אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אִילְמָלֵא לֹא נִיתְּנָה תּוֹרָה, הָיִינוּ לְמֵידִין צְנִיעוּת מֵחָתוּל, וְגָזֵל מִנְּמָלָה, וַעֲרָיוֹת מִיּוֹנָה. דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ מִתַּרְנְגוֹל — שֶׁמְּפַיֵּיס וְאַחַר כָּךְ בּוֹעֵל.
Similarly, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Even if the Torah had not been given, we would nonetheless have learned modesty from the cat, which covers its excrement, and that stealing is objectionable from the ant, which does not take grain from another ant, and forbidden relations from the dove, which is faithful to its partner, and proper relations from the rooster, which first appeases the hen and then mates with it.
תַּנְיָא הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַדֵּעוֹת בְּמַאֲכָל כָּךְ דֵּעוֹת בְּנָשִׁים יֵשׁ לְךָ אָדָם שֶׁזְּבוּב נוֹפֵל לְתוֹךְ כּוֹסוֹ וְזוֹרְקוֹ וְאֵינוֹ שׁוֹתֵהוּ וְזוֹ הִיא מִדַּת פַּפּוּס בֶּן יְהוּדָה שֶׁהָיָה נוֹעֵל בִּפְנֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְיוֹצֵאוְיֵשׁ לְךָ אָדָם שֶׁזְּבוּב נוֹפֵל לְתוֹךְ כּוֹסוֹ וְזוֹרְקוֹ וְשׁוֹתֵהוּ וְזוֹ הִיא מִדַּת כׇּל אָדָם שֶׁמְּדַבֶּרֶת עִם אַחֶיהָ וּקְרוֹבֶיהָ וּמַנִּיחָהּוְיֵשׁ לְךָ אָדָם שֶׁזְּבוּב נוֹפֵל לְתוֹךְ תַּמְחוּי מוֹצְצוֹ וְאוֹכְלוֹ זוֹ הִיא מִדַּת אָדָם רַע שֶׁרוֹאֶה אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ יוֹצְאָה וְרֹאשָׁהּ פָּרוּעַ וְטוֹוָה בַּשּׁוּקוּפְרוּמָה מִשְּׁנֵי צְדָדֶיהָ וְרוֹחֶצֶת עִם בְּנֵי אָדָם
§ It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: Just as there are different attitudes with regard to food, so too, there are different attitudes with regard to women. With regard to food, you have a person who, when a fly falls into his cup, he throws out the wine with the fly and does not drink it. And this is comparable to the demeanor of Pappos ben Yehuda with regard to his wife, as he would lock the door before his wife and leave so that she would not see any other man.And you have a person who, when a fly falls into his cup, he throws out the fly and drinks the wine. And this is comparable to the demeanor of any common man, whose wife speaks with her siblings and relatives, and he lets her do so.And you have a man who, when a fly falls into his serving bowl, he sucks the fly and eats the food. This is the demeanor of a bad man, who sees his wife going out into the street with her head uncovered, and spinning in the marketplace immodestly,and with her garment open from both sides, and bathing with men, and ignores it.
אָמַר ר׳ יִצְחָק: טֶפַח בָּאִשָּׁה עֶרְוָה. לְמַאי? אִילֵּימָא לְאִסְתַּכּוֹלֵי בַּהּ, וְהָא אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: לָמָּה מָנָה הַכָּתוּב תַּכְשִׁיטִין שֶׁבַּחוּץ עִם תַּכְשִׁיטִין שֶׁבִּפְנִים — לוֹמַר לָךְ כׇּל הַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בְּאֶצְבַּע קְטַנָּה שֶׁל אִשָּׁה, כְּאִילּוּ מִסְתַּכֵּל בִּמְקוֹם הַתּוֹרֶף.אֶלָּא בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ וְלִקְרִיאַת שְׁמַע.אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: שׁוֹק בָּאִשָּׁה עֶרְוָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״גַּלִּי שׁוֹק עִבְרִי נְהָרוֹת״, וּכְתִיב: ״תִּגָּל עֶרְוָתֵךְ וְגַם תֵּרָאֶה חֶרְפָּתֵךְ״. אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: קוֹל בָּאִשָּׁה — עֶרְוָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי קוֹלֵךְ עָרֵב וּמַרְאֵךְ נָאוֶה״. אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: שֵׂעָר בָּאִשָּׁה עֶרְוָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״שַׂעֲרֵךְ כְּעֵדֶר הָעִזִּים״.
