[Avodah] Rav Shimon Schwab on how Jewish women should dress

[Chana Luntz]

RYL quotes R' Shimon Schwarb as saying:

>   In general, from Yeshayahu's rebuke of Jewish women's flaunting of
> their clothing, jewelry, and beauty enhancements, it is quite clear
> that such mode of behavior is highly unbecoming a Jewish woman. A
> Jewish woman should present herself not merely as a "woman," but
> rather, as a human being with a tzelem Elokim, who belongs to the
> Jewish nation, and is possessed of a neshamah that is holy - who
> happens to be a woman. To emphasize the other aspects of the person
> means that one forgets the main idea of what it means to be a tzelem
> Elokim.
> 
> Unfortunately, in our times, showy dressing, and cosmetic and beauty
> enhancement have become normal and acceptable behavior. Even very
> "frum" girls and women dress and beautify themselves in a way that is
> designed to attract attention to themselves as women. This is a
> non-Jewish practice; it is a new phenomenon that was unheard of in
> religious circles in Europe - certainly not in my time there.
> Unfortunately, though, it is very difficult to change this now
> because it has taken root in our culture, and certainly if it is done
> in moderation and in good taste, it is difficult to criticize.
> 
>   Once a Jewish woman is aware of her greatness, of her holiness, of
> what she really is, she does not emphasize and flaunt her
> femininity.  Although we have many references to women's beauty in
> the Torah in connection with the Matriarchs, Sara, Rivka, and Rachel,
> such beauty always corresponded to and complemented their inner beauty.

I do have to say that I find RSS's approach somewhat puzzling in the light
of Chazal though. One of the ten takanos of Ezra listed in Baba Kama 82a was
that peddlers should go from city to city for the sake of women's adornments
(tachshitei nashim, which Rashi explains as besamim - ie perfumes and
cosmetics).  The gemora explains on Baba Basra 22a that this was so that
such adornments would be readily available to the Bnos Yisroel, and on Baba
Kama 82b that this was so that they not become repulsive to their husbands.
And indeed, one of the financial obligations of a husband enumerated in the
Mishna in Kesubos (66b) was to set aside money for "her basket".  And what,
the gemora asks further on daf 66b - is her basket?  - Besamim!- ie perfumes
and cosmetics.  And further, it would seem from Kesuvos 48a that the Beis
Din is empowered, in the absence of a husband, to go down onto his property
in order to provide sustenance for his wife, such sustenance to include a
required provision for adornments  (tachshitim - again Rashi, besamim)
because it can be assumed that he would not be happy to have his wife become
repulsive.  And should a woman swear a neder that she will refuse to adorn
herself, and if she did adorn herself, she should be forbidden to her
husband, the Chachamim provided that she should be divorced immediately and
given her kesuba, because it could not be expected that in fact she should
not adorn herself because then she will be called repulsive (Kesubos 71(b)).


And further the gemora in Shabbas 64b explains that the Chachamim originally
said that a woman in nida should not use "kchol" (Rashi explains, a form of
eye make-up), or "tifkus" (Rashi explains, a form of rouge) nor wear
colourful clothing, until Rabbi Akiva came and taught, if so you will make
her repulsive to her husband, and he will divorce her (ie that even in a
state of nida she should do all these things).  

In addition, the Mishna in Moed Katan states that a woman may make her
adornments (tachshiteha) on Chol Hamoed, and the gemora on Moed Katan 9b
explains the adornments about which there is no disagreement as being: (a)
kocheles (eye paint); (b) pokeses (which Rashi here explains as parting her
hair, although on Kesubos 4b and other places he seems to suggest it is also
a form of cosmetics involving reddening of the face);  and (c) putting sarak
(rouge) on her face(Rashi here explains this as a "sam" that makes her
appear reddened).  The gemora goes on to discuss whether this should be
allowed on chol hamoed only to a young woman, but concludes that no matter
how old, a woman is expected to apply such adornments, and the general
permissibility of the application of cosmetics on chol hamoed is brought
l'halacha in Shulchan Aruch Orech Chaim siman 547 si'if 5, where both kechol
and sarak are explicitly mentioned.  

And at the other end of the spectrum, when an unmarried adult woman is in
mourning for her father the gemora in Ta'anis 13b allows her to use kechol
and engage in pirkus (even though in general one is forbidden to use make up
and cosmetics when in mourning) because she may not make herself
unattractive.  And the topic is summed up in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah siman
381 si'if 6, which states that a woman may not apply kechol (or do pirkus)
during the days of her mourning, but for a married woman this is only
forbidden during the shiva itself, but after that she is permitted so she
not look ugly to her husband, that for a kala within 30 days of her chupa it
is permitted even during the shiva and so for an unmarried adult woman
because she stands ready for marriage.


> Yitzchok Levine

Regards

Chana