Natural-Hair Sheitels Are Assur

are the people here that are defending the halachik right to wear sheitels also saying that there isn’t a problem with the sheitels being worn today – (specifically those more than halfway down the back, skin colored parts, falls exposing the very front hairline)?

“Rav Ovadiah permitted Agunahs to remarry. Rav Ovadiah permitted the sale of Holy Land during Shmitta. Rav Ovadiah halachically permitted Oslo. Arguably, No Sage over the last several hundred years ever ruled as leniently ”

Hmm I don’t know how you came to that conclusion – Agunahs have always been a source of seeking Kulahs throughout the ages by ALL poskim. As for Heter Mechira, I would rather not comment. Same with Oslo.

I will say one thing, sorry, the Heter on Pe’ah Nuchris is much clearer and leKatchila than the Heter Mechira..

Gaon – <“I will quote soon the Poskim in those times, in regard to Russia Czarist. Yes – the fact was that it did prompt that most Charedi women opted to go uncovered. Not everyone was able to afford a wig.

Other customs were banished as well due to the Gezeros, e.g. there were many places were married women shaved their heads, the Netziv speaks about it Emek Shailah – it all came to an end then.

I think only some Hungarian chasidim still do that…”>

Why haven’t we returned to the hair covering customs that the Russian government gezeiros stopped us from continuing, now that the government gezeiros are no longer enforced against us?

and if indeed the woman’s wig hadn’t looked so natural, then perhaps nobody would have presumed she wasn’t covered in the first place.

Yet, it was muttar.

Why haven’t we returned to the hair covering customs that the Russian government gezeiros stopped us from continuing, now that the government gezeiros are no longer enforced against us?

If you’re a woman, and you want to, go ahead. As it is, it’s muttar l’chatchilah according to some of our biggest poskim, and R’ Moshe writes that a man cannot insist that his wife not wear a shaitel.

A bit older. How’s that relevant?

Because I think you have no idea what shaitels looked like several decades ago, and you’re lying when you say you do, just as you are about your age.

Who told you this? What makes you assume that’s reliable information?

Any woman I’ve ever heard discuss it says they can tell.

As you know, there are a multitude of shittos on this issue. I presume you aren’t suggesting we disregard others.

No, you are the one of those suggesting we disregard the mainstream shittah. If a woman wants to be machmir, I have no problem with that.

?? so if you ask me if my snack is kosher I should answer that my coworkers snack isn’t kosher either?

If the entirety of my answer was that other articles of clothing could also be untzniusdik, perhaps you’d have a valid point.

BTW, if I’m wrong about real looking shaitels being rare, that just means that there’s even less of a problem of maris ayin, and less of a problem of das Yehudis.

Rav Ovadiah proved in his teshuva that the Shiltei Givorim is talking about a chatzer as a private courtyard. Not a public place. If you bothered to read it, you would understand why.

Everyone is going around in circles. Bh Rav Ovadia Yosef clarifed this topic for Sephardim- hair on top of hair halachically assur and immodest (and illogical). This is even more obvious today when the wigs are much nicer than ones own hair- so even if a heter was given for a wig many years ago it would not be applicable today

“I don’t see why the rest of what I wrote changes or detracts from that.”

because you said “but”

and (as usual) the more you dissect it the harder it will be to retain either what you actually said, or what I actually referenced so I’m not playing along.

Dissect? Where do frogs come into this?

I stand by what I wrote, and I think the disclaimer was important, because I don’t necessarily think that not wearing a shaitel is going to avoid the slippery slope issue.

I know you haven’t read the whole thread, but some have seemingly argued that nobody should wear any shaitels because some shaitels are not tzniusdik.

“I stand by what I wrote”

so does PETA, global warming activists, tinfoil hat people, UFO sighters, open orthodox…therefore what?

😆

The entire mitzvah is about modesty-

Rav Moshe Feinstein was probably unaware of this.

