📖 Chapter 22: Tzenius Dress code – Chinuch & Katan Laws

Chapter 22: Tzenius Dress code – Chinuch & Katan Laws[1]

 

Introduction to Chinuch in Tznius

The Torah value of tznius encompasses far more than standards of dress. It includes modest conduct, dignity, privacy, refinement, holiness, and the ability to live with an awareness of Hashem in both public and private life. Accordingly, the chinuch of children in tznius begins not only with clothing, but with teaching appropriate boundaries, personal dignity, kedushah, and respect for themselves and others.

In this chapter we will discuss the practical laws and educational principles relevant to raising children with proper standards of tznius. Topics include the prohibition of cross-dressing and its application to children, standards of modest dress for boys and girls, educating children in matters of privacy and personal boundaries, interactions between boys and girls, bathing and sleeping arrangements, siblings and relatives of opposite genders, affectionate touch, yichud, children’s participation in mixed settings, protection from predators and abuse, and many other contemporary questions that arise in the upbringing of children. Special focus is given not only to the halachic details themselves, but also to how these laws should be taught in a healthy and developmentally appropriate manner.

 

Tznius Trauma: How to Teach Tznius Without Turning It Into a Battle

There is perhaps no subject in all of chinuch that requires greater sensitivity than the subject of tznius, especially regarding adolescent girls.

Every teenager naturally desires independence and resists being controlled. A girl, however, often experiences an even deeper sensitivity regarding her appearance and clothing, as dress is frequently tied to identity, self-image, social belonging, and peer acceptance. Added to this are the enormous pressures created by friends, school environments, social expectations, and contemporary culture. Accordingly, discussions regarding tznius can easily be interpreted by a girl not merely as criticism of a garment, but as criticism of her as a person.

Unfortunately, many girls carry painful memories of how the subject of tznius was presented to them. At times they felt judged, labeled, shamed, controlled, or reduced to the length of a skirt or the style of a shirt. Some eventually came to resent not only the specific standards that were demanded of them, but the entire concept of tznius itself. Indeed, many educators and therapists have noted that for a surprising number of girls who distanced themselves from religious observance, the subject of tznius played a significant role, not necessarily because of the laws themselves, but because of how those laws were communicated.

This does not, Heaven forbid, diminish the importance of the mitzvah. Tznius remains a fundamental Torah value and obligation. However, if the goal of chinuch is to help a child embrace Torah and mitzvos throughout life, then the educational method is just as important as the information being taught.

 

The First Rule: Know the Facts [2]

Before correcting a child or teenager, one must first know precisely what is halacha and what is custom, what is policy and what is law. Many schools maintain standards that extend beyond the strict requirements of halacha. Schools have every right to establish rules and expectations, and often do so for important educational reasons. Nevertheless, a student who violates a school regulation is not necessarily violating halacha.

A girl who chooses not to follow a specific school policy is not automatically “not tznius.” She is certainly not automatically rebelling against Hashem. When school regulations, community expectations, and Torah law are all blended together as one, confusion and unnecessary guilt often result.

Honesty is essential. Children deserve to know what halacha requires, what their school requires, and what represents a higher standard that a community has accepted upon itself.

 

A Personal Observation

I recall a particularly eye-opening experience. Some years ago, I published a halachic article on a matter of tznius in which I presented the topic as I do all halachic subjects: reviewing the sources, the various opinions, the accepted rulings, and the practical ramifications. Much to my surprise, I received strong criticism from a number of educational figures.

The primary concern expressed was not regarding the accuracy of the material, but rather that students had now become aware of halachic nuances and opinions that some teachers themselves were not familiar with. I was told that educationally it was inappropriate for students to possess information that their teachers did not know. Even more significantly, some argued that such information should not be taught at all. Their philosophy was that tznius education must remain entirely black-and-white. In their view, students should not be exposed to differing opinions, varying customs, chumros, or areas in which there is legitimate halachic discussion, lest they use this information to make independent decisions.

The reasoning was that if students are taught the full halachic picture, they may conclude that certain accepted practices are merely stringencies or school policies rather than absolute halachic requirements. Therefore, everything should be presented as a single, uniform standard without distinction.

While I certainly appreciated the educational concerns that motivated their position, I found myself in fundamental disagreement with this approach.

 

First, educators have an obligation to be properly educated in the subjects they teach. The fact that a student may occasionally know a source or opinion unfamiliar to a teacher is not a failure of the student, nor of the source. If anything, it highlights the need for greater teacher education.

 

Second, there is a reason Hashem created halacha with differing customs, varying opinions, and areas of legitimate discretion. Not every issue was intended to be black-and-white. The Torah recognizes that certain matters contain room for different practices and standards. Presenting every chumra as though it is absolute halacha is not educating students; it is misrepresenting halacha.

 

Most importantly, when students eventually discover, as they inevitably will, that some of what they were taught as absolute law was actually custom, policy, or a preferred stringency, they may begin questioning not only those standards but the genuinely binding halachos as well. When trust is lost in one area, it can spill over into many others.

 

For this reason, honesty in chinuch is essential. Children and adolescents should be taught what halacha requires, what is a matter of accepted custom, what is a school standard, and what represents a higher level of piety or personal stringency. Doing so does not weaken commitment to Torah. On the contrary, it strengthens respect for halacha by presenting it truthfully and allowing students to appreciate its depth and integrity.

 

The Second Rule: Tznius Is One Mitzvah Out of 613

One of the greatest mistakes made in education is allowing children to feel that tznius is the sole measure of their worth. The Torah contains 613 mitzvos. Every Jew has strengths and struggles. One child struggles with davening. Another struggles with honesty. Another struggles with anger. Another struggles with learning. Yet somehow regarding tznius, girls sometimes receive the impression that this one area defines their entire religious identity.

This is simply not true.

A girl may struggle with aspects of dress while excelling in kindness, prayer, Torah learning, respect for parents, helping others, good character, and many other mitzvos. Just as we would not define a child entirely by any other area of weakness, we must not allow tznius to become the sole measuring stick by which a girl judges herself.

A healthy message is:

Tznius is important. It is a mitzvah. We strive for it. But it is not the only mitzvah, and your value as a daughter of Hashem does not depend on being perfect in this area.

 

The Third Rule: Knowing How to Say It

Even when correction is necessary, how something is said often matters more than what is said.

A comment delivered with warmth, understanding, and respect can be accepted. The identical comment delivered with criticism, embarrassment, sarcasm, or anger can create lifelong resistance.

Too often discussions about tznius become power struggles. The parent believes they are advocating for Torah values. The child feels controlled. The conversation quickly stops being about tznius and becomes about autonomy, trust, and self-respect.

A child who constantly feels monitored, inspected, and criticized may eventually reject the entire discussion. By contrast, a child who feels respected and understood is far more likely to remain open to guidance.

 

The Goal of Chinuch

The goal of tznius education is not merely to get a girl to wear a particular item of clothing today.

The goal is that she should want to live a life of tznius when she is twenty-five, thirty-five, and fifty-five years old.

Many parents win today’s battle and lose the war. They achieve short-term compliance through pressure, while creating long-term resentment toward the very values they seek to transmit.

Authentic chinuch asks a different question:

“What can I do today that will help my daughter embrace Torah values willingly ten years from now?”

 

Especially in Our Times

Perhaps in previous generations authority alone was enough. Today, experience has shown repeatedly that force rarely produces genuine commitment. People cannot be compelled to love a mitzvah. At most, external pressure can create temporary compliance. Lasting commitment emerges only when the individual internalizes the value for himself or herself. Accordingly, tznius education today must focus on explanation, inspiration, role modeling, relationship, trust, and respect. Children need to understand not only what the Torah expects, but why these values matter and how they enhance their lives.

 

Conclusion

Tznius must never become a source of trauma. The Torah’s vision of tznius is one of dignity, self-respect, inner beauty, holiness, and personal value. When taught correctly, it elevates a child and strengthens her identity. When taught insensitively, it can become a source of pain and alienation.

The challenge facing parents and educators is therefore twofold: to remain uncompromising regarding the importance of Torah values, while at the same time showing the wisdom, patience, empathy, and emotional intelligence necessary to transmit those values successfully. The objective is not merely to raise children who obey the rules of tznius while under supervision, but to raise adults who appreciate its beauty and choose it for themselves.

 

 

 

1. The Sources and Structure of the Laws of Tznius

An interesting aspect of the laws of tznius is that we do not find a single chapter in the Talmud or Shulchan Aruch devoted exclusively to the dress code of women. Rather, the halachos are dispersed throughout several areas of Halacha, and from these sources the Poskim derive the practical standards of modest dress. One major source is found in Orach Chaim chapter 75, which discusses the prohibition against reciting Shema, learning Torah, or davening in the presence of areas of a woman’s body that halacha considers required to be covered. By analyzing which parts of the body are defined as ervah in this context, the Poskim derive many of the basic requirements regarding what areas a woman must cover.

Additional laws are discussed in the sections of Shulchan Aruch dealing with arayos and matters of modest conduct in Even HaEzer chapter 21, where the obligations of tznius and the prohibition of immodest behavior are addressed more directly.

Another central source is found in the laws of Gittin in Even HaEzer chapter 115, where the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch discuss actions for which a wife may forfeit her kesubah. There, the concepts of Das Moshe and Das Yehudis are introduced, which form the foundation of many laws of tznius. Das Moshe refers to standards of modesty that are rooted in Torah law and are binding upon all Jewish women. Das Yehudis, by contrast, refers to accepted standards of modest conduct established by Jewish women and communities over the generations. These customs acquire halachic significance and are binding within the communities that have accepted them, even when they extend beyond the strict minimum requirements of the law.

“These are the women who forfeit their Kesubah and leave without receiving it: A woman who transgresses Das Moshe or Das Yehudis. What is considered a transgression of Das Moshe?……What is Das Yehudis? Das Yehudis refers to the standards of modesty and proper conduct that have been accepted and practiced by Jewish women.”

Shulchan Aruch Even Haezer 115 Halacha’s 1 and 4

2. The Reason Behind the Mitzvah of Tznius [3]

One of the most fascinating discussions amongst the Poskim and Sefarim is the question of why the Torah requires a woman to dress modestly. What is the underlying reason behind the dress code of tznius? Several approaches are offered.

