Women's Head Covering
Jennifer and I have been discussing the issue of women wearing a head covering vs long hair being the head covering in
I Cor. 11:2-16
.2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of the woman is the man, and the head
of Christ is God.
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head,
5 but every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as if her head were shaven.
6 For if a woman will not be covered, then
let her be shorn! But since it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn
or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For indeed a man ought not to cover his head, being the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.
8 For man was not made from woman, but woman from man.
Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
910 For this reason the woman should have authority on her head, because of the angels.
11 In any case, woman is not independent of man, nor man of woman, in the Lord;
12 for as woman is [created] from man, so man is now [born] through woman. And all things are from God.
13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him,
15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
16 But if anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.
It started by discussing the laws of women's modest apparel. The beliefs that Jennifer follows requires her to have uncut hair and to wear only skirts or dresses instead of pants and to be covered to the elbow and knee. We eventually ended up with a simple discussion on head covering and have conflicting interpretations of the teachings of Paul.
Me taking it to mean that a woman should have her head covered with a garment and Jennifer taking it to mean that the woman's uncut hair is the actual covering.
We would like to get some views on this topic and how strongly this should be adhered to as some interpretations differ and whether or not for you women how you handle the head covering subject.
I sincerely hope this discussion makes since as it is now 2 a.m. and we have been discussing and researching this topic for going on 2 hours now. We do look forward to your views and opinions.
Shalom
I Cor. 11:2-16
.2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of the woman is the man, and the head
of Christ is God.
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head,
5 but every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as if her head were shaven.
6 For if a woman will not be covered, then
let her be shorn! But since it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn
or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For indeed a man ought not to cover his head, being the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.
8 For man was not made from woman, but woman from man.
Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
910 For this reason the woman should have authority on her head, because of the angels.
11 In any case, woman is not independent of man, nor man of woman, in the Lord;
12 for as woman is [created] from man, so man is now [born] through woman. And all things are from God.
13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him,
15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
16 But if anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.
It started by discussing the laws of women's modest apparel. The beliefs that Jennifer follows requires her to have uncut hair and to wear only skirts or dresses instead of pants and to be covered to the elbow and knee. We eventually ended up with a simple discussion on head covering and have conflicting interpretations of the teachings of Paul.
Me taking it to mean that a woman should have her head covered with a garment and Jennifer taking it to mean that the woman's uncut hair is the actual covering.
We would like to get some views on this topic and how strongly this should be adhered to as some interpretations differ and whether or not for you women how you handle the head covering subject.
I sincerely hope this discussion makes since as it is now 2 a.m. and we have been discussing and researching this topic for going on 2 hours now. We do look forward to your views and opinions.
Shalom
Views: 151
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tammy Russell on -
The Talmud in Kesuvos 72a states that the source for this prohibition is from BaMidbar (Numbers) 5:18 which deals with the laws of a sotah - a suspected adulteress - and states, "The priest shall stand the woman before God and uncover her hair...". Rash'i (Rabbi Shlomo Yitchaki, 1040-1105, author of the primary commentary on the Talmud) provides two explanations for the Talmud's conclusion, one, that from the fact that she is punished midah kneged midah (measure for measure) for exposing her hair to her paramour we see that this is prohibited and, two, from the fact that we expose her hair we see that under normal conditions a Jewish woman's hair should be covered.
-
Permalink Reply by Tammy Russell on
-
Covering the Head as a Spiritual Statement
In Jewish tradition, and even in very old linguistic usage, "an uncovered head" means unbridled license. By the same token, covering the head, be it for prayer and study or at any other time, represents, by general usage at least, the acceptance of Divine sovereignty, of the "yoke of the kingdom of heaven."
Women's Head Coverings: A Sign of Marital Status
In the case of women, too, there is, in addition to a general requirement of modesty of dress, a specific one concerning covering the head. Married women are required to cover their hair. This is an ancient law, already hinted at in the Torah, that has been observed among Jews all through the ages. In some communities, even unmarried women have been known to keep their hair covered, though this custom never became widespread. The law is not related to that requiring men to cover their heads, and it is even more stringent. The fact that a married woman covers her hair whenever she leaves the house is a sign of her special status.
-
Permalink Reply by Tammy Russell on
-
In ancient Biblical times there is no indication that women covered their hair except with head-gears for ornament. The Shulammite's long flowing locks are an object of admiration in the Song of Songs (iv. 1; vi. 5; vii. 5; compare Ezek. xvi. 7); and much art is bestowed in coquetry upon the braiding (see Isa. iii. 24; II Sam. xiv. 26; Judges xiii.). The woman suspected of adultery was therefore signally disgraced, or humiliated like a mourner, when for punishment her head was disheveled by the priest (Num. v. 18; compare Lev. xxi. 10; A. V. "uncover"); and shaving off the hair was an insult inflicted only on captive women (Jer. vii. 29; I Cor. xi. 15).
