He must obey Tora!
" The Beard is a Tallit for the face! "
Vayikra(Leviticus) 19:27
27You shall not round off (mar) the edge of your scalp(Hair connecting from ear lobe downward to beard) and you shall not destroy(Cut) the edge(Natural line,growth) of your beard.
Vayikra(Leviticus) 19:27
27You shall not round off (mar) the edge of your scalp(Hair connecting from ear lobe downward to beard) and you shall not destroy(Cut) the edge(Natural line,growth) of your beard.
Yermeyahu(Jeremiah) 9.25-26
" See the days are coming "declares G-d, when I shall punish all circumcised with the uncircumcised(Disobedient Jews with Pagan Gentiles) 26. Mitsrayim(Egypt) and Yehudah(Judah) and Edom(meaning red, also called Idumea- country of Edomites-south west Kena'an) and the children of Ammon(The son of Lot. Children also called: Beni- Ammon. The Ammonites lived on the east side of Yordan and made war often with the Israelites, but were later conquered by Yephthah and later by Da'vid and Judas Maccabaeus) and Moab( The son of Lot's eldest daughter, the progenitor of the Moabites. They lived on the highlands which crown the eastern side of the chasm of the Dead sea, extending as far north as the mountain of Gilead)and all those who trimmed on the edges[of their beards-violation of Tora.] who dwell in the wilderness. For all Ha'Goyim are uncircumcised and all Ha'Beit Yisrael are uncircumcised in heart!
The text shows the Jews were acting like the pagan Gentiles, such a statement by Hashem is cause for a warning for us Jews to keep our beards and to obey Tora!
This Mitzvah is not up for negotiation!
The Tora warns us "do not destroy (lo sashchis) the extremities of your beard" (Vayikra 19:27) and "they shall not shave (lo yegaleichu) the extremities of their beards" (21:5). There are differences of opinion about the appearance and the nature of the operation of the various shaving implements mentioned by Chazal in connection with these prohibitions (Makkos 20,21). Several recent poskim discussed the use of electric shavers but not all of them wrote down the reasons for their rulings; they conveyed their opinions orally and it's hard to know exactly what they meant.
The following article first surveys the subject, looking at some of the areas of uncertainty to which it gives rise. Then some of the possible grounds for leniency are examined. The above mentioned finding does away with the main argument; can any of the others be relied upon? Lastly, the opinions of the poskim whose rulings are cited in support of permitting the use of electric shavers are mentioned.
Some Basic Terms:
The mishna (Makkos 3:) states that the prohibition against shaving is only transgressed when one shaves with a razor (ta'ar). The source of this Halacha is the Tora's use of two different expressions for the forbidden action. In Parashah Kedoshim, hashchosoh (destroying the hairs) is forbidden while in parashah Emor the term gilu'ach (shaving) is used. Through a gezeira shovo, Chazal learn that each posuk's expression applies to the other posuk as well (Kiddushin 35). Thus only the use of an instrument that both shaves and destroys the hairs is forbidden. A beraissa in the gemora states that a ta'ar is such an instrument, hence the mishna's ruling. It should be pointed out that although the Hebrew hashchosoh is translated as "destroying," it lacks the English word's connotation of the destruction's being irrevocable.
The Tora forbids the complete removal of facial hair, even though it grows back.
Which instruments destroy the hair without shaving and which shave without destroying? The beraissa mentions that misparayim (scissors) shave but do not destroy while a malkeit (tweezers) and rahitani (plane) destroy but do not shave. As mentioned, a ta'ar (razor) does both.
There are many different opinions as to the precise nature of these instruments and consequently, to which of the three groups an electric shaver should be assigned. Basically the question is whether or not a shaver both shaves and destroys the facial hair.
Ha'Rishonim advance several different reasons as to why the malkeit and rahitani do not shave. It may be because they are not usually used for shaving, or because they only uproot a few hairs at a time whereas shaving is defined as an operation that removes many hairs at once. A third possibility is that since they pull the hairs out rather than cutting them, they are not considered shaving instruments.
A shaver cannot be classed with malkeit and rahitani according to any of these definitions, for it is used specifically for shaving, it shaves many hairs at once and it cuts them.
It therefore remains only to be clarified whether or not it destroys the hair. If so, it is a type of ta'ar and its use is forbidden; if not it should be permitted.