• Intrinsic Torah Way of Dress: Some authorities[4] understand that modest dress is an intrinsic requirement of Jewish womanhood. According to this approach, certain areas of a woman’s body possess an inherent halachic status that requires them to remain covered. The obligation is not merely to avoid causing others to stumble, but rather reflects the Torah’s own definition of dignity and modesty. Similar to the obligation of a married woman to cover her hair, which is derived from the laws of Sotah and is regarded as Biblical in nature due to the custom of Jewish women, despite lacking an explicit commandment, so too various aspects of modest dress are viewed as intrinsic obligations that apply to a Jewish woman by virtue of the Torah’s standards of tznius which is based on Jewish tradition.
• U’vchukoseihem Lo Seileichu: Some Poskim[5] suggest an additional reason for certain laws of modest dress, namely the prohibition of “U’vchukoseihem Lo Seileichu”, imitating the customs and modes of conduct of the gentile nations. According to this approach, forms of dress that developed among non-Jewish society in a manner that reflects immodesty or a rejection of traditional standards of dignity may be prohibited not only because of tznius itself but also because they constitute an adoption of foreign social values. Thus, when a particular style of dress became identified with immodest culture, wearing it may involve both a violation of the laws of tznius and a concern of following non-Jewish customs. However, this reason is generally presented as an additional consideration and not the primary source for the basic laws of modest dress.
• Lifnei Iver: Others explain[6] that the primary reason for the laws of tznius is based on the prohibition against causing another Jew to stumble in sin. When a woman dresses immodestly, it can lead men to improper thoughts and potentially cause them to transgress the commandment of “V’lo Sasuru Acharei Levavchem V’acharei Eineichem” not to stray after one’s heart and eyes. According to this approach, the laws of modest dress serve as a safeguard that protects both men and women from spiritual stumbling blocks.
• Modesty Before Hashem: A fourth perspective emerges from the Poskim. According to this view, modest dress is not fundamentally connected to men at all. The Shulchan Aruch[7] records that even men should be careful to keep normally covered parts of their body covered out of modesty before Hashem. Tznius is therefore understood as a spiritual quality expressing dignity, privacy, humility, and awareness of G-d’s constant presence. According to this approach, modest dress is first and foremost a relationship between the individual and Hashem, independent of any concern regarding others.

In truth, these approaches need not be mutually exclusive, and it is possible that all of them contribute to our understanding of the mitzvah. Whatever the underlying rationale may be, all agree that the laws classified under Das Moshe constitute binding halachic obligations. The laws classified under Das Yehudis, while rooted in accepted Jewish custom and communal standards rather than explicit Torah law, nevertheless possess halachic authority and must be observed by members of the communities that have accepted them. Thus, regardless of the reason behind tznius, its practical observance remains a fundamental component of Jewish life and halachic practice.

 

3. The Laws of Tzenius – Das Moshe Versus Das Yehudis?

As stated above, educators cannot effectively teach tznius without understanding its basic requirements and distinguishing between what is required by halacha and what constitutes a chumra, hidur, school policy, or community custom. Therefore, we will briefly review the fundamental halachic standards of modest dress and the areas of the body that require covering according to halacha. It is important to emphasize that the guidelines below are intended as a summary of the basic halachic requirements.

 

A. Das Moshe: The Biblical Standards of Modest Dress [8]

Defining Das Moshe: As explained earlier, the concepts of Das Moshe and Das Yehudis are the foundation for understanding the halachic basis of tznius. These categories are discussed in the Gemara in Kesubos and codified in the Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer Chapter 115. However, while the Gemara clearly identifies certain examples of each category, it does not explicitly define every area of the body and specify whether its coverage falls under Das Moshe or Das Yehudis. One point is explicit. The Gemara and Shulchan Aruch state that a married woman who goes out with uncovered hair violates Das Moshe.[9] Likewise, the Gemara and Poskim[10] lists a woman who exposes her arms while working in public as violating Das Yehudis. The question remains regarding the other areas of the body. Practically, the consensus of many Poskim[11] is that in general, with some exception[12], any area of the body that is considered an ervah regarding Kerias Shema and prayer, meaning that a man may not daven or learn Torah while that area is exposed, is included within the Biblical standards of modesty of Das Moshe.

Detailed Areas: Accordingly, the upper arm above the elbow, the chest area, the thighs and knees, the stomach, the back, and other normally covered parts of the body are included within the intrinsic halachic requirements of modest dress.

Constant Exposure: Some Poskim[13], however, distinguish between permanent and occasional exposure. According to this approach, Das Moshe applies when a woman regularly dresses in a manner that leaves these areas exposed. However, if exposure occurs only occasionally, such as through movement, or due to a garment that sometimes shifts position, then while improper, it may be classified as Das Yehudis rather than Das Moshe, as indeed states the Gemara with regards to a woman who sews in the marketplace and occasionally exposes her upper arm.

 

Practical Applications

Practically speaking, the following are generally included within the Biblical standards of tznius and are not dependent upon community custom or local practice:

• Sleeves that expose the upper arm above the elbow.
• Tank tops or sleeveless garments.
• Skirts that expose the knees or thighs.
• Blouses that reveal the chest area.
• Clothing that exposes the stomach or midriff.
• Clothing that exposes other normally covered areas of the body.
• A married woman going in public with uncovered hair.

These are generally categorized by the Poskim as matters of Das Moshe, which represent the baseline halachic requirements of modest dress, as opposed to Das Yehudis, which primarily governs additional standards established by Jewish custom and community practice.

 

Areas Generally Included in Das Moshe

 

Area of Body	Status	Practical Example
Hair of a married woman	Das Moshe	Going out with uncovered hair
Upper arm (above the elbow)	Das Moshe	Short sleeves above the elbow; tank tops
Chest and cleavage area	Das Moshe	Low-cut blouses revealing the chest
Stomach and midriff	Das Moshe	Blouses that expose the abdomen
Back (when normally uncovered)	Das Moshe	Clothing with an open back
Thighs and knees	Das Moshe	Skirts above the knees
Other normally covered areas of the body	Das Moshe	Any garment that intentionally exposes areas that halacha requires to remain covered

 

Important Note: Many Poskim explain that Das Moshe refers to a woman who dresses in a manner that regularly leaves these areas exposed. However, occasional exposure due to movement, poor garment design, or a sleeve or skirt shifting position may be classified as Das Yehudis rather than Das Moshe. Nonetheless, every opinion agrees that these areas are required to remain covered and may not intentionally be displayed.

 

B. Das Yehudis: The Rabbinical Requirements and Customary Standards of Jewish Modesty [14]

Its Definition:[15] While Das Moshe refers to the fundamental halachic requirements of modesty, Das Yehudis refers to the standards of modest conduct accepted and practiced by Jewish women throughout the generations. The Rishonim explain that Das Yehudis encompasses matters that are not explicitly prohibited by the Torah, but are nevertheless binding because they became the accepted modest practice of Jewish women. Rashi writes that these are “the customs of the daughters of Israel.” The Tosafos Rid similarly explains that they are matters not prohibited by Torah law but adopted by Jewish women as expressions of modesty. The Rambam likewise defines Das Yehudis as the standards of tznius practiced by Jewish women. The Meiri beautifully explains that Jewish daughters distinguished themselves from other women through an elevated standard of modesty and refinement. Accordingly, Das Yehudis represents those additional practices through which Jewish women conduct themselves with greater dignity, privacy, and tznius. In addition, as explained in A, some Poskim[16] rule that even by Das Moshe prohibitions, if exposure occurs only occasionally, such as through movement, or due to a garment that sometimes shifts position, then it may be classified as Das Yehudis rather than Das Moshe.

Must Everyone Follow Das Yehudis? As explained above, Das Yehudis refers to the accepted standards of modest conduct practiced by Jewish women. However, an important question arises: Is every aspect of Das Yehudis dependent on local custom, or are there elements of Das Yehudis that are universally binding upon all Jewish women? The answer is that not every law classified as Das Yehudis is dependent on community custom. There are certain matters that the Gemara and Shulchan Aruch explicitly define as Das Yehudis, and these standards are binding upon all Jewish women regardless of community affiliation. For example, the Gemara states that a woman who works in public while exposing her upper arm transgresses Das Yehudis. Accordingly, a garment whose sleeve merely reaches the elbow but routinely exposes the area above the elbow during ordinary movement would fall within the classical definition of Das Yehudis. Nowhere do the Gemara or Poskim state that this depends on communal practice. Thus, we find that certain elements of Das Yehudis are universal obligations for all Jewish women. Nonetheless, there are other aspects of tznius that fall under Das Yehudis which are indeed dependent upon accepted communal standards. As the Poskim explain[17], once a particular level of modesty becomes the established practice of a Torah-observant community, that standard acquires halachic significance and becomes binding upon the members of that community. Accordingly, Das Yehudis contains two dimensions: those standards explicitly established by Chazal, which apply universally, and those standards that develop through accepted Jewish custom and vary from community to community.

Throughout the remainder of this chapter, we will examine the various areas of the body and forms of dress that do not clearly fall under Das Moshe and discuss whether they are governed by universal standards of Das Yehudis or by the customs and accepted practices of specific Jewish communities.

The following behaviors constitute a violation of Das Yehudis: Wearing a decorative ornament upon her forehead or cheek in the manner of immodest non-Jewish women. Spinning or working in public while exposing her arms to others. Engaging in frivolous interaction with young men.

Shulchan Aruch Even Haezer 115 Halacha 4

C. Matters Included or Potentially Included in Das Yehudis

• Occasional exposure of the upper arm:[18] Even according to the view that regularly exposing the upper arm violates Das Moshe, a garment that covers the upper arm while stationary but permits it to become exposed during ordinary movement violates Das Yehudis. Sleeves must therefore extend sufficiently below the elbow to keep the upper arm covered while reaching, bending, and performing ordinary activities.
• Additional arm coverage:[19] In communities where Torah-observant women have accepted coverage extending farther below the elbow, that additional coverage may acquire significance under Das Yehudis.
• The lower legs and feet: The Poskim debate the precise definition of shok and whether the area below the knee, including the foot, is intrinsically required to be covered or depends partly upon accepted communal practice. According to the majority view cited in this chapter and the implied ruling of Admur, the legs and feet must be covered. Even the more lenient opinions require adherence to the established standard of a community in which women cover them.
• Stockings and their opacity: Transparent clothing does not constitute proper coverage. However, the required opacity and denier of stockings are debated, and different Torah-observant communities maintain different standards.
• Tight fitting clothing – Clothing That Reveals or Emphasizes the Body:[20] Even where an area is technically covered, a garment may remain immodest and forbidden due to Das Yehudis and Chukos Hagoyim if it closely outlines parts of the body that modest Jewish dress traditionally conceals. As a practical baseline, garments that are extremely tight and clearly outline areas that halacha requires to be covered are inconsistent with the purpose of halachic coverage. This is especially relevant where clothing prominently outlines the chest, thighs, or other private contours of the body. Coverage is not achieved merely because fabric is technically present when the garment defeats the modest purpose of covering that area.
• Attention-seeking clothing: Clothing deliberately styled to attract conspicuous attention may conflict with the refinement underlying Das Yehudis and may transgress Chukos Hagoyim. Red clothing is a prominent example.
• Styles associated with immodest culture: Clothing or adornment deliberately modeled after styles identified with immodest conduct may violate Das Yehudis and may also raise a separate concern of following non-Jewish customs.

 

D. Matters subject to debate or extra Hiddur

There are matters of Tzenius which enter a genuinely gray area. One community may regard a particular color, cut, fabric, or style as conspicuous and inconsistent with tznius, while another Torah-observant community may view the same garment as normal and acceptable. Even among Chareidi communities, standards of dress differ, and members of one group may consider the clothing of another group insufficiently refined. Such differences cannot automatically transform every unfamiliar or less-preferred style into a universal halachic prohibition.

