- This topic has 108 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
Been noticing comments popping up on other threads regarding this “issue”. I’m curious to see what people are saying to claim these sheitels are assur. So long as the hair hasn’t any previous use for practices of Avodah Zara I don’t see why there is a problem. My wife personally has two we paid a high price for and she is very happy to perform the mitzvah of covering her hair.
There was an article on this topic from R’ Yair Hoffman he lists the different opinions on this topic.
Tznius has gone out the window in many places.
The problem is that hair is considered ערוה and if you can see the hair even though it’s “covered” it’s a problem
It’s like wearing a sheer article of clothing where that place is something that’s supposed to be covered
All sheitels should be ‘noheg bahen isur’
Aside from the fact they are cheating giluy rosh, they just look ridiculous and gaudy. They do not look nice or ‘normal’ unless you’re trying to dress like the 19th century.
The only ones that look nice and fashionable are the really expensive ones. Like the ones that people use for professional modeling and cosmetic commercials. Those cost several thousand dollars and are meant to flaunt beauty and draw attention.
So either someone is wearing a wig for pritzus or else they look ridiculous and 100 years old.
Shana tova!
This is what’s important to Jews in 2021?
Yabia: Why do you follow the Christian calendar? We Jews are in year 5781. You are far far behind.
coffee addict, hair is not an erva but hirhur, as you can look away from it to daven.
Reb eliezer
So someone that wears a see through cover is no different than uncovered, correct?
Reb Eliezer; you can turn away (if totally) from any ervah if you’re stuck, though it’s bedieved. Some hold that regilus, being accustomed to uncovered hair, would make a difference – that’s the aruch hashulchan, referenced by rav moshe as “kvar horah bo zaken”, but almost every other posek argued with this and said rhat it’s stam an ervah like anything else.
But of course the aruch hashulchan starts out his piece by saying “by our great sins most women do not cocer their hair”, indeed it was part of the haskalah driven sinfulness that was enveloping pre war yiddishkeit in Europe
How many men can differentiate between a lace shaitel, a non lace one, a synthetic one or even uncovered hair? It takes a frum woman to spot these things.
My Rov laid out the issue beautifully, and although I am incapable of repeating it like he said it, here’s the basics. There are 2 different inyanim of tznius. One is the D’oraysah factor, that is, to cover the hair, and for that a lace shaitel suffices 100%. However there is a another category of tznius, which is from Das Yehudis. This says that one not only should be tznius, but to be more tzanoa than the umos haolam, and it should be noticeable. For this, perhaps a lace shaitel would be insufficient. Now he did say that to be clear, he is NOT saying straight up that a lace is Assur. And if someone asks for a mikkur that’s it’s Assur, he wouldn’t necessarily have one per se. But to answer the common question “but it’s covering all the hair so why not” here you have it. And he wouldn’t recommend someone wear it.
The Rov also suggested that perhaps those in the past who held a shaitel is Assur, would hold that’s it’s now mutter. Because in the past, everyone wore wigs, and therefore shaitels didn’t satisfy daas yehudis. But today, being that that is not the case daas yehudis is satisfied with a shaitel. I hope I didn’t completely botch up the way he said it….
Yaakov: Can you tell the difference between someone wearing a sheitel versus someone bareheaded?
There is a machlokes between the Beer Sheva and the Shiltei Hagiborim. The Beer Sheva assers a wig. If the wig looks like hair there is no erva but there is hirhur.
According to the Aruch Hashulchan 75, based on the Levush, we become accustomed, si there is no hirhur, but the BM argues, what happens until getting accustomed?
Should be above, so there is, no hirhur, but the MB argues, what happens until getting accustomed?
The lace is parted and the lace is not lined, therefore you can see the woman’s real hair beneath the lace sheitel.
Hence, this sheitel doesn’t fully cover her hair.
@ujm, dont look at women so you wont be nichel
CS, the women don’t have to cover their hair on the street because the man don’t have to look.
> what happens until getting accustomed?
until you are accustomed, you are presumably still a kid, unless you grew up under Talibs.
The lace is parted and the lace is not lined, therefore you can see the woman’s real hair beneath the lace sheitel.
Hence, this sheitel doesn’t fully cover her hair. Lace wigs aren’t different than walking in the street bareheaded.
Almost unfailingly, every time tznius is discussed there are some people who mindlessly resort to the refrain of “just don’t look!”. Disregarding all tenets of lifnei iver, and responsibility that women have not be walking stumbling blocks for men, this sentiment is the battle cry of the miseducated and the excuse for wholesale abrogation of halacha. When personal feelings enter halachik conversations, the results are a hysterical cacophony of comfortable preconceived notions mixed with a stubborn rejection of rationality and evidence.
A frum woman wearing a lace wig is being totally hypocritical. Everyone with a half a brain knows that all Rabbis whose opinions are used as sources to allow women to wear wigs would absolutely not approve of lace wigs and very long wigs ( and even just simply long wigs) to be worn in public.For anyone doubting me how about getting familiar with how the wigs in previous generations looked like on which the rabbonim paskened on and then decide whether we are talking about the same kind of wigs- someone would have to be completely dishonest to say, yes, the lace wigs of todag looks like the wigs from 20-30 years ago, never mind from 100 years ago to 2000 years ago…the lace wigs would 100% be assured by these authors of the sources they are relying upon.
I will not opine on the specifics. Ask your LOR.
This was alluded to in an earlier comment, and I may be adding nothing except for vocabulary that may make the issue more clear.