Biblical and Mishnaic Times.
In Mishnaic times, however, it was regarded as an inviolable Jewish custom ("dat Yehudit") that women should not be seen in the streets with uncovered hair (Ket. vii. 6); and the infringement of that rule by a married woman was deemed sufficient ground for divorce, a view stated also in Roman law (Marquardt and Mommsen, "Handbuch der Römischen Alterthümer," vii., part 2, pp. 554 et seq.). Accordingly, the Mosaic law (Num. v. 18) mentioned above is taken by the Septuagint and the Rabbis to mean "the priest shall uncover the woman's head"; and, consequently, R. Ishmael derives from it the law forbidding the daughters of Israel to walk abroad with uncovered hair (Ket. 72a; Sifre, Num. 11). The great importance of the traditional custom may be inferred from the following story, related in Num. R. xviii. 20:
"On, the son of Peleth, companion of Korah, was saved through the device of his wife, who, having made him so drunk that he fell asleep, sat with her daughter in front of the tent, both having their hair uncovered. When On's companions came to call for him, and saw the women in such an attitude, they turned away; for no one would enter a house where this Jewish custom was so openly disregarded."
The distinction of Ḳamḥit, who saw seven of her sons made high priests, and two officiate on one and the same day, one of them being Simon ben Ḳamḥit, mentioned by Josephus ("Ant." xviii. 2, § 2) as"Simon, the son of Camithus," is ascribed by the Rabbis to the fact that even the ceiling of her house had not seen the hair of her head (Yer. Meg. i. 72a).
Married and Unmarried Women.
Bareheadedness in a woman was, therefore, considered to be an indecorous form of "'ervah" (nakedness, Deut. xxiv. 1), an incentive to improper glances, and it was declared unlawful to recite the Shema' in the presence of a woman whose hair was uncovered (Ber. 24a; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, 75, 2; Eben ha-'Ezer, 21, 2). Originally, this custom included both married and unmarried women, as may be learned from Ned. 30b. Nor does the law (B. Ḳ. 90a), which sets a fine of 400 drachmas upon a man who tears off a woman's head-gear in the street, make any distinction between a married and an unmarried woman. Also Paul (I Cor. xi. 3-12), when declaring that the woman should have her head covered in recognition of the man being her lord, refers to women in general, not to married women exclusively (see also "Apostolic Constitutions," i. 8). According to Pirḳe R. El. xiv., it is a result of Eve's curse that women must go about with the hair covered like mourners. Still, instances are given in the Talmud of unmarried women going about bareheaded, as when the Mishnah speaks of the bride being carried in the procession in her litter, with her hair hanging down (Ket. ii 1); or when the daughter of Naḳdemon ben Gorion covers her face with her hair when seen by Johanan ben Zakkai in her humble condition (Ket. 66b). Later, particularly in Occidental countries, it was not considered indecorous for unmarried women to go about bareheaded (Shulḥan 'Aruk, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, 75, 2, against "Yad," Issure Biah, xxi. 15).
-
Permalink Reply by Melissa on -
Shalom,
I am in agreement with Sandra, whether it is in the Tanakh will decide if its true. I have not seen it in the Tanakh, as of yet, not to say its not there. I am not sure about the verses the Talmud suggests its based on (Numbers 5:18). I do not see how that correlates to head coverings for women.
Melissa
-
Permalink Reply by Man in a Hat on
-
Tammy comments on b.Kesuvois 72a and 'the priest shall stand before God and uncover her hair'. Lets roll this back to the Torah. The Hebrew used in Num 5.18 reads 'para' 'ishshah ro'sh. Para means unbind or make bare, andro'sh refers to the head - not the hair. There is little mention of women's hair in the Torah. There are some brief references in Song of Songs, instructions on how to treat the hair of someone with leprosy in Lev 13:45..and thats it.
We have no indication that unmarried women covered their heads - and this is very slim evedince to basis a rule on head-covering on. A married womens head is uncovered at the temple - so married women must normally wear head coverings, ergo its shameful for a women to have an uncovered head.
From Philo we know that it was common practice to uncover the head when on trial, as is the Sotah (suspected adulteress). There also seems to be a link between uncovering the head and mourning.
The Mishna, Talmud, Tosfeta, and many other Jewish texts expand upon the trial of the Sotah, the issue at its heart it how do we limit the number of people who go to the temple to conduct this trial? First it is asked when we say this is a trial brought about by a jellous husband, what do we mean by Jellous? The question is answered that the husband has prohibited hsi wife being alone with a man, she has carried on being alone with him, he prohibitis her in front of two witnesses, she is then seen by two witnesses going into a room along with this man. And so the trial develops and becomes more complex and harder to inact. Now then, when the women is tried she is already guilty of seclusion before the trial begins - before she went to the trial without her guilt or innocence being known. So now we find talk of the head being uncovered to shame the women. This spirals into a discussion about why women cover their heads, we are told the answers is because Eve sinned, so the women covers her hair in shame.