Caution is therefore necessary before declaring that a garment violates Das Yehudis merely because it appears insufficiently modest according to one person’s sensitivities. A true prohibition requires a sound halachic basis or an established communal standard, not simply a subjective reaction. The clearer cases include garments that expose areas requiring coverage, transparent garments, and clothing that unmistakably emphasizes private contours. Questions involving colors, fashion, looseness, elegance, and the degree to which a garment attracts attention may be less definite and require careful evaluation.

 

Obligation, Community Standard, and Personal Hiddur

The proper approach is to distinguish among three categories:

1. Clearly prohibited: Clothing that exposes areas required to be covered, is transparent, or unmistakably emphasizes private contours.
2. Binding communal standards: Practices accepted by the Torah-observant women of a particular community and therefore obligatory for members of that community.
3. Personal hiddurim: Higher standards of refinement that a woman or girl may voluntarily embrace but that should not automatically be imposed upon everyone as absolute halacha.

Just as one may voluntarily accept other hiddurim in Jewish life, a woman may choose a more reserved style of dress as an expression of greater tznius. Such a choice is worthy of respect. Nevertheless, a personal stringency should remain accurately identified as a stringency and should not be used to declare that women following another legitimate Torah-observant standard are violating halacha.

Accordingly, different Orthodox communities may maintain different degrees and expressions of tznius while remaining within a valid halachic framework. No group should casually condemn another community’s accepted standard without clear halachic grounds. Honesty requires that we preserve the distinction between indisputable prohibitions, binding communal practices, legitimate areas of debate, and voluntary levels of enhanced observance.

 

 

 

4. Practically, What Must Be Covered: Basic Halachic Dress Code for Girls

A. Face: [21]

The face of a woman does not need to be covered being that it is a normally uncovered area of the body, and hence one may Daven and learn Torah in its view.

 

B. Hair [22]

An unmarried girl may leave her hair uncovered. [This is the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch and all Achronim regarding the hair of a besulah, and this has been the widespread custom amongst Jewish communities throughout the generations. Some Poskim[23] however write that although a single girl need not cover her hair, it is proper for her hair to be neatly arranged and braided, rather than worn in a completely loose and untidy fashion. Most Poskim[24] however are lenient even regarding this matter, and so is the widespread custom. Nevertheless, even according to the lenient opinions, there remains an important distinction between a Jewish approach to appearance and the styles associated with immodesty. While a single girl is not obligated to cover her hair, it is appropriate that her hairstyle reflect the dignity, refinement, and modesty befitting a Jewish daughter. Accordingly, many write that it is not fitting for a Bas Yisrael to wear her hair in an excessively attention-seeking or provocative manner.]

 

C. Neck and Chest [25]

The neck itself does not require covering. This includes the upright portion of the neck and, according to the cited authorities, the sloping area ordinarily described as part of the neck, rather than the shoulders or chest. However, the neckline must fully cover the chest and shoulder areas in every position. A blouse may therefore be worn without a collar, provided that it does not expose areas below the neck when the wearer bends, reaches, or moves normally. Special care is required with loose necklines and button-down shirts, since gaps may form between the buttons or the garment may open when bending forward.

 

D. Arms and Sleeves [26] ➡️ See ✍️ at end of this Halacha for a detailed article on the subject!

The arm from the elbow and above must be covered. Even less than a Tefach above the elbow is forbidden to be exposed.[27] Accordingly, sleeves should extend below the elbow so that the area above the elbow remains covered even during normal movement, such as reaching, lifting, bending, or working.[28] A sleeve ending exactly at the elbow is generally insufficient, as it may rise above the elbow during ordinary activity.[29] The area of the arm which is below the elbow is not required to be covered unless one has a community custom to do so.[30]

 

 

 

E. Torso and Stomach

The torso that must remain covered at all times. Clothing that is transparent or allows the skin to be clearly visible does not constitute valid coverage.

 

F. Thigh and Above the Knees – Skirts and Dresses [31]

The area from the knee and above must be covered. Even less than a Tefach above the knees is forbidden to be exposed. This applies even in areas in which dressings this way is normal amongst the secular population.^[32] Accordingly, skirts and dresses must cover the knees at all times, including while sitting, bending, walking, climbing stairs, or entering and exiting vehicles. A skirt that covers the knee only while standing but exposes it when sitting does not satisfy the halachic requirement.

 

G. Legs and Feet; Socks and Stockings [33] ➡️ See ⚖️ at end of this Halacha for a detailed article on the subject!

According to the majority of Poskim, and according to the ruling of Admur, the lower leg and feet are required to be covered in the presence of men. Therefore, women and girls should wear socks or stockings that adequately cover the lower leg. Even authorities who are lenient regarding parts of the foot generally agree that one must follow the accepted custom of one’s community. Stockings should not be transparent. Stockings that clearly reveal the skin beneath them are considered by many Poskim to be insufficient. The accepted rabbinic guidance in many Torah communities is to wear stockings that provide recognizable coverage and do not merely create the appearance of coverage.

 

✍️ From the Rav’s Desk: Why Must a Woman’s Sleeves Extend Below the Elbow?

Question

I understand that according to halacha a woman must cover the upper part of her arm. However, I often see differing sleeve lengths, with some ending right at the elbow and others extending below it. Why is it necessary for sleeves to cover below the elbow? If the obligation is only to cover the area above the elbow, why can’t the sleeve simply stop at the elbow itself?

 

Answer

Based on the Gemara and Poskim, a woman is forbidden to reveal any part of her arm above the elbow, even temporarily. Therefore, sleeves must extend somewhat below the elbow in order to ensure that the upper arm always remains covered, even when she reaches, bends, lifts, stretches, or performs household work. The Talmud and Poskim make clear that the arm may not become exposed even while a woman is engaged in work. For this reason, the accepted halachic standard is that sleeves should extend below the elbow so that the area above the elbow never becomes revealed through normal movement.

 

Explanation

The First Source: “Tefach Be’isha Ervah”: One of the primary sources discussing this subject appears in the laws of Krias Shema and prayer. The Gemara teaches that certain normally covered parts of a woman’s body have the halachic status of ervah regarding Torah study and prayer. The Shulchan Aruch rules that if a woman has a tefach of normally covered skin exposed, one may not learn Torah or daven while facing it.

Does This Mean Less Than a Tefach Is Permitted? No. A common misconception is that since the laws of Krias Shema discuss a tefach, perhaps less than a tefach may be left uncovered. This is incorrect. The tefach discussion relates primarily to whether a man may recite Torah and prayer in view of the exposed area. However, regarding the woman’s own obligation of tznius, the Poskim explain and all conclude that the entire area that requires covering must remain covered. Indeed, the author of Kevod Bas Melech notes explicitly that while the laws of Krias Shema discuss a tefach, there is strong evidence that even less than a tefach of the upper arm may not be exposed, and that the obligation is for the area to remain covered entirely, and so is the implies ruling of all the Poskim who write that the zeroa must be covered.

Proof from the Gemara in Kesubos: A powerful proof is found in the Gemara regarding a woman who is classified as violating Das Yehudis. The Gemara states that a woman who exposes her arms while working in public is acting improperly, and this ruling is codified in the Rambam and Shulchan Aruch. The Gemara does not say that only if a tefach becomes exposed there is a problem. Rather, the simple implication is that the exposure itself is improper. The Poskim therefore conclude that the upper arm must remain covered and may not become exposed through ordinary activity.

Das Moshe and Das Yehudis: The Poskim explain that there are two separate concepts involved.

Das Yehudis refers to the standards of modest conduct accepted by Jewish women. The Gemara states that a woman who reveals her arms while engaged in work in public violates Das Yehudis. Some Poskim, however, explain that this refers to a situation in which the arm becomes exposed temporarily through activity, such as weaving, kneading, or other labor. However, for a woman to regularly walk about with short sleeves that permanently expose the upper arm is more severe and enters the category of Das Moshe, as she is constantly exposing an area that halacha requires to be covered. Thus, the issue is not merely occasional exposure due to movement, but the very fact that the upper arm is intentionally left uncovered.

What Exactly Is the “Arm” That Must Be Covered? The Poskim discuss the precise definition of zero’a (arm). After analyzing numerous Talmudic and halachic sources, they conclude that the arm requiring coverage is the section extending from the elbow to the shoulder. This is the area repeatedly referred to by the Poskim as requiring complete coverage.

Why Must the Sleeve Extend Past the Elbow? This is the practical conclusion of the Poskim.

Since the upper arm may never be exposed, a sleeve ending exactly at the elbow will frequently ride upward whenever the wearer bends her arm, reaches for something, lifts a child, cooks, cleans, or performs ordinary daily activities. For this reason, the Poskim write that sleeves should extend somewhat below the elbow, so that even when the arm moves naturally, the halachically required area remains covered. In fact, one rabbinical ruling cited in the source states that sleeves should be made: “Even when they bend and straighten their arms in every manner, the area after the elbow should still remain covered.” This is the reason that traditionally accepted sleeve lengths do not stop exactly at the elbow but continue beyond it.

What If Local Custom Is to Cover More? The Poskim add an important principle. While the area above the elbow is intrinsically required to be covered, if a community has accepted the practice of covering further down the arm, then exposing those additional normally covered areas may also become prohibited under the laws governing normally covered parts of the body.  Thus, in communities where women customarily wear sleeves extending close to the wrist, greater coverage may be required.

 

Practical Summary

• The entire area above the elbow must remain covered.
• The obligation is not merely to cover up until less than a tefach of that area; the upper arm itself may not be exposed.
• The Gemara criticizes exposure of the arm even when it occurs through ordinary work.
• Temporary exposure is included in the concern of Das Yehudis.
• Constant exposure through short sleeves is even more severe.
• Therefore sleeves should extend somewhat below the elbow so that the upper arm remains covered throughout normal movement and activity.

