Purim Costumes: Dressing for Success, or Dressing for Trouble?

[From an article I wrote for our Toronto Torah two weeks ago.]

Today, Purim costumes are largely the province of children and shul rabbis, but historically Jews of all ages costumed themselves for Purim. Notwithstanding the Mishneh Berurah’s recommendation (695:3) to wear Shabbat clothes on Purim, for at least 750 years adult Jews have also dressed up in costume for Purim.

Rav Klonymus ben Klonymus, living in late 13th and early 14th century France, wrote in his Even Bochan, “And on the fourteenth of Adar, for the sake of honor and beauty, young men are glorified and exalted, acting in a manner of insanity and foolishness… One wears a woman’s dress and a necklace about his throat, one acts like one of the fools, with a drum and a dance and joy…”

Numerous reasons are offered for this practice, including:

• Relating to the events of Purim itself, Megilat Esther revolves around changes of clothing, from the clothes of Achashverosh’s party, to Vashti’s refusal to undress, to Esther’s pageant, to Mordechai’s sackcloth, to Mordechai’s parade, to Haman’s pre-party downfall, to Mordechai’s elevation to royal robes.

• The sefer Eleh haMitzvot suggested that since the gemara states that the Jews sinned “for show” in bowing to idols in the days of Nevuchadnezzar, and HaShem only acted “for show” in endangering us (Megilah 12a), and so we, too, display a façade which does not match who we are underneath.

• Chassidic authors discuss changing clothing in order to induce the joy and laughter that comes with the unexpected and unusual.

• Anthropologists describe liminal festivals, in which individuals or societies mark a rite of passage by erasing their old identities and taking on something new. Jeffrey Rubenstein, in his Purim, Liminality and Communitas, mentions this as a possible explanation for why masks have such appeal on Purim, a day of transitions and reversals, a time when we re-accepted the Torah (Shabbat 88a), a moment when we were transformed from endangered vassals to a celebrated population en route to a new Beit haMikdash.

Despite these various explanations, the practice of dressing up has, historically, raised troubled halachic eyebrows. Two specific questions were raised regarding potential prohibitions against Shatnez and Cross-dressing, but prominent halachic authorities justified the practice.

Regarding shatnez, the Maharil argued that costumes are not truly “worn.” Just as the gemara (Yevamot 4b) notes that merchants who sell Shatnez goods may drape them on their own bodies for display and we do not consider this an act of “wearing clothing,” so the Maharil considered dressing up in costume as an act of display rather than an act of donning clothing.

Regarding the prohibition against cross-dressing, the Rambam ruled that intent is irrelevant; the phenomenon of cross-dressing is, in itself, an act associated with idolatrous rites. However, other authorities viewed it as an issue of leading to sexual license, and so they argued that it depends on intent, and so Maharil, Rav Yehuda Mintz and other early authorities permitted the cross-dressing costume, so long as it was limited to the special occasion of Purim.

And so we are heirs to a centuries-old tradition of dressing up on Purim, mirroring the events of Purim, inducing joy and marking our transition. We might also mark two other Purim practices described by Rav Klonymus ben Klonymus: “They send portions to each other from the seven species, but gifts to the poor are minimized, like the rest of the year.”

Sending mishloach manot which include the seven species for which Israel is known is an excellent way to connect Purim to our national return from Persia to Israel, which was advanced by the miracles of the day and which we have merited to witness in our own time.

As far as the observation that people stinted on matanot la’evyonim in centuries past, may we merit to see ונהפוך הוא, a Purimesque reversal, such that we will follow the Mishneh Berurah’s advice (694:3) and make sure that our primary Purim expenditure is not on costumes, or even on the feasting and mishloach manot of the day, but on ensuring that we provide for the needy.

Daf Notes on Nedarim - IV

Just one short note on 42a - pay careful attention to the Bach's amendment of "Nechasim elu" to read "Nechasai." When you get to the end of the discussion on 42b, you'll see that his amendment makes the whole discussion read more clearly. Without it, the whole discussion is superfluous.

46b - Note the Rosh (I am referring to his second edition on "Taska", rendering it "Piska") vs the Ran on the difference between Rav Nachman and Abayye. The Ran's odd edition "beitzim" gives him a whole different way to look at the difference, but his approach has the force of logic behind it. It's hard to understand distinguishing between percentages, but it's easy to see a distinction between bathhouse commissions and a separate (egg) concession.

Of course, the gemara on 46b about splitting a shul - and the fact that individuals don't have that right - is also fascinating. It reminds of the Mishneh Berurah's forceful language regarding breakaways, in 150:2.

47a-b - The Raavad on the Rambam Hilchos Nedarim 5:16 is fascinating, with many ramifications.

On 48b we discuss avurei achsanta, warping the normal order of inheritance because of children's behavior. Of course, one must see Bava Basra 133b on this issue, and whether or not it is a good idea. Caren wrote her third-year law paper on this issue, and the way it plays out in halachic estate planning.

Also on 48b, we discuss kinyan sudar, and what works and does not work. This is a fascinating issue, and it comes up every year when we delegate people to sell chametz on our behalf. Whose pen do we use, and what if the delegator decides to walk off with it? See especially the Ran's concluding comments, which appear on 49a. See also Choshen Mishpat 195:3 for a ruling on this issue.

49-50 is just packed, wall to wall, with fascinating material (most of which has very little to do, directly, with Nedarim...)!

The issue of digestion and diet (on the figs at the bottom of 49a) is part of the foundation of the Rambam's dietary advice in Hilchos Deios as well as his "Medical Aphorisms." We ran a program on his dietary advice in the winter of 06/07, and it was a great hit. It's interesting to see the way the Rambam blends the gemara's advice with that of Galen and Arab writers, as well as eastern medicine. All are referenced in his writing, although he is explicit about the Greek and Arab sources and not explicit about the Eastern element.

The Bavel/Eretz Yisrael 'rivalry' shows up on 49b in comments about diet, reflecting a much larger issue which surfaces in other comments, such as the classic "Bavlai Tipshai" lines. You might look at some of my references here.

The unisex garment at the bottom of 49b is also interesting, in light of concerns for Beged Ishah. There is a major machlokes as to why the Torah prohibits Beged Ishah, and it has a practical ramification. Most rishonim believe it's because of the danger of inappropriate gender mixing, but the Rambam also notes a concern for the practice of idolatrous priests, who might wear a single garment from the opposite gender in their worship. If we follow the Rambam, then even wearing one garment from the opposite gender should be prohibited - so how do we understand this robe? Perhaps (and I admit that I haven't looked into it) the Rambam accepts the idea of a unisex garment.

The Yerushalayim shel Zahav that R' Akiva wishes to give Rachel on 50a is very interesting; recall the Gemara in Shabbos about going out with such an ornament on Shabbos, but more important is the Gemara in Gittin (7a) about wearing ornamentation after the churban. See the Hagahot Oshri to the Rosh in Shabbos 6:4; he permits this ornament post-Churban other than for weddings.

Also see the Ran (printed on 50b) on the legitimacy of annulling Kalba Savua's neder.