The Halacha requires a married woman to cover the hair on her head (not just to have a "head covering"), but does not specify what kind of covering it must be. An unmarried girl must not wear her hair loose, but either short or tied together. Our sources discuss a Peah Nochri, a wig, which was the accepted covering for generations. The problem is not with wigs, per se, but with wearing anything which attracts the eye. This is a matter of Tznius (modesty) which all women, married and unmarried, must abide by. Judaism is concerned with creating safeguards and fences to protect potential abuses to morality. Improper personal relationships between the sexes such as between a married woman and a man other than her husband can be staved off when the woman takes care to wear modest clothing and with modest behavior. Men, too, must be modest in their relationships with women and not speak with a woman immodestly, flirtingly, etc. Basically, it is not "wigs" which is the problem, it is "attractive" wigs, such as those which are shoulder-length and longer or those which are made into any style which attracts attention which are the problem.

I have a question, so whats with this head covering issue in judiasm? is it obligatory for Jewish women to wear? I don't know how true is it, but I heard that muslims actually took the tradition of head covering from jews!

This kind of opinion illustrate the way the israeli society, but also jews in general are divided. Remember the symbol of the Menorah, or the different species we put together when we setup the Lulav in Sukkoth... It would have been so nice if we just respected each other, accepting our own differences and beliefs. Then, why should we complain when we hear about antisemitism? Some non-jews just express the same kind of hatred because we are different. What's the difference with this article? Jews against other Jews; and this is more painful for those jews who feel targeted :-( ...

This yet another example of the Orthodox control of women by men. If people want to submit themselves to such slavery, they should be free to do so, but the State should not encourage or subsidise such organizations. The Orthodox should be as free as any other stream of Judaism to propagate their view. An end must be made to their monopoly over our personal status. BTW, their obsession with sex is a joke. If their men have no self control, there is a radical solution. Brit lechumra.

There is a very important point to made behind this PR stunt. We have become so inundated with fashion and what 'the other guy does' we have not stopped to look at the basis of the Halacha. I find it doubly disturbing that some Sephardim wear wigs as it is completely contrary to all Sephardic Halacha and Posekim. Also, what about the idea of some Haredi women shaving their hair. I have read Halacha that clearly state that shaving ones hair is a man's thing, yet many do it. It has long stopped being a matter of Halacha amongst certain Orthodox sections. I hope Ynet do an article on the winner if there is one and let us know if noone was able to win.

Forbidden according to the Torah Citing decisions in Jewish law that forbid the wearing of wigs that look like hair, by among others, Rabbi Shmuel Auerbach, Rabbi Shalom Elyashiv, and Rabbi Nissim Karelitz, three of the most important ultra-Orthodox authorities on Jewish law. In due deference to the above mentioned learned scholars, I am troubled by the absolutism of this so called Jewish tradition of requiring a married woman to cover her hair as being Halachicly “Forbidden according to the Torah”. According to my simplistic knowledge of the Jewish laws that are Forbidden according to the Torah, are those laws that were universally acknowledged and accepted by the entire Jewish rabbinical authorities, as clearly described in Magilas Esther, wherein it states “Kimi vakibly alyhem val zarum”. The notion that required woman to cover their “hair” was promulgated by the concept of Sarr Issua Ervea” translated, the hair of a woman is immodest, which also describes as a woman’s voice in the same category, that is why in some orthodox societies, men do not listen to female singers, yet the exact direct is not restricted to “singing” it is to all sounds emanating from a woman. As we are very aware that this requirement of all married woman to cover their hair was never excepted nor acknowledged by leading halachicly authorities in many countries, just to name a few, Germany, Holland, the Netherlands, in the United States, until the influx of European Jews “after the Holocaust”. If the requirement of having a woman cover her hair is Forbidden according to the Torah, I can assure you that such prohibition would be universally performed across the entire religious Jewish world, and not only by the Ultra Orthodox segment of Jewish society, to name a few what is called “universally performed across the entire religious Jewish world” like Shabbos, 2nd day Yom Tov outside of Israel, Kasrut, Milla, and many other religious observances “that is observed” by any and all organizations that consider themselves orthodox. I can guarantee that this prize will not be claimed by any scholar, providing absolute proof that will be able to satisfy to the Jewish Orthodox World and will accept such proof that, requires only a married woman to cover her hair, let alone the added burden of what type of covering is proscribed as being Halachicly “Forbidden according to the Torah”. The unvarnished truth of this issue is never addressed nor mentioned in the Torah one way or another. This prize may be collected after the coming of Mosiach, as the Talmud so aptly utilizes when an answer to complex issue is unavailable it sets it aside for Masiach to answer by declaring “TYKA”.