 

Sources

• The prohibition of learning or davening opposite a tefach of a normally covered area: Admur 75:1; Michaber 75:1; Brachos 24a; Ketzos Hashulchan 9:3-6
• The ruling that the Zeroa [area above the elbow] has the status of a normally covered area and hence must be covered at all times: Michaber E.H. 115:4; Rambam Ishus 24:12; Kesubos 72a; Semag Asei 48; Bereishis Raba Vayishlach 80; Rokeaich 324; Lechem Chamudos 117; Elya Raba 75:3; Tiferes Shmuel on Rosh 37; Pischeiy Olam 75:3; Chayeh Adam 4:2; Ben Ish Chaiy Parshas Bo 8, 11; Od Yosef Chaiy Bo 1; M”B 75:2 and 7; Kaf Hachaim 75:2-3; Igros Moshe O.C. 1:42; Yabia Omer 6 O.C. 14:3; Kevodo Bas Melech 2:8; Halichos Bas Yisrael p. 70; Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:4; Lehoros Nasan 5:92; See Michaber C.M. H. 83:1; Rambam Chovel Umazik 4:15
• The ruling that even less than a Tefach above elbow is forbidden to be exposed: All Poskim ibid; Implication of Bava kama 48a and Kesubos ibid; Kevodo Bas Melech, ch. 2 Mavo 2
• The Gemara and Poskim regarding a woman exposing her arms while working: Kesubos 72a; Rambam; Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer 115; Halichos Bas Yisrael p. 70 footnote 23
• The definition of the arm requiring coverage as the area from the elbow to the shoulder: Od Yosef Chaiy Bo 1; Mishneh Ohalos 1:8; Chazon ish 16:8; Kevod Bas Melech, ch. 2
• The ruling that sleeves should extend beyond the elbow so the arm remains covered while bending and stretching: Kevod Bas Melech, ch. 2
• The ruling that temporary exposure is Das Yehudos while permanent exposure is Das Moshe: Yechaveh Das 3:67; Kevod Bas Melech, ch. 2 Mavo 1

 

⚖️ Women wearing socks and stockings: [34]

It is forbidden for men to learn Torah or Daven opposite a woman’s legs [literally, Shoka] as the legs are considered an area of privacy by a woman, and is therefore an Erva to be revealed. [It is therefore necessary for women and girls to cover their legs when they are in view of other men.^[35]]

Definition of Shoka/legs and what area of the legs must be covered: The term Shoka in modern Hebrew is translated today as the leg, or shinbone, and reaches up until the ankle. However, the Halachic definition of this term is obscure and hence disputed amongst Poskim.^[36] Some Poskim^[37] learn that the Shoka includes the entire leg, from her thighs all the way down to the toes on her feet, and thus it is forbidden for men to learn and pray in sight of these revealed areas, and consequently women must be modest to cover these areas as well. Other Poskim^[38] however learn that the Shoka only includes the legs up until the ankle, while the actual feet are not included, and do not have to be covered. Other Poskim^[39] rule that the Shoka only includes the thighs, until the knees, while from the knees and down is not included, and does not need to be covered in areas that are not accustomed to do so. Practically, majority of Poskim^[40] negate the latter opinion, and rule that even the feet must be covered in all areas, and so is the implied opinion of Admur^[41], and so is the custom amongst all Chareidi Jewry and one may not be lenient in this matter.^[42] Furthermore, even according to the lenient opinions, in an area that the custom is to be stringent, they too agree that one must be stringent and abide by these forms of modesty.^[43]]

See through socks/stockings:^[44] If a woman is wearing sheer clothing [i.e. see-through] and her flesh is visible through it, it is forbidden to learn and Daven in her presence, just like is the law if she was not covering it at all. [See Q&A for how many denier is defined as valid and not see through]

 

Summary: According to majority of Poskim, and the ruling of Admur, women and girls are required to cover their legs and feet with socks/stockings when out in public or in the presence of other men. Even those who are lenient to not cover the feet and/or legs, must cover it when in a community that is stringent. It is forbidden for a man to learn Torah or Daven in the presence of woman whose legs are uncovered. Q&A How are the legs to be covered? The area of the legs that are below the knees may be covered with stockings and are not required to be covered with a skirt.[45] However from the knees and above must be covered with a skirt, even if one is wearing stockings that cover this area.[46] The knees must remain covered even when sitting.[47]   How many deniers should the stockings be?[48] It is forbidden to wear transparent stockings that allow the skin to be seen.[49] Therefore, according to the stringent opinion above and the ruling of Admur that the legs must be covered, the stockings must be dense enough cover all the skin and opaque enough to block sight of the legs. In terms of deniers this would match a very high number, such as 70/80, and would not allow skin color stockings.[50] Practically, while some Chassidic communities follow this ruling[51], the majority of Jewry is accustomed to allow the wearing of even lesser dense stockings that are skin color.[52] The reason for this is because even skin color stockings blur the sight of the actual skin, and this suffices in this regard.[53] The accustomed Rabbinical directive is to wear no less than 40+ deniers.[54] However, some are lenient to wear even up until 20 denier. Seemingly however, this is invalid according to the astringent opinion, and ruling of Admur.   From what age are girls to begin careful to wear socks? Girls must begin to be careful to cover their legs starting from three years of age.[55] One should not be oppressive about this and should speak in a pleasant way.   May one walk around without socks in the summer? There is no leniency given in this regard in the summer versus the winter. Nevertheless, in the privacy of one’s home, when men are not present, it is permitted to walk without socks.[56]   May one be lenient to walk around at home without socks?[57] If there are men in the area, including a father or brother, then one is not to do so. If however there are no men at home, then from the letter of the law one may be lenient. A wife may likewise be lenient to walk in front of her husband without socks at times that she is not a Nida. [Nevertheless, it is an act of piety for a woman to follow all codes of modesty even when she is alone at home and by doing so one merits having special and G-d fearing children.[58]]   If one is wearing a long skirt that reaches her ankles, must she still wear stockings?[59] No. If however the skirt lifts up when she sits or bends and her skin can be seen then knee high stockings are to be worn.

Letter of Rabbi Chadakov: The following is a confidential letter sent by Rabbi Chaim Mordechai Hodakov, director of Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch, to Camp “Gan Israel” in Kfar Chabad, headed by the renowned Chossid Rabbi Itchke Gansbourg OBM, in 5733 (1973).   The letter deals with the Tznius of the girls in camp. It was copied by R. Itchke because it was marked “confidential” and the original was supposed to be sent back to the offices of Merkos.   Free Translation Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch   Confidential   BH, 9th of Tamuz 5733 Brooklyn, NY   To the Management of the girls camp Kfar Chabad   Peace and blessings!   We have received a startling rumor today about what happened during last year’s summer girls camp, that although the general conduct in camp was extremely satisfactory, and left a good impression on the campers, the management did not properly pay attention to their essential education with regard to Tznius. As an example they cite the fact that the girls did not refrain from going barefoot, not only on camp property but also as they walked around Kfar Chabad.   According to the above rumor, in addition to the problem with this conduct, this rumor has spread to a certain extent among the parents, many of which come from Chareidi homes, and who teach in Chareidi schools throughout the year.   And when such a rumor reaches these circles, it is clearly a Chilul Hashem. And there is no doubt that it also affects their general attitude towards our institutions, and specifically to send their daughters and students to our ssummer camps (and of course, it has an effect when they decide which high school they will attend, and so when they graduate from other classes).   We hurry to inform you about this rumor, and ask you to notify us immediately how real it is. In any case, this year you will certainly be careful in the conduct of Tznius, that is should be at the highest levels until there shouldn’t remain even a suspicion. And furthermore, that the camp will have a positive effect on the campers in camp, that they should behave appropriately as it befits a daughter of Israel, and they should have a positive effect among the girls whom they are around during the year.   Hoping for good news,   Wishing All The Good Forever,   Rabbi Chaim Mordechai Aizik Hodakov Director   As it is customary by us in regards to confidential letters, please return to us this letter after reading it.

 

 

 

5. Practical Applications of Tznius: What May Be Worn?

A. Pants [60]

It is forbidden for women to wear pants. This applies even towards women pants that are made specifically for women and are not worn by men.^[61] In the latter case it is disputed as to whether this prohibition is due to Lo Silbash or only due to reasons of modesty.^[62]

Under a skirt: Women are not to initially wear pants outside even for protection from the cold and even if they wear a skirt on top.^[63] However, in a time of need, one may be lenient.^[64] [See below regarding skiing]

Children: It is forbidden for girls who have reached the age of three years old to wear pants.^[65] Some Poskim^[66] rule it is even forbidden prior to this age.^[67] Practically, girls below three years old may wear girl pants^[68], however they are not to wear pants of boys unless there is no other clothing available and they need to wear it to protect from the cold or the sun.^[69]

 

May a woman wear pants while skiing?

Some Poskim^[70] rule it is forbidden to do so.^[71] Practically, however, if she is wearing it in order to protect her from the cold or for Tzenius purposes, then she may wear pants under a skirt for extra modesty and protection.^[72] It is forbidden to go skiing without a skirt due to reasons of modesty.]

 

May women wear pajama pants?

Some Poskim^[73] rule it is forbidden for women or girls to wear pajama pants even at night in an only girl’s room, and even if it is worn under a nightgown, unless she is wearing it to protect from the cold.^[74] Other Poskim^[75] however rule that pajama pants are permitted to be worn in private, while not in the presence of other men. Practically, it is permitted for women and girls to wear women pajama pants in private, under a nightgown or long T-shirt, for Tzenius purposes or in order to protect from the cold, and so is the widespread custom even amongst Chassidic and G-d fearing women.^[76] They are however not to wear the pants in front of other men that are in the house.

 

B. Tight Shirts and Blouses [77]

Even when the required areas of the body are covered, clothing that tightly outlines the shape of the chest or body can contradict the purpose of tznius. Accordingly, many Poskim caution against overly tight shirts and blouses that draw attention to areas meant to be concealed.

 

C. Tight Skirts [78]

A skirt may technically cover the knees and still fail to meet the spirit of tznius if it tightly outlines the body. For this reason, many Poskim write that skirts should not be worn in a manner that accentuates the shape of the thighs and lower body.

 

D. Leggings Under a Skirt

Leggings worn underneath a skirt or dress are technically permitted and, in certain respects, may even have an advantage over stockings that are partially transparent. Since leggings completely cover the skin and do not allow it to be seen, they provide a fuller form of coverage than many commonly worn stockings. Nevertheless, various schools, communities, and educational institutions have adopted more stringent standards regarding leggings. Some discourage their use due to concerns of appearance, style, or communal norms, even when worn underneath a skirt. Accordingly, while leggings worn under a skirt are generally permissible from a halachic perspective, one should also take into account the accepted standards and customs of one’s family, school, and community.

This serves as a good example of the distinction between a basic halachic requirement and a communal standard. While the actual coverage provided by leggings may satisfy, and in some respects exceed, the level of coverage achieved by many stockings, different communities have nevertheless adopted varying practices regarding their use.

 

E. See-Through Clothing [79]

Clothing through which the skin is clearly visible is not considered valid coverage. Accordingly, sheer fabrics that allow the body to be seen defeat the purpose of covering the area and should not be worn.

Revealing Undergarments:[80] Just as a woman is required to cover the areas of her body that halacha defines as requiring coverage, so too she should not wear clothing that allows her undergarments to become visible. Accordingly, it is improper to wear garments whose cut, fit, fabric, transparency, or design causes one’s undergarments to be seen.

This applies even if the body itself remains technically covered. The purpose of tznius is not only that the skin be covered, but that one be dressed in a dignified and modest fashion. Therefore, clothing that exposes bras, slips, undershirts, shapewear, or other undergarments is inconsistent with the standards of tznius expected of a Bas Yisrael.

Practical examples include:

• A blouse that opens between the buttons and reveals an undershirt or undergarment.
• Transparent or semi-transparent fabrics through which undergarments are visible.
• Low necklines that reveal portions of an undergarment.
• Clothing that becomes transparent in sunlight or strong lighting.

