Putting Red in the Blue Label: Mutar or Not?


johnnie walker blueBy Rabbi Yair Hoffman, The Five Towns Jewish Times

Its origin is in Kilmarnock Ayrshire Scotland, but is the most widely distributed brand of blended Scotch whiskey in the history of mankind.

Indeed, it is sold in almost every country in the world, with sales approaching some 150 million bottles each year.

It is known as Johnnie Walker Scotch whiskey, and it comes in many versions.

Red Label is 80 proof and is a blend of 35 grain and malt whiskies. It is intended for making mixed drinks.

Black Label is 80 proof, is a blend of about 40 whiskies, each one of which is aged for at least 12 years.

Blue Label is Johnnie Walker’s premium brand 80–86 proof blend with no age statement. Bottles are numbered serially and sold in a stunning silk-lined box accompanied by a certificate of authenticity. It is one of the most expensive blended Scotch whiskeys on the market, with prices of about $200 to $300 per bottle.


It seems that some people may have the practice of putting the Red Label in the Blue Label bottle. Even if there is no monetary gain made here whatsoever, from a halachic view, this practice could possibly be as treif as the worm in a margarita.


The prohibition is known as geneivas daas, fooling or deceiving others in physical practice. The Gemara in Chullin (94a) cites Shmuel as saying that the prohibition applies to everyone.

The Gemara in Chulin 94a cites a Baraisah which discusses four examples given by Rabbi Meir of things that are forbidden on account of the issue of geneivas daas. 1] It is forbidden to repeatedly invite someone to a meal when you know that he will refuse 2] It is forbidden to repeatedly offer gifts when you know that he will refuse 3] It is forbidden to appear to up a new barrel of wine (when one is actually opening it for a previous sale) unless one informs him of the real reason he has opened it [the underlying issue is that the wine will not last as long now that the barrel is open and it is a big favor to the guest, much like opening a brand new bottle of Blue Label would be nowadays] 4] It is forbidden to offer someone oil from an empty flask to anoint oneself when one knows full well that the person will refuse it. If, however, he is offering the oil to show (others – Rashi) his fondness for the person it is permitted.

We see, therefore, that geneivas daas is violated even if there is a non-financial deception. This is true in the case of dressing up Red Label in Blue Label packaging at a Kiddush or simcha.


In regard to the verse of midvar sheker tirchak stay away from a false matter, there is a three way debate as to how we understand this pasuk. The Chofetz Chaim rules in his ahavas chessed that there is an out and out prohibition to lie. This is in accordance with the view of some Rishonim. Other Rishonim hold that the verse is merely good advice, but not halacha. A third opinion holds that it is applicable to judges adjudicating law. Generally speaking, the view of the Chofetz Chaim is normative halacha.

The prohibition of deceiving, however, is a clear out and out prohibition according to all opinions. According to the Sefer Yereim and the Ritvah it is a biblical prohibition. According to the Smak the prohibition is derabanan. But all hold that it is a full blown prohibition.


The Mishna in Bava Metzia (59b) tells us that it is forbidden to mix older produce with newer produce and sell them together as one package. This is a parallel to our case, but our case is worse since in the whiskey only the inferior product is being presented. The Gemorah in Bava Metziah 60b has more cases where a seller makes animals and animal skins look newer through artificial means. These too are forbidden on account of Geneivas daas. While it is true that these cases in Bava Metziah are dealing with a sale, but if we combine this with the Braisah in Chullin then we have a parallel.

Does everyone agree to this? It would seem that it may well be a debate in the Rishonim. The Rashba in Chullin (94a) and the Rosh (Perek 18) hold that if the item is a matana, a gift – there is no prohibition of Geneivas daas. Tosfos (Chullin 94b DHM “Amar”) and the Ritva (Chullin 94b “Rav Ashi”) hold that it does apply even by a free gift. How do we understand the distinction between the cases of the braisah and the free gift according to those authorities who hold that it is not considered Geneivas daas? It would seem that since the deceiver is giving something to the person – that makes up a bit for the deception.


There are a number of other contemporary applications of this prohibition that apply according to all Rishonim. These applications apply across the board in numerous industries.


In the age of the internet, a number of people adopt other identities. While anonymity is permitted, when it is used to give off the impression that person X is really someone else – this is clear Geneivas daas. There are magazines and newspapers that do this as a matter of course, where letters to the editor are printed by an author of an article that he himself had penned.


Sometimes a newsmagazine or paper will create a false headline to get the reader to read the story. This too is a violation of Geneivas daas. It further causes the reader to waste time, if that is not what he or she would have wanted to read. In the modern internet age or on FaceBook, there is something called “Clickbait.” Headlines are designed to lure the reader into clicking and reading. This is permitted as long as there is no Geneivas daas involved.


If a company produces a product they will often be tempted to write their own reviews and post them on Amazon.com. This too would clearly be a case of geneivas daas. It falsely gives off the impression that there are more readers as well as falsely inflating up the rate of satisfaction.


There are websites and papers that falsely report their internet traffic or distribution. This too is Geneivas daas, deceiving those who think that the site receives more visitors than it actually does, or deceiving its advertisers. Falsely inflating how many issues are printed is also geneivas daas.


There is a fascinating Shaarei Teshuva (3:181) which states that the leniency of “mutar l’shanos mipnei hashalom, sometimes it is permitted to tell a white lie to maintain peace” does not apply to Geneivas daas. Geneivas daas is an important and essential value in Torah Judaism. Whether it is pouring Red Label into a Blue Label bottle, or inflating web hits, printing numbers, or using false emails to create wrong impressions, we must realize that it is a serious halachic issue that should not be ignored or trampled upon.

The author can be reached at yairhoffman2@gmail.com.

Five Towns Jewish Times

{Matzav.com Newscenter}


  1. Similar cases, are, when Rochel took the Trofim from her father and kept them, or when Yakov put dotted sticks in front of the animals so that they should give birth to dotted off-springs, or when the brothers told the father that Yosef was killed, or when Yakov bought the Bechoreh from Eisov while Eisov was in a incoherent state.

  2. Great article. However he forgot to mention a story on a website that gets people to click and forwards them to a tzedaka website.

  3. “this practice could possibly be as treif as the worm in a margarita”?! Gneivas daas of substituting inferior whiskey has absolutely nothing to do with treif or other aspects of kashrus. Hopefuly, it’s just a misprint, not a misrepresentation of halacha.