Assuming that this article has an anti-religious attitude or displays the growing rift between the ultra-orthodox and secular populations in Israel strictly because it concerns haredi or ultra-orthodox issues, is a gross logical error. An Israeli publication has the right - indeed the responsibility - to post articles about any and all issues of interest to Israelis or World Jewry. And if some were convinced to read said article because of its humorous or catchy headline alone, it is better than being uninformed.

since mohamed was a "worker" in a jewish home he took most everything from the jews. moslems don't eat pork, have some brit mila at age 13 and today are trying to take back jewish land which was given to them from their allah! learn your roots girl!!!

Anyone know what this has to do with wigs? Anyone know what this dude is talking about?

#6. avi, kol ha kavod!!!!!!

When I first traveled to Israel as a tourist, I saw many well-coiffed religious women but very few of them wore hats or scarfs. I had no idea those were wigs! I just thought head-coverings were out of vogue.

Dear "Troubled" #8- You make numerous erroneous statements. You state - "According to my simplistic knowledge of the Jewish laws that are Forbidden according to the Torah, are those laws that were universally acknowledged and accepted by the entire Jewish rabbinical authorities, etc." There is no requirement for the entire rabbinical or Jewish community to "acknowledge and accept" for a Law to be valid, other than "edicts". Short of those, all Dinim are obligatory and not subject to democratic vote or consensus. You also wrote- "As we are very aware that this requirement of all married woman to cover their hair was never excepted nor acknowledged by leading halachicly authorities in many countries, just to name a few, Germany, etc." Observant married women with uncovered hair is a relative recent phenomena. It seems that the rabbis in those communities were unable to control this. Few, if any, rabbis of stature ever gave their approval. You write- "If the requirement of having a woman cover her hair is Forbidden according to the Torah, I can assure you that such prohibition would be universally performed across the entire religious Jewish world, and not only by the Ultra Orthodox segment of Jewish society..." Bad premise. There are sectors in the "observant" world whose Yetzer Hora is still strong. They are more influenced by in-vogue fashion than Halacha. You write- "The unvarnished truth of this issue is never addressed nor mentioned in the Torah one way or another." It is Torah Shebe'al Peh, our oral Tradition - like the Talmud, which has equal validity with the Written Law. You write- "This prize may be collected after the coming of Mosiach," Probably. This "prize" sounds like a bit of joke to me.

What a waste of time, how much light does this bring to this world? Halachah has become today's golden calf. Will we ever learn?

"It is Torah Shebe'al Peh, our oral Tradition - like the Talmud, which has equal validity with the Written Law" The Talmud does not have equal validity with the Written Law, rather certain halachot are based on Talmudic discussions. Could you also please tell me the exact halacha and source by which a married woman should cover her hair. thanks

This is scary SH-T

This custom emerged as matter of pikuach hanefesh in areas where cossacks and other Jew lovers were rape happy. A woman with a shaved head could escape because her attacker could be left with her head covering in his hand and not a handful of hair with the woman attached. Why do they still do it? Like many minhagim, people forget the reasons and continue doing it even when its no longer necessary. As for the topic itself: Arbarbanel states outrigh the wearing of wigs is zonut. And, though the article doesn't mention the sepharidic poskim, they take the same very staunch view.

This is a continuing story of sex obession by a bunch of control freaks. The issue itself is not so important. What is important is that you do what you are told. After all the bigger the Rabbi's beard and the blacker his coat, the closer he is to God, until he becomes a Lubavitcher and then he is God or at least a close relative.