 

F. See-Through Stockings

This subject is debated among contemporary Poskim as explained in Halacha G . Some require stockings that are fully opaque, while others permit stockings that partially conceal the skin so long as the legs are not truly exposed. Different communities have adopted different standards regarding this matter.

 

G. Knee-High Socks and Stockings – May one wear knee-high socks underneath a skirt? [81]

From the letter of the law, knee-high socks may be worn so long as all areas that require coverage remain properly covered. Accordingly, the determining factor is not the type of hosiery worn, but whether the skin remains concealed at all times.

Practically, however, this can be difficult to guarantee. A skirt may shift while walking, climbing stairs, entering or exiting a vehicle, sitting down, crossing one’s legs, or in windy conditions. In such situations, the area between the top of the sock and the bottom of the skirt may become visible, and at times even portions of the knee may become exposed.

For this reason, many contemporary Poskim preferred the wearing of full stockings or thigh-high hosiery that continue above the knee, as these provide more reliable coverage in all positions and circumstances. Several leading authorities ruled that one should not rely on knee-high socks when there is a realistic possibility that the leg or knee may become exposed during ordinary movement.

Accordingly, while knee-high socks are not inherently invalid, a woman who wishes to rely on them must ensure that her skirt remains sufficiently long and that the skin remains covered even when sitting, bending, climbing stairs, entering a car, or engaging in normal daily activity. Where this cannot be assured, full stockings or thigh-high hosiery are preferable.

 

H. Short Socks Worn Over Stockings [82]

There is generally no issue with wearing socks over stockings, provided the area requiring coverage remains covered and the overall appearance remains modest. Nevertheless, various schools, communities, and educational institutions have adopted more stringent standards regarding this.

 

I. Sneakers

There is no inherent tznius issue with sneakers. The relevant questions are whether they are appropriate for the setting and whether they conform to the accepted standards of dress of one’s community.

 

J. Button-Down Shirts

Button-down shirts are entirely acceptable and are among the most common forms of modest attire. The relevant issue is not the type of shirt but rather whether it fits properly and provides appropriate coverage. Nonetheless, care must be taken that the buttons are closed in a manner that ensures the neckline remains within the required standards of tznius. A button-down shirt should not be worn in a way that exposes areas below the neck that require covering. Likewise, one must ensure that gaps do not form between the buttons, whether while standing, walking, bending, or sitting, which could reveal parts of the chest or undergarments.

 

K. T-Shirts

T-shirts may likewise be perfectly acceptable provided they satisfy the halachic requirements regarding sleeve length, neckline, fit, and overall modest appearance.

 

 

L. Spaces Between Buttons

One common issue with button-down shirts is that a gap may form between buttons, exposing areas that should remain covered. A shirt that is technically buttoned but exposes skin through the spaces between the buttons does not provide adequate coverage.

 

M. Leaving the Top Buttons Open

The neckline must remain within the standards of tznius. Whether one, two, or more buttons may be left open depends on whether the resulting opening reveals an area that requires coverage. There is no fixed number of buttons that may be left open; the determining factor is the amount of exposure created.

 

N. Wearing red colored clothing:

Red colored clothing is forbidden to be worn [by either men or women], as they are worn by gentiles for purposes of promiscuity, [and one who wears it transgresses the prohibition of “Thou shall not go in their statutes”^[83]].^[84] It is likewise not befitting for modest people to wear red colored clothing. [This especially applies to women, as red is a seductive color which attracts the eye of the male and leads to sin.^[85]] Furthermore, there is a tradition from our ancestors to avoid wearing red colored clothing.^[86] [However, some Poskim^[87] are lenient today to permit men to wear red colored clothing, as it is no longer a color that is worn by gentiles, and thus is no longer included in the prohibition of “Thou shall not go in their statutes.” Practically, one is to be stringent in this matter.^[88] This especially applies towards women, due to reasons of Tznius, and so was the custom in all Frum Jewish homes, to avoid wearing any red colored clothing.^[89]]

 

Summary: Men and women are to avoid wearing red colored clothing. This especially applies to women, due to reasons of modesty. Q&A May one wear clothing which are not entirely red but contain red parts? Some[90] write that the above avoidance of wearing red colored clothing is only when the majority of the clothing is red.   May one wear a small article of clothing which is red, such as socks, a head band or hair clip, a watch, or shoelaces?[91] One is to avoid wearing anything that is red, even if it is a small item, such as socks, a headband and the like.   May a woman wear red lipstick? Based on the above, and due to reasons of Tznius, possibly a woman is to avoid wearing bright red colored lipstick.[92] Nonetheless, other shades of red, such as maroon, or pink, are certainly valid.   May one wear undergarments that are red, and may one wear red clothing in the privacy of one’s home? Some[93] write that one is to avoid doing so.[94] Others[95] however rule it is permitted.   May children wear red colored clothing? Some Poskim[96] rule that children who are below the age of Chinuch may wear red colored clothing, while children who are above the age of Chinuch are to be educated not to do so. [However, based on the tradition recorded next, seemingly, even young children should not wear such clothing.]   May one wear pink or maroon colored clothing? The above prohibition and tradition is only associated with the color red, and not to any other shade of color, such as pink or marron.[97] However, some[98] argue that all colors associated with red are included in the avoidance, such as pink and marron. Practically, any color which shouts attention to the male eye is not to be worn by G-d fearing women.[99]

What is wrong with the color red? Despite what we may think, colors effect our feelings and attraction. Red is a color associated with blood, and is therefore the color of Eisav and Edom, of whom the verse states “By your sword you shall live.” A Jew who wears this color is spiritually affected by it.[100] Furthermore, red represents love, romance and promiscuity, and naturally draws the attention of the male eye.[101] This is referred to as the red dress effect. Studies and social experiments performed by universities and journalists have proven that the color red attracts the eye of a man more than other colors, and can be viewed as promiscuous even by women. In one study, it was found that the vast majority of wives would not allow their husbands to chat with a woman wearing a red dress, as opposed to if the same woman was wearing another color. In another study, it was found that men who dated women who wore red felt a more promiscuous atmosphere by the date, as opposed to if the same woman wore another color. The color red shouts for attention from the onlooker, and is thus avoided by the Jewish people who are traditionally modest and avoid wearing things that seek attention of others.

 

Question

May I Wear Red-Colored Shoes? Does It Make a Difference if I’m a Man or a Woman?

 

Answer:
Due to the halachic restrictions regarding wearing red clothing, you should likewise not wear red shoes. Red is considered a color associated with promiscuity and gentile practices, and wearing it transgresses “Lo Seilchu Bechukos HaGoyim” according to many Poskim. It is also viewed as immodest, especially for women, as red naturally draws attention and can lead to inappropriate thoughts.

• Men: While some authorities are lenient today for men, arguing that red is no longer a distinctively gentile or promiscuous color, the practical custom among G-d-fearing Jews is to avoid wearing any red garments—including shoes.
• Women: The restriction is even stronger for women due to reasons of tznius (modesty) and the traditional custom in all frum homes to avoid red clothing entirely.

Summary:
Both men and women should avoid wearing red-colored shoes. For women, this is especially important due to modesty concerns. If the shoes are only partially red or a shade like maroon or pink, some Poskim are lenient, but any color that draws undue attention should be avoided.

 

Sources:

See our Sefer “Topics in Practical Halacha” Vol. 3, under the Yoreh Deah section, Or, our Sefer “Shemiras Henfesh Encyclopedia” Volume 2, under the Title “Red”

 

O. Loud or Attention-Seeking Colors

This enters a genuine gray area. The concern is not any specific color but clothing whose purpose is to attract attention. However, what constitutes “attention-seeking” often depends greatly upon culture, location, age, and community standards.

 

P. Fashionable Clothing

Not every fashionable garment is immodest. A common mistake is to assume that because something is stylish it is necessarily against tznius. The true question is whether the garment violates a specific halachic principle or accepted standard of Das Yehudis. A garment may be fashionable and still be fully tznius.

 

6. Crossdressing-Lo Silbash:^[102]

A. The General Laws

A woman may not wear the clothing of a man, such as to place on herself a male turban or male hat or wear a shield and the like. She may likewise not get a male haircut. Likewise, a man may not wear the clothing of a woman, such as to wear colored female clothing or a gold necklace, in those areas that these clothing and ornaments are only worn by women.^[103] The general rule is that any clothing that is customarily worn in one’s area by only one gender is forbidden to be worn in that area by the opposite gender.^[104] [Thus, in most areas of the world, it would be forbidden for men to wear a skirt. However, in Scotland it would be permitted to wear kilts.] One who transgresses the above has transgressed a Biblical negative command and is liable for lashes.^[105]

Wearing a single garment of the opposite gender:^[106] It is forbidden to wear even a single garment of the opposite gender, even though one’s gender remains recognizable due to the other clothing of his gender that he is wearing. [One who transgresses the above has transgressed a Biblical negative command and is liable for lashes.^[107]]

Wearing clothing of the opposite gender due to the cold, or for purposes of shade or Tznius: Many Poskim^[108] rule the prohibition of Lo Silbash only applies when one wears the opposite gender’s clothing for the purpose of resembling the opposite gender.^[109] It is however permitted for one to wear the clothing of the opposite gender for other purposes, such as to protect one from the cold, or from the sun [or for other purposes]. Other Poskim^[110] however rule that doing so is forbidden. [Practically one may be lenient in this matter in a time of need.^[111]] This however only applies if one’s gender is still recognizable. It is however forbidden in all cases to wear clothing of the opposite gender in a way that his gender is no longer recognizable.^[112]

Garments and items that are not ornaments of beauty: Some Poskim^[113] rule that the prohibition of Lo Silbash only applies towards garments and items that are ornaments for a woman and make her look beautiful, however other items are permitted to be worn by a man even if he does so for the purpose of appearing like a woman. Other Poskim^[114] however question this ruling.

Wearing out of jest and fun/Purim/Chasana:^[115] It is accustomed on Purim [and by Chasunas^[116]] to allow males to wear the clothing of females and vice versa.^[117] [However many Poskim^[118] challenge this custom^[119] and thus practically one is not to do so. Some write it is to be avoided even by children.^[120] If it is recognizable that the person is a man or woman, and he or she merely wears a single clothing of the opposite gender, there is room to be lenient.^[121] The Rebbe in one letter expressed contempt for children who cross-dress for playful purposes.^[122]]

 

The reason behind the prohibition:[123] Two reasons are recorded in Rishonim: ·         Some[124] write the reason behind this prohibition is because crossdressing leads to promiscuity. ·         Others[125] write the reason is because crossdressing was practiced by idolaters.

 

B. Chinuch for Children [126]

Children who have reached the age of Chinuch must be educated not to dress in clothing of the opposite gender [unless there is no other clothing available and they need to wear it to protect from the cold or the sun].^[127] Some^[128] write this begins from age six. Other’s write this begins from age three.^[129] Other Poskim^[130] rule the obligation to educate the child begins from the age in which the child or/and parents are embarrassed for him/her to wear clothing of the opposite gender.