Rabbi Yitzḥak stated: An exposed handbreadth in a woman constitutes nakedness. The Gemara asks: Regarding whichhalakha was this said? If you say that it comes to prohibit looking at an exposed handbreadth in her, didn’t Rav Sheshet say: Why did the verse enumerate “anklets and bracelets, rings, earrings and girdles” (Numbers 31:50), jewelry that is worn externally, over her clothing, e.g., bracelets, together with jewelry worn internally, beneath her clothing, near her nakedness, e.g., girdles? This was to tell you: Anyone who gazes upon a woman’s little finger is considered as if he gazed upon her naked genitals, for if his intentions are impure, it makes no difference where he looks or how much is exposed; even less than a handbreadth.Rather, it is referring even to his wife, with regard to the recitation of Shema. One may not recite Shema before an exposed handbreadth of his wife.Along these lines, Rav Ḥisda said: Even a woman’s exposed leg is considered nakedness, as it is stated: “Uncover the leg and pass through the rivers” (Isaiah 47:2), and it is written in the following verse: “Your nakedness shall be revealed and your shame shall be seen” (Isaiah 47:3). Shmuel further stated: A woman’s singing voice is considered nakedness, which he derives from the praise accorded a woman’s voice, as it is stated: “Sweet is your voice and your countenance is alluring” (Song of Songs 2:14). Similarly, Rav Sheshet stated: Even a woman’s hair is considered nakedness, for it too is praised, as it is written: “Your hair is like a flock of goats, trailing down from Mount Gilead” (Song of Songs 4:1).
(א)מקום התפילה / איסור אמירת דברים שבקדושה מול ערווה
(ב) אסור לומר דברים שבקדושה מול ערווה, שנאמר (דברים כג, טו): "וְהָיָה מַחֲנֶיךָ קָדוֹשׁ, וְלֹא יִרְאֶה בְךָ עֶרְוַת דָּבָר וְשָׁב מֵאַחֲרֶיךָ". כאשר גבר רואה גבר אחר, או אשה רואה אשה אחרת, רק כאשר מקום הערווה עצמו גלוי אסור לומר דברים שבקדושה. אבל לגבי גבר שרואה אשה, אמרו חכמים (ברכות כד, ב): "טפח באשה ערווה". וכוונתם, שכל מקום שנשים רגילות לכסות – אסור לגלות, ואם הוא מגולה, אסור לומר מולו דברים שבקדושה (גדרי דין זה נתבארו בשו"ע או"ח סימן עה, ובפניני הלכה ליקוטים ג' ו, ג-ו).
(ג) ואף שצריך לחנך ילדות ללבוש צנוע מגיל חינוך, האיסור לומר דברים שבקדושה למול טפח שרגילים לכסותו מתחיל משעה שהבת מתחילה להתבגר (שם ו, ז).
(ד) וכן לגבי שער הראש, אמרו חכמים (ברכות כד, א): "שער באשה ערווה". וכוונתם, לאשה נשואה, שאם אינה מכסה את שער ראשה, אין לומר מולה דברים שבקדושה (גדרי כיסוי הראש נתבארו בפניני הלכה שם ו, יז-יט).
(ה) הצריך להתפלל או לברך ברכות או ללמוד תורה, ועומדת מולו אשה שמגלה טפח ממקומות המכוסים, לכתחילה יפנה עצמו לכיוון אחר, כך שלא יוכל לראותה. ואם אינו יכול להסתובב, יביט בסידור או יעצום את עיניו, ויאמר דברים שבקדושה (שו"ע או"ח עה, ו; משנה ברורה עה, סעיפים: א, כט).