Any reason to not wear a sheitel is good for me. I hate wigs! They are expensive, uncomfortable, hot, scratchy and always feel lopsided. I wear hats and I like them!

Dear Reuven of Raanana, I was amused by your arguments against my refusal to attribute the requirement of a “Married” Woman, the element of being Married emphasis added, as being Forbidden according to the Torah, wherein you erroneously make the supposition that, “There is no requirement for the entire rabbinical or Jewish community to "acknowledge and accept" for a Law to be valid, other than "edicts". Short of those, all Dinim are obligatory and not subject to democratic vote or consensus” 1) you forgot to include my recognition of, in what manner is the Torah Sbal Peah binding upon the Entire Jewish observant Jews, which is, as described “in Magilas Esther”, wherein it states “Kimi vakibly alyhem val zarum”, the “Dinim” that you espouse which are universally binding, are according to the established Talmudic theology, only binding upon the specific location that the Posek has authority over, otherwise, how before our wonderful ability to disseminate information to the entire world, was any Jewish community in France (where Rashi resided) able to know what specific “Dinim” were promulgated in England that he is bound by. 2) Then you state, Observant married women with uncovered hair is a “relative recent phenomena”. It seems that the rabbis in those communities were unable to control this. Few, if any, rabbis of stature ever gave their approval, this only shows you are unaware of the dress code for Jewish woman prior to the 18th century. To have visual proof of just how Orthodox Jewish Woman dressed in the Askanazic countries during the 13th to 17th century, if you are able to accesses Passover Haggadas printed during those eras “which are the only halachicly approved sferim having pictures” then you will have a visual view of what Orthodox Jewish Woman dress code was, I have seen quite a few of these Hagadas which are stored in the Jewish Theological Seminary when I researched the only known copy in existence of the Levush’s 6th volume. You cannot just use your imagination to prove a point. 3) You further state, Observant married women with uncovered hair is a relative recent phenomena. It seems that the rabbis in those communities were unable to control this and then you go on and denigrate world renown acknowledged Poskim by stating, “Bad premise. There are sectors in the "observant" world whose Yetzer Hora is still strong. They are more influenced by in-vogue fashion than Halacha.” You are so wrong about that theory it almost borders on the ridicules, I guess you never heard of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, learn about him, learn about his Halachic dissertations, learn about his being subservient or influenced by “sectors in the "observant" world whose Yetzer Hora is still strong. They are more influenced by in-vogue fashion than Halacha” Before you espouse your theory of the binding effect of the Torah Sebalpa, you first must know just how and in what manner such Dinim became binding upon the Jewish World. The Halachic decisions by the Rambam, by the Levush, are used in our Sulchan Orech as a guide but are not considered binding. Educate yourself about the various differences between established Jewish theory and customs, before you utilize your customs as the only accepted Jewish way. There is a very known accepted theory about seemingly different Torah ShbalPah halachic viewpoints “zah Torah’s Elokim Chaim, Vzah Torah’s Elokim Chaim.

What if I can prove with archeology that the torah is 7th century bc theological propoganda ? Then how much will I win?

When I was a kid--I am a senior citizen--noone wore wigs excepts a fiew nutty ladies. My grandmother was an Orthodox woman., She wore a kerchief around the house and a hat when she went out. My mother, the same. My shul had single girls wear hats too. I wore a hat from the time I was too old for a baby bonnet. Wigs today can cost hundreds of dollrs and look prettier than your own hair which makes the whoe thing ridiculous. The rebbitzen Jungreis looks gorgeous in her wigs and her perfect makeup.