May one dress children under the age of Chinuch in clothing of the opposite gender? Some Poskim^[131] rule that children of all ages, even below Chinuch and even a baby, may not have clothing of the opposite gender placed on them [unless there is no other clothing available and they need to wear it to protect from the cold or the sun].^[132] Other Poskim^[133] however rule one may dress children in opposite gender clothing until the child is of age that he/she, or the parents, are embarrassed for him/her to wear clothing of the opposite gender. According to Kaballah, one is to be very careful to avoid placing the clothing of a female on a male child or vice versa even by a newborn child, as explained below.^[134]

May one place a Yarmulke on a baby daughter’s head? This is subject to the same dispute as crossdressing for the sake of jest and fun, explained above, and to whether the prohibition applies to children below the age of Chinuch/embarrassment.   

May children cross dress for a skit, play and the other purposes of the like? No.^[135] However, if he/she remains recognizable as a man/woman and merely wears a single clothing of the opposite gender, there is room to be lenient.^[136] Many however are stringent in all cases^[137], and the Rebbe expressed contempt for children who cross-dress for school plays and the like.^[138]

 

The severity of crossdressing a child in Kabala: The Shlah Hakadosh[139] relates in the name of Rav Menachem Habavli[140] that the reason behind the prohibition to cross-dress is because a clothing effects a person’s thoughts and emotions, and if one wears clothing of the opposite gender, it causes one to have an inclination towards promiscuity. Accordingly, it is written in Sefarim that when a child exits his mother’s womb, if the child is wrapped in a garment that is not of his gender, such as a male child in a female garment, or a female child in a male garment[141], then that child will have a very promiscuous inclination. Therefore, [since the gender of the child is unknown] one must be careful to wrap the child in a new garment.

 

7. The Age of Chinuch for Tzenius

Some Poskim^[142] rule that starting from age three a girl is required to dress modestly, and it is thus forbidden for a man to Daven or learn Torah in her presence from age three and onwards if she is not modestly dressed. Other Poskim^[143] however rule the necessity of dressing modestly and the prohibition of learning Torah and Davening in her presence does not begin at age three but rather at a later age, when the girl’s body is developed enough to cause men to have attraction to them [i.e. age 6-7^[144]]. Nevertheless, even in their opinion, it is proper to educate a girl to dress modestly from age three.^[145] Practically, the Rebbe^[146] concludes like the former opinion that according to Halacha girls must be educated from age three in the laws of modesty.

 

8. The Influence of a Mother’s Modesty on Her Children’s Education [147]

The Gemara relates that Kimchis merited having seven sons who all served as Kohanim Gedolim. When the Sages asked her what special merit earned her this extraordinary blessing, she replied: “The beams of my house never saw the braids of my hair.” In other words, she conducted herself with exceptional modesty and tznius. From this, an important lesson emerges for every Jewish mother: the education and spiritual development of children depend to a great extent upon the mother and the atmosphere she creates within the home. The primary requirement is not merely that the house be beautiful, organized, or well maintained, but that it be permeated with holiness, dignity, and modesty. The quality of tznius, in its practical and authentic sense, serves as a powerful foundation for the successful upbringing of children. Through her personal example and conduct, a mother instills values that shape her children’s character, faith, and commitment to Torah for the rest of their lives.

 

9. Tznius in the Home and Children’s Dress

One of the more challenging areas of chinuch in tznius is the home environment. Children naturally want to feel comfortable in their own homes and often find certain articles of clothing restrictive, especially during hot weather. Many children dislike wearing socks, stockings, or clothing that feels tight against their skin. As a result, parents are often faced with the question of how carefully tznius standards need to be maintained within the privacy of the home. To clarify this matter, several distinctions must be made.

Only women and girls are present: If only women and girls are present in the home, there is room for greater leniency regarding certain matters. For example, as discussed previously, there is basis for leniency regarding the covering of the feet and similar issues that are dependent on the presence of men.[148] Nonetheless, this leniency applies only to matters that are themselves dependent upon the presence of others. However, regarding parts of the body that halacha requires to be covered, the obligation is not dependent on who is present. Just as men are expected to cover the normally covered parts of their bodies even in private, so too girls should not become accustomed to walking around improperly dressed, even when alone in their own rooms and certainly when outside their bedrooms within the home.

Men Present: Furthermore, when males are present in the house, such as fathers and brothers, there is even more reason to maintain basic standards of tznius. Although some Poskim rule that a father may learn Torah and daven in the presence of a daughter who is below the age of adulthood even when she is not completely dressed according to the laws of tznius[149], practically speaking this is not an ideal environment in which to raise children. Aside for the halachic discussions, permitting a casual attitude toward dress within the home can weaken the overall atmosphere of tznius and refinement that parents seek to create. Likewise, while a father may view matters differently, brothers may find such situations more problematic, especially as children grow older. Therefore, as a practical educational guideline, parents should strive to ensure that the basic standards of dress required by halacha are observed within the home as well.

This does not mean turning the home into a place of constant enforcement or discomfort. On the contrary, parents should remain sensitive to the practical needs and comfort of their children. Nevertheless, children should grow up understanding that tznius is not merely something practiced when leaving the house or appearing in public, but rather a value that accompanies a Jew wherever he or she lives. The goal is not perfection, but creating a home in which the basic halachic standards of tznius are respected and naturally observed.

 

[1] See Halichos Bas Yisrael Chapters 4-8

[2] See Az Nidbaru 14:48

[3] See Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:81; Yechaveh Daas 3:67; Kesubos 72b

[4] See Mishpat Tzedek 3:3; Eidus BeYehosef 1:29; Yechaveh Daas 3:67; Kevuda Bas Melech Mavo for Chapter 1 and 2 pp. 80- 83

[5] Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:81

[6] Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:81

[7] Admur O.C.  2:1

[8] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Das Moshe Vol. 8 p.

[9] Rambam Hilchos Ishus 24:11; Sotah 8a; Kesubos 72b; Rashi and other Rishonim Kesubos ibid; Semag Asei 48

[10] Michaber E.H. 115:4; Rambam Ishus 24:12; Kesubos 72a;

[11] See Maharam Rothenberg 310; Mishpat Tzedek 3:3; Eidus BeYehosef 1:29; Tzemach Tzedek E.H. 139; Yechaveh Daas 3:67; Igros Moshe E.H. 5:17; Lehoros Nasan 5 Kuntrus; Kevuda Bas Melech Mavo for Chapter 1 and 2 pp. 80- 83

[12] The Upper Arm and Lower Leg: Not all Poskim agree regarding the exact scope of Das Moshe. While many authorities maintain that the entire upper arm, from the shoulder until the elbow, falls under Das Moshe and is therefore subject to the intrinsic Biblical standards of modest dress, others disagree. According to their understanding, the requirement to cover the area above the elbow is part of Das Yehudis [i.e. Rabbinically Forbidden], while Das Moshe only applies to more fundamental areas of coverage. According to this approach, the common requirement that sleeves extend below the elbow is certainly binding, but its classification is under Das Yehudis rather than Das Moshe. Likewise, there is significant discussion among the Poskim regarding the lower leg below the knee. While all agree that the thigh and knee area itself require coverage, there is a major debate regarding the status of the area from the knee down to the foot. Some authorities classify its coverage as part of Das Moshe, while others view it as an obligation of Das Yehudis that depends upon accepted Jewish standards of modest dress. This subject will be discussed separately in detail in the section dealing with the laws of stockings, socks, and lower-leg coverage.

[13] See Az Nidbaru 9:57; Yechaveh Daas 3:67; Kevuda Bas Melech Mavo for Chapter 1 and 2 p. 80

[14] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Das Moshe Vol. 8 p.

[15] See Michaber E.H. 115:4; Rambam Issurei Biyah 24:12; Ishus 24:12; Rashi, Shita Mekubetzes, Tosafus Rid, Meiri on Kesubos 72b; Midrash raba Bamidbar 8:10; Kevuda Bas Melech Mavo for Chapter 1 and 2 p. 5

[16] See Az Nidbaru 9:57; Yechaveh Daas 3:67; Kevuda Bas Melech Mavo for Chapter 1 and 2 p. 80

[17] See Admur 75:1; Od Yosef Chaiy Bo 1 and 17; Kevuda Bas Melech 2 Mavo 2 footnote 10 and 14

[18] Kesubos 72a; Rambam; Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer 115; Halichos Bas Yisrael p. 70 footnote 23

[19] Kevudah Bas Melech 2:9 p. 114

[20] See Minchas Shlomo 3:103-15; Kevudah Bas Melech 2:19 p. 143; Levusha Shel Torah

[21] Admur 75:1

[22] Admur 75:4; Kuntrus Achron 75:3; Michaber 75:2; Rosh Bracvhos 3:37; Ravayah 76; Bach E.H. 21; Perisha 21; Beis Shmuel E.H. 21:5; Pischeiy Teshuvah E.H. 152:6; M”B 75:11; Chazon Ish 16:8

[23] M”A 75:3; M”B 75:12; Kaf Hachaim 75:16

[24] Setimas Admur and all Poskim ibid who omit Magen Avraham ibid; Machatzis Hashekel and Magen Giborim, brought in M”B 75:12; Yeshuas Yaakov 75; Kevod Bas Melech, ch. 1:4 P. 22

[25] Tiferes Shmuel on the Rosh, Berachos 3:37; Derishah, Orach Chaim 303; Levushah Shel Torah, Vol. I, §§34–36; and Halichos Shlomo, ch. 20, n. 22; Piskeiy Teshuvos 75 footnote 29; Kevodo Bas Melech, ch. 2:6 p. 106

[26] Michaber E.H. 115:4; Rambam Ishus 24:12; Kesubos 72a; Semag Asei 48; Bereishis Raba Vayishlach 80; Rokeaich 324; Lechem Chamudos 117; Elya Raba 75:3; Tiferes Shmuel on Rosh 37; Pischeiy Olam 75:3; Chayeh Adam 4:2; Ben Ish Chaiy Parshas Bo 8, 11; Od Yosef Chaiy Bo 1; M”B 75:2 and 7; Kaf Hachaim 75:2-3; Igros Moshe O.C. 1:42; Yabia Omer 6 O.C. 14:3; Kevodo Bas Melech 2:8; Halichos Bas Yisrael p. 70; Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:4; Lehoros Nasan 5:92; See Michaber C.M.  E.H. 83:1; Rambam Chovel Umazik 4:15; Kevodo Bas Melech, ch. 2:8-9 P. 109

[27] All Poskim ibid; Implication of Bava Kama 48a and Kesubos ibid; Kevodo Bas Melech, ch. 2 Mavo 2

[28] Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer 115:4; Kesubos 72a; Rambam; Halichos Bas Yisrael p. 70 footnote 23

[29] Kevod Bas Melech, ch. 2

[30] Admur 75:1; Od Yosef Chaiy Bo 1; Mishneh Ohalos 1:8; Chazon Ish 16:8; Kevod Bas Melech, ch. 2

[31] Admur 75:1; Kevodo Bas Melech, ch. 2:10-13

[32] Ketzos Hashulchan 9:3; Chayeh Adam; Tzemach Tzedek 1:139

[33] Admur 75:1; Rav Chisda in Brachos 24a; Simple implication of Admur ibid “Although the Shoka is not a private area by a man as it is customary for it to be revealed in areas they walk without Anpalaot:socks”; Implication of Mishneh Ohalos ibid according to many Mefarshim; Implication of Michaber Y.D. 194:10; Makor Chaim 75:1; Shut Rav Akiva Eiger Tinyana 28 based on Tosafos Menachos 37a; Tzur Yaakov 2:1; Chasam Sofer E.H. 69; Shulchan Hatahor 75:1 based on Zohar Naso 142 that “a Shoka of a woman is an Erva and the leg of a woman is an Erva”; Mahariy Shteif 43

[34] Admur 75:1; Rav Chisda in Brachos 24a

[35] This is necessary in order to not cause men to stumble in forbidden thoughts, as well as so they not transgress learning or Davening before an Erva.