And for those that asked for the history of how sheitels became the accepted “custom” in frum circles:
The custom of wearing wigs in “reshut harabim” (i.e. on the street) appeared about 150 years ago due to the decree of the Russian Tsar for Jews to change their attire:
Aruch HaShulchan Ohr hAChaim 551:11: “in our time – because of the order of the authorities we have changed the dress code” – and Jewish women were forced to walk bare-headed – the idea was thought of and promoted to the Tsar by the renegade Jews (maskilim).
Rav Shlomo Kluger (in the book Shnot Chaim 316): “There was a “gzera” in Russia (an order decreed by the authorities) to go bare-headed – and in our time many walk that way deliberately.” I.e.: first, there was a “gzera”; afterwards this “tradition” spread from city to city and from country to country, from Russia to Europe. Unfortunately, even the wives of Rabbis walked with uncovered head.
Attempts to justify (already after the gzera was canceled) that this “tradition” is contrary to the Torah brought no results – see Aruch HaShulchan 75:7, Kaf HaChaim 75.
Righteous Jewish women could not walk in a kerchief during the gzera, as expected by the Torah law, but did not want to walk bare-headed – so they had chosen the lesser of two evils – wearing a wig. But they intentionally made their wigs such that they did not attract attention, not like today’s wigs, which are more beautiful than one’s own hair.
Is this the tradition that we should continue?

This is the translation of a letter written by a top talmud of Rav Elyashiv zt”l:
(Opening paragraph praises those who have raised the topic of today’s wigs, which is described as pritzut and a gateway to sin).
“Many times, we heard from Rav Elyashiv zt”l, how pained he was by this great breach, and how much he encouraged Jewish women to go with a mitpachat, which he considered “Glatt”, because even the old wigs, were a matter of controversy among the poskim, and from then on to today, the Yetzer Hara has not rested to produce different styles of wigs, the common denominator of which is to stimulate the Yetzer Hara and cause the men of Israel to sin, and it is a double obligation for us to cast aside this pritzut, and for sure anyone who is a Ben Torah– Heaven forbid that he should be lenient in this matter–
and let this be the first stringency that he takes upon himself, especially as (today’s wigs) can create a Michshol for the Rabbim (a pitfall for the masses). And “Ashrei” (fortunate/blessed) is one who separates
himself and who REFUSES to allow today’s wigs into his home. And in this merit, he will merit children who are Talmidei Chachamim and Tzaddikim…

And on this I have come to sign
(Rabbi) Moshe Mordechai Karp

I’m not really sure what that’s supposed to mean

slonimer
שמא יחזור דבר לקלקולו
Seriously though that isnt how mesora is practiced. We dont dig up what was done 150 years ago and mimic that. We do what our religous parents did. they wore sheitels, their poskim held they were allowed we do the same. why did htis change who knows maybe because 150 years ago there was soem gezeira. And I do find it fascinating to study how customs/practice s change, but on practical halacha this doesnt come into play.

As an aside this is why I eat Turkey, my parents were frum and they ate turkey they copied their parents. True at soem point one of my ancestors started eating turkey without a clear mesora, and that is an interesting historical tidbit. MAybe he has to give a din vechesbon on what right he had to eat it. But that doesn’t change today’s practice. (The Netziv says this regarding Turkey)

DM
“All this back and forth comes from a lack of understanding of the purpose of the mitzvah of kisui rosh”
Ok So R’ Moshe didnt understand the purpose of the Mitzva. Nonetheless, as I told you when you used this same argument that a proffessor didnt see the logic, then Baalei Teshuva to whom this doesnt make sense and now it is anybody who points out that you are mistaken (interesting progression btw)
When in fact it is you who are mistaken. That isnt how halacha is decided.
for example when the torah says “לא תקפו פאת ראשכם ולא תשחית את פאת זקנך ” chazal teach us that if not done with a תער/razor it is nt assur. thsi might not be logical to your profesor friend, it might confuse baalei teshuva, and you can argue shaving with sam or scissiors undermines the reason for the issur. You’d of course be wrong.
Again we are not discussing extra-halachic reasons to avoid sheitel (or shaving) whether based on kabbala or extra hiddur. Halachicly sheitels are muttar as has been demonstrated to you repeatedly no matter how illogical you findthe distinction

