23

Can you buy and drink a beer (such as Miller or Budweiser) at a bar owned by non-Jews?

Double AA
  • 98,894
  • 6
  • 250
  • 713
RCW
  • 6,748
  • 1
  • 24
  • 35

3 Answers3

28

According to the Shulchan Aruch (YD 114:1) it is forbidden to drink beer in the same place as non-Jews do, i.e. bars. This is not a kashrus concern, but rather is forbidden out of concern that Jews will come to socialize overly much with non-Jews and come to eat with them. The Rama there writes that the custom in ashkenaz was to be lenient on honey and wheat based alcoholic drinks. However, barley based alcoholic drinks (such as beer) remain forbidden. (The Shach understands the Rama to be permitting barley as well. The Gra and the Peri Chadash there both reject the Rama's leniency.)

With regards to other hard liquor, there is a difference of opinion. Some achronim (Aruch Hashulchan 114:11 among others) say that drinks like rum and cognac are permitted to drink at bars because they are very expensive and were not a part of the original decree not to drink. However, in our times this might be a difficult case to make considering that these drinks are very commonly consumed in bars (see SHU"T shevet halevi 2:43).

Some authorities (chochmas adam, pischei teshuva ibid.) actually assume that this decree includes drinking tea and coffee in coffee shops with non-Jews because the same issue of socialization is a concern. There are some poskim today that actually reccommend not drinking in Starbucks because of this. However, many are lenient on this point (particularly if the leniency is utilized occasionally).

However, it should be noted that all of the issues above are not applicable if you take the beer out of the bar and drink it elsewhere (see Shulchan Aruch ibid).

