Kashrut, Wine and Music
Posted June 25, 2009 - 3:29pm
Kosher Restaurants, Live Music and Wine
By
Rabbi J.Simcha Cohen
Question: Is a Kashrut organization mandated according to Halakha to withhold Kashrut certification from a restaurant that permits live music to be performed while wine is served at meals?
Response: This issue was brought to the forefront of public rabbinic concern as a result of a recent incident that occurred. Rabbi Marc Angel, Founder and Director of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals, planned a reception at a kosher restaurant for a major donor, his family together with a number of friends of the Institute. To enhance the event, a musician was engaged to play background music during the reception.This last seemingly innocent item was deemed by the OU, the Kashrut certifying organization of the restaurant, as a violation of Halakha due to the fact that wine was served. As such, it was claimed that that the restaurant would lose its certificate of Kashrut in the event that live music would take place. To support this position, one of the OU rabbis cited the Shulhan Arukh Orakh Hayyim 560:3 where it states that subsequent to the Hurban HaBayit [destruction of the Temple in ancient Jerusalem] the sages decreed that one should not listen to live music at an event that serves wine. Accordingly, any attempt to have live music during a reception where wine was served would be a violation of Halakha and would mandate the OU to remove its Kashrut certification. Live music with the availability of wine at banquets may only be permitted at the performance of a Mitzva such as a wedding or Sheva Berakhot.
Of concern is whether this is a correct reading of the Shulhan Arukh. Also, is such a prohibition relevant and operational in contemporary society?
What does the Shulhan Arukh actually say?
The Shulhan Arukh states that as a result of the destruction of the Holy Temple, the sages decreed a number of ordinances to manifest a degree of sadness and mourning. One such decree was the prohibition to listen to live music. The Rama limited the prohibition. He contended that this general (year-round) prohibition applied only to people who awoke in the morning and retired at night to the accompaniment of music (i.e. kings). In addition, the Rama noted that those in attendance at a Bet Mishteh (a banquet party) were also included in the ban against music. The Mishna Berurah ruled that the latter position of the Rama would extend the ban on music to even those who are not accustomed to daily listen to music. The prohibition was operational due to the presence of wine at the meal (O.H. 560:3 , Mishna Berurah 560"12).
A logical conclusion would be that one who does not listen to music daily and who does not drink wine (or attend such banquets) would not be included in the general ban against live music enacted by the sages to recall the Hurban HaBayit.
To this, Rav R. Moshe Feinstein demurs. He rules that even the Rama would prohibit Jews from attending a public musical event throughout the year for it is a form of excessive Simha prohibited because of the Hurban.
To the extent that the rabbis imposed a ban against music during Sefira (and the nine days) one must logically assume that such a ban would be above and beyond that which is normally prohibited due to the Hurban. Since a public musical event is prohibited throughout an entire year, the extra stringency imposed for the nine days and Sefira must relate to music played even within the confines and privacy of one's home. (Iggrot Moshe, Yore Deah Volume II:137)
This ruling of Rav Moshe (ZL), as well as the OU's refusal to grant Kashrut certification to restaurants that have live music and wine, appear bizarre and certainly not relevant to modern Orthodox contemporary lifestyles.
According to Rav Moshe (ZL) it would be forbidden to attend a concert throughout the year. To contend that the multitudes of observant Jews who do attend musical events are violating Halakha and are to be classified as sinners is simply not a proper orientation. Perhaps, for Rav Moshe (ZL), whose creative mind and Neshama were totally immersed in sacred Torah, such a view could be understood. To, however, the vast numbers of Torah Jews who find music a positive Kosher form of entertainment, such a ruling cannot represent general Halakhic practice.
Rav Shalom Klass(ZL) the former (Baki B'Shas) publisher of the Jewish Press once sent me the following: Rav Henkin was once requested to determine the proper ruling in a case where the position of the Mishna Berura differed from that of the Arukh HaShulhan. Rav Henkin ruled that one should follow the P'sak of the Arukh HaShulhan. His reason was that the Mishna Berura (the Chofetz Chayyim) was the Tzaddik of the generation. The Tzaddik of a generation is not to be the final Halakhic authority for the generation for the Tzaddik has a proclivity to be constantly stringent. So too with listening to music throughout the year.
