To Donate Click Here

re:shaving legs and laser


regarding your answer in the shulchan aruch is clear we do differentiate between different methods – tar and misparaim kein tar – no where do we find the result of these 2 is different
many poskim hold we dont judge by chilonim עי’ בפרישה, סימן קפב, ובחידושי רע”א, שם; שו”ת מהרש”ם, ח”ב, סימן רמג; אך דעת הגאונים היא שדי בדרכם של גויים של אותו המקום, כפי שהובא באוצר הגאונים למסכת נזיר וכמבואר בשבלי הלקט, יו”ד סימן מ; ועי’ עוד בשו”ת גינת ורדים כלל ו, סימן יב
– even if rav elyashiv was maikel on these 2 points – [which is very questionable – the source quotes a kovetz with piskei halachos bal peh – usually very unreliable – you could check with his many talmidim – r morgenstern etc.] – we would have to judge each place – is it common to shave legs in lakewood, in yerushalayim? laser hair removal is unheard for men anywhere- meaning a complete women’s grooming-
this is a real chashash deoraisa – maybe he could trim a little with a trimmer – we are not talking about major issue – hairy legs for men… there are many people who will see this and think all is mutar – which is basically what you are saying, so plucking white hairs is also mutar…
definitely check with your rabbeim on this one [and a talmid of r elyashiv] – it comes across as a shtikel psak tamuah


You have a valid point that the mareh mikomos of the answer weren’t clear enough, so I will explain myself. The reason for the heter is not because of the amount of people that shave body hair, whether they are gentiles, non religious or frum, (although it might be a heter on its own, but it is controversial). I was also not coming from an angle of where it is or isn’t the minhag. The heter is because of the Rashba, and Mordechai, brought in the Darcei Moshe Y:D 162, and in the Mechaber Seif 4, that when it is being done for refuah or to illiminate an embarrassment that it isn’t considered lo tilbash and it is permitted to remove. Also see Nishmas Avrohom Y:D 162-6 regarding dying hair for someone who has a discoloration of the hair, that he brings R’ Eliyashiv In Kovetz Teshuvos 3-128, that shaving hair for a man is a takana d’rabonon, (see Bais Yosef 162-6, that this is the shita of the Rif Rambam and Rosh) and there was no takana bmakom tzar. Meaning that it is muter to remove the hair. What I meant with bringing R’ Eliyashiv, is for the point that he says regarding electrolysis, that  once it is permitted to remiove the hair, it doesn’t matter how it is done, because the end result is the same in the way it looks. The person that quotes R’ Eliyashiv is Hagaon R’ Mordechai Gross shlit”a in Tel Talpios, where he write the question that he himself asked R’ Eliyashiv. I consider him to be reliable.


Join the Conversation


  1. the heter brought there in the name of r elyashiv is bec of the chilonim – which you say is controversial and dont rely on
    so the only heter is “refuah” – the shoel did not have a medical skin condition [chatatin berosho] or something bizarre – unevenly colored hair or even a unibrow – he has hairy legs… something men have sometimes and live with while women never let it grow – this is tikunei nashim – so is there a baal horaah you spoke with who agrees with your comparison – which seems very questionable – your entitled to your opinion – but the rabbis you often quote here may think otherwise, maybe check it out

    1. You missed the first words of the question. He says clearly that he is embarrassed by it. If you want to dispute this with him you may, but this is the way he feels. The poskim say that if a person is shaving hair because of embarrassment it is the same halacha. It doesn’t have to be a diagnosed medical condition. See noseh Keilim on the Shulchan Aruch, and Nishmas Avrohom Y:D 162-6

  2. didnt miss – just feel that that is not included in the heter u bring from nishmas avraham and others
    its a subtle but clear chiluk
    does r’ y. cahen agree with you?

    1. Subtle? See Bais Yosef, Tosefos, Mordechai and Darcei Moshe. Also see
      יביע אומר מעין אומר ח”ד פרק ד’ סי’ א’ וס’ י”ט, אבני ישפה ח”ד סי’ צ”א, אבני דרך ח”ט סי’ קי”ב.

  3. they are all maikel only with tzirufim
    not meyuchad lenashim
    its a mum for kohanim
    etc – unibrow much worse….
    hairy legs is different, dont think they would hav been maikel here

    1. again… look at the lashon of the rishonim… tzar gadol not mum.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *