Kippah and Head Coverings - An Introduction

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It is forbidden for a person to walk four cubits [aprx. 5-6 feet] with an upright posture, which is considered an arrogant manner, as it is stated: “The entire world is full of His glory” (Isaiah 6:3). Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, would not walk four cubits with an uncovered head. He said: The Divine Presence is above my head.

Question: If one has a headache (lit. “his head is heavy”), may he sit and eat with his head uncovered? Response: I know of no prohibition against reciting a blessing without [wearing] a head covering. Yet it was obvious to Maharai (=R. Yisrael Isserlein) that it is forbidden to invoke God’s name without the head covered, and I do not know whence [he infers that]. Now I have found that it is written in tractate Soferim (14:15) that there is a dispute: “A shabby person whose knees are visible or whose clothing is torn, or one whose head is uncovered, may lead the prayers (“pores et ha-Shema”), but some say that one may lead with knees [showing] or torn clothes, but not with an uncovered head. And he may not let mention [of God’s name] leave his mouth.” R. Yeruham wrote at the end of §16 that it is forbidden to recite a blessing with an uncovered head. If not for the fact that I do not usually dispute earlier authorities unless there is a great authority to support me, I would incline toward leniency and in favor of reciting blessings with an uncovered head. Even the recitation of Shema is permitted, for it states in Midrash Rabba (Vayikra §27): R. Berekhya said: A flesh-and-blood king sends his charter to the province, what do they do? All residents of the province stand up, uncover their heads, and read it with fear, awe, trembling, and perspiration. But the Holy One, blessed be He, says to Israel: Recite the Shema, My charter. I do not trouble you to read it standing or with your heads uncovered. This clearly implies that it is not forbidden to uncover one’s head; rather, He did not impose [an uncovered head] as a stringency. But what can I do? They have already ruled this to be forbidden. Yet I am astonished that they treat uncovering the head as forbidden even when not praying. I do not know whence they derived this, for we find no prohibition against an uncovered head except in the case of a woman, as stated in the chapter “Ha-madir” (Ketubot 72b), and that it reflects piety (midat hasidut, i.e., not actually required by law) not to walk four cubits with an uncovered head. Yet this is specifically walking four cubits, as stated in the chapter “Kol Kitvei” (Shabbat 118b): “R. Hanina said: I deserve it, for I did not walk four cubits with an uncovered head.” This reflects piety, like all of the other examples of “I deserve” listed there. Further evidence is from the first chapter of Kiddushin (31a), which rules: R. Yehoshua b. Levi said: It is forbidden to walk four cubits with an upright posture, as it is stated: ‘The whole world is filled with His glory’ (Yeshayahu 6:3). R. Huna b. R. Yehoshua would not walk four cubits with his head uncovered. He would say: ‘The divine presence is above my head.’ This implies that specifically walking with an erect posture is forbidden, but it is not forbidden to do so with one’s head uncovered. Rather, R. Huna was stringent with himself, motivated by piety. Nowadays, the opposite is the case: they are not careful about avoiding an erect posture. On the contrary, the proud and the rich walk around with their heads held high, but they are careful about uncovering their heads—not because of piety, but because they think this is the Jewish religion. I have also found written that this statement about an uncovered head only applies out under the open sky. This is a reasonable explanation of the case of the erect posture—even though the entire world is filled with His glory, nevertheless, one does not look as though he is ignoring his Maker except when he walks out under the open sky. It is there that one must remember and maintain vigilance. And even though R. Isserlein wrote that there is no distinction between home and courtyard, for the whole world is filled with His glory, this only applies to the case of invoking God’s name. Indeed, it stands to reason that refraining from invoking God’s name with an uncovered head reflects piety, much like the case of walking four cubits in the open air. I have also found this written in the name of R. Meir [of Rothenburg], namely, that this is all a matter of pious practice, although R. Peretz wrote that one should object to someone entering the synagogue with an uncovered head. Moreover, Tur does not state “and he shall cover his head” except with regard to prayer, not with regard to the recitation of the Shema. But what can I do? The people practice this as a prohibition, and I have no authority to be lenient in their presence. I have heard of a sage who would study Torah with his head uncovered, saying that the weight was too heavy for him. Nevertheless, it seems to me that although it is not forbidden, and it is not even an act of piety if one is not invoking God’s name, a Torah scholar should still be cautious, for the people perceive it as laxity and permissiveness, as though he transgressed the Jewish religion. Even if he is studying in his room, he should not rely on this, lest an ignoramus see him and make light of him. It is not for naught that they say that anything forbidden because of how it looks (mar’it ayin) is even forbidden in the innermost chambers. Now I will disclose the shame of Ashkenazim. Certainly one who drinks libation wine (yeyn nesekh) in a gentile’s inn, and eats fish cooked in their vessels, and who is considered strict if he trusts the innkeeper’s wife when she says that she did not cook anything else in them, is not under any suspicion. We do not investigate him, and we treat him with respect if he is rich and powerful. But one who eats and drinks only kosher food, but he does so with his head uncovered, is perceived to be a deviant. Therefore, “the wise man has his eyes in his head” (Kohelet 2:14) and will know to protect himself so that they do not attack him. If placing something heavy on his head will weigh upon him, he should cover his head with a garment of fine linen or silk. Still, it seems reasonable that even one who wishes to recite a blessing over consumption (Birkat ha-nehenin) at night, when he has no hat on, or while he is bathing, it is sufficient for him to cover his head with his hands, even though one major authority has recorded that this is forbidden, and R. Isserlein cites him. Their proof is that Rabbeinu Tam, when he was bathing in warm water and would drink, would cover himself with a garment over the place of his heart, not with his hands. But this is no proof, for the reason this is not considered covering is that it is normal for someone to place his hands on his heart, and one who sees this will not know that one needs to cover his heart, or will imagine that he did not really cover the area over the heart. However, since it is discernable, it is sufficient to use the hand as a cover above his head, especially given what I have written, namely, that this is not a prohibition but merely a matter of piety. It is therefore sufficient to use the hand as a cover in an impromptu fashion.

§ The mishna stated: And who is considered a woman who violates the precepts of Jewish women? One who goes out and her head is uncovered. The Gemara asks: The prohibition against a woman going out with her head uncovered is not merely a custom of Jewish women. Rather, it is by Torah law, as it is written with regard to a woman suspected by her husband of having been unfaithful: “And he shall uncover the head of the woman” (Numbers 5:18). And the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: From here there is a warning to Jewish women not to go out with an uncovered head, since if the Torah states that a woman suspected of adultery must have her head uncovered, this indicates that a married woman must generally cover her head. The Gemara explains: By Torah law, if she covers her head with her basket [kilta], it seems well and is sufficient. But by precepts of Jewish women, i.e., custom, even if her head is covered by her basket this is also prohibited; she requires a substantial head covering. Rabbi Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: If she covers her head with her basket, there is no violation of the prohibition against having an uncovered head. Rabbi Zeira discussed it: Where is the woman that Rabbi Yoḥanan is referring to? If we say he means that she appears this way in the marketplace, this is a violation of precepts of Jewish women, as explained previously. And if you say rather that he means she appears this way in her own courtyard, if so, you have not allowed any daughter of our father Abraham to remain with her husband, since most women are not careful to cover their heads completely inside their own courtyards. Abaye said, and some say that Rav Kahana said: Rabbi Yoḥanan is referring to when she walks from one courtyard to another courtyard or via an alleyway. Although these places are not considered public areas, strangers may still be present in them.

Rabbi Yitzḥak stated: An exposed handbreadth in a woman constitutes nakedness. The Gemara asks: Regarding which halakha 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).