The OU's position to remove certification from any restaurant that allows live music to be played at meals that also serve wine may also be a stringent misreading of Halakha. Indeed, the Shulhan Arukh never mentions a ban against music at a meal. It explicitly states that the ban occurs at a "Bet Mishteh." A literal translation is not a banquet but "A house of drinking" .
The Mishna Berura, in his notes titled Shaar HaTzion, cites great rabbinic authorities who contend that the ban against live music referred specifically to an ancient custom to serve only wine accompanied by music. In other words, no food was served at all. Now the term Bet Mishteh makes sense, it was a drinking party. Of interest is that the Mishna Berura explicitly states that in the event one serves food together with wine and music, one should not protest the event.
It is apparent that the OU accepts the Mishna Berura's clarification that Bet Mishteh is prohibited to have live music due to the presence of wine yet rejects the Mishna Berura's suggestion to not protest the matter by denying Kashrut certification to those who do , indeed, have live music and wine. As such, in light of the Mishna Berura's request not to protest those that serve wine at meals plus music, the OU's position appears quite onerous and not so clearly backed by Halakha. Rav Henkin's ruling should have been the proper halakhic guide. Also, it is clear that the OU did not even recognize that the purpose of the event was to support a Torah institute. That very fact should have swayed the OU to grant permission. Indeed, support of Torah is always deemed a Mitzvah.
Based upon the above consideration that the original ban due to the Hurban was against music together with a drinking party, we may understand what extra prohibition was added to be operational during Sefira and the Nine Days. The rabbis may have for the days of Sefira and the Nine Days merely added a ban against music with meals. Namely, not just music with drinking parties was prohibited. Also, the rabbis may have outlawed during these periods of time all public musical events, even those without any food or drink. Of interest, is that the rabbis may never have forbidden music to be heard in the privacy of homes.
By
Rabbi J.Simcha Cohen
Question: Is a Kashrut organization mandated according to Halakha to withhold Kashrut certification from a restaurant that permits live music to be performed while wine is served at meals?
Response: This issue was brought to the forefront of public rabbinic concern as a result of a recent incident that occurred. Rabbi Marc Angel, Founder and Director of the Institute for Jewish Ideas and Ideals, planned a reception at a kosher restaurant for a major donor, his family together with a number of friends of the Institute. To enhance the event, a musician was engaged to play background music during the reception.This last seemingly innocent item was deemed by the OU, the Kashrut certifying organization of the restaurant, as a violation of Halakha due to the fact that wine was served. As such, it was claimed that that the restaurant would lose its certificate of Kashrut in the event that live music would take place. To support this position, one of the OU rabbis cited the Shulhan Arukh Orakh Hayyim 560:3 where it states that subsequent to the Hurban HaBayit [destruction of the Temple in ancient Jerusalem] the sages decreed that one should not listen to live music at an event that serves wine. Accordingly, any attempt to have live music during a reception where wine was served would be a violation of Halakha and would mandate the OU to remove its Kashrut certification. Live music with the availability of wine at banquets may only be permitted at the performance of a Mitzva such as a wedding or Sheva Berakhot.
Of concern is whether this is a correct reading of the Shulhan Arukh. Also, is such a prohibition relevant and operational in contemporary society?
What does the Shulhan Arukh actually say?
The Shulhan Arukh states that as a result of the destruction of the Holy Temple, the sages decreed a number of ordinances to manifest a degree of sadness and mourning. One such decree was the prohibition to listen to live music. The Rama limited the prohibition. He contended that this general (year-round) prohibition applied only to people who awoke in the morning and retired at night to the accompaniment of music (i.e. kings). In addition, the Rama noted that those in attendance at a Bet Mishteh (a banquet party) were also included in the ban against music. The Mishna Berurah ruled that the latter position of the Rama would extend the ban on music to even those who are not accustomed to daily listen to music. The prohibition was operational due to the presence of wine at the meal (O.H. 560:3 , Mishna Berurah 560"12).