Tznius involves two issues. One is halacha. There are varying opinions on several tznius matters that address basic halacha. Is the forearm considered ervah – do elbow length sleeves suffice? This is addressed by poskim. The second issue is the value aspect. Halacha does not proscribe bright red dresses. However, the eye catching colors are provacative. This becomes a violation of the value aspect. Again, I turn to poskim with the erudition and expertise to render rulings on all of this. But our discussion will be enhanced if we are clear about what is clear halacha and what is the spirit of the law.
And, as was noted in an earlier comment, certain shaitels might be more appealing. But is that what Bnos Yisroel should be wearing? I suggest we address the question, and reach the conclusion after careful deliberation. Let us not decide that we want a certain psak, and then engage in the discussion to justify it.
Avira > mindlessly resort to the refrain of “just don’t look!”
I agree. This is a bigger issue – we all need to consider first how we behave towards other people. Beitza 10 (daf yomi) and also Bava Basra – you can take the dove if dist <= 50 amos to the nearest house. Judge Menahem Elon explains that the goal is to have simple rules that every simple farmer can apply in order to make sure he is stealing someone else’s dove, rather than taking the dove and saying “sue meif you can prove it is yours” to the neighbor
> Can you tell the difference between someone wearing a sheitel versus someone bareheaded?
exactly, the sheitel turns out to be lifnei ever, as some need to make sure they can daven and have to get too close to the ladies to ascertain that the lady has a sheitel and not hair on. So, no sheitels at least until the end of Covid for everyone’s good.
A frum woman wearing a lace wig is being totally hypocritical. Everyone with a half a brain knows that all Rabbis whose opinions are used as sources to allow women to wear wigs would absolutely not approve of lace wigs
Just so happens that there are some choshuv poskim who don’t think lace shaitels are assur.
I hope you are willing to retract that anyone who thinks that way has less than half a brain.
No one has still addressed the real outright halachic issue that the lace is parted and the lace is not lined, therefore you can see the woman’s real hair beneath the lace wig. Therefore, this wig doesn’t fully cover the hair.
How’s a lace wig different than going in public with uncovered hair?
DaasYochid, who are the chushiva poskim who don’t think lace shaitels are assur?
it may depend not only whom you are asking but who is asking.
here is an example: my daughters were not sure whether a particular separation in an outdoors shul was OK, I asked a “hoshuva Rav”, who was sitting nearby and is pretty strict himself, whether this is OK. He looked back, shrugged and said – “they can stand there, if they are ok with this”. I said – “they are not ok with this”. He said “then, they should not stand there”. You may get a similar answer with the shaitel.
would this depend on woman’s height? If she is taller than an average Yid in shul (shoes included), then shuold be concerned that someone needs to stand on a chair and see her hair from the top?
AAQ, this is an argument between Rashi and the Rambam according to the understanding of RMF ztz’l. Rash says in Sukkah that the mechitza is for shelo yisarvu, not mixing whereas the Rambam on the mishnayus says shelo yistaklu, not to look or stare. Rashi could be is not arguing but emphazing the main reason for not looking.
According to R’ Moshe ztz’l it is not a problem as the mechitza is for separation and not for looking.
AAQ and reb Eliezer; I disagree with the shakla vetaryah here, because the poskim say that outdoor or various other temporary minyonim do not require a mechitzah m’ikar hadin. This is very nogaya when davening in a bais ovel or an airport, or any other place where putting up a mechita isn’t practical. I understand the rov’s reply to have had that in mind, and that it is indeed dependent on an individual’s sensitivity in such a case, not that he was getting involved in the machlokes between rav moshe and the satmar rov regarding the ikkar taam for mechitzah.
That being said, I don’t think it has any bearing on the outlook we should have regarding kashrus of a given shaitel or any other tznius issue
That is a total lie. Whether it’s a לאו or an עשה or a דרבנן (דת יהודית) might have various opinions, but it’s a real הלכה.
See אג”מ אהע”ז ח”ב י”ב who says it’s an עשה but says it’s to be צנועה.
https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=918&pgnum=325
(It’s pretty clear to many, btw, that he would be mattir these shaitels as long as the hair is covered, even if they look realistic.)
Covering hair is das yehudis which gets divorced without a kesuva not erva but hirhur and girls are no hirhur, or not to make her ugly.
If erva it is covered but hirhur is a problem when it looks like hair, but you can look aside when davening.Are we affected by environment on these issues? for example, would anyone use lace ir non-lace sheitel in today’s Kabul? Presumably, Taliban would be OK with Jewish women following our own halakha .. If yes, whom would they ask
It says upora es rosh hoisha, uncover her hair by sota, so normally it is covered.
I think the mods need to go nuclear and remove that post; an open halacha as codified by chazal and rishonim is not a fashionable decision like a hat… that’s really disgusting.
And, still, no one has an answer to the issue that the woman’s real hair is publicly visible under the lace wig.
He isn’t the first or only non-Orthodox to post here.
Chaim Shulem, see Kesuvas (72,1) as I mentioned above where the hair, if completely uncovered, is assur min hatorah, biblically forbidden, the proof is from sota where a married woman’s hair is being uncovered. A shetel is an argument between the Beer Sheva and the Shiltei Hagiborim as I mentioned above. There is an interesting sefer on this topic called Hakeser Vehakavod Lechai Alomim where the talmidim quote their rebbi’s views with their pictures.
On ben Peles was saved by his wife at the incident with Korach. She set outside with uncovered hair. so the people trying to catch him refrained from entering.
Reb Eliezer, which demonstrates you’re not allowed to be near a married woman whose hair is uncovered. (Including a lace wig, which her real hair is publicly visible under the lace.)
DaasYochid: There’s an outstanding question for you from Philosopher.
Many people line their lace tops and they are not see through. And still all the ads saying they are assur specify that even the lined ones are not okay.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.