2

I'm looking for a sourced reason for what purpose married women (as opposed to women who were never married) need to cover their hair. I have found that it is assumed that it is to make her less attractive, but have not found a source for that. Also, that would not explain why a divorced or widowed women needs to cover her hair. I also heard once, that it is to make her look more refined, but also no source.

The other questions on this subject only address the halachic requirements but not the reason for this obligation. I am not asking IF they have to cover but why. I'm clearly not asking about a divorced or widowed per se but married women in general.

msh210
  • 73,729
  • 12
  • 120
  • 359
  • Possible duplicate of Why do divorced or widowed women still need to cover their hair? – robev Jun 25 '17 at 01:52
  • 1
    @robev Why is that a dupe? That's asking about divorced and widowed women, why their status doesn't change from when they were married; this is asking about married women, why they need to cover their hair in the first place. – DonielF Jun 25 '17 at 10:29
  • 1
    If it should be a dupe of anything, it's this: https://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/35926/9682 – DonielF Jun 25 '17 at 10:32
  • 2
    Possible duplicate of Level of obligation of married women covering their hair – DonielF Jun 25 '17 at 10:35
  • I saw two questions here, what is the reason women cover their hair and why would that apply to divorced women. I found a dupe for both but didn't know how to flag both so I chose the second one, which loosely covers the first one – robev Jun 25 '17 at 13:30
  • I hope this wording makes it clear that I am not asking IF they to cover and HOW they are obligated but WHY they need to cover their hair. –  Jun 25 '17 at 14:19
  • 1
    Maybe the focus is not so much on the modesty-tzeniut aspect as it is a universal sign; it signifies that the woman is married and already taken by someone else, so that people don't think of forming a loving relationship with her (it is possible that the ancients regarded the hair as something that belongs to the husband only, thus covering it effectively conveyed the idea - that she is married - to everyone). Just sharing my thoughts. – Bach Jun 25 '17 at 15:32
  • @Bach was thinking along the same lines, it would be a nice response to the anti-sheitel movement (if you can tell it's a wig). But then why would a divorcee or widow need to cover her hair... –  Jun 25 '17 at 16:00
  • 1
    However, note that its called Ervah in the gemara. This suggests a different understanding of this custom/law, but it can be reconciled with my interpretation. regarding divorcees and widows see robev's link, it seems to suggest that its a cultural thing not necessarily Halachic obligation (perhaps the custom of covering later evolved to include even widows and divorcees). – Bach Jun 25 '17 at 16:15
  • @Bach excellent point it is dat yehudit for a divorcee/widow –  Jun 25 '17 at 16:32
  • Re "I have found that it is assumed that it is to make her less attractive": I believe this is a misconception. In Judaism, "modesty" doesn't mean less attractive. Perhaps a way to think about is "reserved for special times and places". – Josh Grinberg Apr 19 '23 at 13:20

0 Answers0