Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Judaism -> Halachic Questions and Discussions
S/O Tznius
1  2  3  Next



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

keym




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 11:55 am
This is a spin-off from all the Tznius threads going on right now.

I spoke to my DH and my rav (both RW Lakewood) about the sources for tznius and I was very interested and surprised with what they said so I wanted to post and hear comments.

The source is from Devarim "lo yirah bcha ervas davar." Literally, you should not have your nakedness seen. (It's not pshat, it's drash. Pshat is that literally you should not have feces lying around in your camps, but every soldier is required to be given a shovel to cover their fecal matter.)

Then there are various sources, mostly from shir hashirim that expand what erva is being the literal nakedness- underwear area. Kol bisha, shok bisha, saar bisha. This is also considered d'oraisa. Meaning according to the Torah, it's not enough to cover one's privates, one also has to cover a bit more. However each community and shita translates what exactly that means. for example shok. Thighs? knees to ankles? opaque? sheer? skirts? pants?
Daas yehudis is traditions that the decent women of the times used to do so it became standard to do. The example given is covering ones hair with a basket in one's courtyard.

However, the shulchan aruch tells us that everyone, man and woman is required to cover up as much as possible and as much as they should be all the time when possible. Practically, it's inappropriate according to the SA for anyone man or woman to dance around their house buck naked even if no one's home.

The next halacha is about saying kriyas shma and devarim shbikdusha facing erva (whatever you personally hold is erva). This is really the few areas when a man has a problem regarding a woman.

The last bit is about lo sasuru. A man is not allowed to be "mistakel" at a woman for the purpose of coming to aveira (hotzaas zera.) However many say it means gaze for pleasure and not merely glance. Regardless, a man has the responsibility.

I do not know of any source that says that a woman is not allowed to live here regular life for fear of a man "looking."

I'd love to hear more sources and maybe start a conversation. But if you're going to say something, especially inflammatory or controversial, please cite sources (not my kalla teacher or I heard, but real chapter and verse sources.)
Back to top

MrsDash




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:08 pm
keym wrote:
This is a spin-off from all the Tznius threads going on right now.

I spoke to my DH and my rav (both RW Lakewood) about the sources for tznius and I was very interested and surprised with what they said so I wanted to post and hear comments.

The source is from Devarim "lo yirah bcha ervas davar." Literally, you should not have your nakedness seen. (It's not pshat, it's drash. Pshat is that literally you should not have feces lying around in your camps, but every soldier is required to be given a shovel to cover their fecal matter.)

Then there are various sources, mostly from shir hashirim that expand what erva is being the literal nakedness- underwear area. Kol bisha, shok bisha, saar bisha. This is also considered d'oraisa. Meaning according to the Torah, it's not enough to cover one's privates, one also has to cover a bit more. However each community and shita translates what exactly that means. for example shok. Thighs? knees to ankles? opaque? sheer? skirts? pants?
Daas yehudis is traditions that the decent women of the times used to do so it became standard to do. The example given is covering ones hair with a basket in one's courtyard.

However, the shulchan aruch tells us that everyone, man and woman is required to cover up as much as possible and as much as they should be all the time when possible. Practically, it's inappropriate according to the SA for anyone man or woman to dance around their house buck naked even if no one's home.

The next halacha is about saying kriyas shma and devarim shbikdusha facing erva (whatever you personally hold is erva). This is really the few areas when a man has a problem regarding a woman.

The last bit is about lo sasuru. A man is not allowed to be "mistakel" at a woman for the purpose of coming to aveira (hotzaas zera.) However many say it means gaze for pleasure and not merely glance. Regardless, a man has the responsibility.

I do not know of any source that says that a woman is not allowed to live here regular life for fear of a man "looking."

I'd love to hear more sources and maybe start a conversation. But if you're going to say something, especially inflammatory or controversial, please cite sources (not my kalla teacher or I heard, but real chapter and verse sources.)


Well, I'm screwed...
Back to top

tichellady




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:21 pm
Nothing you are saying is particularly surprising to me. I do think that it's important not to confuse modesty with shame and that feeling uncomfortable being naked may lead to intimacy issues, so some balance is necessary.
Back to top

amother
Seashell


 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:22 pm
Please tell DH. I'm tired of seeing him sit around the house in the evening, wearing nothing but a t-shirt and underwear.

People look better in clothes, stam. JMHO.
Back to top

allthingsblue




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:26 pm
amother wrote:
Please tell DH. I'm tired of seeing him sit around the house in the evening, wearing nothing but a t-shirt and underwear.

People look better in clothes, stam. JMHO.


LOL
My husband is the same way. Doesn't bother me much though, and I'm sure it'll change once our kids are old enough to have friends over.
Back to top

PinkFridge




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:27 pm
keym wrote:


However, the shulchan aruch tells us that everyone, man and woman is required to cover up as much as possible and as much as they should be all the time when possible.