In regards to all אחרונים ופוסקים that the above Yabia Omer compiled – opposing pe’ah nuchris vs Matirim -there are two points we need to know.

a) One point, which I heard from a Posek Gadol, the fact that there are X amount of Later Poskim that wrote Teshuvot against it and X supporting – comparing them is really an insufficient way of determining anything. For a very simple reason; in the places where they did go, there was no need for any Posek to actually pen it in writing ‘supporting’ it, as it has already been permitted by all our founding Poskim i.e.:
, רמ”א, שט”ג, מגן אברהם, לבוש, פרישה, אליה רבה, פמ”ג, “שו”ע הרב, מחצית השקל, באר היטב, ביאור הגר”א
and later….. משנ”ב, כף החיים…

Therefore, the true amount of Poskim that really support it cannot be determined by anything, and the ones that wrote in support happen to have been the ones that were covering those Simanim in Shulchan Aruch. Rather, the ones opposing were the ONLY ones that really opposed it (for various diff reasons – see next) – all the rest agreed, as the final above Psak Din.

b) Another point we need to examine is, the ones that did oppose it, was it since that was the Minhag at the time, and thus going with any pe’ah nuchris was a breach in Das Yehudit, and that is the very reason they opposed or not. Would these very poskim permit it once there is a change in the actual Minhag, or doesn’t it really matter? If yes – then most of the ones that are quoted as אוסרים are really irrelevant.

– to be cont. –

Dancing,

You keep on going in circles:
“Rav Ovadiah proved in his teshuva that the Shiltei Givorim is talking about a chatzer as a private courtyard. Not a public place. If you bothered to read it, you would understand why”.

“it is clear from their findings that the Shiltei Giborim was referring to the wearing of a wig in the חצר – the courtyard, where other men were usually not prevalent.”

(I will re-post)

Explain – as per your above Peshat in the SH”G (that it’s only pertaining to the courtyard) – what exactly was the opposition of the Be’er Sheva?

I will quote part of the opposing words of the Be’er Sheva Ch 18:

“ואפילו זכר לדבר ליכא להתיר לנשים נשואות לצאת בפאה נכרית מגולה בשוק או בחצר דבקעי ביה רבים כמו שעלה על דעת החכם הנזכר מפני שאפשר לפרש דמה ששנו היתר להתקשט ולצאת בפאה נכרית מיירי דוקא בחצר שאין הרבים בוקעין בו וא”כ בחנם טרח כל הטורח הזה החכם הנזכר דהא אפילו בשערות ראשה ממש מגולות מותר לה לילך בחצר שאין הרבים בוקעין בו ואינו אסור אפי’ משום דת יהודית דהיינו מנהג הצניעות שנהגו בנות ישראל
“ואין להקשות היאך אפשר לפרש הא דתנן יוצאה אשה בכבול ובפאה נכרית בחצר דמיירי דוקא בחצר שאין הרבים בוקעין בו

I.e. The very pshat that we are speaking about i.e. a “Courtyard” is exactly the pshat how the Be’er Shva is disputing the very Mishna the Sht”G based his psak on!

Please relate to that “Talmid Chacham to look up the entire responsum of the Be’er Sheva, and you will see that pshat holds no ground.

Also, the Rema in דרכי משה סי’ ש”ג is specifically talking about Reshus haRabim and so is the Magen Avrohom and SM”A and PRM”G and Mogen Giborim.

See sefer Magen Giborim Ch 71 that he answered all Be’er Sheva’s questions.

Fascinated by a 5 page thread largely populated by men, discussing the woman’s obligation of kissui rosh.

What’s even worse is that almost all of the teshuvos written (except for the one written by dancingmom’s chashuva rebbetzin) were written by men.

I see. So apparently the gentlemen hear discussing vital issues such as sheitels consider this part of their learning, like learning halacha. I wonder if any of them are putting out shu”t sefarim. I’ll look for them in my local Judaica store.

