This section should have been included in my previous post on the first chapter of Rabbi Ephraim Luft's book, "In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part III."
The dangers of misplacing notes... continuing my comments on this chapter...
In this chapter, Rabbi Luft attempts to "prove" from Plato (and also Confucious) that certain music is "bad". Looking at the quotes, it is apparent that he is selectively quoting without understanding or context. In particular, it seems as though he has no understanding of modes and conflates them with notes.
The notion of quoting Plato as "posek acharon" (authoritative) here, when many of his positions on music have largely been rejected, beginning with Aristotle's rejection of Plato's reservation of music for education and ritual, is strange. ( Aristotle disagreed with Plato, finding music useful for entertainment and relaxation too, as long as it is not overdone.) Plato's views reflect an idea Rabbi Luft likes - that a given melody can be inherently "dangerous." Nevertheless, intellectual honesty would require Rabbi Luft to indicate that this understanding of music is not the conventional thinking in the broader world of contemporary Classicial Music Theory.
Regardless, if one grants that Plato is correct, then leshitaso, Rabbi Luft has two problems; one general and one specific.
The first general problem raised by this is that Plato admired the Dorian mode in particular because it was associated with Sparta and the Spartan ethos. Sparta didn't exactly have a Torah hashkafa. In other words, that mode which Plato sets as most ideal is one that both represents and imbues values presumably antithetical to Rabbi Luft's. The modes Plato idealized, to the extent that he would ban the use of the other Greek modes in his ideal nation-state, were the Dorian and Phrygian modes, to the exception of the others. (Republic 398d-399c)
(There aren't a whole lot of traditional chassidic Dorian mode-based melodies played at contemporary simchos. Out of the contemporary simcha bandstand repertoire, Chaim Dovid's "Ya-Ma-Mai" comes to mind, but I'm pretty sure that song is one Rabbi Luft would reject as inappropriate.)
The second specific problem Rabbi Luft has is that, if Plato is correct, then the very example of the traditional Chupa melody that Rabbi Luft presents as "kosher music" in the book is "treif". Put simply, Plato expressly rejects the use of specific modes like Ionian (the major scale) and Aeolian (a minor scale) which are used for some of the music Rabbi Luft deems acceptable. The "Vishnitzer Chupa Nigun" [sic] Rabbi Luft includes in his book as an example of a kosher melody uses the Ionian mode. It's intellectually dishonest to cite Plato's views on music without mentioning that this position would effectively prohibit the use of many well-known traditional Jewish melodies.
Now, it is possible that Rabbi Luft would accept Plato's premise that some modes are "good" or beneficial and others are "bad," but have his own distinctions as to which modes they are. He does not make this argument in the book, though. And, he cites no sources which he could theoretically use to assert this.
Rabbi Luft also quotes some Torah sources in this chapter. One, R' Sa'adya Gaon in Emunos Vedeios 10:18, is difficult to understand. I'm going to look for a good translation. It seems to be talking about certain melodic note combinations, or else modes, having specific influences on the listener. In any event, Rabbi Luft does not demonstrate that any of these are/aren't present in the music he wants banned.
Another Torah source is Rav Avraham ben HaRambam who holds that one shouldn't listen to music that is meorer the yetzer hara [arouses the evil inclination]. In context, this is an irrelevant source, as no definition of what music that is "meorer the yetzer hara" is given. One can accept this premise, rejecting, for example, songs with vulgar or heretical lyrics, while denying the assumption that any kind of music is inherently inappropriate if the lyrical content is not objectionable. So, there is no proof from this source.
Similarly, Rabbi Luft quotes Chovas Halevavos who advises one to separate from music that takes one away from doing good deeds -- "minei hazemer vehanigun vehasechok veharina haterudim osach min hamitzvos vehama'asim hatovim." Once again, it doesn't say what these are and the same caveats as above likely apply.
In short, these latter two Torah citations he cites on the "influence of music" have no direct relevance because they can be understood to refer to improper lyrical content, whereas Rabbi Luft's campaign is against Chassidic pop, most of which utilizes liturgical texts as lyrics.
Rabbi Luft often cites quotes like this, that on the surface appear to support his position, but upon closer investigation bear no relevance to his crusade.
Next in the series will be a look at Chapter Two - Quotes from Newspapers and Books on "Rock and Roll".
Here are my previous posts in this series:
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part I
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part II
"In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part III"
UPDATE 2/1/09:
For your convenience, I have updated the posts in this series to include links to all of the posts on this topic.
Here are the links to all of the posts in this series:
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part I
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part II
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part III
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part IIIa
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part IV
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part V
In Review - Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part VI
In Review - R'; Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part VII
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part VIII
In Review - R' Ephraim Luft's "The Torah Is Not Hefker" Part IX