Thanks. It sounds like we're in similar circles. Personally, I keep with covering hair, collarbone, elbow, knees, and feet (and don't wear anklets, I wear knee socks or knee his, occasionally tights).
But re the bolded: I know you don't mean burkas but hat's what it sounds like.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:29 pm
keym wrote:
This is a spin-off from all the Tznius threads going on right now.

I spoke to my DH and my rav (both RW Lakewood) about the sources for tznius and I was very interested and surprised with what they said so I wanted to post and hear comments.

The source is from Devarim "lo yirah bcha ervas davar." Literally, you should not have your nakedness seen. (It's not pshat, it's drash. Pshat is that literally you should not have feces lying around in your camps, but every soldier is required to be given a shovel to cover their fecal matter.)

Then there are various sources, mostly from shir hashirim that expand what erva is being the literal nakedness- underwear area. Kol bisha, shok bisha, saar bisha. This is also considered d'oraisa. Meaning according to the Torah, it's not enough to cover one's privates, one also has to cover a bit more. However each community and shita translates what exactly that means. for example shok. Thighs? knees to ankles? opaque? sheer? skirts? pants?
Daas yehudis is traditions that the decent women of the times used to do so it became standard to do. The example given is covering ones hair with a basket in one's courtyard.

However, the shulchan aruch tells us that everyone, man and woman is required to cover up as much as possible and as much as they should be all the time when possible. Practically, it's inappropriate according to the SA for anyone man or woman to dance around their house buck naked even if no one's home.

The next halacha is about saying kriyas shma and devarim shbikdusha facing erva (whatever you personally hold is erva). This is really the few areas when a man has a problem regarding a woman.

The last bit is about lo sasuru. A man is not allowed to be "mistakel" at a woman for the purpose of coming to aveira (hotzaas zera.) However many say it means gaze for pleasure and not merely glance. Regardless, a man has the responsibility.

I do not know of any source that says that a woman is not allowed to live here regular life for fear of a man "looking."

I'd love to hear more sources and maybe start a conversation. But if you're going to say something, especially inflammatory or controversial, please cite sources (not my kalla teacher or I heard, but real chapter and verse sources.)


Swimming separately is completely halachically allowed. Men go to mikvah all naked all together
Back to top

Chayalle




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 12:36 pm
keym wrote:
I do not know of any source that says that a woman is not allowed to live here regular life for fear of a man "looking."

I'd love to hear more sources and maybe start a conversation. But if you're going to say something, especially inflammatory or controversial, please cite sources (not my kalla teacher or I heard, but real chapter and verse sources.)


First time I ever heard a source for that was when I was in high school - two different Gemarahs I remember.

...something like - there was the daughter of someone (don't remember) who used to pray "shelo yikashel be adam" - that no man should sin from looking at me.

This is not a Halacha that obligates the woman, though....(or I never heard it as such). Just a measure of tznius that we would not dress provocatively, so as not to cause someone else to sin.

Then there's a story of a Tana (or amorah, I don't remember) who had a very beautiful daughter. There was a man, who tried to stare at her thru a window, so the man prayed that rather she should die than cause men to sin. And she died.

I could never really relate to this one. But I think it's the source for alot of that.

Story we had once: There was a man in our neighborhood who was something of a Kanai - his family was super RW and he tried to get everyone else to follow. He knocked on our door and told us that our daughter - who was 10 at the time - was wearing dresses that were too short, he could see her knees, and "bringing down the standards of tznius in the neighborhood" (his exact words.)

Funny thing was, I had just done try-ons with my DD the previous week and all her dresses adequately covered her knees. (I do this periodically, for shopping purposes more than anything else.) So I was pretty taken aback by these accusations. We asked our Rav, whose only reaction was "he should not be looking at her knees". Period. (RW Lakewood Rav, BTW). He said we should pay no attention. So we didn't.

This particular DD happens to be rather lively and spunky, she was the tree-climbing type...Rav said not to worry about any of that, she will outgrow it. She has, and is very tzanua as a teen B"H.

My point is - don't drive yourself nuts.
Back to top

sequoia




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 1:11 pm
You're supposed to outgrow tree-climbing? 😂
Back to top

zaq




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 1:14 pm
Chayalle wrote:


Then there's a story of a Tana (or amorah, I don't remember) who had a very beautiful daughter. There was a man, who tried to stare at her thru a window, so the man prayed that rather she should die than cause men to sin. And she died.

I could never really relate to this one. But I think it's the source for alot of that.

.


And perhaps this is one of the passages in Talmud that are not to be taken literally. I would sincerely hope so. curtains and shutters are not a modern invention.

I can totally see this as an allegory with the father being the KBH, the dd is the nations of the world and the peeping Tomas is AmYisrael, although normally we would expect the beautiful dd to be Am Yisrael .