Double AA
  • 98,894
  • 6
  • 250
  • 713
Tsvi
  • 329
  • 3
  • 2
  • 4
    Rum is a sugarcane product and less of a kosher issue. Cognac is a form of brandy, a wine derivative, and thus is absolutely not kosher unless supervised! – Shalom Jul 22 '10 at 14:14
  • 1
    Clarification: cognac absolutely needs a kosher certification. A few major brands of rum are okay without certification; see for instance http://www.star-k.com/cons-appr-liquor.htm – Shalom Jul 23 '10 at 11:56
  • The issue with social drinking is intermarriage, not inter-eating. – yitznewton Dec 07 '11 at 17:35
  • What about once in a while (akrai)? It seems that Maran is Matir that – Hacham Gabriel Apr 03 '13 at 06:01
  • 2
    The following comment is from an attempted edit, which I think is invalid, but which makes a point I want to record for posterity: Comment: Based on Rabbi David Yosef Shlit"a (on a shiur given today in Argentina). His stand is that the issur is also with coffee. Unclear about water and other non-alcoholic drinks – Seth J Aug 19 '13 at 18:40
  • The Rema does not forbid barley bear--only date beer which was the beer at the time of the amoraim is forbidden according to the Rema. As far as I know, no one distinguishes between wheat and barley. Also, the Chochmas Adam does not think that coffee is included in this prohibition; however he thinks that one shouldn't drink coffee with the akum anyhow for another reason. – wfb Aug 20 '13 at 03:18
  • @wfb Where are you getting that from? The Shulcham Aruch prohibits barley beer and the Rama doesn't argue. See the link. – Double AA Aug 21 '13 at 04:36
  • 1
    The Rema does argue: ויש מתירין בשכר של דבר ותבואה וכן נוהגין להקל במדינות אלו. – wfb Aug 22 '13 at 02:57
  • @wfb He only argues about wheat and honey. I dont understand you. You just quoted a text that says exactly what the OP said it would. (Please remember to ping me @DoubleAA so I see your responses.) – Double AA May 10 '16 at 20:16
  • @DoubleAA How do you translate תבואה? In general, it means "grain" not "wheat." (See Gra 114:8.) I have not looked at the rishonim on this recently, but do any distinguish between wheat and barley? – wfb May 11 '16 at 15:32
  • @wfb The Shulchan Arukh distinguishes in that Se'if. You can't just skip to the Rama. – Double AA May 11 '16 at 16:04
  • @DoubleAA That is a nice theory, but if you actually look at the Rema's source, it is obviously false. See Beit Yosef & Darkei Moshe: והמרדכי (סי' תתיח - ט) כתב בשם אבי העזרי (ראבי"ה ע"ז סי' אלף ס) משום ספר הישר (חלק החידושים סי' תשכז) דשכר שלנו אין בו משום חתנות ונראה שטעמו מפני שסובר דכיון דלא אשכחן שיאסר השכר אלא מההיא דרב פפא ורב אחאי אין לאסור אלא כמין שכר שלהם שהיה של תמרים אבל לא של שעורים או של מינים אחרים – wfb May 11 '16 at 16:26
  • @wfb The Darkei Moshe HaArukh actually has a slightly different version of that quote which doesn't mention Se'orim, FWIW. As it happens, looking at the Darkei Moshe also reaffirms the OP's wording that the Rama isn't really endorsing the practice as much as observing it. Indeed, if ruling like the opinion that only one thing is prohibited, the Rama's listing what is permitted instead of what is prohibited is striking. While you are right about what the Raavya said, what the Rama is willing to tolerate is a separate question. – Double AA May 11 '16 at 17:51
  • @DoubleAA Inasmuch as the Rema is referring to contemporary practice, it only makes sense to distinguish between wheat and barley if what people were commonly drinking at the time was wheat beer, which I greatly doubt. The nosei keilim all understand the Rema as I did (Shach, Gra, Pri Chadash). If the Rema wanted to forbid barley beer, he really should have said so. – wfb May 11 '16 at 17:56
  • @wfb The Gra does not state how he understands the Rama, and it is already mentioned in this post how the Shakh understood him. I'll just note that while the BY quotes the Mordechai quoting the Ravyah quoting RT as having this position, no one actually says that. RT only permits grain beer in a Jew's house. The Ravyah permits even in a gentiles house because there can't be a Gezera on food which could be eaten raw (like grain kernels (!)). The Mordechai quotes the Ravyah and then immediately quotes other opinions rejecting it, relying on the Ravyah for grains only in cases of Eivah. – Double AA May 11 '16 at 18:35
  • The Shakh is mentioned, but not that no one argues with the Shakh's interpretation. 2. As explained previously, it is clear why no one argues with the Shakh's interpretation -- both based on the sources and based on sevara and practice. This answer would be improved if it acknowledged its innovation of a position never before advocated by anyone @DoubleAA
  • – wfb May 11 '16 at 19:01
  • @wfb It was stated by the Rama whether you like it or not, and whether or not he made it up, and whether or not he intended it. As noted above the position you think he's saying was just made up by the Beit Yosef. – Double AA May 11 '16 at 19:03
  • It was stated by the Rema if you accept the highly questionable notion rejected by everyone who has commented on this issue before you that the word "tevuah" used by the Rema means "wheat" and not "grain" – wfb May 11 '16 at 19:06
  • @wfb Which is the straightforward meaning of the words, as evident from the Shakh. It's not surprising btw that Acharonim tried to read a Rishonic position into the Rama's Hagah instead of thinking he was just noting common custom. That just gets into general issues of what the role of the ShA and Mappah was intended to be by their authors. The further you go in history, the more people assume ShA was intended as a Posek Acharon book, and the more they treat it as such, instead of cliff-notes of the Beit Yosef. – Double AA May 11 '16 at 19:07
  • @DoubleAA Do you assume the common custom was to drink wheat beer and not barley? – wfb May 11 '16 at 19:11
  • @wfb Frankly I have no idea. The Raavya himself talks about barley, but it wouldn't be the first time in history someone confused the two (cf Shut Bach Chadashot 49). Note also the Arukh haShulchan goes giving extra Svaras to permit hard liquor instead of just saying "it's not date beer". It's not so clear this position the BY made up is everyone else's. The Bach too there thinks the Rama is basically saying Mutav SheYiyhu Shogegin. – Double AA May 11 '16 at 19:18