Selected Responsa 139

But this is an individual sentiment, not a law. The Tur does not mention it at all. Since it is not a fixed law, we have no right to promulgate it. It is a principle in Jewish law that one may not prohibit that which is permitted.

Moreover, besides its not being a law, when it is mentioned it is only with regard to entering the synagogue sanctuary. In other words, if the marriage did not take place in the sanctuary itself(say, in the rabbi’s study or in a hall) even this individual objection to a “long knife” would not apply.

To sum up: The custom of special garments of mourning to be worn by bride and groom has largely lapsed among most Jews . There is, therefore, no requirements as to the type of garments to be worn. As for the full military officer’s uniform which includes a sword, there is only one chance opinion that one should not enter the synagogue with a long knife. But that is not the law and, besides, it applies only to the sanctuary itself.

An analogous question was dealt with recently by Eliezar Waldenberg of Jerusalem in Volume X(#18) of his response series Tsits Eliezar. The responsum, of course, reflects the tense situation Which prevails at present in Israel . He was answering the question as to whether an Israeli soldier may enter the synagogue with a rifle or arevolver. He calls attention to the fact that the origin of the law Prohibiting entering the synagogue with weapons is to be found in Sanhedrin 82a(bottom of the page) which cites the text from Numbers 25:7 that Phineas“went forth out of the congregation and took the spear in his hand.” From which the Talmud concludes that one may not handle a spear except outside of the congregation or the Synagogue .

Waldenberg suggests that it would be better if the bullets were taken out of the rifle or revolver so that while the soldier is in the Synagogue these should cease to be lethal weapons. Or he suggests