From everything I have heard, this law stems from a sotah uncovering her head. Which meant that THEN, married women covered their hair- as did ALL married women. This then became extrapolated to married women in the 20th century having to cover their hair. There were many known Orthodox rabbis in the 20th century whose wives did not cover their hair (including ancestors of mine in Europe!). A friend of mine did extensive research before making a decision - as she wanted to follow halacha, and in the end did not find Halachic basis to make her cover her hair. She later moved to Israel and started covering her hair out of peer pressure. What a lousy reason to have to cover your hair! To me, covering hair, not wearing pants etc. is an outgrowth of very religious first trying to out-machmir each other and then wanting to dress to display belonging within a 'certain group'. (BTW- I was also provided a different reason by a Hasidic cousin, which was a women need to cover their heads to make a bracha- again, not exactly a halachic reason). So, if there is a LAW in the Torah that says or even justifyably alludes to the requirement of women covering their hair (or not wearing pants- and dont give the men's clothing arguement as I vie any man to wear some of the pants I own) then put it out there and go collect your money.

In your inquiry you request clarification just what value or enforceability does Oral law have against the written Torah seemingly immutable decrees. First you must recognize that the acceptable Jewish world of the Oral law known as Torah ShaBalpa, referees only to the Mishna as compiled by Rebi and is the opinions from the Tannaim who’s various halachic disputes were codified into a single unassailable law. The Gamara portion is a discussion of the seemingly confusing contravening edicts that disputes and or is not in keeping with the established recognized rule of law. It was established when seeking a Halachic monetary ruling from a Rabbi and he erred in his Pesak what and when is he liable for his mistake, the established rule is, if the Rabbi made a mistake and is contravened in the Gamara he has no liability, but if his mistake is contrary to the Mishna he is personally liable to the injured party. In essence the Mishna is the recognized Oral law, the Gamara is trying to comport seemingly conflicting statements appearing in the Mishna. In reference whose has the ultimate authority between the Written and Oral Torah, believe it or not, it is the Oral Torah, that dispute was raging during the period of the second temple, and the different communities were known as the Tzadokim, and the Perushim and we in our observances follow the edicts as promulgated by the Perushim. Jewish history is replete with Rabbis and other leading Jewish Kings making a decree that is for that particular period seemingly against the Written Torah, as for instant, when King Solomon consecrated the first Bais Hamikdash, and made a month long Simcha it occurred during Yom Kippur and that Yom Kippur no Jew fasted what-so-ever, when Queen Ester issued her decree through Mordichi for all the Jews living in the Capitol to fast for three days including their nights, no Jew celebrated the requirement of eating Matzo on the first night of Passover, even though both of those decrees are in contravention of the Written Torah. I hope this clarifies some of your questions

Just one minor correction to your posting and a refute to your Chasidsh cousin faulty reasoning why married women must cover their hair. The minor correction in that era all females married or not even girls that have never been married upon reaching a certain age covered their hair, it had nothing to do with a particular Jewish religious requirement. Ask you Chasidish cousin just how does a woman immersing herself in the Mikva make the Bracha, yes the clear see through water covers her nakedness, but her head is on covered during her recitation of the Bracha.

My question was what is the actual halacha regarding a married woman and head covering. Is the head covering a minhag or actual halacha?

To clarify some points:Some mikvaot do have a head covering for the woman to recite a brocha. this of course is something you wouldn't know about since you are a man. A woman does not have to cover her hair to make a brocha but it is preferable to do so. Regarding reciting brochos the halacha is: A man must not make a brocha before a married woman's uncovered hair. And for all those who do want to know there is a specific commandment in the Torah for a woman to cover her hair. And for the lady who would like to know about pants. The Torah requires a female to have the area from the neck to the knees covered with a garment that is not tight fitting and definately a garment that doesn't show the outline of the legs from the waist to the knees which is clearly what pants is all about. It doesn't take too much brains to understand why tight fitting pants is unacceptable for the laws of modesty.

A ruling on head coverings must take into consideration not just women in Israel but women who live abroad as well. We are encouraged to dress in a way that 'does not draw attention to oneself'. Wigs address that problem very well. The conservative view here is so close to radical Islam that it chills the blood. Are we also to go veiled from head to toe? Why only married women? Don't unmarried women attaract attention? If looking at women distracts men from their studies, let them separate themselves from the community altogether.

"And for all those who do want to know there is a specific commandment in the Torah for a woman to cover her hair" Please someone tell me what is the specific commandment, how it is worded, where it appears, etc.