This is all relevant to the 1 Cor source cited above as Paul links headcovering to Genesis, and views the uncovered head as shameful. He was following a line of reasoning based on this long discussion originating in Num 5.18.
(tips hat)
Man in a Hat.
-
Permalink Reply by Denise on -
Maybe the key here is to go back to verse 2, and to reread the rest of the passage in that context, without thought to hair or literal "head coverings".
-
-
I think you are missing a little bit of the point of what Paul is trying to do.
As far as i can see it within early judaism head-covering was seen as a requirement upon women found in Num 5. The origins of this where then traced to the fall. Women covered their heads because they brought sin into the world and so dressed as mourners. What Paul does in 1 Cor is try and maintain the social propriety of wearing a head-covering, but reframes the reason for it. He refers to the creation story but now instead of accepting the received interpretion that women should wear head coverings because of sin, he says women should wear head coverings because men are the head of women. This at the time when viewing men as the head of women would have been seemed self evident and uncontroversial. Hopefully most people can see that while his intentions where good - his thinking was of its time.
-
Permalink Reply by Deanna Joy on -
Since a child I always felt a desire to cover my head . . I think it came from seeing nuns who wore coverings and as a young child I knew it meant they were devoted to Yeshua in a very serious way. Well I am not catholic so no head gear as such but I did begin to wear different colored scarfs about 9 years ago. Reason being was that I was married to a man who wanted my full submission to him over G-d. I prayed and asked G-d for a way to show that my allegiance was to Him before man, even my husband.
I began to meet others who wore coverings and asked for their reasons . . many said it was for submission to their husband . . for some reason that never sat well with me of course so I looked into the passage more closely . . what stood out for me is the verse that says, "because of the angels . . " In my spirit what hit was that the angelic realm has authority! And whose authority does a woman need and want over her life but G-d's! I also saw it as a woman's protection, right and privilege to remind those who are in worldly authority that there is a higher authority over all.
I personally have found much blessing in wearing a head covering . . . Many men have come to me and asked me why I wear it. Some of them are looking for me to say that it is a sign of my submission to my husband and then they want me to go talk to their wives. When I tell them it is in submission to God over my husband when he breaks God's laws, they are not so interested anymore.
Ungodly men have told me it is ugly and I would look better and attract more attention if I took it off. My take on this reaction is that they know it is a sign to them to be cautious with me and they didn't want that restriction put on them. Before I wore the covering I had more attention from men than I wanted. Once I began to wear it, when they approached me it would be with more care and caution than before. They knew it meant something, either committed submission to my husband or strong commitment to my faith and God. I wasn't a woman to be messed and coyed with.
Many woman like it and say they think it is pretty and woman who are not so modest also have been very attracted to me for it. My take on this is that they see that I am respecting myself as a woman in setting forth a message that I am not just any man's woman, I belong either to my own husband or to God. Woman who are concerned about being attractive have a hard time accepting it. This is my testimony! Thanks for letting me share!
-
Permalink Reply by Jeff on -
as far as I know, covering of the hair literally was at that time more of a cultural sign of submission to her husband more so than a requirement of God.
IM not sure of the exact refrence but in the torah one of the commands in regards to adultrey i beileve is that if she is accused or convicted she will uncover her hair... (thus implying before accusations, court, etc it was covered).
I personally do tend to favor covering but im more of a stickler to traditional ways....
but explicit command to cover- i dont know of one...only the mentioned above implication of covering....
-
-
Jeff said:as far as I know, covering of the hair literally was at that time more of a cultural sign of submission to her husband more so than a requirement of God.
IM not sure of the exact refrence but in the torah one of the commands in regards to adultrey i beileve is that if she is accused or convicted she will uncover her hair... (thus implying before accusations, court, etc it was covered).
I personally do tend to favor covering but im more of a stickler to traditional ways....
but explicit command to cover- i dont know of one...only the mentioned above implication of covering....
The text you are describing is Numbs 5. We dont know alot about headcovering prior to 1BC, but looking at 1BC-onwards we see that head-coverings where understood within judaism not to be a sign of subjection of women, or submission, instead they where worn as symbols of mourning - this being a fitting state for women because they brought sin into the world. That was the belife within Judiams during Paul's life time. Paul provided a fresh approach - recasting the reasons for head-coveirng.
Events
Forum
Who is my brother? 3 Replies
Started by Tom Moniz. Last reply by Ted Walther on Friday.
Potluck for Torah Dedication
Started by Jodell O May 22.
The number of a man 8 Replies
Started by Leo333. Last reply by Leo333 May 8.
Music
© 2012 Created by Ross Nichols.
