Jewish law, observed by Orthodox and (in theory) by Conservative Jews, forbids shaving with a razor. Shaving with an electric razor that uses a scisors action is permitted. For more liberal Reform and Reconstructionist Jews, shaving (and Jewish law in general) is not an issue, although some follow the prohibition. I am a Conservative Jew, and I have conscoiously decided to ignore this particular law. I wonder whether there are other Jews on Badger and Blade who have made this decision.
Shaving and Jewish law
- Thread starter Ilnones
- Start date
- Status
Not exactly...Ashkenazim law permits shaving on the four corners on the face...though the fine details come down to what is said to be used..50 years ago my rabbi used de razors..today judt a slight cliper trim..sephardic law forbids shaving on the 4 corners of the face as more of a "tradition"...but some do shave with what they wish eitherway...basically..depends on who you ask 
This is a very interesting question. By law, Jews are not allowed to do anything to cut their skin, except circumsicion. The reason for not putting a "blade" to ones face is of fear of cutting the skin and scarring the skin, which is also why we are not allowed to get tatooed. I purchased a straight edge a few months back. I took it out of the box, held it in my hand and knew that that is where I draw the line for myself- I'll pif the straight edge at a later date. Like all Jewish laws, they can be interpreted in many different ways. Consider the reasoning behind this particular law and I hope it helps you to come to a decision that is right for you.
I'm not Jewish, but I have to tell you, this is just fascinating to me. Can you provide any more background regarding that law?
The Bible says you shall not take a blade to your face, or something of that nature. I was raised Orthodox, I don't like it, and don't like the way it is practiced where I was raised so I don't talk about it much.
Last I saw there was a list of "permitted" electric razors. This is part of the extreme control I do not like that the religion does.
Last I saw there was a list of "permitted" electric razors. This is part of the extreme control I do not like that the religion does.
I don't want to read this all the way through, but if you're interested, read this:
http://www.star-k.com/kashrus/kk-mitzvos-shavers.htm
If you don't understand something I can try and explain.
http://www.star-k.com/kashrus/kk-mitzvos-shavers.htm
If you don't understand something I can try and explain.
Many things in Jewish law have connections to health and diseases prevalent in the time they were made law. In other words, they made sense and still do under the conditions in which people lived during the time of ancient Hebrews. If one looks at the parts and types of animals permitted in Kashrut and the methods used by the Sochet in slaughter, the aim is clearly disease prevention and food safety.
Possibly this law relates to cuts and abrasions 4000+ years ago leading to possible infection/severe scarring if one follows the same logic but this is just speculation.
Possibly this law relates to cuts and abrasions 4000+ years ago leading to possible infection/severe scarring if one follows the same logic but this is just speculation.
I completely agree! For one more famous example, observant Jews were basically left out of many of the larger sweeping plagues since they prepared meat and un-meat in separate cooking ware. This kept them safe from bacteria and diseases that none of their contemporaries understood at the time.
Im not jewish but i have the understanding most laws of this nature are about cleanliness no ?, because a cut when laws were made could lead to infections that could not as easily be cured thousands of years ago as can be today, does the temples take this into consideration and kind of treat it as tradition because of that,... or is there more to it that i dont know about ?
whoops it seems i skimmed over a post, and the very post that answered my question lol, sorry about the redundant post
whoops it seems i skimmed over a post, and the very post that answered my question lol, sorry about the redundant post
Last edited:
¢orey;4179248 said:
They do, but sometimes they just explain how the law works. For example with shaving they use the Talmud to for example find that shaving below the skin is not allowed. But still not reason why a razor.
(I'm pretty sure it's because that was all there was and there would be electrict razor laws but they weren't around back then, that's my view).
I've researched this in the past. While I've long been a student of ancient history in general, I'm no expert on Judaic law, so take what I say with a pillar of salt, and read up elsewhere. The best information comes from current religious practitioners, and while I'm often skeptical and find the approach a bit unbalanced, in this particular case, I do think you can find a balanced view without straying into Canaanite ritual. Since I want to inject just a touch of skepticism and an alternate take, here's a bit of overview.
Leviticus 19
(27) You shall not round the edge of your head, nor shall you destroy the edge of your beard. (28) And you shall not make a cutting for the dead in your flesh, nor shall you make a written tattoo upon you; I am YHWH.
The laws about facial hair appear in several places in Leviticus which is the law for the priesthood and ritual, as well as penal law. Leviticus is named for the tribe or Levi which is a sort of helper for the priests. As a result, some people take it that this prohibition only applies to the priests. Other people say that parts apply to priest and others apply to everyone. (This next part is probably incorrect. A later post explains that shaving as punishment was only for women.) There are also cases where shaving (probably half the face) is used as a punishment (I believe for adultery), which would only be effective if everyone at that time grew their beard. So there does seem to be an implication that being clean shaven was prohibited or discouraged at the time the law was written.
It's kind of hard to understand exactly what the prohibitions mean, and even harder to put them together, so there's a lot of interpretation, even among people who are very strict in applying the prohibitions. These prohibitions are probably meant to discourage Israelites from adopting hairstyles popular among the pagans. The round head (sort of like Moe of the 3 Stooges) and the Hammurabi beard are examples, though it takes some imagination or familiarity with ancient hairstyles to interpret the exact wording of the prohibition. The word edge or corner is used, and obviously had a known meaning at the time. From what I've read, there are 5 corners: sideburns in front of the ear, just below there on the jawbone, and the chin.
