According to the latest pashkevil (wall poster), posted by Rafi of Life in Israel, the Edah Charedit warns women against adopting new customs, going against their husbands, wearing strange clothing including veils, and dressing up their daughters according to various stringencies.
The Edah Haredit is a stringent, anti-Zionist rabbinical court in Jerusalem with a large following.
The first paragraph of the pashkevil warns against clothing that is too straight or tight. Here is my translation of the second paragraph:
At the same time, one must be careful not to wear strange and weird coverings and clothing (and likewise, veils etc.) especially if it is against the opinion of the husband, even if they appear to be stringencies in matters of modesty, because this is against the halachic tradition, and the determination of these modesty issues must be under the supervision of the rabbis shlit”a, especially regarding things that have already led, unfortunately, to changes in the running of the home and the education of children, as known to the religious court signed below, that are against the religion of the Holy Torah. And should not implement changes and stringencies like this with young women and small girls.
The proclamation is dated 24 Av, 5770 (last week) and signed by Rabbis Weiss, Ullman, Rosenberger, and others.
My comments:
Hyper-Tzniut at the Jerusalem Zoo, 2009
Update: According to comments on the Kikar Shabbat website, the date of the posters recommending shawls for all wmoen is from six years ago. Someone must have reprinted and posted them.
The Edah Haredit claims they are not behind the current poster. They claim to have considered prohibiting “shalim” altogether, but in the end did not go that far.
Th
e other day I wrote that husbands of women who cover their faces requested that the Edah haredit rule against the practice. Miriam Shaviv from the Jewish Chronicle reports that it will soon. But in the meantime, a poster went up with a ruling that all women should wear shalim (redidim). But it was six years old.
Background on cloaks/shawls: Thee custom of wearing cloaks to obscure the contour of a woman’s body began in the Toldot Aharon community in Jerusalem when its leader recommended them to his granddaughter, as she was unable to get pregnant. Her relatives wore the cloaks, known as shalim in Hebrew, to show solidarity with her. After the baby was born, and other women began experiencing good fortune, the trend caught on and extended to communities of returning Orthodox Jews, especially Breslav. (Source: article in Mekor Rishon by researcher Sima Zaltzberg).
Bruria Keren, a mother of 10 from Beit Shemesh, attracted national attention when she adopted the cloak, multiple layers of clothes, and other extreme behaviors including covering her face. I am not sure if she was the first to cover her face, but she was the best-known.
In Elad, near where I live, you can see many women in cloaks. The number of women who cover their faces is still small, but growing.
Related:
Neve Yaakov: Immodest and Modest Women Asked to Sit Separately
According to the religious Zionist weekly Matzav Haruach, the following sign appeared in a playground in the haredi neighborhood of Neve Yaakov in Jerusalem:
According to the suggestion of our teacher the great rabbi H. Kanievsky, women are requested as follows, to divide seating in the city according to groups of women. Women dressed appropriately (wide clothes, a properly covered neck, a modest scarf [MiI: to cover hair]) will sit on separate benches. Women dressed immodestly [bepritzut] Heaven forbid, (tight clothes/open collar/bandana) will sit by themselves. And in this merit the women [MiI: there's no question as to which women, even though the wording is vague] will merit viable offspring, a comfortable living, and true comfort [nachat] from their children.
Notice that the suggestion is not directed at women who wear pants, show cleavage, or (married women) who leave their hair uncovered. The target appears to be women who more or less follow the rules, but fall from the community standard or the standard of whoever wrote the sign. There is even a subtle dig at wigs, as they are not mentioned in the description of modest clothing. Wigs are verboten in more modest circles.
Somehow I don’t think ostracizing women in the park is going to make anyone start dressing more modestly. And the implication of this sign—that a woman who wears a bandanna is contaminating someone who wears a modest scarf—is scary. We should be glad that children of prutzot are still allowed to play in the park with the children of righteous women.
Related:
An Uninspiring Letter to the Women of Beit Shemesh
VozIzNeias: Jerusalem Home Tznius Campaign (thanks to Joel Katz for the link)
Hyper-Tzniut at the Jerusalem Zoo
While the face-covering phenomenon seems to have died down, shalim, capes or cloaks worn over the shoulders to disguise the contour of the body, are still popular. I saw many women in shalim during our visit to the Biblical Zoo in Jerusalem, along with the two girls pictured above who looked about 7 and 10 years old.