A logical conclusion would be that one who does not listen to music daily and who does not drink wine (or attend such banquets) would not be included in the general ban against live music enacted by the sages to recall the Hurban HaBayit.
To this, Rav R. Moshe Feinstein demurs. He rules that even the Rama would prohibit Jews from attending a public musical event throughout the year for it is a form of excessive Simha prohibited because of the Hurban.
To the extent that the rabbis imposed a ban against music during Sefira (and the nine days) one must logically assume that such a ban would be above and beyond that which is normally prohibited due to the Hurban. Since a public musical event is prohibited throughout an entire year, the extra stringency imposed for the nine days and Sefira must relate to music played even within the confines and privacy of one's home. (Iggrot Moshe, Yore Deah Volume II:137)
This ruling of Rav Moshe (ZL), as well as the OU's refusal to grant Kashrut certification to restaurants that have live music and wine, appear bizarre and certainly not relevant to modern Orthodox contemporary lifestyles.
According to Rav Moshe (ZL) it would be forbidden to attend a concert throughout the year. To contend that the multitudes of observant Jews who do attend musical events are violating Halakha and are to be classified as sinners is simply not a proper orientation. Perhaps, for Rav Moshe (ZL), whose creative mind and Neshama were totally immersed in sacred Torah, such a view could be understood. To, however, the vast numbers of Torah Jews who find music a positive Kosher form of entertainment, such a ruling cannot represent general Halakhic practice.
Rav Shalom Klass(ZL) the former (Baki B'Shas) publisher of the Jewish Press once sent me the following: Rav Henkin was once requested to determine the proper ruling in a case where the position of the Mishna Berura differed from that of the Arukh HaShulhan. Rav Henkin ruled that one should follow the P'sak of the Arukh HaShulhan. His reason was that the Mishna Berura (the Chofetz Chayyim) was the Tzaddik of the generation. The Tzaddik of a generation is not to be the final Halakhic authority for the generation for the Tzaddik has a proclivity to be constantly stringent. So too with listening to music throughout the year.
The OU's position to remove certification from any restaurant that allows live music to be played at meals that also serve wine may also be a stringent misreading of Halakha. Indeed, the Shulhan Arukh never mentions a ban against music at a meal. It explicitly states that the ban occurs at a "Bet Mishteh." A literal translation is not a banquet but "A house of drinking" .
The Mishna Berura, in his notes titled Shaar HaTzion, cites great rabbinic authorities who contend that the ban against live music referred specifically to an ancient custom to serve only wine accompanied by music. In other words, no food was served at all. Now the term Bet Mishteh makes sense, it was a drinking party. Of interest is that the Mishna Berura explicitly states that in the event one serves food together with wine and music, one should not protest the event.
It is apparent that the OU accepts the Mishna Berura's clarification that Bet Mishteh is prohibited to have live music due to the presence of wine yet rejects the Mishna Berura's suggestion to not protest the matter by denying Kashrut certification to those who do , indeed, have live music and wine. As such, in light of the Mishna Berura's request not to protest those that serve wine at meals plus music, the OU's position appears quite onerous and not so clearly backed by Halakha. Rav Henkin's ruling should have been the proper halakhic guide. Also, it is clear that the OU did not even recognize that the purpose of the event was to support a Torah institute. That very fact should have swayed the OU to grant permission. Indeed, support of Torah is always deemed a Mitzvah.
Based upon the above consideration that the original ban due to the Hurban was against music together with a drinking party, we may understand what extra prohibition was added to be operational during Sefira and the Nine Days. The rabbis may have for the days of Sefira and the Nine Days merely added a ban against music with meals. Namely, not just music with drinking parties was prohibited. Also, the rabbis may have outlawed during these periods of time all public musical events, even those without any food or drink. Of interest, is that the rabbis may never have forbidden music to be heard in the privacy of homes.
