RRR 173-178

Wedding on the Ninth of Av

You informed me that a family had arranged for a wedding on Sunday, the 23rd of July, which is Tisha B’av, and you ask whether you should officiate or not. You were strongly inclined not to officiate, but you want to know whether there is any basis for permit ting the marriage on that day. (To Rabbi Dudley Weinberg, Milwaukee, Wisconsin)

I had already referred to this matter in Reform Jewish Practice, Vol. I, pp. 73-74, but the statement there is rather brief. It is based mainly upon the responsum of Marcus Horowitz (1884-1910), the Orthodox Rabbi of Frankfurt, in his “Matteh Levy” 32. His responsum is in answer to the Rabbi of Trier, who had heard that marriages were conducted on public fast days in Frankfurt. Horowitz denies that marriages were held on fast days in Frankfurt, and insists that there should be an absolute prohibition of marriages on all public fast days, in spite of the fact that there are some permissive statements in the law. He says that in these days of religious neglect, we ought to avoid such permissiveness. Yet the very fact that Marcus Horowitz knows and cites certain opinions in the law which would permit marriage on fast days indicates in itself that there must be considerable basis in the law for permitting such marriages. Before deciding, therefore, whether or not we should officiate at marriages on fast days, let us review the law and see what its actual status is.

Moses Isserles to the Shulchan Aruch, Orah Hayyim 5 51: 2, says that it is our custom to be strict and not to have marriages from the fast of the 17th of Tammuz up to and including the 9th of Av. Of course he means that instead of being strict from the 1st of Av through the 9th we should be strict beginning two weeks earlier, from the 17th of Tammuz. Still, he uses the word “custom” (minhag). His statement would indicate that the strictness is rather a custom than a definite law. Caro himself, speaking of the nine days from the 1st of Av to the 9th of Av, says that we do not marry or have betrothals; but, he adds, if a betrothal takes place without a feast, it is permitted even on Tisha B’av itsetf.

Going back to the beginnings of the law, we find its origin in the Mishnah, Taanis IV : 6 and 7, where the four main fast days are mentioned (Fast of Gedaliah, 10th of Tebet, 17th of Tammuz, and 9th of Av). The Mishnah ends with the statement: “When the month of Av comes, we diminish joy.” The next Mishnah speaks of what is prohibited, especially in the week in which the 9th of Av comes, namely, we do not cut the hair or bathe (i.e., all that week until after the fast). The Talmud, elaborating on the prohibitions just mentioned, says (b. Yevamoth 43a): “We do not betroth and do not marry and do not make betrothal feasts.” On which the Tosfos comments that only the feast itself is forbidden—not the betrothal.

Since the emphasis seems to be on the festive meal itself as a symbol of joy, which is prohibited, the question naturally arises whether a marriage ceremony was really prohibited in itself, or prohibited because of the feast which accompanies it. Would a marriage ceremony be prohibited if, let us say, it was a small marriage taking place in the rabbi’s study, and there were no celebrations involved? There is no question that the later law would say that a marriage, even without a feast, is joy in itself and therefore is prohibited on the fast days (cf. “Magen Abraham” to Orah Hayyim 546 : 1). Yet certainly it is strange that Maimonides (in Yad, “Hilchos Ishus” X : 14) giving all the laws of the days on which marriages are prohibited, mentions that marriages are prohibited on Friday and on Sunday (lest the Sabbath be violated to prepare the feast) and on half-holidays; but he does not mention the 9th of Av.