But there's also a prohibition against scarring, which was partly equivalent to modern tatooing, but actual scarring was also practiced. Both of these are clearly stated in Lev. 19.28. The way the law is stated elsewhere, you can't put a blade against your skin. While it's known and understood that this law is a prohibition against scarring and tatooing, it's been applied to shaving as well because of the literal way it's stated, without mention of the practice.
If I may suggest something for further research, these two laws regarding facial hair and scarring appear next to each other, strongly implying that there's a pagan ritual behind both hair cutting and scarring, though there's no implication that they are part of the same ritual. (If not, there's still an implication that these two--hair and scarring--might have something to do with each other.) While I've never run across anything definite in this case, such research is fruitful, if only suggestive, for other laws, such as the prohibition against consuming meat and milk together. There is a Canaanite book containing instructions for rituals that says to prepare the sacrificial meal by boiling a kid in milk and cooking it in butter. The prohibition against meat & milk first appears just after the 10 commandments as part of a long list of prohibitions against what are clearly Canaanite temple practices, and it says to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. I've never seen an example for the case of hair and scarring, so it might be fruitful to look into scarring and various hairstyles popular among pagan priests or adherents.
Leviticus 19
(27) You shall not round the edge of your head, nor shall you destroy the edge of your beard. (28) And you shall not make a cutting for the dead in your flesh, nor shall you make a written tattoo upon you; I am YHWH.
The laws about facial hair appear in several places in Leviticus which is the law for the priesthood and ritual, as well as penal law. Leviticus is named for the tribe or Levi which is a sort of helper for the priests. As a result, some people take it that this prohibition only applies to the priests. Other people say that parts apply to priest and others apply to everyone. (This next part is probably incorrect. A later post explains that shaving as punishment was only for women.) There are also cases where shaving (probably half the face) is used as a punishment (I believe for adultery), which would only be effective if everyone at that time grew their beard. So there does seem to be an implication that being clean shaven was prohibited or discouraged at the time the law was written.
It's kind of hard to understand exactly what the prohibitions mean, and even harder to put them together, so there's a lot of interpretation, even among people who are very strict in applying the prohibitions. These prohibitions are probably meant to discourage Israelites from adopting hairstyles popular among the pagans. The round head (sort of like Moe of the 3 Stooges) and the Hammurabi beard are examples, though it takes some imagination or familiarity with ancient hairstyles to interpret the exact wording of the prohibition. The word edge or corner is used, and obviously had a known meaning at the time. From what I've read, there are 5 corners: sideburns in front of the ear, just below there on the jawbone, and the chin.
But there's also a prohibition against scarring, which was partly equivalent to modern tatooing, but actual scarring was also practiced. Both of these are clearly stated in Lev. 19.28. The way the law is stated elsewhere, you can't put a blade against your skin. While it's known and understood that this law is a prohibition against scarring and tatooing, it's been applied to shaving as well because of the literal way it's stated, without mention of the practice.
If I may suggest something for further research, these two laws regarding facial hair and scarring appear next to each other, strongly implying that there's a pagan ritual behind both hair cutting and scarring, though there's no implication that they are part of the same ritual. (If not, there's still an implication that these two--hair and scarring--might have something to do with each other.) While I've never run across anything definite in this case, such research is fruitful, if only suggestive, for other laws, such as the prohibition against consuming meat and milk together. There is a Canaanite book containing instructions for rituals that says to prepare the sacrificial meal by boiling a kid in milk and cooking it in butter. The prohibition against meat & milk first appears just after the 10 commandments as part of a long list of prohibitions against what are clearly Canaanite temple practices, and it says to not boil a kid in its mother's milk. I've never seen an example for the case of hair and scarring, so it might be fruitful to look into scarring and various hairstyles popular among pagan priests or adherents.
Last edited:
There are two seperate issues at work here, one is law, the other is Halacha i.e. tradition. The law says, not to take a blade to ones face, and herein lies the interprtation of why. To me it was explained that it might cause injury another speculation is that it serves no purpose other than vanity and that the time could be better utilized doing something else. By Halacha or tradition, its the notion or explanation that this is how it has always been done- which to me is not acceptable. A friend told me a joke many years ago that I use as a gage when being told what is allowable and what is not allowable. Here goes, a young couple marries; the young bride knowing that the husband loves Turkey makes him Turkey. That night at dinner she presents him with the fine dinner and the husband is not impresssed. The young bride says, "I was told you love Turkey". "I do" replies the husband, but why did you remove the legs. The young bride thinks about it and says, "because that is how my mother made it".. They go to the mother and ask her why she removes the Turkey legs and she replies, "because that is how my mother made it". They go to the Grandmother, ask the same question, get the same answer. They finally go to the Great Grandmother and ask her the same question, she thinks long and hard and finally responds, "when me and your greatgrandfather married we had a small pot and the whole Turkey did not fit in, so I removed the legs". That story or joke is the reason I question things like this particular thread topic.
The story of the small pot makes a good point. I'm interested in history, so I tend to ignore the interpretations and look for precedents and relations. However, you have to balance that against the practical reality that laws are politics, and the stated reasons for things are often not the actual reason behind the law. As a result, I'm not prepared to dismiss what Jews refer to as their oral law. (And I can't believe I'm sticking up for this when I'm almost always on the pagan side of things.)
Thanks for all of the information! This is VERY interesting reading. While not necessarily a proponent of organized religion, neither do oppose it and respect the rights of individuals to practice it in a manner in which they see fit. So much can be open to interpretation that it's fascinating to read how individuals view history and tradition.
Excellent thread.
Excellent thread.
I am not trying to throw a monkey wrench into the works ....but what about my signature with it's verse?
- Status
Similar threads