Can Shavers Be Likened to Scissors? (I)
According to the beraissa, misparayim shave but do not destroy. There are two ways in which this can be understood. It could be because scissors leave longer remnants of the hair than a razor does, since the lower blade prevents the upper blade from cutting next to the skin. A razor, by contrast, cuts the hairs right at the skin's surface. (See the Rivan, Makkos 21: "They do not cut the hair at the root like a razor" and Tosafos [Nozir 40, beg. Desanya]: "Scissors do not destroy because they do not cut the hair at its base and root.") Alternatively, the reason why scissors do not destroy might be based on their cutting action -- two blades moving across each other, as distinct from the razor's single blade.
Many poskim wanted to permit the use of electric shavers based on the first explanation. They argued that the lattice within which the blades rotate prevents them from cutting the hairs at the skin's surface. According to this, however, shaving with scissors in a way that achieves results identical with those of a razor -- that is, if any part of the face is left where hairs cannot be felt when a hand is run across it -- will clearly be forbidden. Whether or not the action is classed as destroying the hairs will be determined by the result -- the smoothness of the shave -- not the way in which it was brought about. How then, can permitting electric shavers even be considered?
This is the point to introduce the concept of "misparayim ke'ein ta'ar (scissors like a razor)." Although the Gemora concludes that it is forbidden to use an instrument that both shaves and destroys, The Shulchan Aruch rules explicitly that, "It is permitted with scissors, even like a razor" (Yoreh Dei'ah 181:10). Some point to the Sifro in Parashah Kedoshim (#3) as a possible source for this ruling. Apparently, scissors may be used even in a way that destroys the hairs like a razor. Therefore, if a shaver can be classed as a type of scissors due to the mode of its action, its use should be permitted even if it shaves as closely as a razor.
Several Acharonim however, led by the Chasam Sofer and the Tzemach Tzedek, reject the idea that the Shulchan Aruch's words "even like a razor," permit using scissors no matter how smooth the result. The Chasam Sofer points out that the word ta'ar isn't actually mentioned anywhere by the Tora. It's brought by the beraissa as an example of an instrument that both shaves and destroys but, he writes, Tora law certainly forbids any method of shaving that achieves a similar result to a razor (Teshuvos Chasam Sofer, vol. I, Orach Chaim siman 154).
Can Shavers Be Likened to Scissors? (II)
What about the second way of understanding why scissors are permitted -- not because of the smoothness or roughness of the result but because they use two blades moving across each other, as opposed to the razor's single blade?
Some poskim wanted to use this approach to permit using shavers, arguing that the hair is cut when it is caught between the wall of the groove in the lattice and the rotating blade, in the same way that it is caught between the two blades of scissors.
The film produced by the Philips Company shows that this is not true. One clearly sees the blade cutting the hair by itself, without any pressure from the wall of the groove. In fact, in many instances, the shaver doesn't work like scissors at all. The only way to allow its use is therefore to ensure that the hairs it leaves are long enough not to have been considered "destroyed." It is important to make sure that the shaving blade doesn't touch the skin; if it does, it cuts the hair at the skin's surface. Despite the presence of the lattice, the skin's suppleness allows it to enter the grooves, where it is met by the shaving blades. The lattice is actually very thin -- on Philips' shavers, around the outer edge of the shaving head where the grooves are, the lattice is only 8-9 hundredths of a millimeter thick.
Repeated tests have been carried out on gentiles of different ages and with different skin types and the results show that irrespective of whether or not the shaver was applied to the face with pressure or not, there were always areas that emerged completely smooth. Participants even said that the shaver shaved them closer and deeper than a razor. Results varied with the differing types of skin and shaver and also depended on whether the skin had first been washed with soap, or had gel or talc applied, in which case the smoothness of the shave was more complete. The tests were conducted in front of a number of rabbonim over a period of approximately a year.
What's the Solution?
Using depilatory creams is certainly permitted. Nowadays there are creams suited to different skin types and they no longer have an unpleasant smell. The only thing to watch for is not to scrape them off the skin with a sharp edge, as mentioned by the poskim.
Concerted efforts are underway to develop a shaver that is safe to use from the halachic point of view. A Tora observant, senior development engineer has been working on the problem. An initial attempt involved making the grooves in the lattice narrower to stop the skin entering and being cut by the blades. This failed because not only couldn't the blades touch the skin, they couldn't shave either.
