Torah & Judaism For Today's World
women in the Jewish perspective
Are there other orthodox Jewish women who experience feelings of inferiarity or bitterness because of the way we have to dress?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by chaya3 on -
no, Rivka Leah, you have not said anything upsetting. My previous commentary was not intended to reflect your reply. Actually, I found your comments inspiring.
-
Permalink Reply by Rabbi Joshua Waxman on
-
I look forward to seeing your evidence of this retraction, and to your explanation of why the Mishnah Berurah, who was born after the Pri Megadim's death, makes no mention of this retraction when he makes the diyuk.
-
-
To help things along, my presumption is that you are basing the Pri Megadim's retraction on his comments on Orach Chaim siman 303. I'll likely wait for you to post about it before giving my reply.
-
-
perhaps I will. does he speak English? joshwaxman is the first part of the email address, and the second part is dot yahoo dot com. I am not sure what ""Ot Ketuba Ot Tzaif" is. A reference to a siman?
The siman in Pri Megadim I referred to, he cites the opinion that it is OK to expose hair, and another opinion that the Mishna in Shabbat allowed going out only with a "tzaif." It appears that he interprets this machloket therefore as a *safek*. On the level of deRabbanan we would say lekullah, but he considers back and forth the possibility that since a Rabbinic problem invalidates kriat Shema on a deOrayta level, perhaps we should say that safek deOrayta leKulla. On the other hand, perhaps we should first evaluate it on the derabbanan level, say it is muttar, and then it presents no problem for Shema deOrayta. Thus, he does not entirely *invalidate* the opinion that going outdoors with exposed wig is permitted. It is an application of *other* principles after this initial setup, perhaps even only to forbid Shema opposite an exposed wig.
But let us say for a moment that we accept Pri Megadim's statement there as a retraction. He was not the only one saying this.
That is, instead of saying Mishnah Berura based on the Pri Megadim, I could have said (and say this now):
Rema in Darkei Moshe cites the Hagahot Alfasi heChadashim that it is permitted to go out to the public domain in an uncovered wig, composed either of their own hair or of their friend's hair. And he cites this also in context of allowing Shema opposite it.
See Rema in Darkei Moshe on the Tur, siman 303.
Indeed, Pri Megadim was basing himself on this opinion, and thus it was not (as suggested above) just the Mishnah Berurah's diyuk in the Pri Megadim.
Furthermore, Rema did not retract. Nor did Hagahot Alfasi heChadashim (I believe = Riaz, a 13th century source often quoted in Shiltei Giborim on the Rif) retract. Neither did the Chafetz Chaim (Mishnah Berurah) retract.
And Rav Moshe said in that teshuva I mentioned in Igros Moshe that we rely on the Rema about allowing exposed wig.
-
Permalink Reply by Rivka Leah on
-
who are the gedolei yisroel that are recommending that women burn their clothing? and what is wrong with wearing a cotton top?
-
Permalink Reply by Baruch Meir on
-
Thank you, Rivka Leah. I was waiting to see who might ask who the gedolei Yisroel are.
YerushalayimIrHakodesh, even though I generally agree with taking a stricter position with respect to tznius issues, I would not personally accept the message you've provided, unless the supporters are named. This is a standard practice. And, unfortunately, sometimes it's even necessary to verify the sources.
There have been too many anonomous statements made that have been proven false, claiming un-named gedolei Yisroel as supporters. It would be especially important to provide the sources when the message is as demanding as the one you have provided.
Please understand that I am not saying your message isn't valid. I'm merely explaining the need for sources so those who question it can verify it for themselves or see if the sources are ones they accept or follow. As you know, there are many pathways to the Truth.
-
-
YerushalayimIrHakodesh, your devotion is commendable, however, it is considered a merit in Torah to attribute information to its originator. Not to do so is considered an aveira by some. On several occasions you have expressed that you are not allowed to say where or who the information is from. I believe that in these cases, this is wrong.
Even though I lean toward the stricter viewpoints, including several of the ones you have supported, I must make it clear that I cannot accept undocumented information that I can not verify, nor from someone I do not know, even if I may agree with it. Even if you and your source are 100% reliable, I wouldn't expect anyone to blindly accept and follow what you are presenting.
That there are "seforim out there that have Hakomos and that means 0 they are worh nothing" is true. Yes, often it is not from a person(s) we would choose to follow, but at least we have the ability to see who's supporting something in order to make our decision. And, that you say there are haskomos but refuse to reveal them, simply makes the statements less credible and not more. Torah is not to be hidden away for only the very few secret believers.