@slominer:
In this post, you told me that my tale of scarves –> uncovered –> shaitels was about America. Return to the post and read it again. I was talking about Europe. Ruchoma Shain records how in Mir, Poland (located in Europe) the majority of women did not cover their hair. The progression I described occurred in Europe.

zaltzvasser – We’ve established that the Czar forced Jewish women to stop covering their hair and had the Russian police beat women caught in the street with their hair covered. Poland and Lithuania were under Russian jurisdiction. So this regression to uncovered hair was due to the Christian authorities violently forcing them to go uncovered. Or at best a wig that looked similar to hair but without the Maftachos that Jewish women had the minhag of wearing.

So you can’t really fault them being they were beaten into submission by the police. Nor can that unfortunate period be used as an example of anything, especially the righteous way.

Gaon – I’d be interested in hearing your feedback on the points I made in my previous five or so comments above.

zaltzvasser – Russian rule of Poland and Lithuania began in the 1700s and ended in the 1900s. You couldn’t possibly expect that after over 100 years of oppressive Czarist anti-Jewish rule that all the women would suddenly start covering their hair again properly as soon as the Russians were kicked out.

Mir was part of the Russian Empire until 1920. And it became part of Russia (USSR) again in 1939. Mir was only part of Poland between 1920 and 1939. There was no country Poland for over a hundred years until 1920. Rebt. Shain went there only eleven years after the Russians left and she left Mir just two years before the Russians took it over again. Just a few short years after the Russians left for only a brief period, it isn’t reasonable to have expected everyone to have adjusted from a hundred plus years of oppressive religious rule.

The Czarist gezeira is a known reality that isn’t under dispute. I believe even the fact that bochorim in Mir were clean shaven was a result of the after-effects of the gezeiros. Prior to the gezeiros frum Jewish men in Russia/Lithuania/Poland (non-Chasidic) had beards, kapotes and long sidecurls. And the frum women wore tichels. The Russian government effectively changed all that.

My question (note that I’m not here claiming anyone needs to change anything) is if the change was forced upon us by the Russian Czar, once we are free from his yoke, why haven’t the kehilos from the Russian/Lithuanian/Polish areas that changed minhagim due to these gezeiros returned to their traditional minhagim vis-a-vis head covering for women and kapotes and beards for men.

That’s the question I’m trying to understand.

Again, the wigs that were worn for hundreds of years looked nothing like todays wigs. I think I posted enough sourced info to show that Jewish women cover their hair for modesty (why is this even a debate??). Most of the wigs today are not modest, they look just like one’s own hair and usually nuch nicer which is defeating the purpose of the mitzvah.
Jewish women are not covering their hair to look married, they are covering their hair to increase their modesty level- which is not happening with todays sheitels. The maaris ayin issue is not relevant
My point is not to argue assur/ mutar (although there is much to debate about on that). My point is that many current Gedolei Hador who knew what the more recent wigs looked like stated that the wigs of today are not modest. One example of many:
From מצות כיסוי שערות by Rabbi Pesach Elyiyahu Falk,
“The present day Geolei HaPoskim have similarly stated that it is assur and wholly incorrect for a sheitel to be made to simulate the maiden appearance of a woman. In a proclomation from year 5750 a central paragraph reads as follows:
פאה היא כיסוי לשיער ראשה של האשה, במה דברים אמורים שאכן ניתן להבחין בה שהיא פאה. אך אלו נראת כמראה שיער טבעי לחלוטין לא נוכל לכנותה בשם כיסוי שיער הראש. ובחבישת פאה זו היא מחשילה כל רואיה באיסורים חמורים
“The sheitel is intended as a covering for the woman’s hair. It can be considered as such only when it can be recognized as a sheitel. if it looks like natural hair, it cannot be considered to screen off what is supposed to be hidden. By wearing such a sheitel the wearer ensnares those who see her in very serious issurim.”
HaGaon HaRav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, HaGaon HaRav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, HaGaon HaRav Shmuel Halevi Wosner and HaGaon HaRav Nissim Karelitz. (page 12)