Another idea is to insert a thin disk between the lattice and the shaving head that carries the blades. This prevents the blades from getting too near the skin and ensures that they don't shave too close. This is currently being pursued as a possible solution. It's unclear how thick the disk needs to be. Disks of thickness ranging from five to fifteen hundredths of a millimeter are being tested.
Removing the Double Blade
In their constant pursuit of a more efficient shave, Philips introduced a new idea: the double blade. The company produced an animated clip to demonstrate how it works. It shows the first blade encountering the hair and drawing it upwards, out of skin, exposing part that is normally below skin level. Then the second blade arrives and cuts it very low down. After being cut the hair returns to its place, beneath the level of the skin's surface.
This demonstration leaves the impression that in a regular, single blade shaver such an effect is absent. This is untrue. Even without the double blade, the first of the revolving blades to encounter the hair pulls it up and the next one cuts it. The effect is simply slower and less efficient without the double blade but it is there.
For example, after not shaving for several days, many people prefer to use a trimmer to shorten the hairs before shaving with a regular shaver in order to avoid the pain of the longer hairs being pulled. Removal of the second blade is therefore no solution. In fact, newer models shave better even after the double blade has been removed than older ones do even with the double blade.
In the past this pulling action of the blades was used as the basis of an argument to permit shavers. The hair is pulled upwards when it is drawn into the machine and its root, which usually sits in a pit (fovea) in the skin, is exposed. After cutting, it sinks back to its usual position, below the skin's surface. Even though the blade cuts the hair right at its base, the cutting takes place well above the skin's surface, unlike the action of a razor, which cuts at the skin's surface. Perhaps this is not called "destroying" the hair?
Ha'Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach zt'l, rejected this argument as conclusive. He wrote, "It isn't clear whether we look at the beginning of the shaving [i.e. the actual cutting] or the end [once the cut hair returns to its usual position, below the skin's surface]."
It should also be noted that this discussion only applies to those hairs that are pulled upwards but some areas are shaved after the skin is pulled into the groove.
But I Can Feel Bristles; But I Don't Apply Pressure
If bristly stubble can still be felt after shaving, the hairs have clearly not been destroyed. How evident do the bristles have to be?
Responding to an argument that it is sufficient if tiny bristles can be seen with a magnifying glass, Ha'Rav Auerbach wrote, "This should not be relied on. Ordinary eyesight is the only yardstick in this case, unaided by any means of magnification."
The problem with relying on this type of proof is that one transgresses the prohibition even if just two hairs are destroyed! Stubble on some areas of the face is no proof that hairs in other areas have not been destroyed. The suppleness of the skin varies on different parts of the face, changing its response to the action of the shaver.
A bochur asked Ha'Rav Eliashiv if he could shave, since he still felt bristles after shaving. Ha'Rav Eliashiv's response was, "Can you swear that not even two of the hairs have been destroyed?"
A Yid who examines shavers has been approached by a number of people who shave and rely on leaving stubble, asking him to check the results of their shaving. He told us that certain areas of the face are found to be completely smooth. All the people he examined told him that they made a point of not pressing the shaver against the skin, in order to leave stubs. The constant ambition of the companies producing shavers is to develop models that fit themselves better and better to the contours of the face and considerable progress has been made in this area. The lattice covering the blades is very thin indeed -- those of some Philips models have been found to be just 8-9 hundredths of a millimeter thick. (A teshuvoh written by Ha'Rav Y.Y. Weiss zt'l thirty-eight years ago quotes a letter from Remington reporting an even thinner lattice!) As mentioned at the outset, filmed trials show clearly that the skin is drawn into the grooves.
In the new ranges of Philips shavers, the shaving heads rest on a springed base that adjusts itself to the curves of the face. In the newest models the head is divided into three separate parts, each of which fits itself precisely to the angle of the area to which it is applied. Virtually no pressure is needed on the part of the user to achieve perfect results, which once could only have been obtained with effort. (The closeness of this kind of shave is the reason why many people feel they need to apply moisturizing cream after shaving.)
But Didn't Some Earlier Authorities Permit Using Shavers?
It is known that The Chofetz Chaim zt'l, prohibited using shavers. He wrote, "The new device for shaving . . . they shave literally like a razor, removing the hair completely and leaving nothing behind. It would seem that a person using them to shave his beard transgresses what's written in the Torah, `and they shall not shave the extremities of their beards.' Anyone who guards his soul will keep his distance from them"
(Likutei Halochos, Makkos, perek 3, Ein Mishpat 7).
Ha'Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzensky zt'l disagreed with this ruling and permitted using the early shavers. Ha'Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach once discussed at length how people sometimes cling to a lenient ruling that has become outdated because conditions have changed completely, citing this ruling of Reb Chaim Ozer's as an example. He said that in R' Chaim Ozer's day, one could see with one's own eyes that shavers didn't remove the hairs completely, whereas today's shavers leave the skin completely smooth.
In ShuT Har Tzvi, HaRav Tzvi Pesach Frank zt'l discusses hair cutting with electric clippers (Yoreh Dei'ah siman 143). First he mentions shaving: "Regarding shaving . . . since the actual blade neither encounters, nor touches the skin because there is a thin intervening layer, it is considered to be `scissors like a razor,' which does not involve transgressing the prohibition of shaving the beard."
In the Sivan 5712 issue of the journal Hapardes, HaRav Frank was quoted as having forbidden the use of electric shavers. HaRav Mordechai Yaakov Breisch zt'l av beis din of Zurich, wrote to Ha'Rav Frank asking him about this and printed the reply he received in his ShuT Chelkas Yaakov (Orach Chaim, siman 103).
Ha'Rav Frank wrote, "What was printed in my name forbidding electric shavers is incorrect. My response to those who asked me was that since those who shaved using them emerged clean, with completely smooth skin, on which there were no remnants [of hair], this type of shaving is considered to be a razor . . . Thus, there are grounds for saying that a shaver that experience shows gives a smooth shave is a razor."
In view of the efficiency of today's shavers, the hetter mentioned in Har Tzvi is certainly inapplicable today. In fact there were many who took issue with it even then, simply because many people are in a hurry when they shave and unwittingly apply pressure, or because of those areas where pressure has to be applied in order to shave -- which means that in practice it's impossible to be vigilant.
Ha'Rav Reuven Feinstein told us the following about the lenient ruling that his late father Ha'Rav Moshe Feinstein zt'l gave regarding shavers. "Father permitted it on two conditions: first, that the blade is not sharp enough to shave by itself and second, that it doesn't actually touch the skin. Today, it's certainly hard to find a shaver that is in order."
With regard to the first condition, it's clear that today's blades are extremely sharp and can shave on their own. As for the second condition, that even a blade that isn't sharp shouldn't touch the skin, we've already mentioned the evidence that shows that this is no longer the case.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The beard is a covering as the dome of the heavens cover the earth. So does the covering of Hashem's Shekinah cover us too. As the tree leaves bare it's covering, so does the covering of man bare a beard. The testimony of the brit is it's own covering as a bird's feather their own, a beard is our's! Could you imagine a world without it's own type of covering, as a sky without a cloud, as a yard without it's grass. Without seed bearing it's yield, such a covering has Hashem placed in creation of every kind of thing there is. He hasn't created a substance of something without it's own covering, who be there that finds anything without it's own type of mantle that foreshadows the presence of Hashem in its fibers. Yes even a man was given a mantle of two- a Tallit for his head and a beard for his face!!! It is almost unbelievable for me to see Rabbis in this age without a beard unless they can't grow one. It is this new age doctrinal dogma that changes the Tora for the idolatry of the heart (Ha'Chillul Hashem Ha'Lev), yes to not have beard and can grow one is to dismiss Tora, and the G-d who gave the mandate to have it grow. We see man minded mingled monodrama of new age thinkers who twist the text to appease their own longings instead of obeying the G-d of Yisrael! They sew together fabrics of Tora with intermingled fabrics of falsifications and spew it out as scriptorial inductive implacable impromptu. With the expectation of changing Tora altogether, this is despicable and against Halacha!
The beard is a forebading shadow of masculinity. It detects an observant member of the tribe of Yisrael, and it shows no lady-likeness within him, as the comparison of other men who are here in this world who lack their place in ownership of manliness and obeisance to the G-d of Yisrael. Tora is not optional nor is there room for contention and reservation.
Thanks for coming by, as of IYar 5779 I am trying to ascertain time past work and life to readapt our website presence, programs, classes and courses etc. Thank you for your emails,new friendships and connections. We have great future plans for our Yeshiva that we are currently working on...