You are not asking people to taste something and if they don't like it, stop eating it. You are telling people to make significant changes in their life based on your say so.
I'm sure that you are an honorable person, however, I suggest that you go to your source, show them my response and report back with their reply. If you can not do, at least that, then I must take extreme caution in what you say and treat it as your personal opinion, at best. Even if I agreed with you, I would not repeat what you write in support of anything I might say.
Again, whether I agree or disagree with you is not the point. Proper learning is to be backed up with credible sources. We have no prophets today, so we must know clearly, what and who we follow.
-
-
Why can't you say? surely the Rebbeim would want their names to be publicized if it is emes.
-
-
Baruch Meir, I did n't see your post before i posted - sorry for redundancies.
-
-
Just a quick interjection:
I disagree with the content of the letter for various reasons (which I may be tempted to get into).
However, I believe that a careful reading of the letter will reveal that it does *not* really claim that the anonymous Gedolim are telling women to burn their clothing.
Rather, there is only a single claim as to what the Gedolim said: "The Gedolei Yisroel have called upon married women and young girls to increase their level of צניעות in order to merit ` ה's miraculous protection of כנסת ישראל." You probably can find one or two named Gedolim who have said this publicly.
However, it continues:
"In light of the call of Gedolei Yisroel to women and girls to increase their צניעות ,each woman and girl is being requested..."
and
"The date of the great bonfire will be released shortly, but you can start immediately to carry out the Gedolim's request to make changes to increase your level of צניעות"
and so on.
That is, whichever anonymous people authored the letter are *interpreting* the Gedolim's call from greater tznius as matching these particular requirements, such as eliminating straight skirts, etc., and furthermore interpreting a public bonfire as in line with the Gedolim's call.
It is written, I think, in an *accidentally* misleading way, such that it seems to some casual observers that the Gedolim are the ones calling for these particular changes and prohibitions, are interpreting this particular Rashi, are calling for a public bonfire.
-
-
1. well, it not only says to get rid of the clothing/wigs but also to publicly burn them. I know that many in chareidi circles thought that the last burning (of wigs, by the Indian hair scare) was a big kiddush Hashem, but you should know that was not how it was received in the secular Jewish as well as non-Jewish press. Any type of public burning of this type is associated mentally with the intolerance of book-burning (such as burning of the Talmud but other book burnings as well). And relatedly, many saw the burning of expensive wigs (sometimes worth thousands of dollars) as tremendous Bal Tashchis, and asked in articles why they were not donated to cancer foundations, who stated (and were quoted in the same articles) that they would gladly have accepted the wigs. Now, there may be a defense for why wigs which are takrovet avoda zara could *not* be so donated (as I argued at the time, adopting for the purpose of the argument they actually were takrovet avoda zara), because of issues of lo techanem and tovat hanaah.
Still, what one may consider a kiddush Hashem may in fact be a great chillul Hashem. Therefore, it would be nice to get haskamot of Gedolim informed of the possible repercussions one way or another before taking such a public step.
2. Secondly, it is not at all clear that each of the items listed should actually be considered "non-tzniusdik" clothing. Certainly within some groups, it would indeed be so. But not in others. Let us ignore the issue of sheitels. Another item listed as categorically untzniusdik was sheer stockings. But it would seem that according to some major opinions, they would not be considered categorically untzniusdik. (They might still be so for specific communities though.) For example, Rav Moshe Feinstein based on the Mishna Brura.
See this post on my blog for elaboration on this point, where I have scans of the relevant Igros Moshe:
http://parsha.blogspot.com/2007/10/rav-moshe-feinstein-on-stockings...
This is not in the same class as whether to eat a bagel or an onion roll. And the specifics of what standards of tznius to adopt (is such should really be applied across the board) is something I would like seen stated by a gadol or rabbi, before taking action.
Certainly, there may well be merit within each local standard of tznius to make sure one conforms and does not stretch the bounds of propriety, and to act in a tzanua manner. Which may well fit with what was attributed to the Gadolim in the very beginning of the letter. It is the extrapolation and the specifics which are more problematic.
-
Permalink Reply by Aryeh Leib on -
I asked my wife that question, she said that by dressing modestly she feels that she is an emessary of Hashem. A woman who dresses in a modest way brings out a tremendous kiddish Hashem. Women can dress in the style she likes, it just has to be fitting for a daughter of the King.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Follow Us
Subscribe by Email 
The Global Yeshiva on Facebook
The Global Yeshiva was created by Rav Mitterhoff
Tell A Friend
© 2010 Created by Rav Mitterhoff
