[Avodah] Halachic justification for short sleeves

[Moshe Feldman]

Shu"t Bnei Banim III:26 par. 4 writes the following "limud zchus" on women
who wear short sleeves:
The Gemara Kesubos 72b writes that a woman who knits in public and shows her
elbows while doing so violates das yehudis.  The Gemara Gittin 90a refers to
a woman who knits in public and who is "fruma m'shnei tzdadeha," which Rashi
interprets as: one can see her armpits [MF: through the openings in her
sleeves].  He also cites the Teferes Shmuel on the Rosh Berachos 3:33, and
Divrei Chamudos there, and Yerushalmi [Gittin ch. 9 halacha 11] who make the
same point.  He then argues that the das yehudis is violated only if one can
see the armpits [through the openings in her sleeves], which occurs today
only when a woman wears a sleeveless dress.

I have a different limud zechus, based on the fact that showing elbows is
considered das yehudis.  Many years ago, I heard a shiur from Rav Mordechai
Willig (whom I believe was speaking in the name of RYBS) about shok b'isha
erva.  He noted that there is a machlokes achronim (Chazon Ish vs. Mishneh
Berurah) whether the shok goes to the knee or to the bottom of the foot.  He
said (IIRC based on a comparison to the location of shok in animals) that
there is a good argument that shok refers to the bottom of the foot, but
nevertheless, the gemara was not listing only places which are objectively
erva (in all societies), but even places which are "subjectively" erva-i.e.,
because people in the time of the gemara had the minhag to cover them, they
have the din of mekomos ha'muchusim.  However, in our time, when women do
not cover to the bottom of the leg, that part is not considered "subjective"
erva.  It would seem that the same reasoning should apply to elbows (esp. as
Bnei Banim notes that elbows are further from the makom erva than legs are).


I also note that Rashi Kesubos 72a explains "das yehudis" as "what women
were noheg even though it's not written."  It would therefore make sense
that das yehudis should be fluid and depend on the way women dress in any
particular locale.  I admit that theoretically, one could argue that once
something becomes das yehudis, it never loses that status, but from a
historical perspective, such an argument would be hard to make: it seems
that in the time of the Shulchan Aruch, single women covered their hair (as
is customary by Arab women today), yet that is not done today.   (The Magen
Avraham argues that the Torah merely requires that hair be braided, but that
does not deal with the fact that in practice, single "bnos yisrael" used to
cover their hair.)

I wrote the following at
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol06/v06n075.shtml#17:

) I believe that R Ovadia Yosef proves pretty convincingly that
) sheitels violated daas yehudis in the time of the gemara--the Aruch says
) that Kapaltin (the word used in the Yerushalmi instead of Kalsa, used by
the
) Bavli) means a wig in Latin (lashon Romi).  (My father told me that
) capilitium means little hair, or something like that.)  The Shiltei
) Hagiborim is shver (and I've read lots of the tshuvos--both pro and con
) dealing with the SHG).

) My chiddush on what ROY says is that because sheitels are in the realm of
) daas yehudis, society can decide to be meikel against the gemara's
) standards.  

Has anyone heard whether Rav Lichtenstein says about short sleeves?  (I
heard third-hand rumors, but would like to confirm them.)

Kol tuv,
Moshe 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 6594 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20061212/0a1775ca/attachment-0001.bin>