As a matter of fact, Marcus Horowitz, wanting to have marriages completely prohibited on the fast days, is aware that the prohibition against marriages on fast days (and therefore the 9th of Av) is not too firmly founded. He feels it necessary to explain away the statement of the Magen Abraham to Orah Hayyim 559, end of section 11, who discusses the question of whether a groom must finish his fast if his marriage takes place on a fast day. The Magen Abraham bases his discussion upon responsum 2 of Solomon Halevi (whose responsa were published in Salonika, 1652). Solomon Halevi is asked whether a father whose child is to be circumcised on a fast day should complete his fast or not, since the day of circumcision is a simcha for him. He decides, first of all, on the basis of the Tur, which says that if Tisha B’av was properly on a Saturday, but was postponed (as is the custom) to Sunday, then this postponed Tisha B’av is not so strict, and he would permit the father of a child to break his fast at the circumcision. But Solomon Halevi says that even if the fast were on the 9th of Av (and not postponed because of Saturday to the 10th) the father should not complete his fast. Then he quotes his grandfather who says: “He who marries a woman on the 9th of Av should not complete his fast even though he could have postponed the wedding to another date, which the father of the child to be circumcised cannot do with regard to the circumcision, which must occur on the eighth day.” Solomon Halevi ends this interesting responsum as follows: He believes that a bride and groom who fast on their wedding day should complete their fast, unless this Tisha B’av, when the wedding took place, is postponed (because of Saturday),to the 10th of Av. A relevant responsum of the Gaon Hai (who is quoted by Rabbenu Nissim to the Alfas, at the end of chapter 1 of Taanis) discusses what is forbidden on fast days, and specifically the prohibition to build marriage pavilions. The Gaon Hai makes a distinction between a man who was married before and has children and a man who was not married or who was married and has no children. In the latter two cases, where there are no children, the marriage is not merely a permitted happiness (simcha) but a mitzvah, and because it is a mitzvah, it is permitted to build the pavilion for the wedding, and so forth.

This statement of the Gaon Hai, permitting relaxation as to building the wedding pavilion on fast days in the case of a man who has not yet fulfilled the commandment of “increase and multiply” (i.e., who has no children), is quoted by Joseph Caro in his “Bes Joseph” to the Tur 551, and he says this might well apply, not only to the building of a marriage pavilion, but even to conducting the marriage itself. But, he adds, that the reason we do not have a marriage on fast days is because it would be unlucky (i.e., it is not really forbidden).

Joseph Caro states further that those special fast days which are called because of drought are more serious fast days than the 9th of Av and so on. Yet it is clear that marriages are permitted on the other fast days, except the 9th of Av. See the latest decisor, Yechiel Epstein, in “Aruch Ha-Schulchan,” Orah Hayyim, 550 : 2, in which, speaking of other fast days, he describes the liturgy for the Mincha service if there is a marriage on that fast day. See also Raphael Meldola, in his “Chupos Chassanim” (in Laws of Betrothal), who speaks of marriages on the fast day and is concerned only with the question as to whether or not the blessings over the wine are proper on a fast day.

In general, from the above, it is clear that while the present custom is to forbid marriages on fast days and on the 9th of Av, the custom rests primarily upon the prohibition of festivities on that day. The present law, even today, permits betrothals without festivities, and it seems clear that in earlier times marriages, too, were permitted without festivities. In fact, Marcus Horowitz says so. He warns, toward the end of the responsum (“Matteh Levy” 32), that we should not draw general conclusions from the fact that they did have weddings without festivities. Horowitz then says that nowadays, when most people neglect the fasts, it is our duty to be doubly strict and not to draw conclusions from the fact that quiet weddings were formerly conducted on fast days. The question for us is, should we draw the same conclusion which this Orthodox Rabbi of Frankfurt has drawn? The general neglect is even greater than that mentioned by Marcus Horowitz. It is more than a question of the neglect of fasting. The law prohibited all business and all washing, “even to dip the finger in water.” The whole somber mood of these fast days has vanished from our lives. Why, then, should we ignore the evidence of earlier permissiveness and conclude that it is our duty to prohibit even a quiet wedding?

The only justifiable ground is our respect for the sentiment of more observant people, whether or not their sentiment is consistent with the rest of their observances. It is on the basis of this decent regard that our new Rabbi’s Manual says: “On the grounds of historical consciousness, marriage should be avoided by Reform Rabbis on the 9th of Av, even though the Reform Synagogue does not officially recognize the day as a fast” (p. 125).

Our respect for general sentiment on the matter should certainly lead us to avoid large wedding festivities. But if a small marriage ceremony in the rabbi’s study is requested, there is, as has been said, good ground to permit it. As for the specific wedding about which you have asked me, this year the fast is a postponed fast and occurs on the 10th of Av, and as Joseph Caro said in the “Bes Joseph” to the Tur, Orah Hayyim 559: “When it is postponed, it is not quite so strict” (Lo chamir kuley hai).