In my next post I’ll share thoughts about a shal-wearing mother nursing her baby on a park bench.
The trial of Bruria Keren, the face-covering mother of 12 who started a movement encouraging hyper-tzniut (extreme modesty), has been convicted of abusing six of her twelve children.
Keren attracted the attention of the press in December 2007 because she covered her face, wore multiple layers of clothes, refused to speak while men were present, and persuaded other women to do likewise. Shortly after this “movement” became known in the press, she was arrested for severe child abuse.
Here you can find photographs and links to more posts on the subject.
According to Ynet, Keren’s lawyer brought expert witnesses who recommended psychiatric care for his client, “whose voice I never heard, and whose face I never saw.” But the psychiatrist appointed by the court determined that the behavior stemmed from religious belief, not psychosis.
The judge, while placing the blame firmly on the parents, criticized the extended family and community, who for 25 years stood by while the children suffered and “the walls around them grew higher.”
Defense attorney Gil Dechoach criticized the decision. (I don’t know what happened to the female lawyer who represented her originally.) He claimed that because his client refused to speak to him, she could not get a fair defense. “This is a woman who was enclosed in darkness, did not leave her house for ten years, who was absorbed in ceremonies and murmurings. She should be treated by a doctor and not imprisoned with convicts.”
Rafi’s take on it can be found here.
“Autumn” left the following comment on the “Burka Wedding” post, in response to a comment by Ora:
Ora wrote:
“I think there’s a big problem with covering the face. It’s dehumanizing. I don’t know what research, if any, has been done on the subject, but I would think that not seeing a someone’s face would make it easier to beat or otherwise abuse them.”
Autumn:
I agree with this, also it allows those with covered face to get away with rude behavior as well. I live in a Gulf Arab Country and a lot of women choose to cover their face with either a niqab (which can also be called a burqa – or ninja style as others like to call it) or a full veil. I have noticed that many (but of course not all) of these women are some of the rudest when it comes to things like waiting politely in line for something, they push in front of others etc. I am guessing that this is because of the anonymity that having their face lends them – they can’t be held accountable as a person for their actions. They can do something rude to someone, and if they seem them the next day, can walk by them without even being recognized and therefore held to account for their actions. Anyway, this is just my observation and these are women who probably did not choose the veil, it just is the norm for their families. So this is a danger to watch out for if it becomes the norm for certain communities – that it creates a detachment of a person from their own actions. Kind of like if one is invisible.
I think that people who choose to impose this on themselves (don’t grow up with it as a norm) have a whole other set of problems.
One thing that struck me from the interviews with these women was how one of them talked about how she feels like a princess when she goes out completely covered. This is identical to how converts (or “reverts” as they like to call themselves) to Islam who embrace the niqab or the full face veil speak about how they feel. There is one convert who who talks about how she wishes she could live in Saudi Arabia so she could be completely separated from men, (have separate elevators, etc.) she also refrains from speaking to men. She feels she is more respected by men, etc., and she feels good that her friend’s husband will not try to speak to her because of the way she dresses but will talk to her other friends who only wear the normal hijab (headscarf). This woman will not allow men to comment on her blog because she feels that even communicating with them that way (though they can’t see her or even hear her voice) is wrong. Another interesting thing that I noted about these converts is that most of them have had some traumatic experience or suffered from abuse – often sexual in nature – (which is known to result in a hate of one’s self or one’s own body.) I think there are always some sort of psychological issues when people choose / embrace extreme restrictions to the point of hampering their own ability to function. Not being able to see clearly, or not being able to talk to people including one’s own family, encumbering oneself with too many articles of clothing can all be quite problematic.
By the way I am not Jewish, but I found this article and discussion very interesting and I hope you don’t mind me commenting..
You also might be interested to know that I came across your blog because one of the muslim women’s blogs posted a link to it – not this article but the one about the Jewish soldiers helping the Palestinian smugglers..
Autumn | 01.07.09 – 12:39 pm | #
Autumn, thank you for your thought-provoking comments. I didn’t realize that a Muslim blog had linked here–it didn’t show up in my statistics.
Twitter links powered by Tweet This v1.7, a WordPress plugin for Twitter.