[36] See Mishneh Ohalos 1:8 and Mefarshim there; Rashbam Baba Basra 57; Mishneh Keilim 14:8 and Mefarshim there; Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:4; Halichos Bas Yisrael 4:4 footnote 12

[37] Simple implication of Admur ibid “Although the Shoka is not a private area by a man as it is customary for it to be revealed in areas they walk without Anpalaot:socks”; Implication of Mishneh Ohalos ibid according to many Mefarshim; Implication of Michaber Y.D. 194:10; Makor Chaim 75:1; Shut Rav Akiva Eiger Tinyana 28 based on Tosafos Menachos 37a; Tzur Yaakov 2:1; Chasam Sofer E.H. 69; Shulchan Hatahor 75:1 based on Zohar Naso 142 that “a Shoka of a woman is an Erva and the leg of a woman is an Erva”; Mahariy Shteif 43

[38] Simple implication of Chayeh Adam 4:2 “The bottom of her feet [Parsos Ragleha] in areas that women walk barefoot may be revealed.” [So understands Shevet Halevi 1:1 and Beis Baruch on Chayeh Adam and Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:4. However, see Shaar Hatziyon 75:4 who seemingly learns the Chayeh Adam permits until the knee, Vetzaruch Iyun]

[39] P”M 75 M”Z 1 “It is known that the Shoka is from the knee and up [thigh] and thus it is possible that from the knee and down in areas that women walk with this area revealed, it is permitted.” [See however Shut Magidos 24]; M”B 75:2 and Shaar Hatziyon 75:4; [Rules based on P”M ibid that it is permitted, even though the P”M only suggested this matter.]; Igros Moshe E.H. 4:100; Kovetz Tehsuvos of Rav Elyashiv1:13

[40] Salmas Chaim 88; Minchas Yitzchak 6:10; Divrei Yatziv 37; Beir Moshe 8:1; Shevet Halevi 1:1; 3:91; Chazon Ish 16:8 [however he later states that it is difficult to rule on this matter]; Az Nidbaru 7:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 75 footnote 26

[41] As is evident from the continuation of Admur ibid that although men are accustomed to walk around barefoot, in those areas that they walk without socks, nevertheless by a woman it is considered a modest area. Thus, we see that it includes also the feet.

[42] Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:4

[43] M”B 75:2

[44] Admur 75:3; M”A 75:1; Bahag Brachos 3

[45] See Halichos Bas Yisrael 4 footnote 12 who learns that according to the Poskim who rule the legs are part of the Shok, then the legs must be entirely covered by a skirt and those lenient to wear stockings are following the opinions who rule the Shok is not the legs. However in truth, nowhere does it say that the legs or skin must be covered by a specific form of dress, and this matter is seemingly relevant to Das Yehudis, in accordance to community custom, as well as provocative areas. Thus, since from the knees and above is a provocative area for a man even when covered, therefore it must be covered in a way that its shape is not seen. However the area of the legs which are below the knees, and don’t cause as much provocation to men, may be covered in a way that shapes the legs. [See Igros Moshe ibid; Rav Zilber in Malbushei Nashim p. 11, brought in Halichos Bas Yisrael ibid footnote 11]

[46] Halichos Bas Yisrael ibid in name of Poskim; See Igros Moshe ibid

[47] Halichos Shlomo ibid; Halichos Bas Yisrael ibid in name of Poskim

[48] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 75 footnote 27

[49] Based on Admur ibid; Mishneh Halachos 12:5; Az Nidbaru 10:34; Poskim in Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid;

[50] Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[51] Satmar and other Hungarian Chassidic communities

[52] See Igros Moshe E.H. 4:100; Halichos Shlomo 2:12 in name of Rav SZ”A

[53] Igros Moshe ibid “In truth the skin is not really viewable through the stockings and it only seems so due to the camouflage color. The proof is that if the stockings were to be black then in truth it would not even appear to others that they are seeing the skin”; Halichos Shlomo ibid

[54] Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

^[55] Chayeh Adam; Biur Halacha 75:1 “Tefach Megula” in name of Shulchan Shlomo; Ketzos Hashulchan Vol 1, Haaros Page 90; Shut Daas Sofer; Likutei Sichos [18 p 448] and other prominent Rabbis of this generation; See letter of Rav Farkash in “The Jewel of our Crown” page 79

Other opinions: However, the Chazon Ish rules that the laws of modesty only begin at a later age [6:7].

[56] Halichos Shlomo 2:12 in name of Rav SZ”A

[57] See Halichos Shlomo 2:12 in name of Rav SZ”A; Minchas Yitzchak 6:10

[58] Rebbe in Toras Menachem 1982 4:2190 [printed in Shulchan menachem 6:66] regarding Kimchis

The reason: As if one is not careful at home when alone it can become a second nature and lead her not to be careful when someone enters the house. [Rebbe ibid]

[59] See Shevet halevi 5:77

[60] Minchas Yitzchak 2:108; Shevet Halevi 2:63; See Ohel Yaakov 188:44-45

[61] The reason: As pants is mainly a men’s clothing and hence it is considered Beged Ish for a woman to wear it even if it is a woman’s style. [Minchas Yitzchak ibid; Shevet Halevi ibid] In addition, these clothing are Bigdei Zima, clothing of promiscuity which shape a woman’s legs, thighs and private area. [Minchas Yitzchak ibid; Shevet Halevi ibid] Some Poskim however rule that women pants which are different than men pants do not contain Beged Ish as it is not similar to men’s clothing, although it would nevertheless be forbidden due to being immodest. [See Avnei Tzedek Y.D. 72; Mishneh Halachos 12:353]

[62] See previous footnote

[63] The reason: Although doing so is not forbidden due to Beged Ish, being she is wearing it for protection from the cold, nevertheless it is not a modest and elegant form of dress.

[64] Avnei Tzedek Y.D. 73; Shevet Halevi 2:63; See Minchas Yitzchak ibid

The reason: As according to most Poskim it does not transgress Lo Silbash being she is not intending to wear it in order to resemble a man, and even according to the dissenting Poskim, if she is wearing women pants, perhaps they do not at all contain a prohibition of Lo Silbash. Regarding modesty, since the pants is covered by a skirt it does not present any prohibition.

[65] The reason: As starting from three years of age we educate a girl to dress modestly. Furthermore, once she reaches the age of Chinuch, it is forbidden for her to wear men’s clothing.

[66] Minchas Yitzchak 2:108

[67] The reason: As it is forbidden to feed children a prohibition even from one day old. [See Admur 343:2] Furthermore, by Lo Silbash perhaps the person who places the clothing onto another also transgresses. [Minchas Yitzchak ibid]

[68] As a) They are different than boys pants and do not contain Lo Silbash [Avnei Tzedek Y.D. 72 and perhaps even according to Minchas Yitzchak 2:108 and Shevet Halevi 2:63 they would agree that by a toddler it is not considered at all a boys clothing any more than a girl being that so is the common practice] B) There is no immodesty involved as they are below the age of three.

[69] See Minchas Yitzchak ibid

The reason: As it is forbidden for an adult to dress even a child with men’s clothing as it is forbidden to feed a prohibition to a child of any age.

[70] Minchas Yitzchak 2:108

[71] The reason: As although many Poskim rule a woman may wear men’s clothing to protect her from the cold and the like, nevertheless here she is placing herself into the situation, and in this case according to all Poskim we tell her simply not to go skiing and thus not have a need to wear the pants, [Minchas Yitzchak ibid]

[72] See Avnei Tzedek Y.D. 73; Shevet Halevi 2:63

The reason: As according to most Poskim it does not transgress Lo Silbash being she is not intending to wear it in order to resemble a man. It is difficult to accept the argument of the Minchas Yitzchak ibid as if so “Nasnu Devarecha Leshiurim.”

[73] Minchas Yitzchak 2:108

[74] The reason: As the prohibition of Lo Silbash applies even when wearing the clothing in private, not in front of men. [ibid]

[75] See Avnei Tzedek Y.D. 73 and Rivivos Efraim 5:534 and Ohel Yaakov p. 308 in name of Rav Elyashiv and Rav Wozner and many Poskim of today that pajama pants do not contain the prohibition of Lo Silbash as they are not men’s clothing at all and are not made to appear in public

[76] Avnei Tzedek Y.D 73

The reason: As according to most Poskim it does not transgress Lo Silbash being she is not intending to wear it in order to resemble a man.

[77] See Minchas Shlomo 3:103-15; Kevudah Bas Melech 2:19 p. 143; Levusha Shel Torah

[78] See Minchas Shlomo 3:103-15; Kevudah Bas Melech 2:19 p. 143; Levusha Shel Torah

[79] Admur 75:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 9:5

[80] See Shach Y.D. 340:22; Bach Y.D. 340; Daas Torah Mahrsham O.C. 75:1; Kevodo Bas Melech 2:16

[81] Oz Vehadar Levusha p. 327; Malbushei Kavod p. 55

[82] Oz Vehadar Levusha p. 326

[83] See Michaber Y.D. 178:1; Maharik Shoresh 88; Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:81; Dibros Eliyahu 34

^[84] Rama Y.D. 178:1; Beis Yosef 178; Maharik Shoresh 88; Aruch on Brachos 20a

[85] Aruch ibid; Rashi on the verse [Bereishis 49:11] “Ubidam Anavim Susa” that “Clothing which are colored with the blood of grape are worn by women to seduce the male, and is therefore called Susa by the verse”; Dibros Eliyahu 34

^[86] Shach 178:3; Maharik ibid; See Drashos Chasam Sofer 2:244

The reason: See below for the discussion of “What is wrong with the color red”

[87] Darkei Teshuvah 178:16 in name of Rav Yitzchak Elchonan of Kovna; Orchos Rabbeinu that so ruled Rav Kanievsky even regarding women; Dibros Eliyahu 34 regarding men; See Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:81 based on Maharik ibid that red clothing is considered “Nidnud Peritzus” and hence may not be worn due to Chukos Hagoyim so long as Jews avoid wearing it. Thus, we see its dependent not on whether the gentiles actually wear it, but on whether Jews avoid wearing it or not.