In any case, something is missing from the story. It cannot be that this is being held up as an ideal. Perhaps this is being held up as an example of where excessively zealotry and worrying about yennem more than about o es own family can lead a person. Or perhaps the man foresaw that his dd would die an ignominious death after being led horrifically astray by this voyeur and prayed that she should die before that could happen, rather than after.

You have to be careful with Gemara tales. Sometimes people cut-and-paste and tell you only the part that seems to back up whatever point they are trying to make, when the rest of the story makes quite the opposite point.
Back to top

tigerwife




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 1:19 pm
Op, I pretty much learned similarly- that tznius is more of a personal matter than a precaution against men sinning. However, I once joined a tznius group and the material was very similar to what Chayalle gave as an example. I didn't end up staying but I couldn't relate to that approach.
Back to top

Chayalle




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 1:51 pm
sequoia wrote:
You're supposed to outgrow tree-climbing? 😂


Yeah at some point. Could you imagine a Grandma stuck up in a tree?
Back to top

sequoia




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 1:54 pm
Chayalle wrote:
Yeah at some point. Could you imagine a Grandma stuck up in a tree?


I can imagine one not stuck but rather nimbly climbing down Smile

There's all kinds of grannies out there. My mom does handstands, cartwheels, and front walkovers, and she's of an age to be a grandma........
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 1:59 pm
Chayalle wrote:
Yeah at some point. Could you imagine a Grandma stuck up in a tree?


Back to top

jkl




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 2:12 pm
sequoia wrote:
I can imagine one not stuck but rather nimbly climbing down Smile

There's all kinds of grannies out there. My mom does handstands, cartwheels, and front walkovers, and she's of an age to be a grandma........



80 year old grandma on Britain's Got Talent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjHnWz3EyHs
Back to top

MagentaYenta




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 2:19 pm
Chayalle wrote:
Yeah at some point. Could you imagine a Grandma stuck up in a tree?


I briefly got stuck on the face of a 30ft waterfall last summer, is that close enough?
Back to top

tichellady




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 2:21 pm
zaq wrote:
And perhaps this is one of the passages in Talmud that are not to be taken literally. I would sincerely hope so. curtains and shutters are not a modern invention.

I can totally see this as an allegory with the father being the KBH, the dd is the nations of the world and the peeping Tomas is AmYisrael, although normally we would expect the beautiful dd to be Am Yisrael .

In any case, something is missing from the story. It cannot be that this is being held up as an ideal. Perhaps this is being held up as an example of where excessively zealotry and worrying about yennem more than about o es own family can lead a person. Or perhaps the man foresaw that his dd would die an ignominious death after being led horrifically astray by this voyeur and prayed that she should die before that could happen, rather than after.

You have to be careful with Gemara tales. Sometimes people cut-and-paste and tell you only the part that seems to back up whatever point they are trying to make, when the rest of the story makes quite the opposite point.


Agreed! There are lots of weird stories in the Gemara. We typically don't learn halakha or appropriate behavior from them ( I am thinking right now about the student who climbed under his rabbi' s bed to learn about sx by watching the rabbi and his wife )
Back to top

amother
Pewter


 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 2:23 pm
PinkFridge wrote:
Thanks. It sounds like we're in similar circles. Personally, I keep with covering hair, collarbone, elbow, knees, and feet (and don't wear anklets, I wear knee socks or knee his, occasionally tights).
But re the bolded: I know you don't mean burkas but hat's what it sounds like.


Actually, the op mentioned daas yehudis which is the inyan of dressing in the standard dress of ones community. I have heard big Rabbanim here in EY say that wearing a burka is assur and a violation of the laws of tzznius under the umbrella of daas yehudis.
Back to top

MagentaYenta




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 2:33 pm
What does the height of a foot covering have to do with tznius? The most current instruction in Crown Heights mentions shoes not being higher than ones ankles. For goodness sakes women in CH are schlepping kids and strollers all winter long what the heck is wrong with a boot?
Back to top

sequoia




 
 
    
 

Post Wed, Jul 12 2017, 2:41 pm
Omg. I live in warm, lined boots from October to May. My feet are always FREEZING. Right now in July I'm wearing two pairs of socks at home.

Someone should clarify about this because it truly makes no sense.
Back to top
Page 1 of 3 1  2  3  Next Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Judaism -> Halachic Questions and Discussions

Related Topics Replies Last Post
Anyone find tznius shells on Temu or Shein?
by amother
2 Tue, Mar 26 2024, 8:37 am View last post
Tznius exercise videos on Youtube
by amother
6 Mon, Mar 04 2024, 3:09 am View last post
Buy the skirt to help her with tznius??
by amother
28 Sun, Feb 25 2024, 10:21 pm View last post
Any tznius and affordable accounts?
by amother
1 Thu, Feb 15 2024, 8:55 pm View last post
Is it rude/not tznius to tell a man "Ima's in the shower"?
by amother
30 Wed, Feb 14 2024, 10:52 am View last post
by zaq