While meal portions were not supplied to the entire large crowd of attendants, the expense for security for such a large wedding was enormous - to the tune of 6000nis.
The families asked who needs to pay for this security - the owner of the hall, the families of the groom and bride or the wedding guests (as they directly benefited from it).
Rav Zilbershtein compared it to a case that had previously come before him regarding a woman who called a snake catcher to come catch a snake in the courtyard of the building. The snake catcher came, did his work, and caught the snake. When presenting the bill, the woman raised the question about who should pay - she, for calling the catcher, the entire building as everyone within benefited, or residents of all the surrounding buildings, as the snake could have moved on to any of the buildings and yards nearby and they all benefited.
AT the time this original question had presented itself Rav Zilbershtein asked his father in law Rav Elyashiv for his opinion on the matter. Rav Elyashiv paskened that any mother who would not send her child down to play in the courtyard out of fear of the snake is directly benefiting from the work done and has to participate equally in paying the snake catcher.
Rav Zilbershtein says he thought initially to compare the case of the security to the case of the snake catcher and anybody who benefited from the presence of security should have to participate in paying the bill. However, he decided, the case is different, as everyone is at equal risk from the enemies that threaten us. Rav Kanievsky was asked and he concluded that all participants of the wedding have to pay an equal share.
source: Behadrei
and now, can someone please tell them how to go collect, after the fact, 1-2 shekels from each person who showed up to dance at the wedding?
The question and answer could also be extended further - they needed a hall that could hold the thousands of guests. That too is very expensive - do the participants have to share the cost of the wedding hall that they each enjoyed the use of? what about the price of the band?
And, taking it another step further - why does this only apply to this wedding with so many guests - couldn't the same psak apply to every wedding - each guest should be obligated to pay his fair share of the food and the hall and the security and any other charges that might apply?
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel
------------------------------------------------------
It seems the 4000 extra guests were not invited, they showed up on their own. (The original article says that the hall was average size, my guess is because the families didn't expect so many guests.) That would explain the distinction with other weddings you were asking about.
ReplyDeleteIt's comparing apples with oranges. The snake problem was a building problem and all tenants should share the cost for getting rid of the snake. Common sense. The wedding issue is totally different. Weddings, firstly, should never be that big and guests not invited should not come. Common sense. When a guest is invited and comes, the ethical thing is, of course, to give a gift (money or whatever). Weddings should also not be that big - it becomes a circus instead of the holy nuptials. The wedding should never cost more than the parties involved can afford. Another common sensible concept. Outside parties are not responsible for the irresponsibility of those responsible for the mishaps.
ReplyDeleteI have a more basic question: why was security required? Is there a history of weddings being targets of attacks? Even with the violence of the past 15 months, I can't recall a single attack on a wedding hall.
ReplyDelete