, yeshivas in which students do not necessarily study Torah full time. In some of these institutions, group trips abroad are organized as a way to attract students to the yeshiva.
Characterizing these groups is particularly important for the purposes of this review, which seeks to examine the overseas travel habits of yeshiva students of conscription age, as they are closer to broader Israeli society in this regard and have a higher conscription potential compared to the rest of the Haredi population. Thus, members of these groups turn, more broadly than others in Haredi society, to secondary yeshivas that incorporate general studies, and some of them even enlist.
In addition, among some yeshiva students who belong to the mainstream Lithuanian stream, there is a phenomenon of "low-cost tourism" during the vacation period ("between times"), in which yeshiva students go on short vacations abroad on budget flights, stay in cheap hotels, and bring canned food with them from home. In this way, they can afford to vacation abroad relatively cheaply.
Data segmentation indicates the significant impact of a travel ban abroad on the following groups:
- Youth at risk and students of "soft" yeshivas, who may briefly attend yeshivas but do not remain in them for long.
- "Chutznikim" (students from families originally from abroad) and modern Haredim, who are closer to Israeli society and thus have a higher likelihood of conscription.
- Hasidim – who tend to enter the labor market at a relatively early age.
The findings of this study indicate that imposing sanctions that restrict departure from the country could impact many young men of draft age from the Haredi community, at whom the sanction is targeted—71% of the group who studied in yeshiva for a few years and left before age 26, and another 41% of those who remained in yeshiva for an extended period. Together, this represents approximately 48% of the entire group studied. It also emerges that Haredim who traveled abroad tend to participate in the labor market at a higher rate, suggesting an existing or developing affinity with the world of employment—compared to those who did not leave the country.
Beyond describing the phenomenon of yeshiva students traveling abroad, the findings may also serve as an additional indication that a significant portion of the students are not devoted full time to Torah study as imagined, many travel abroad frequently, and some have a connection to the labor market, sometimes even actively participating.
Furthermore, if the legal policy in force in Israel during the studied period (2018–2022) stipulated that yeshiva students are exempt from military service because they are engaged in Torah study, then it would be appropriate for the proportion of yeshiva students among those with “Torato Omanuto” status to stand at 100% through age 26. In practice, the data tell a different story: about a quarter of those who began their studies in yeshiva at a young age did not continue to study there until through age 26 (not to mention that registration as a yeshiva student does not necessarily reflect actual presence)—which indicates a lack of effective enforcement of this policy at the time.