A Strange Halakhic (sort of) Thought

[debka_notion]

So there's a general principle in halakha (Jewish law) that the law of the land is the law. (Dina d'malchuta dina, I think- I don't know Aramaic, so this is just what I remember a teacher telling me it was in high school. It was Rabbi Eli I think.) So, why do the orthodox/observant (pick the word of your choice) folks drink underage? If they're so stringent about other aspects of the law, why break one that's pretty easy to follow? SOmehow I'd think this would be a more common idea.

Note, this is not intended to be a criticism of anyone in particular- just a thought.

Comments

[nuqotw.livejournal.com]

I believe that dina d'malchuta dina applies when there is no halakha on a particular question. Hard to imagine, but it happens. This is one of the reasons that it is halakhically forbidden to smoke marajuana. If the government mandated the consumption of ham on alternate Wednesdays, we would have a halakhic obligation not to eat ham on alternate Wednesdays, as well as any other time.

[shirei-shibolim.livejournal.com]

I thought that went without saying, yes. But underage drinking to excess — or in any amount beyond four cups of wine spaced over several hours — is not halakhically mandated. In my opinion, those who think that it is are citing an unhealthy cultural attitude of what constitutes `oneg, rather than the Torah itself.

[shirei-shibolim.livejournal.com]

Point I forgot to make: "when there is no halakha on a particular question" isn't quite how it goes. Dina d'malkhuta applies so long as civil law does not directly conflict with halakhah, even if there is a halakhic position already in existence. So if civil law demanded that all citizens wait 7.5 hours between meat and milk, we'd be obligated to follow.