RRR 47-50

Use of Temple Organ by Christians

Millikin University, a good neighbor of the temple, has made a request of us. There are not enough elec tric or pipe organs at the University, and they ask for the use of the temple organ for the teaching of stu dents in the University School of Music. Obviously, some of the pupils will be taught Christian music. Some members of the congregation are in doubt as to the propriety of such use of the temple organ and ask for an opinion on the question. (From Rabbi Leo Turitz, Decatur, Illinois)

There is a great deal of law concerning the various degrees of sanctity of synagogue objects and also the relation of non-Jews to them. These laws are found mostly in the Talmud (Avodah Zara 40 ff.) and in the Shulchan Aruch, Orah Hayyim 154, where a variety of synagogue appurtenances and their respective sanctity are mentioned.

Naturally, the organ as a synagogue appurtenance is not mentioned in the classic list of sacred objects. The only possible mention of a pipe organ is the magrefah in the Talmud (Arakin 10 b ) but, of course, this never was part of Jewish synagogue worship until the modern Reform movement. However, since its introduction into modern synagogues, the organ has acquired a certain aura of reverence, since it is regularly used in the service. Hence the psycho-logical basis for the question and its emotional importance.

The only way in which such a question can be decided at all on the basis of Jewish tradition is to judge by analogy, and ask which of the synagogue appurtenances would we consider analogous to the organ and how sacred is that particular appurtenance.

It might be clearer at the outset if we make a general statement about the degrees of sanctity of synagogue objects. The most sacred object of all is the Sefer Torah. Then, also, the synagogue building itself has special sanctity. Objects which are used as auxiliaries to these two sacred things are given the appellation auxiliary holiness (Tashmishey Kedusha). The auxiliary holy things to the Sefer Torah are, for example, the mantle and the ark. Auxiliary sacred things to the building would be the bima where the Torah is read, the fixed benches or pews, and so forth. Those things which are secondary to these secondary objects have very little sacredness and are called the auxiliaries to the auxiliaries. Then there are objects which, while used for services, are not appendages to the Torah or to the building, such as a succah or a shofar.

What is involved in this careful gradation is whether these varied grades may be used for secular purposes or by a Christian. For example, may the Torah itself be handled by a Christian? May the pews of the synagogue be used for scrap lumber if the building is wrecked?

Even the Sefer Torah itself may, according to most opinions, be handled by Christians. See Maimonides, who, in “Hilchos Sefer Torah” X : 8, says definitely that the Sefer Torah may be handled by Christians. Also, therefore, the opinion of Joseph Mesas, in “Mayim Hayyim” (Orah Hayyim 13), in which he permits the opening of the ark to show the Torah to Christians, and so Abadiah Joseph in Volume III of his work “Yabiah Omer” (Yore Deah 15).

The question of the organ comes closest to the question of the sanctity of the building itself, rather than to the sanctity of the Sefer Torah, because generally the organ is a fixed part of the building. Of course if the organ is a movable electric organ its sanctity is less, since it is not really a part of the building. But if it is a fixed organ, built into the building, it partakes of the sanctity of the building. Yet, even so, that sanctity has its limitations. Use by a Christian of the building does not invalidate it for Jewish use. For example, even in a case of idolatry, once the idol is removed from the building, it may be used as a synagogue, provided the building itself was not meant to be worshiped. Thus, the Shulchan Aruch clearly says, in Yore Deah 145 : 3, that once the idols are removed from the building, the building may be used. Since this applies even to idolaters, how much more does it apply to Christians, who are not considered idolaters at all.

All this applies to the organ as part of the building, but the organ can best be compared to a musical instrument used in sacred Jewish service. The only such instrument that we have for analogy is the shofar. The shofar is definitely described in the law (see Tur, Orah Hayyim 154) as having no inherent sanctity, and it can be used for secular purposes because it is not considered one of the Tashmishey Kedusha; it is one of the Tashmishey Mitzvah.

Therefore, while it is understandable that there would be some sentiment in the congregation against allowing a college to use the organ for instruction, since certainly Christian music will be played on it during the week, nevertheless, the organ has sanctity only by analogy. It is partly analogous to the sanctity of the building itself. As to that fact, Christian use of the building does not invalidate its Jewishness. It is most closely analogous to what is called Tashmishey Mitzvah, appurtenances of a mitzvah and, like a shofar, may be used for a secular purpose. Hence it is logical to assume that the mood of Jewish law would permit such use as the question indicates.