(ו) לגבי כיסוי הראש, כתבו כמה אחרונים, שהואיל ולצערנו נשים רבות אינן מכסות את ראשן, שער שאינו מכוסה אינו מעורר הרהורים, ובדיעבד אפשר לומר מולו דברים שבקדושה. וכל זה לגבי שיער שדינו קל משאר מקומות מכוסים, שכן מצינו שרווקות אינן חייבות לכסותו, אבל לגבי מקומות המכוסים שבגוף, שגם רווקות צריכות לכסות, אין להקל על פי סברה זו (ערוה"ש עה, ז; בא"ח בא יב; אג"מ ח"א מד, ועיין פניני הלכה שם ו, טז-יז).
(ז) אין לומר דברים שבקדושה בסמוך לאשה השרה (שו"ע או"ח עה, ג). ושמיעת זמרת מרדיו, לדעת כמה אחרונים, בדיעבד, אינה אוסרת אמירת דברים שבקדושה (עיין בפניני הלכה שם ו, יא).
(1)The Place of Prayer / The Prohibition of Reciting Matters of Sanctity in Front of “Ervah”
(2) It is prohibited to recite matters of sanctity in front of ervah (nakedness)... Regarding a man who sees another man, or a woman who sees another woman, it is prohibited to recite matters of sanctity only in front of the specific organs of ervah itself (the private organs).
However, concerning a man who sees a woman, the Chachamim teach (Berachot 24b), “A tefach (handbreadth) of a woman is considered ervah.” What they meant is that it is forbidden to reveal any part of a woman’s body which is normally covered, and that if a part is exposed, one is prohibited from reciting matters of sanctity in front of it.
(3) Although we must educate girls to dress modestly starting from a young age, the prohibition against reciting matters of sanctity in front of a tefach that is normally covered begins from the time the girl starts to mature.
(4) Likewise, regarding the hair on one’s head, the Chachamim teach (Berachot 24a), “A woman’s hair is ervah.” This refers to a married woman, for if her hair is not covered, one may not recite matters of sanctity before her.
(5) Regarding one who must pray, recite berachot, or learn Torah, and there is a woman facing him who is revealing a tefach of areas that are normally covered, l’chatchilah, he should turn away so that he cannot see her. If he cannot turn away, he must look into his siddur, or close his eyes, and only then say the matters of sanctity.
(6) Concerning hair covering, some Acharonim write that since, unfortunately, many married woman do not cover their hair, uncovered hair does not arouse impure thoughts, and b’dieved one may recite matters of sanctity in front of it. This only pertains to hair, regarding which the rule is more lenient than other normally covered parts, as single women are not obligated to cover their hair. However, concerning the normally covered parts of the body, as we have learned, one may not be lenient. Only in extenuating circumstances may one close his eyes or look in a siddur without looking at the exposed part.
(7) Similarly, one may not recite matters of sanctity near a woman who is singing. However, according to some Acharonim, b’dieved, hearing a female singer on the radio does not prohibit reciting matters of sanctity.
Modesty Inside and Out: A Contemporary Guide to Tzniut
Rabbis David Booth, Ashira Konigsburg, and Baruch Frydman-Kohl
As a result, cultural norms have halakhic significance for determining appropriate dress. In a context where it is normal to go swimming in a bathing suit, for example, such behavior is permissible. A man wearing a bathing suit in a business environment is problematic because it is so different to the typical office attire and so will draw the eye. Flapper dresses in the 1920s were initially quite shocking; as society became accustomed to the style, the dresses began to be seen as appropriate. Shorts or sleeveless tops for men or women may be inappropriate, depending on the context, because they raise similar issues of context and modesty. That is, a tank top might be appropriate at the beach but not in shul, in part, because it surprises. The change in people’s expectations affects their perception of modesty and appropriate attire. By the same token, a person has a responsibility to others and should choose clothing suitable to the context.