[88] See Shach ibid that aside for Chukos Hagoyim, we have a tradition not to wear it, and hence why should the tradition stop simply because Chukos Hagoyim is no longer applicable; See Igros Moshe ibid; So rules Rav Eliezer Melamed and Poskim brought in next footnote [although most only discuss women and not men]

[89] Shevet Halevi 6:24-2; Beir Moshe 4:147 “Such clothing, such as a red skirt or blouse, are an abomination, and such clothing cannot be found amongst G-d fearing Jews.”; The Chasam Sofer did not allow any red clothing into his home; See Drashos Chasam Sofer 2:244; Rav SZ”A, and Rav Chaim Kanievsky, brought in Malbushei Kavod ibid; Halichos Bas Yisrael 7 footnote 7 in name of Rav Elyashiv; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:136; Dibros Eliyahu 34

[90] Halichos Bas Yisrael 7 footnote 7 in name of Rav Elyashiv; Dibros Eliyahu 34

[91] Beir Moshe 4:147-13

[92] I have not found this matter discussed in the Poskim, and have not found any mention of avoidance of red colored makeup in the Poskim. Nonetheless, due to reasons of Tzenius, it is improper for a woman to wear makeup in a way that attracts undue attention from bystanders, and hence a bright red lipstick which highlights the lips very extravagantly should be avoided.

[93] Malbushei Kavod 1:25 in name of Rav Chaim Kanievsky

[94] The reason: As it may involve Bechukoseihem Lo Seileichu, and certainly goes against the tradition and bad effect that red clothing brings onto a Jew.

[95] Rav SZ”A, brought in Malbushei Kavod ibid; See Dibros Eliyahu 34

[96] Shevet Halevi 6:24

[97] Halichos Bas Yisrael 7 footnote 7 in name of Rav Elyashiv

[98] Hatzenius Vehayeshua 12 of the Admur of Zutchka; See Shevet Halevi 6:24 that any color which is immodest is included in the prohibition

[99] See Shevet Halevi 6:24 that any color which is immodest is included in the prohibition

[100] See Drashos Chasam Sofer 2:244 in name of Rabbeinu Bechayeh that red draws down the power of Maadim, which is detrimental for a Jew

[101] Aruch ibid; Rashi on the verse [Bereishis 49:11] “Ubidam Anavim Susa” that “Clothing which are colored with the blood of grape are worn by women to seduce the male, and is therefore called Susa by the verse”; For a secular study on this matter-see here http:::www.sciencemag.org:news:2012:02:red-dress-effect [This site was viewed by us with a filter which prevents potential immodest pictures, which may or may not be on this page. You can avoid immodest pictures from showing up by attaching a filter to your internet, and/or disabling your browser from showing pics. In general, every G-d fearing Jew must have some filtering system and/or picture blocking method installed onto his internet, to allow for Kosher internet access.]

[102] Yoreh Deah 182:5; Rambam Avodas Kochavim 12:10; Nazir 59a; Parshas Ki Seitzei “Lo Yihyeh Keli Gever..” “Lo Yilbash Gever Simlas Isha”

[103] Michaber ibid

[104] Rama 182:5

[105] Taz 182:6; Chinuch Mitzvas 542 [women crossdressing] 543 [Men crossdressing]; Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos Mitzvah 40; In Hilchos Avodas Kochavim it is listed as two Mitzvos;

[106] Rama ibid; Chochmas Adam 90:1

[107] Taz 182:6

[108] Shach 182:7 in name of Bach; Taz 182:4; Avnei Tzedek 72; Shraga Hameir 7:124 that the Shach agrees with the Bach on this matter; See Darkei Teshuvah 182:9; See also Admur 301:6 based on M”A 301:16 and Gemara Shabbos that a female ring is not considered a Shinuiy for a aman to carry through wearing on his finger on Shabbos being that at times during the week they wear it on their finger to bring it to be fixed. Thus we see that if one wears the item for non-cross-dressing purposes, it is permitted

[109] The reason: As the verse states “Eideiy Isha” which refers to ornaments that beautify a woman and make her appear like a woman. [see Taz ibid]

[110] Yad Haketana 2:6 [p. 279], brought in Darkei Teshuvah 182:9; Binas Adam 90:94; The Shach ibid questions the ruling of the Bach, although some write that his question is not relating to this matter, of which he also agrees; See Divrei Chaim 2:62 [prohibits even to prevent pain]; Maharsham 2:243; Yabia Omer 6:14-4

[111] Shraga Hameir 7:124; Maharsham 2:243 rules one may only be lenient if it is recognizable to the viewer that one is doing so due to the cole and the like; Bach ibid writes one may be lenient because one has no other choice; See Minchas Yitzchak 2:108-4

[112] Shach ibid

[113] Bach, brought in Shach 182:7

[114] Shach ibid

[115] Rama 696:8; Mahriy Mintz 16; Hisorerus Teshuvah 500

[116] Custom mentioned [and negated] in Yireim 96, brought in Taz Yoreh Deah 182:4; Shach 182:7

[117] The reason: This is not forbidden due to the cross-dressing prohibition as the intent is for mere joy [as opposed to promiscuity]. [Rama ibid]

Other opinions in Rama: According to some opinions, there remains a prohibition [for a man to wear women’s clothing, or vice versa, even in such a case]. [Mahariy Brin, brought in Rama ibid and Darkei Moshe 696 regaridng Rabbinical Kilayim and Rama in Darkei Moshe explains that certainly this applies to Lo Silbash] Practically the custom is like the lenient opinion. [Rama ibid]

[118] Opinion [Mahariy Brin] brought in Rama ibid and Darkei Moshe 696; Bach brought in Taz Yoreh Deah 182:4 [Taz concludes “One who is stringent is blessed”]; Shach 182:7; Yireim 96 negates the custom; Teshuvas Harambam; Shalah; Kneses Hagedola; M”B 696:30; Kisei Eliyahu 696:3; Birkeiy Yosef 696:13 and Yoreh Deah 182:3; Beis Oved 696:10; Kaf Hachaim 696:57; Aruch Hashulchan 696:12

[119] The reason: As the allowance to wear clothing of the opposite gender for mere playfulness is only in a case that one does not appear like the opposite gender, being that he:she remains wearing clothing of also his:her gender. [See Shach ibid and Atzei Levona 182]

[120] Piskeiy Teshuvos 696:14; Nitei Gavriel 75:7

[121] P”M 696 M”Z 4; M”B 696:30 in name of P”M; Implication of Shach 182:7 as explained in Atzei Levona

[122] Igros Kodesh 10:238, printed in Shulchan Menachem 5:56

[123] See Arugas Habosem 138:4

[124] Chinuch Mitzvas 542-543; Rashi Dvarim 22:5; See Nazir 59a that it is a Toeiva

[125] Rambam Moreh Nevushim 3:37, brought in Chinuch ibid

[126] Meaning that they are getting dressed themselves, regarding if they may be dressed by an adult-see next Q&A!

[127] Admur 343:2-3 regarding all Mitzvos; Shevet Halevi 6:118-4

[128] See Ohel Yaakov p. 291

[129] See Ohel Yaakov ibid footnote 33 in name of Rav Elyashiv

[130] Igros Moshe E.H. 4:62-4

[131] Minchas Yitzchak 2:108; Kerem Shlomo 17-3; Minchas Peri 2:66; Poskim brought in Ohel Yaakov 292

[132] See Minchas Yitzchak ibid

The reason: As it is forbidden for an adult to dress even a child with men’s clothing as it is forbidden to feed a prohibition to a child of any age. [Minchas Yitzchak ibid, based on Admur 343:5]

[133] Igros Moshe E.H. 4:62-4

[134] Shlah Hakadosh Parshas Ki Seitzei in name of Rav Menachem Habavli Taamei Hamitzvos Lavin 313-314

[135] Shevet Hakehasi 2:258; Mishneh Halachos 7:43; Ohel Yaakov p. 288

The reason: This matter is subject to the same dispute mentioned regarding cross-dressing on Purim or for a wedding, in which we concluded like the stringent opinion. Furthermore, there is room to learn that in this case it would be forbidden according to all, being that the joy of Purim and a wedding is Simcha related, as opposed to a mere skit. [Shevet Hakehasi ibid]

[136] As the implication from the Poskim is that whenever the dressing is done for jest and not for promiscuity, it is permitted if one’s gender remains recognizable, even if the joy is not for the sake of a Mitzvah.

[137] Ohel Yaakov p. 287 in name of Harav Gerelitz that it is forbidden for girls in a play to wear a hat or Tzitzis; Orchos Rabbeinu 1:226

[138] Igros Kodesh 10:238, printed in Shulchan Menachem 5:56

[139] Parshas Ki Seitzei

[140] Taamei Hamitzvos Lavin 313-314

[141] It is unclear if the intent here is a garment that is made for a female versus male, or a garment worn by a female versus male, or both.

[142] So rule regarding a man praying or learning in presence of a three year old girl who is not modestly dressed: Biur Halacha 75:1 “Tefach Megula” in name of Shulchan Shlomo; Ketzos Hashulchan Vol 1, Haaros Page 90 in name of Chayeh Adam [that from 3 years old a girl is considered an Ervah regarding Shema and Torah learning]; Shut Daas Sofer 1:11; Ben Ish Chaiy Bo 8 brought in Kaf Hachaim 75:10 [concludes to be stringent when possible]; Halichos Shlomo 20:9 in name of Rav SZ”A; Az Nidbaru 13:1; Likkutei Sichos [18 p 448] and other prominent Rabbis of this generation; See letter of Rav Farkash in “The Jewel of our Crown” page 79; Chesed Lealafim 75:8, brought in Kaf Hachaim 75:10, leaves this matter in question regarding any Ketana; Ashel Avraham of Butchach 75 brings sides to be stringent and lenient in this matter. See Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:8 footnote 82aa

[143] So rule regarding a man praying in view of a young girl not properly dressed: Yifei Laleiv 75:2 [brings up question and leans to be lenient]; Maharam Brisk 2:70; Chelek Levi 36; Salmas Chaim 76; The Chazon Ish [16:9] famously ruled that the laws of modesty for a girl do not begin from age 3 but rather from a later age from when their bodies are developed enough to cause men to have desire for them; Chesed Lealafim 75:8, brought in Kaf Hachaim 75:10, leaves this matter in question regarding any Ketana; Ashel Avraham of Butchach 75 brings sides to be stringent and lenient in this matter. See Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:8 footnote 81;

[144] See Az Nidbaru 12:49; Or Letziyon 2:6-12; Piskeiy Teshuvos 75:8 footnote 87

[145] Salmas Chaim 67; Orchos Rabbeinu 2:204 that this applies even according to Chazon Ish ibid

[146] The Rebbe in a letter in Likutei Sichos [18 p 448] writes that according to Shulchan Aruch the age of Tznius needs to begin at three years old and a day, although one should not be oppressive about this and should speak in a pleasant way. [For a translation of the letter see “Beautiful within” page 39]

[147] Toras Menachem 16:262

[148] Halichos Shlomo 2:12 in name of Rav SZ”A

[149] Biur Halacha 75:1 “Tefach” in name of Shulchan Shlomo